A Question about Scholarly Writing

You are very welcome, dear friend!

As for scholarly writing, I could wax poetic for days but I’ll try to be brief.

The two main kinds are an article and a book. Everything else is a derivative of the two.

To write a scholarly article, you need an idea and a calculator. The idea should never be “I want to write about …” because that’s not an idea but a topic. An idea is, for example, “In her novel Frankenstein’s Mother, Almudena Grandes projects her neoliberal subjectivity of a twenty-first-century leftist back onto the dictatorship of Franco.” I first came up with this idea right here on the blog but then the article suffered significant travails because the edited volume it was destined for became a victim of a romantic split between its editors. In any case, the article is coming out in print in a couple of months.

After you get your idea fleshed out, get out the calculator. Think about how many words you can realistically write in a day and subdivide the intended length by this number. Then look at your calendar and mark the date when you will be done. I do not recommend sitting down to write anything unless you have a clear date of completion. The worst thing is to turn into one of those people who spend years “working” on the same article that no longer motivates or remotely interests them. They have the eyes of exhausted old horses that should have been put out to pasture years ago.

We are in literature, folks. Nobody is solving Fermat’s theorem or curing cancer. Whatever it is can’t possibly take several years. If it does, you are probably writing the wrong article in a wrong way.

Another piece of advice: in the name of everything holy, please don’t tell yourself, “today I’ll be working on my article / book.” That’s a road to bad, bad places. Say, instead, “today I will write 3 sentences about the extent to which Grandes was influenced by Ramiro Pinilla.” After you finish your 3 sentences, decide what tomorrow’s 3 sentences will be about. “Tomorrow I will write 3 sentences on how Grandes is much more influenced by Pérez Galdós than Pinilla.”

The brain resists the grandiose. It likes tiny, bite-sized projects. I can’t tell you how easy it is to write when you start every day knowing exactly what today’s 3 sentences should look like.

As for a book, it’s one of those things where the changes accumulate incrementally but are realized in a burst. I came up with the idea and a detailed plan of Neoliberal Love in a single afternoon. But I had been thinking about neoliberal subjectivities for at least a decade. I have all my secondary sources annotated and pretty much learned by heart at this point.

The Ukrainian book was written in a 5-month ecstasy of writing but it contains things I’ve been reading and thinking about since 2006. So my advice: read, think, discuss, and one day it will burst out of you like a geyser.

An article is planned, scheduled and executed. A book erupts like a flamethrower. But there won’t be a book without many carefully planned and severely executed articles.

I’m not sure if I’m answering what you wanted to know but feel free to specify if you were looking for something else.

Survival of the Unfittest

We had a lot of snow today, and as a result, the Darwin Day was cancelled.

Just Died

Markov was 42. It’s not very likely that he “just died.” Especially not on the same day as Navalny.

The Crisis of Masculinity

It’s sad, really. An adult man is terrified of having an opinion because he sees himself as too ordinary to resist manipulation by all-powerful rulers. And he declares it openly.

This dude needs to go get his sperm count checked out. It’s probably non-existent.

Important Dates

And organized the terror act in Israel on Putin’s birthday.

Putin is heavily into numerology and all sorts of occult crap. So reputedly was Stalin. He used astrologists to create his famous plan for the redesign of Moscow, including the subway system that useful Western idjits like to admire.

Consequences

So… “consequences” now means something that happened before?

I should stop being so shocked by the extraordinary cynicism of these people.

Silicone Lady Is Defeated

I know people are wondering why there’s been a whole 15-minute stretch with no book news. So here they are. My interview about the book was picked up by many news portals and FB groups in Ukraine. Finally, when you enter the Cyrillic version of my name into Google, something decent pops up. Before, the only search results were of some woman in St Petersburg with horribly distended, silicone lips.

Those poor silicone women who look like there’s a pair of pelmeni attached to their faces. Whoever came up with the idea that it’s pretty to look that way?

Incoherent

Oh, God. Can we have the dementia patient speak instead? He’s bound to sound more coherent than Harris.

Dismantling the Nation

I don’t believe, by the way, that the US is obligated to avenge a dead Russian dissident as a matter of principle. Or defend Ukraine from a Russian invasion, for that matter.

What I do believe is that if an American president made a very public promise, or if the US signed treaties and agreements, these promises and agreements should be honored.

The US signed the Budapest Memorandum and then spent 20 years aggressively coercing Ukraine to disarm and promising to defend it if Russia invaded. Once you incur an obligation, you have to follow through. If you don’t want to or can’t do that, then simply don’t incur obligations. Don’t promise, don’t sign, don’t foam at the mouth.

This isn’t unreasonable or too much to ask. The US placed itself between Ukraine and Russia since 1990. And then stayed there all through the Clinton, Bush and Obama presidencies. Then in 2014 we suddenly discovered that all those promises, including the very recent ones, were bunkum.

This is why I’m so annoyed by the “not my war” slogan. It very much is your war because your country made this war possible through consistent, open, decades-long policy. A nation-state by definition conducts foreign policy. You can’t have a nation-state while simultaneously saying, “I personally didn’t make these promises, so it has nothing to do with me.”

“I’m an individual and not bound by the social contract of my nation-state” is a post-national approach. And post-national means “open-border.” Because if there’s no nation, there can be no border like there can be no nose without a face for the nose to be located.

Not your war? Not your promises and obligations? Great. Welcome to the world without borders, police, comfort, standards of living, and everything else that the nation-state brings. Welcome to the third-world hellhole you are ushering in with your anti-national tantrums. Welcome to the world where words mean nothing and duty was obliterated by the whim of the moment. I hope you enjoy it since you worked so hard to bring it about.

Empty Threats