Ronell News

So do you remember Ronell? The NYU professor accused of sexual harassment by a male grad student?

This is pretty pathetic:

From Wikipedia: “Ronell is slated to return to teaching at NYU in the fall of 2019. Her course, “Unsettled Scores: Theories of Grievance, Stuckness, & Boundary Troubles” was advertised on campus with a flyer asking: “How have we secretly internalized penitentiary structures?”[64][65]”

Apologies to the person whose FB I stole it from. It was just too priceless to pass up.

I don’t want to sound bitter but there are many academics with real research, valuable teaching and amazing pedagogy (and I don’t mean myself. I mean, for instance, the person whose FB I stole the quote from) who have no hope in hell of being hired by NYU.

12 thoughts on “Ronell News”

  1. C’était moi and check this out: when AR was hired at Berkeley, I was chair of women’s caucus (I was in graduate school) and we had her over to my apartment for a welcoming cocktail. So I’m nice. Then I went out of country on dissertation research and when I got back there were already all these stories about her, namely that she and a tag team she had formed went on “seduce and destroy missions” among the graduate students. I do not know whether they tried to report it, but this was before Title IX, so. But in any case this is why I am so after her, I know for a fact she has been getting away with this for decades.

    Therefore I don’t mind tarnishing some of her reputation as star with a bit of truth. First, the reason she was even hired on the tenure track was that UCB faculty were not on the ball about getting someone better. They ended up with her on a one year job just to keep the line going, and then ended up turning her tenure track. It was all because they were supposed to hire someone in Theory and as a group didn’t really know how to do that in that field, then. So they ended up, as often happens in these situations, with a dud of this type. She’s not entirely boring so if had been just your regular responsible person could have done a decent if minor job. But she had decided long since that it was her neuroses that would make her career, so.

    Like

    1. Here is what I don’t get. She’s not completely stupid. She’s got to understand that a course like this looks pathetic. Even if she’s 100% in the right (and she’s clearly not), it’s still pathetic. Why is she doing this? Is she this spoiled and lacking in self-awareness?

      It’s really sad that people get so full of themselves and so drunk in accolades that they can’t see they are turning into a caricature.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. All her work is like this, though, from early on if you knew her. She takes some experience or neurosis and turns it into a course / a book / etc. It’s all completely narcissistic. All of us get our ideas from our neuroses, to some extent, but not everybody makes everything about themselves the way some, and especially Avital, do

        Like

        1. I never heard of her before. The navel-gazing trend of literary criticism is not my thing. Which is why I was rejected for a job by your favorite school this year, by the way. Apparently, they despise neo-Marxists now. I’m still bitter.

          Like

          1. My favorite school? Don’t tell me Berkeley, although if it is that I could have told you they are right wing (people do not believe me on this, but it is true, and i am in it 3 generations).

            Like

            1. It’s another one in the UC system. I didn’t believe you but you were right. During the interview, the moment I said the word “neoliberal,” they had these disgusted looks like they had chewed on something nasty. I was actually asked how I justify using the term “neoliberalism.” They only want people who use Derrida and Lacan.

              Oh, and then I said that Wendy Brown offers a valuable critique of Foucault, and it was like telling Evangelicals that the Bible is not literally true.

              Like

      2. What I don’t understand is why people fall for it, but she always claimed that just saying she knew Derrida personally really worked for her. And I guess I have known other people that were super admired like him, and that name dropping about would get people fairly far, but still… !!!

        Like

    2. “she and a tag team she had formed went on “seduce and destroy missions” among the graduate students”

      To be frank, she sounds like every other narcissist/sociopath I’ve ever known in academia (including the malignant narcissist that has caused so much uproar/misery where I work).

      ” She’s not entirely boring”

      Neither was Idi Amin… so that wouldn’t be much of a recommendation… but the thing is, if you’ve come across her type before then she’s extremely boring and predictable, an infantile personality that expects the world to be fascinated by her and determined to punish the heretics who don’t see her as a special, wonderful person.

      Like

      1. I mean, her actual work isn’t entirely boring. Her books.

        Infantile personality, yes, and apparently a lot of people do fall for it and have.

        Like

        1. “I mean, her actual work isn’t entirely boring”

          I assumed that was what you meant, but I will never be able to confirm because I’d rather drink a battery acid and monkey blood cocktail than read anything she wrote. Is that fair? No. Will I reconsider? No.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.