On Being an Academic Jack of All Trades, Master of None
Over the past two days, I have either published or received approval for publication on three separate articles. One of them focuses on disability and the incredible harm done by Social Darwinism. The next proposes philosophical questions science is unequipped to answer. The third studies the organization known as the Sunday Assembly, essentially an atheist church, and considers whether it ought to be classified as a religion.
Three papers, three entirely different topics. Writing in this fashion goes against a great deal of professional advice. For example, in The Professor Is In, Karen Kelsky wrote, “CVs are not just passive records of things that you happen to do. They are records that you actively, consciously, and conscientiously build. You watch your CV, you think about it, you develop it.” This is great advice, and it is very likely true. I have much less experience placing graduate students in full-time faculty positions (and have not even done so myself). I’m sure taking a very deliberate approach to CV cultivation and directing all of my efforts in one direction would help me build my reputation as an expert which would directly correlate with a variety of academic opportunities.
I am just not wired that way though. I do just happen to do a lot of things. I get interested in something, I dive into it, and I write something. I am focused on being productive, I am trying to build my CV, but I seem to be building in multiple directions at the same time.
Should I stop being an academic jack of all trades, master of none?
Beyond the fact that I don’t know that I would be able to go against my natural tendency anyway, I think there is something valuable to engaging a variety of different disciplines. The world is a very complex place, and when we become hyper specialized, we can easily develop tunnel vision. By unintentionally finding myself delving into different disciplines, I have to learn to speak the language of that field. For example, in my forthcoming paper discussing the Sunday Assembly, I had to learn to speak like a sociologist because it is in a sociology journal. You’ll notice another article on my CV about Thomas Merton and J.R.R. Tolkien. I published that in a theological journal, so I had to be able to speak to a different audience. Theology is a little bit closer to my training given my MA in apologetics, but I think you can understand my point. There is value in learning to communicate with different audiences and look at the world through a different lens.
Another potential virtue of working on a wide variety of projects at the same time is sometimes you find them cross pollinating. Some of you might be aware that I have been going through The Lord of the Rings chapter by chapter every week on Facebook Live. Just tonight I streamed a video on the next-to-last chapter of The Return of the King where we see the Shire under the control of Saruman. A few months ago, I participated in a series of videos you can find on this website where some friends and I talked about totalitarianism in the context of Rod Dreher’s book Live Not by Lies. When I was reading Tolkien this time, all I could think about was the shadow of totalitarianism hanging over this portion of the story. Now I want to dive in and study what Tolkien thought about totalitarianism, especially its Eastern European manifestation during the Soviet era. Two ideas I had never connected before suddenly hit me because of the work I have done in different fields. Who knows if it will develop into anything? It may be nothing, but it may actually be something. No one knows. That’s kind of the fun of it.
Again, I don’t claim to be an expert in getting tenure-track jobs. I don’t doubt specialization is the way of the Academy, so if you want to succeed in the game, you have to play by the rules. I openly admit my natural tendencies do not fit nicely into this game. I could conform, but I would then lose the driving force behind my best work. I cannot write something good when I don’t care. I am not good at faking. In order to deliver something even remotely close to the quality I need to for any kind of reputable academic publication, I can’t get by on anything less than my best. I’m not that good. Therefore, it looks like I will have to capitalize on the benefits of being an academic jack of all trades, master of none, and embrace it despite its shortcomings.
If you like what you have read here, please be sure to subscribe to the newsletter below!