Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

Nomad Scholar

Drinking and Debauchery in the Liberal Arts

October 19, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The end-of-the-year departmental party was held at a lovely private club near the ocean just a few miles away from campus. The din was great; colleagues laughed and talked. I finally escaped the noisy room and stumbled outside. There were a group of colleagues -- the grammar queen was there, standing in the grass along with six other professors. A man on the hiring committee, a friend who ran a poetry contest every year, two men who both advised students on majors, a  woman who taught developmental writing so well that students followed her from course to course, and a colleague who was best friends with our department chair.

I said, "Hey" to my poetry contest colleague; he turned. He was holding a joint. After taking a quick hit, he motioned to me. I shook my head and leaned back. The grammar expert grabbed for the uneven cigarette, took a hit and passed it to the next English instructor. As I stood there in a swirl of sweet-smelling smoke, someone shoved a half-empty bottle of Chardonnay in my hand. "Bottoms up, bottoms up, bottoms up!" they chanted in unison. Shamed, I passed it to the next colleague. I stepped back out of the circle, lurched back into the rented hallway and made my way to the women's bathroom. Confused, I locked myself into the stall farthest from the sinks and waited. Ten minutes later, and a bit more composed, I escaped to my car.

As an undergraduate, I had no idea that professors partied. As a grad student, I was too busy shuttling from job to campus to notice some of my professors slinking off to a dark bar six blocks from campus. Now that I work in the business, I've started to notice that there is a distinct difference between the professor who does a little wine tasting on the weekends and the ones who can't seem to control their use of drugs or alcohol -- regardless of the effect on their work, their relationships, even their self-respect.

I sometimes get a shaky feeling in my stomach when I hear the stories: My colleague at lunch who confessed to me that she downs three or four drinks quickly, in succession, each night. My office-mate who told me that a glass of wine makes grading papers easier. My department chair who keeps a bottle of Jim Beam in his desk. A friend in administration who is fighting a charge of driving under the influence. A colleague who holds his office hours in a cafe so he can sip an imported beer. And just when I think I'm overreacting, I remember a departmental secretary who brazenly told me that she locked her three-year-old in the bedroom as she and her husband smoked dope every night. Unable to fire her for incompetence on the job, the community college where I worked chose to rewrite her job description so that she could not be rehired for her own position.

Why the overindulgence? I've had the chance to talk to colleagues at over a dozen campuses -- a lucky side effect of being off the tenure-track -- and several compelling factors crop up again and again:

Camaraderie: Bonding over a pint is big. As a form of relaxation, it's more affordable than golf and more quick than a long hike in the woods. In fact, the drinking tradition in academe is as entrenched as it is in advertising -- it's just the most accepted lubricant to sharing intellectual ideas (and avoiding that big stack of grading). Unfortunately for some it comes with a big price tag. In 1992, the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse found that the American economy loses $80.9 billion a year because of drug-related problems; of that, $66.7 billion is directly attributed to alcohol abuse.

Heavy workload: Most professors are overextended. Many perform research and teach; some have to work overloads or summers to make ends meet. The result? A feeling of entitlement -- and a desire to "cut loose." End-of-the-year parties and informal get-togethers can be triggers, as well as post-committee meetings at restaurants that host $1.50 drinks. It's fun, but when fun runs into work, everyone suffers. According to a 1998 study by JSI Research & Training, 60 percent of alcohol-related work performance problems are attributed to employees who occasionally drink too much during a lunch hour or on a work night.

Expectations: Professors are just people. But in the community, they may be looked at as some sort of "intellectual example" that many non-academics don't relate to. Although this kind of elevated status may be welcome at first, over time many professors complain that they feel isolated and set apart. As a copywriter in advertising, I found it easy to strike up conversations with strangers or acquaintances. "You're kidding? Do you do commercials? Hey, you know that Taco Bell commercial with that little dog? I love that commercial." Today when I identify myself as an English composition instructor, the responses are consistently negative, as in "I hated English in school. It was my worst subject. Oh, I'm sure my English is just awful." Conversation over. Like me, some professors will crawl home to the work of Hesse or Joyce; others will go further and avoid contact with non-academics altogether. Yet isolation is not good for those with a propensity for drink or drugs.

Work hours: To the new Ph.D., being able to set your own hours and name your office times sounds delicious. In time, however, many professors find that they have odd blocks of time which are not optimum for grading or seeing students. For adjuncts and full-time contract instructors, many teaching jobs also demand night or weekend teaching -- which may leave an instructor exhausted and resentful. Feeling left out of family events and often unable to see friends with regular nine-to-five jobs, professors may find themselves taking comfort in a married friend, a bottle of schnapps or a joint. In a 1992 study, the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse connected increased rates of alcoholism with jobs that had little supervision and high mobility -- a spot-on description of faculty positions.

Creativity myth: The Liberal Arts is awash with writers and artists. And everyone knows that drinking goes as well with the old Remington (or new iMAC) as it does with the pottery wheel. A colleague of mine lost a contract due to drinking and had to have his chapbook of poetry self-published. Although it contained some striking examples of his work, colleagues wondered what he could have accomplished if he hadn't been relying on bourbon and fighting with his (now) ex-wife. About a year ago, a colleague of mine, a recognized literary scholar and drinker, killed himself. When the person he loved would not return his affection, he drank some hard liquor, wrote a note, went into his basement, and shot himself. Stunned, students and colleagues attended an on-campus memorial and read his works aloud. Awed by the beauty, we cried, knowing that he would not be greeting us in the hallways, teaching rows of students, or attending poetry slams.

Simpletons will, of course, simply say that the solution is to "just say no" to drinking or using illicit drugs. I believe that the answer is far more complex than that. There are no campus police to gently take the pint and paper cup from our hands. There are no 20-question cards that will guarantee someone in trouble will seek  
diagnosis and treatment. There are no handbooks that will compel a professor to "do the right thing" when to do so would leave him or her completely alone without companionship.

There are, however, some interesting stories cropping up in media that suggests that those in power are concerned. In Britain, reports of grade school teachers overindulging lead many to also conclude that higher education is affected as well. In the United States, we have enough high school and college instructors drinking to excess to encourage a move to make employee assistance programs available to every educator. In fact, in 2004, the University of Michigan developed a self-screening instrument to assist not only students, but also staff and faculty members, in diagnosing drinking problems.

And some believe that assistance by mental health experts will help. Studies have found that efforts by employers to sponsor help for employees result in fewer sick days, more productive days on the job, and fewer accidents. In a 2004 membership survey, Alcoholics Anonymous reported that 3 percent of its members are educators. Through intervention, official reprimands from higher-ups, or self-diagnosis, some have received help for their out-of-control drinking or drug use.

In general, attitudes may be changing. I went to a barbeque with colleagues on Sunday. No beer or wine was served -- just soft drinks and mineral water. When I asked about the hostess about her "no bar" bar, the Humanities instructor simply said, "Well, the kids are around." Her boyfriend, an Instructional Tech-head, nodded in agreement. Two adjunct instructors tossed a foam football around and someone turned on a television to watch a game. I could hear a  neighbor's lawnmower buzzing in the distance and realized that I  
didn't miss the nonsense one bit. There was something simple about  enjoying a grilled burger with three kinds of potato chips, knowing that I would remember it the next day.

Shari Wilson, who writes Nomad Scholar under a pseudonym, explores life off the tenure track. 

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Drinking and Debauchery in the Liberal Arts

  • Posted by Tony , Oh please on October 19, 2005 at 4:38am EDT
  • It's bad enough college students that can fight in the military are being harassed for underage drinking. Now we're going to monitor the graduate students and faculty too?

    Part of why I love the job is that I can mix business with pleasure. Most of us enjoy drinking moderately, despite the inflated statistics that the author cites.

    I've had enough of the fun police! If I wanted to deal with this nonsense, I would have gone into corporate America.

    For the record, it's 4:18 AM, I'm pulling an all nighter trying to finish a conference paper, and yes, I'm completely sober. Again, most of us drink in moderation despite the scare tactics

  • Posted by Paris on October 19, 2005 at 6:56am EDT
  • The opening description of the success of the author's colleagues suggests that smoking pot and drinking at an occasional event (end of year parties only happen once a year) is not preventing them from doing their jobs well. So why is she equating this with smoking dope every night or keeping a bottle of whiskey in one's desk?
    While all these situations may suggest debauchery, I'm not sure the first is worthy the concern of the second and the third.

  • Slide away
  • Posted by Mr. Guinness on October 19, 2005 at 9:30am EDT
  • Perhaps somewhere during her teaching career the author has read about the "slippery slope" argument. Maybe she has even warned her students against using it. Surely, a composition instructor should know better than to suggest that a few drinks at a faculty party or a glass of wine while grading has a connection to the percentage of Academics attending AA. Moreover, the puritanical, moralistic tone of the article is insulting. Yes, I am one of those horrible people who drink wine while grading, and I can assure the author that it enhances my performance, contrary to her suggestions.

  • Drinking and Debauchery in the Liberal Arts
  • Posted by Craig on October 19, 2005 at 9:31am EDT
  • Is it a reflection of our times that to seek notoriety for a idea/theme one only has to use the word "liberal" in association with a theme of "excess"? (Drinking and Debauchery!{capitalized for maximum effect/attention}. Perhaps the Sciences are indulgence free and hence a more suitable field of study for our morally compromised scribe? There was a time some 500 years ago when the population of London was forced, almost exclusively to drink beer, due to the unfortunate quality of the water. Only the aristocrats could afford wine. That era gave us Sydney, Raleigh, Johnson, Donne, Shakespeare and Kydd along with Montaigne ( probably a wine drinker) who wrote convincingly that European civilization was in fact inferior to that of the cannibals of the New World. Shakespeare is likely to have known of Montaigne's essay and used it as a basis for ideas in The Tempest. There are of course compelling reasons for the withholding of states of euphoria when we are compelled to spend inordinate hours steering our chariots along heavily congested highways. Rather than shock, fear and withdrawal as seem to have been the writer's response to recreational substance useage(abuse?) perhaps a more humanitarian and less judgemental position might have been the offering of a ride home to those she considered to have been a danger to themselves of others and a diologue to advance her view of temperance amongst academicians. Everything else is mere prattling and attention seeking! The grape, the hop and the plant cannot be rooted out by moral outrage, as history should tell you.

  • Puh-leeze indeed! Fun police indeed!
  • Posted by John R. Leo , Professor at Univ of Rhode Island on October 19, 2005 at 9:45am EDT
  • The most telling moment in this inflated "Chicken Little" panic! piece is the retreat to the farthest stall in the bathroom, where our panicked! writer sits for ten minutes, to get "composed" (befitting a composition instructor), no doubt coming up with an "angle" on all those successful, happy degenerates she is forced to be collegial with and yet secretly holds in contempt. Sad, very sad situation and comments. . . .

  • Posted by Bob on October 19, 2005 at 9:45am EDT
  • I remember the first time I saw a teacher idol of mine sitting on the lap of some guy, drunk and flying a box kite. It took me quite a while to come to the conclusion that she had a life and what she was doing was entirely legal. While I no longer idolized my teacher, seeing her like that helped me have a healthier outlook on teachers as humans. I am more inclined to congratulate the people who find their way to a 12-step program and get the help they need rather than point an accusing finger at people who are alredy acutely aware of their problems.

  • Drinking in Colleges
  • Posted by JMG on October 19, 2005 at 11:34am EDT
  • What hurts students is that faculty hide their pot and their drinking and as a concession to the kind of prohibitionist hysteria that this article promotes.

    One of the key reasons that so many students binge and drink so irresponsibly is that they are allowed to see no examples of responsible use of alcohol and drugs. As Ray Oldenburg wrote in "The Great Good Place," one of the virtues of the German beergarden and American corner pubs in many ethnic neighborhoods is that these were family places, so children went with their parents, whose conduct was moderated thereby. And children were protected while they observed what happened when people drank to excess, and they saw how stupid it was.

    I live near a Big 10 school with perhaps the worst reputation in the country for student drinking, carousing, and rioting -- and it's supposedly a dry campus. There is a constant flood of students into court where they receive "minor in possession" convictions for doing what, it's safe to say, every single person in the courtroom has done, drink while underage. It's fantastically profitable for the local town police and quite damaging to the poor students.

    This is in a state where the wife of an executive from Germany was recently convicted of corrupting minors for providing beer to a party of sixteen year olds -- a practice that is, I'm told, not unusual in Germany. So, instead of drinking in a home where adults were present to take care of them, the kids are back to drinking alone in cars while driving around. Nice.

    I suggest that academics -- people who are supposedly in the business of teaching others how to learn, and to profit from experience and to recognize and engage reality -- should be among the leaders in making society aware that prohibition strategies do not work, have never worked, and show no sign of working in the future ... but that harm reduction strategies work quite well in taking the carnage out of what is apparently a strong biological preference for substance-induced euphoria.

  • Thou dost protest
  • Posted by CBH on October 19, 2005 at 11:58am EDT
  • The author here is getting attacked from many sides, but here overall piece is well written and worth examination. My experience at three public institutions and two private would affirm that drinking particularly is ingrained in the culture of many campuses.

  • Posted by tony on October 19, 2005 at 11:58am EDT
  • It's so nice to see that I was not the only one who was disgusted with this self-righteous annoying article!

  • Posted by Vika Zafrin on October 19, 2005 at 11:59am EDT
  • There's strength in numbers, so I will add my small but vehement voice to the chorus of comments so far: Ms. Wilson is conflating drug use and (possible) drug abuse.

    To be clear: I am including alcohol into the term "drug" quite purposely. For that matter, throw nicotine and caffeine in there too; their abuse can certainly affect sleeping patterns and general health, and thus teaching ability.

    Kudos to the article's rejection of a simple just-say-no attitude: the answer *is* more complex than that. But so is the issue. A glass of wine or a joint may indeed increase one's ability to do mentally taxing work. We need not look to the classics for a substantiation; a July article in The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/ae/media/articles/2005/07/18/mellow_attitude_toward_pot_use_lingers_locally/) claims that many Harvard faculty use it on a regular basis. Harvard is hardly representative of educational institutions as a whole, but the work performed by people there is not different from academic work elsewhere.

    I've got to say, it's disturbing to read what looks like a politically motivated, poorly researched article in an academic news source. The drug war has put out quite enough inaccurate publicity, don't you think?

  • Oh, Please!
  • Posted by Sheila on October 19, 2005 at 12:46pm EDT
  • I have been working in higher education for 25 years, and before that I was a student. I've encountered parties like the one this author describes from the time I was a 17 year old freshman. What is the big deal here? Faculty in their 50's and 60's were children of the 1960's and 70's. Is she too young to understand the culture of that era or just unbelievably sheltered?

    But my point here is about something else. Alcohol and drug use in and of themselves aren't the issue here, and she seems to be confusing correlation with cause. Many people who drink or drug are not unhealthy people. On the one hand, I know hundreds of brilliant, well adjusted people who drink or smoke pot, and these behaviors have never affected their work--in higher education or elsewhere. On the other hand, use in excess can often be self-medication for emotional pain, and those emotional issues are the problem--the drug use is a side effect. Her friend and colleague, for example, didn't commit suicide because he drank, he committed suicide because he was in an excruciating personal hell, and obviously drinking wasn't numbing it anymore.

    I think it is a great and important thing that institutions of higher education provide support for those who are addicted and/or ruining their careers as a result of a drug or alcohol problem. Back in the 80's there was no recourse but to watch such people climb into a bottle, teach drunk, stop writing anad eventually die, receive a forced retirement or drift away. Now, there are ways to deal with such problems inside the university. Why does she think that is such a bad thing?

  • Academics and Mind Expansion
  • Posted by George Sibley , Instructor, Director of Special Projects at Westrn State College of Colorado on October 19, 2005 at 12:47pm EDT
  • Since almost all academics were once graduate students, who were once undergraduates, and since relatively heavy drinking and smoking after dark is historically a part of campus culture, no one--not even students--should be all that surprised that many faculty carry forward that academic tradition, with whatever balancing out from hard experience they've picked up along the way. I stopped drinking to excess because the hangovers got worse and worse as I got older, but I haven't stopped drinking up to that wonderful high that comes somewhere after two drinks and somewhere before four....

    Euripides tried to deal with this, I think, in his great play, "The Bacchae"--what happens to people when they separate virtue and vice by impossibly harsh lines that usually result in sneaking around after dark to indulge that "Dionysian" side of the soul. We shall not live by the bread of reason alone; we're fools if we try to live by the wine of passion alone; but I always tell my students I wish they would bring into the classroom a little more of kind of expansive energy they exhibit after two beers in the local brew pub (when I'm going home because age has wisened me a little, but they are just getting started). Keeping Apollo and Dionysus at war, Euripides suggested, is a good way to tear up a society.

  • Posted by dan on October 19, 2005 at 1:00pm EDT
  • It's not clear to me how advocating the provision of diagnostic and treatment alternatives for dangerous addictions equates with calling the "fun police". It shouldn't take anyone too long to notice that walking among the responsible, moderate drinkers in the halls of the academy are a significant number of people whose drinking or drug habits endanger themselves or others. Ensuring that treatment options are available on campus and that sober social alternatives exist are reasonable ways of approaching the problem. Occasional and responsible users of alcohol et al. don't need to worry about anyone harshing our buzz, but we do need to keep some space open for those that don't work so well with our prefered lubricants.

  • Posted by stinky on October 19, 2005 at 1:55pm EDT
  • Dan, good points. Surely most of us have seen or experienced the effects of real excess, and how academic cultural norms can sometimes make it difficult to approach a colleague who might really need help. I think a lot of the negativity here is due to the shrill, self-righteous tone of the article. Unfortunately the author undermines the useful aspects of the piece by sliding around on that slippery slope, as mentioned above... a colleague who drinks a glass--a glass!--of wine while grading! Another prof who sits in a cafe sipping--sipping, for crying out loud!--an imported beer! (is that supposed to underline the debauchery of it, the fact that it's imported, maybe even European?). While Wilson says "there is a distinct difference between the professor who does a little wine tasting on the weekends and the ones who can’t seem to control their use of drugs or alcohol," she doesn't seem to believe her own words.

  • Fire the Secretary - A New Intervention Strategy
  • Posted by Suzanne E. Franks on October 19, 2005 at 1:56pm EDT
  • It's hard for me to take seriously the author's support for diagnosis and treatment programs for those who suffer from the disease of drug/alcohol addiction. Yes, that's what one has to say in a piece where one self-righteously looks down upon the pond scum who "brazenly" admit to their addictions, in order not to look so nasty. But I have to ask: why did the departmental secretary have to be written out of her job just because she admitted to you that she smoked pot at night? You obviously couldn't fire her legally, as you acknowledged - she was performing her job - so the pot-smoking wasn't interfering. No, your smug morality interpreted her as a sinner rather than as someone with a disease. And a secretary is more easily gotten rid of than a professor. So instead of offering her help, or encouraging her to seek out help, you "helped" arrange for her to lose her job. I'm sure THAT "helped" out her three-year-old child. Now unemployed Mommy can sit home and smoke pot all day, to cope with her depression over losing her job. Yeah, your concern for the child is so touching. Fire Mommy. That's a great strategy for dealing with drug abuse.

  • Immaturity and Insecurity
  • Posted by James on October 19, 2005 at 3:31pm EDT
  • The author left out two of the most common reasons people disassociate from reality.

  • Are Profs Different?
  • Posted by Jonathan Dresner at UH-Hilo on October 19, 2005 at 4:25pm EDT
  • I'm sorry, but I've known many a professor who drank lightly, if at all, avoided illegal drugs, and generally lived moderate, healthy lifestyles. I've even been at faculty mixers with alcohol where people had serious discussions they could remember the next day. I've known a FEW who overdid it, but of course they're the ones who always show up to the parties.

    Given the prevalence of alcohol use and abuse in US society, the question isn't "do eggheads party?" but "do college faculty party differently than the general population?"

  • "Drinking and Debauchery
  • Posted by Marvin McConoughey on October 19, 2005 at 4:25pm EDT
  • My comment is that I respect the author for being a composition instructor. Learning how to write understandably is a key lifetime skill. Thank you for your service.

    I found your essay convincing. As a teetotaler, I know that one can be successful and cope with heavy workloads without alcohol or other mind-altering aids. Those who like to indulge can take comfort in reports that light drinking may be good for the heart.

  • Shocked!
  • Posted by tenure track in the Midwest on October 19, 2005 at 5:58pm EDT
  • I’m shocked, SHOCKED, to learn of such debauchery in academia! We must all do our part to ensure that papers are graded in strict sobriety and that our dope smoking department assistants are in the unemployment line where they belong!

    Seriously, I appreciate the attempt of some to defend the Wilson’s intentions, but the overriding tone of condescension undermines any value of the piece. The response by Suzanne E. Franks was right on the money. She pointed to the most disturbing part of the article where the author implies a link between the secretary’s private pot smoking (hidden from her child, no less) and the loss of her job. As someone who tries hard to convince my students that correlation and causation is not the same thing, it was galling to see a college educator reason like a college freshman.

  • Point me to the Party!
  • Posted by huntly on October 19, 2005 at 9:24pm EDT
  • Could someone please tell me where all these great pot-parties and drunken orgies are taking place? I'm long overdue for one of those! Now in my fifth year as a full-time faculty member at two different universities, I have yet to witness one of these bacchanalian events. Our parties generally involve a table full of fruit-and-cheese party trays from Whole Foods, a few bottles of cheap wine, and some petty bitching about department politics or mundane campus events. Occasionally, an overly warm and utterly dorky flirting match breaks out between two middle-aged, still-single writers or medievalists. Is this the dark danger that we're being warned about? Possible fornication amongst the congenitally myopic? I've seen absolutely no evidence that academia hides a proportionately larger percentage of alcoholics or drug-addicts than any other profession in America. While any addiction among the ranks is sad and regrettable, I hardly see any cause for raising the alarm. Start a support group on your campus if you're worried for God's sake! Put please spare us the self-righteous temperance lecture. Better yet, have a drink and relax a little...I'm sure your students will appreciate it when they get their papers back.

  • About that secretary...
  • Posted by Shari Wilson , Nomad Scholar at Midwest University... on October 20, 2005 at 10:15am EDT
  • For those who are overly concerned about the secretary, I should note that professors (including myself) had nothing to do with her "restructured" position. The department chair was fed up with her tardiness, lack of motivation, poor work habits and refusal to do her job. I would like to mention that it was *her choice* to go home every night, lock her 3-year-old into a bedroom for eight hours and smoke pot with her husband (unless they fell asleep on the sofa--in which case the child was locked up, alone in a room for 18 hours) . It was *her choice* to come to work late and talk loudly to students, professors, and staff about her overindulgence in pharmaceuticals and illegal drugs. The end result is that she was NOT fired... the campus systems have a very difficult time firing a staff member. They simply allowed her to apply to jobs in other departments until she ended up working for our Dean. He had to shore her up with several student assistants to get her to do simple copying and collating -- which she complained constantly about. In fact she was the most unhappy (and vocal) employee I had ever met after working there for six years. So those who were worried that she was now unemployed, have no fear. She is still in charge of that 3-year-old, a few confused student assistants, and now a department as well.

  • Posted by Vika Zafrin on October 20, 2005 at 2:33pm EDT
  • Ms. Wilson, with your comment you dig yourself further into your own hole. You grab on to the reactions to the preposterous firing story that you related and evade the criticisms of your article's tone and lack of understanding of the issues at hand.

    Again: a glass of wine or a joint does not an addiction make, and the line of where harmful behaviour begins is ever-moving and highly dependent on the individual in question.

    Locking one's child in a bedroom for however many hours may not be pleasant, correct or condonable behavior, but has nothing to do with a person's performance on a job. You want her child to be better taken care of, you call social services. As for all her flaws on the job, that's up to her coworkers to judge; but ascribing to her all the stereotypes of a POTHEAD (with a tone of oh.my.god. did you HEAR what that woman DID?) merely highlights your lack of understanding of the physiological effects of marijuana smoking.

    As a concrete example: you will certainly know that the smoked part of the cannabis plant is the dried flower, less often the leaf. The material is organic and has been cultivated for thousands of years. Has it occurred to you that there might possibly be different strains of the plant, with different psychotropic effects?

    Your anti-drug argument is anecdotal. Not only does it select potentially extreme cases (along with irresponsible conflating of those cases with a glass of wine while grading), but it creates causality between her drug use and her job performance that is not a given based on the facts you provide. She may have been a poor worker irrespective of her choices with regard to her leisure time.

    I wonder where you got your data, by the way. Was it hearsay, or did you see her hanging out with her husband while their baby was pounding on the bedroom door, shedding innocent tears? If there's child abuse, then it needs to be dealt with; but the tone of your article and subsequent comment is gossipy and full of politicized spin.

    Had you spent some time outside of the humanities and talked to neuroscientists, or read the political history and scientific studies of the use of psychoactives (a category to which alcohol, marijuana, heroin, caffeine and nicotine all belong), you might not have presumed that psychoactive consumption is on balance deleterious to the pursuit of humanistic studies, or indeed the pursuit of knowledge.

  • Poor baby
  • Posted by huntly on October 20, 2005 at 5:28pm EDT
  • My parents used to lock me in the bedroom at night while they had sex. Or "grown-up" discussions. Or "quiet time." Or when I was being a rotten little snot. I suppose all of these were instances of child abuse too. Better that they had given me their full attention 24 hours a day, or perhaps a good beating when I was bad, rather than taking some time to themselves. Sadly, I used all that alone time to play make-believe games, read books, organize my room, and build hideouts. Had I known I was an abused child, I might have tried to escape, or told one of mommies friends at work about my sordid situation so that she could squeal to all her colleagues and write scathing articles (anonymously) online. No wonder I've become one of those raging alcoholics who drinks wine while I grade!

  • But look at how well Prohibition works!
  • Posted by JMG on October 21, 2005 at 12:03pm EDT
  • See today's IHE story on "Detox at [U-Wisc] Madison" (my alma mater). It provides a nice complement to this piece because it shows how well the campaign to root out drinking works ... which is to say, not at all.

    The drinking age in Wisconsin was 18 until the federal bluenoses used a transportation bill to greenmail states into raising the drinking age to 21 (on pain of losing highway money otherwise). Read the piece on drinking among students in Madison to see how well it's worked. Now we're back to killing 18-20 year olds in the military and then telling them they aren't responsible enough to drink at home.

    The tobacco industry long ago figured out that one of the best ways to market tobacco to kids is to keep running ads about how "smoking is for adults" -- sends two messages: (1) adults smoke and (2) people who want to appear older than they are can do so by smoking. Presto -- smoking among teens soared even as we cranked up anti-tobacco rhetoric and cigarette taxes.

    Now we appear determined to do the same with alcohol.

    The prohibitionist reflex is just another proof that, for every social problem, there is a solution that's logical, easy-to-understand, widely popular, and dead wrong.

  • Posted by Thane Doss on October 21, 2005 at 12:12pm EDT
  • Presumably one drinks or smokes pot or whatever to induce some sort of change in one's state. And presumably there is a correlation between the amount of alcohol/THC consumed and the amount of alteration in one's state that occurs.

    This leads to the question of whether one is grading all of one's students upon the same basis if one consumes substances that alter one's mental state while one grades. That last paper may look a lot better simply for being the last paper after some alcohol has cranked up one's endorphin-production machinery.

    I'm no angel. Back when I worked at two colleges, carried a full load of graduate classes, worked for professors, and tried to get a little bit of personal writing done all at the same time, I often drank while grading. I could exist on four hours or less of sleep a night for months on end, as long as I kept inputting some alcoholic fuel. It seemed personally useful for a time, and I took great measures to assure that my grading was unaffected, marking papers for both content and correctness and then piling and comparing them both ways to be certain that papers with similar qualities were getting similar grades.

    But I will not claim that altering my mental state had no effect on my grading and never resulted in any degree of unfairness in grading. I am not aware that it ever did, but I really would have to be flatly dismissing the simple fact that alcohol and drugs affect perception and emotions in order to make the claim. I'm not really big on dismissing facts in order to make myself feel more self-righteous....

    As a matter of assuring fairness, I don't think one should drink while grading. If you want to drink after the grading, after the semester, on vacation, or whatever, that's your business, but drinking while grading is drinking on the job.

    (One should, of course, be paid a reasonable wage for those grading hours.)

    If I could undo the drinking I did while grading, I would, simply to be more certain that I achieved the as-fair-and-objective-as-humanly-possible mark that I sought. [For what it's worth, having not drunk for a number of years, I realize that I'm actually a lot more comfortable not drinking than I was drinking.]

  • Posted by JMG on October 21, 2005 at 1:41pm EDT
  • What about the effect of fatigue as you grade those huge piles of blue books or papers? Or the lucky ones who get graded after you have your jolt of caffeine, rather than the unlucky ones who get you while your attention is flagging and you're dying to get to bed.

    Bottom line is that grades and grading are hugely problematic in and of themselves -- whether you're doing any good for any single student by giving them a mark is one question, and the other one is how you grade more than one student fairly, presuming you think there is some benefit to grading students at all.

    Seems like quite a stretch to overlook all the problems with grading and focus on whether someone has a glass of wine or a beer while doing it.

  • not cool
  • Posted by librarygal on October 21, 2005 at 3:18pm EDT
  • No matter what Huntly says... locking up a 3 year old each night for whatever reason is not a good parenting technique. Geez, I can't even believe I have to say that.

    Some of the defensive reactions to this column are intense. I suspect it's hit a few nerves. I work at a state run university library. On my campus, it's against campus policy to drink during work hours. I guess it's not at other campuses?

    Alcohol alters your perception, mood and judgment. That's why we drink it! Duh. Anyway, that's why I drink. And that's why I don't drink when I have to act in a professional capacity.... on the job or during board meetings for my various volunteer groups, etc...

    Keeping a bottle of whisky in your desk? Drinking during office hours or while you're grading? It's unprofessional and probably against campus policy. And personally, I think it's disrespectful to your co-workers and your students.

  • Good Advice for faculty or anyone with a drinking problem
  • Posted by Ken on October 21, 2005 at 3:43pm EDT
  • I find it very interesting that the reaction to the article was so negative and vitrolic. Disclosure: I am a recovering alchoholic and I work as in student support services and am an adjunct instructor at a small college. The author is pointing out warning signs of substance dependency. If you "need" a joint or some alchohol to grade papers or have a good time, or to relax, you have a problem. If you think this might be you, then it might be. If you do not "need" these things, then its not you. As far as people who began drinking in the 50's and 60's and 70's...the rest of us grew up, it is your turn. Seek help if you need it, there is plenty of good counseling available and a lot of very competent people around to help you on the way to sobriety.

  • Nonsense
  • Posted by huntly on October 21, 2005 at 4:44pm EDT
  • Both of the above claims about the mind-altering and potentially unethical consequences of "a glass of wine while grading" are utter nonsense. A single alcoholic beverage while sitting quietly in a chair in your den is hardly going to skew your grades in any noticeable way, unless you're somehow allergic to alcohol or a struggling alcoholic as it is. We're not talking about the rare instance in which someone is downing a bottle of Tequila while trying to pilot an airplane! As JMG points out, a glass of wine or a beer isn't likely to be any more of a factor than a couple of cups of coffee, several hours of grading, an argument with your spouse, or any one of a million other "mood-altering" events that influences your subjectivity. There is no utterly objective state in which to grade a paper--and no one needs one. This isn't eactly heart surgery that we're performing! I don't need a steady hand and a zen-like consciousness to identify a writing problem or a fallacious argument. If anything, I need to get rid of that tension knot in the back of my neck and my frustratingly clenched-jaw more urgently than I need to clear my system of "impurities." Finally, the idea that I somehow owe my employer or my students an "alcohol-free environment" outside of the classroom is sheer fascism. There is no such obligation or expectation.

    As for children being sent to their rooms--please spare us the overprotective parental paranoia. Children are as much in need of their "private time" as are parents. Give them a safe environment, a means of communication, and frequent visits, and they'll be fine. I have a feeling that the article's hysterical portrayal of the child left alone with his finger in a socket while the parents are toking up is more than a little bit exaggerated.

  • I am SHOCKED TOO
  • Posted by andrew on October 22, 2005 at 4:27am EDT
  • I am with "Tenure Track" I am utterly SHOCKED AND DISMAYED at such behavior. Just SHOCKING and horrible, behavior!

    Point me to the party! And fast, this is a harsh semester !!!!

    Tenured Skydog in the Midwest (at a liberal arts college too!)

  • Insulting your critics
  • Posted by suzanne.franks on October 28, 2005 at 4:09pm EDT
  • Shari Wilson wrote to me privately following me comment to argue with me, and at the end of her email she essentially accused me and anyone else who disagrees with her of having a drug or alcohol problem. Here's my reply.

    It's interesting that you accuse me of having an addiction merely because I was critical of your article. Anyone who disagrees with you is probably an addict - so only those who agree with you have valid opinions? that's a nice position to put yourself in.

    My point was, and is, if a person is doing their job - and in the article, you said she was, that the only way to get rid of her was to write her job description differently - if a person is able to do their job and accomplish their tasks, then they've met their responsibilities to their coworkers. You may dislike what they do outside work, but that doesn't mean you get to fire them for it.

    In this particular case: did you encourage her to seek help for her addiction? Did you report her to child social services, if it's the child you were truly so worried for? Do you understand that addictions are just that, addictions? People with addictions have a disease that needs to be treated. Addictions are not moral failings, and what I find offensive is the implication that they are. You understand very little about them if you think that if you just punish people with addictions appropriately, they will see the light and never lift a glass or light a joint again.

    This secretary may have been a lousy person, I don't know and don't care, but if she was addicted to pot, then she had a disease, and needed treatment for it. She might still be a lousy person after successful treatment for her addiction, but you are conflating her personality and her illness. (As if, had she been a nicer person, her situation might have had some pathos for you.) And you are making moral judgments about her illness.

    It's easy to moralize from a distance, but moralizing doesn't do a damn thing to help anyone with an addiction or the people who are affected by those with addictions. It does, however, add to the shame that addicts feel about their disease, and make it even harder for them to seek the help they need.