Over the last several months, I've written a series of posts (
part 1,
part 2,
part 3) on
Orexis Dianoētikē motivated originally by a Chronicle of Higher Education post,
The Art and Science of Academic Self-Promotion. The issue originally raised was one which is particularly pressing in contemporary academia, where stiff competition for more and more scarce resources is rapidly becoming the "new normal," relatively new social media open up interesting new opportunities for publicizing or promoting one's legitimate achievements, academia remains beset by the radically uneven lighting of its own self-replicating class and tier system - and yet many people remain chary of engaging in self-promotion, unsure of themselves, noticeably uneasy with the efforts of less restrained colleagues and coworkers. Still, as in every time and place, some people definitely do cross the lines.
How should one draw the lines, though -- that's a question not so easily answered. Egregious violations of good taste, collegiality, reciprocity, those we can all get behind, or rather
against, forming some kind of consensus. Practicing a parsimony of publicity -- meeting only whatever requirements of reporting come down from one's chair, or dean, tenure committee, provost -- entering the data supposedly comprising one's career into whatever digital (or God forbid, still paper!) portfolio one's school demands -- that seems the safe route. But it is the sagacious course to adopt? It's hard to say, because there seem to be no real rules, except those of rather ad hoc compilations reminding one more of unintentionally stuffy etiquette lists, or prudential "how to make friends and influence. . . " bulletpoint blocks.
