The second column of significance this go around was the one titled “My Ride to the Airport,” in which I tried to dole out some thanks to a fellow named Jim Marshall, who was a great help to me at a key moment at the beginning of my undergrad career. My only regret about the column is that I didn’t individually thank all of the other folks at Iowa who helped me out so much.

The gig goes on.

My Ride to the Airport (3/19/13)

Just Go to Bed (3/1/13)

On Guns in My Classroom (2/6/13)

A Chance to Advance (1/21/13)

Personal and Professional Boundaries (1/4/13)

How to Handle ‘In Process’ Work (12/3/12)

Veterans in the Classroom (11/12/12)

Prepare for Administration (10/26/12)

I have mixed feelings about how large RSA, and its conference in particular, has become, and I’ll probably post on those at a later time. Regardless of my feelings though, it is an important conference, and I would argue the vanguard conference in the field. It is the highest quality, and largest, conference where folks from the English side of rhetorical studies and the Communications side of rhetorical studies converge on the same spot. It’s probably worth attending for that quality alone.

I’ll also say this for the CFP: it’s short, sweet, and not nearly as contrived/cutesy as many conference themes are. Thank you for that, RSA.

What appears below is the official RSA 2014 CFP:

Rhetoric Society of America Conference

“Border Rhetorics”

#RSA14

May 22-26, 2014

Marriot River Center – San Antonio, Texas

San Antonio is an ideal city for thinking about borders.  Not only has the city been positioned along different national borders, but it also exists at the interesting intersection of diverse cultures and histories.  “Border Rhetorics” not only invites consideration of these kinds of geographic, political and cultural borders but also invites consideration of a wider range of borders: the borders between identities, between roles, between disciplines, between concepts, etc.  The 2014 conference theme seeks to spur a broad conversation about the borders that unite and divide us, the ways in which these borders are constructed and deconstructed, confirmed and contested.

The theme of “Border Rhetorics” opens a space for numerous inquiries and conversations about the things that constitute our borders – politically, culturally, academically, etc. – as well as the ways in which those borders are constructed, crossed, challenged, circumvented, diminished and redrawn.  The theme also encourages us not only to think about our borders but also to think across them in the hopes of opening spaces for dialogue and disagreement that may in turn alter our sense of these borders. 

Interested parties are invited to submit abstracts for individual papers, proposals for panels, and ideas for special format events (roundtables, debates, etc.).  Panels representing only one institution are strongly discouraged and a slight preference will be shown for panels representing not only different institutions but also different disciplinary fields (e.g., Composition and Communication Studies). Submissions that take advantage of off-site venues are also encouraged. 

Proposals Due July 1, 2013; Notifications September 1, 2013

For more details and to submit your proposal, visit:  http://rhetoricsociety.org/aws/RSA/pt/sp/conferences

Join the official RSA 14 conference Facebook group for networking, news and updates:  http://www.facebook.com/groups/551900858153994/553997331277680/?notif_t=group_activity

The Honors class is an open-ended nightmare, because I’m making the students design the course materials, down to the policies, syllabus, readings, and writing assignments. Watch it unfold here. Content will fill in as the class collectively completes it, but I hope to have a complete picture of the semester within a week or two. The sooner we work it all out, the better for students. My other 202 course is more straightforward, though I have tweaked the course considerably since last semester.

In a change from prior semesters I am rolling out major writing assignments only as they arise, and not all at the beginning of the semester. This is to keep students focused on the immediate tasks at hand and to reduce their anxiety. We’ll see if it works in either case.

This is also my very first semester at WCU not teaching a grad class. Instead I’m teaching an upper level English Lit/Liberal Studies class called Stories Retold, in which we’ll read Nicholson Baker, Colson Whitehead, Nicole Krauss, Jose Saramago, Italo Calvino, Michael Ondaatje, Magnus Mills, and related criticism.

As always, fellow instructors are free to crib whatever they like, but I always appreciate getting credit.

While the guide below explains meanings, it isn’t a very helpful guide to usage, so user beware. More than is the case with typical speech, swearing is all about context, tone, and idiom. To mess up any condition is to sound like a child, an idiot, or to provoke a sudden fight. As in English, swearing can be done casually or playfully, but only in the right company. Again, reader beware.

Padulo  –  (noun) padulo itself does not actually mean anything, and instead simply rhymes with a longer phrase which it invokes. The word is uttered, signaling the meaning of the whole phrase, which typically remains unspoken. The phrase that padulo rhymes with and stands-in for in common speech is “un uccello che vola all’altezza del culo.” Literally, this phrase translates as “a birds that flies at asshole height,” or, a “a bird that flies at the height of an asshole.” Imagine, for a moment, the, uh, inconvenience of having a bird fly up your asshole and you quickly understand the sentiment of the phrase and the all that the single, rhyming word “padulo” invokes. An inconvenience or “pain in the ass” would be referred to as a padulo in some circles, like my cousin’s law office.

Il Stronzo – (noun) asshole. Plural is gli stronzi. Femmine is la stronza (s) or le stronze (p). This is stronger in sentiment than when one calls another an asshole in English.

Che Cazzo – What the Fuck! Strong, but used fairly casually.

Cazzo – (noun, m) dick, but never used to call a person a dick. (Minchia is a Calabrian equivalent.)

Testa di Cazzo – dickhead. Here’s how you call a person a dick, essentially.

Il Coglione – (noun, m) ball. Plural, i coglioni, for balls.

Rincoglionito – (adjective) stupid without reason or motive, out of one’s head without a cause, literally “head like balls.” One might say “Sto rincoglionito,” to mean essentially, I’m out of my fucking mind and I don’t know why. The word though is pretty rude in Italian.

Vaffanculo! – Fuck you!Literally, “go put something in your asshole,” but translates most directly to the English “fuck you.”

La Puttana – (noun, f) whore. The gender of Italian swears is quite important, and this, as well as the subsequent two terms for whore, would only be used against a woman, and would be quite rude. To use it, or either of the next two terms, against a man would be silly or nonsensical.

La Migniotta – (noun, f) whore. This version of “whore” has an interesting etymology. When the Catholic Church registered orphans who had been abandoned in their records (ecclesiastic or provincial) they would register the child as “figlio/a di madre ignota,” or, “son/daughter of unknown mother.” In time “madre ignota” collapsed into “migniotta” (in an intermediary step it actually was abbreviated as m. ignota) which now means “whore” or “easy woman.”

La Troia – (noun, f) whore.

La Porcaputtana, La Porcamigniotta, La Porcatroia – (nouns, f) Pig whore. Slightly stronger than calling a woman simply a whore is to, apparently, call her a pig whore.

Il Puttanane – (noun, m). Literally, big whore, but made even ruder because it uses a masculine rather than a feminine ending.

La Fica – (noun, f) pussy. (La fissa is a southern/Calabrian variant).

A fiss’i mammita – Calabrian, literally “your mother’s cunt.” Very rude.

Bastardo – (noun, m) bastard.

Il Cornuto – (noun, m) cuckold. This is a stronger much stronger condemnation in Italian than it is in English. It’s used against men exclusively.

Figlio di puttana – son of a whore.

Rotto in Culo – broken off in the asshole. Very, very rude.

Rodimento di Culo – very angry, burned in the ass. Very rude.

Ma che ti rode il culo? – Does your asshole burn? What’s burning your asshole? Very rude.

Come un ditto nel culo – Like a finger in the ass, like a finger in the asshole. Very rude. For example, if your friend asked you if you want to go to hear his band play you might say, “Si, come voglio un ditto nel culo,” sarcastically saying, “Yeah, like I want a finger up my asshole.” (Notice, this phrase does not acknowledge that there are actually people in the world who enjoy having fingers up their assholes, so don’t think too literally here.) Pretty rude.

Come un ditto nel culo con la sabbia – like a finger in the ass with sand, or like a sandy finger in the asshole. An even ruder variation by a friend of a friend.

Cacacazzo – a person who pisses you off, literally “one who shits on my dick.” Very rude.

Rompere le palle – to break balls

Merda – (noun, f) shit

Porco il claro – the invention of a friend of mine, literally “damn the clergy”

Pezzo di merda – piece of shit

Chiavare – (verb) to fuck (conjugate compound tenses with avere). Of the “to fuck” verbs in Italian, this is the rudest.

Trombare – (verb) to fuck (conjugate compound tenses with avere). Of the “to fuck” verbs in Italian, this is secondary in rudeness to chiavere and equivalent to scopare and fottere in rudeness.

Scopare – (verb) to fuck (conjugate compound tenses with avere). Of the “to fuck” verbs in Italian, this is secondary in rudeness to chiavere and equivalent to scopare and trombare in rudeness.

Fottere – (verb) to fuck (conjugate compound tenses with avere). Of the “to fuck” verbs in Italian, this is secondary in rudeness to chiavere and equivalent to scopare and trombare in rudeness.

Battere – (verb) to hook, to sell one’s body, doing the work of selling one’s body (conjugate compound tenses with avere).

La Sega – (noun, f) literally, a handjob. One might say “Non mi importa una sega,” and the phrase would translate most closely to “I don’t give a fuck.”

Italians say things that are the equivalent of “goddamn” so frequently that it doesn’t even qualify as profanity, so I haven’t even included those phrases. This is a reasonable introductory guide to swearing in Italian. Use it carefully. I’ve listed some additional resources below.

Additional Resources:

When an Italian Says a Parolaccia (a reflection on Italian swearing by an American Comp Lit PhD candidate written in 2008)

Ma Che Cazzo

Another Dictionary

I use NOAA’s Interactive Snow Information site to monitor the snow depth and water depth equivalent of snow at the cabin. NOAA uses observed data to interpolate computer predictions of ground conditions around the country (public funds well spent). It’s a great site. But all it allows me to do is worry. I can’t take any action short of driving out to New Mexico if I see worrisome accumulations.

After dismissing many electric (unavailable) and mechanical (too Wylie Coyote) solutions to my snow accumulation problem, and after reading a great paper (pdf) on Ice Engineering by the US Army Corps of Engineers (more government dollars well spent, seriously), I’ve decided that the best insurance is to apply an icephobic, ultra-modern coating that should help my metal roof to slough off frozen accumulations more easily than otherwise, primarily by reducing the ice’s ability to body to the roof and effectively reducing the snow’s angle of repose on the roof. The long and short–these coatings make the snow slide off of the roof easier and thus reduce the weight the roof has to bear.

I have decided that Wearlon Super F-1 is the best coating to go with to prevent hazardous snow accumulations. It’s expensive stuff (approximately $190/gallon), but appears to work. I’ll put it on this summer, unless my roof caves in before then, and report back about effectiveness (both actual and psychological).

So, here goes:

A friend of mine recently expressed an interest in learning to fly-fish.

I’ve often fantasized about creating an entire fly-fishing curriculum. So, I was sort of excited when he asked if I could recommend some reading to introduce him to the sport/hobby until he has a chance to get on the water.

I think that it is a good idea when taking up fly-fishing to first read a book about it, a very practical, hands-on, how-to book. In particular, it is a good idea to read The Orvis Fly-Fishing Guide by Tom Rosenbauer. This is because fly-fishing is a hobby in which one does not need a lot of equipment to participate and have fun, but then there is no upper bound on what one could spend on gear and gizmos and flies meant more for catching fly-fishers’ wallets than fish. Rosenbauer explains the basic premises and techniques of the sport, and his thorough explanations, which extend to most basic aspects of the sport, are aided by simple, readable illustrations. But Rosenbauer also gives practical, sensible advice on gear, so that a beginning fly-fisher can focus on essentials and not get roped into a bunch of inessential equipment that, while perhaps fun, gets very expensive very fast. (Aside for one person in particular: this one alone should get you started, John, and I can make further recommendations on specific topics once you’ve gotten the broad strokes.)

In terms of guidebooks, I am a huge fan of the series put out by Wilderness Adventures Press. They aren’t always the best guides for every state, but in my experience they are most consistently the best compared to other series.

In addition to the many pleasures that fly-fishing provides on the water–the settings in which we fish, the joys and disappointments of fish caught and missed and spooked, the discovery of a new spot, the excuse simply to be outside, indulging in a beautifully-inefficient-and-yet-zen-pursuit–one of the great pleasures of fly-fishing is the cerebral and intellectual life it invites. Fly-fishing, more than any hobby I know of, has a vast, intellectually-robust, highly diverse literature that surrounds it. You have to think a lot on the water as you fish, and then there is plenty to read and think about when you can’t get out on the water.

Simply thinking about or staring at pictures of fly-fishing used to calm me during the worst parts of my Ph.D. program.

On the psychology of fishing, I love Paul Quinnett’s Pavlov’s Trout. I should probably force women to read this book before becoming involved with them, but I’ve never had the stones to make that request.

Two of my favorite fly-fishing travelogues are James Prosek’s Fly-fishing the 41st and Christopher Camuto’s A Fly Fisherman’s Blue Ridge. Prosek’s book invites me to imagine fishing across many parts of the world that I will probably never have a chance to visit, while Camuto’s indulges my preference for the Southern Appalachian waters that I already know, love, and share with him.

Anders Halverson’s An Entirely Synthetic Fish explains why and how rainbow trout have come to dominate many American cold-water fisheries, much to the detriment of native species.

If you wanna get REAL geeky about it, take a field trip to Montana State’s Trout and Salmonid Library Collection some day.

And anybody who fly-fishes for trout should join Trout Unlimited, which works very hard to protect cold-water species and their habitats and our world. I’m a Life Member.

I will, however, be at MLA this year on Friday, January 4th, from 1:30-2:20, presenting somewheres in the Convention Center. More than likely I’ll be speaking about some of the tensions between rhetoric and literature in English departments, and how both rhet/comp and literature grad students can negotiate those tensions ethically while on the job market. It will be very practically oriented toward those on the job market, and I will seek not to add to those tensions (which are ridiculous, but still exist at many institutions). I’ll be presenting with Mary Churchill, co-editor of the University of Venus blog, as well as with Dean Dad, author of the column by the same name, who will be revealing his true identity to the public for the first time. I suggested some high drama with a lucha libre mask as a possibility, but he decorously parried that suggestion. The three of us, in addition to some other IHE folks, will also be sporadically manning a booth at which we will consult individually with graduate students or faculty who would like to consult with us about professional issues.

I also have the privilege at MLA of chairing a panel of rhetoric superstars, to whit, Trish Roberts-Miller, Cynthia Selfe, Gail Hawisher, and Victor Vitanza. I will not be speaking with them, but meekly alerting one of them that they have run over time if necessary, and attempting to moderate questions from what is sure to be a large audience. Additional details for each event to follow as I receive them.

Conquering Writing Anxieties (10/10/12)

Fight for Your Rights (9/24/12)

Salary Realities (9/5/12)

Walk Like a Duck (8/20/12)

Deadlines Matter (8/1/12)

Ease Up, Don’t Ratchet Down (7/11/12)

Protect Your Health (6/27/12)

We All Need a Vacation (6/11/12)

As always, feel free to crib materials, but I always appreciate attribution.

Re:  Go Native, Be Happy

Dear Mr. Kreuter:

You state, “Bloon’s opinion piece (the point of which I already forget).  .   .

So since you have forgotten, all I read thereafter is an  exposition about Nathan’s Big Ego.

So be it.

However, don’t use Professor Bloom as a whipping boy for your narcissistic thoughts.

Mr. Bloom does know Iowa and it’s citizens. 

I know:  my family on both sides have lived in rural and urban Iowa for 160+/- years.  I moved back to Iowa after living in many locations for 25 years.  I have been tarred and feathered by my “neighbors”  for doing nothing more than installing a locked gate at the entrance to my property (the sheriff told me when I bought the property, that if I left anything on property overnight, it would be gone or destroyed by morning).  And yes, I have been (on both sides) an illegal immigrant for 375 +/- years.

Oh yes, I read your “ABOUT NATE” autobiography,  your “INTERESTS”, your “AMBITIONS”, your “ALLIES”, and your “ABOUT 3 X 3″ on your “special” site.

You sir are the last pompous twit that I would listen too.  Maybe if Newt gets the Republican nomination (because of the evangelicals of Western Iowa), he can ask you to be his V.P.  Two self-absorbed buddies:  Newt can be President, you can be the head of the Supreme Court.  Then the two of you can dissolve the Congress.

As another Iowan import of limited mental capacity that trashed Professor Bloom says, (a Southerner like you who says if Professor Bloom had just said those three little words no one would have objected, because they would have known he really loved them):

“Bless your heart”.

[Redacted] [sic all, and emphases in the original -NK]

Of course, I had to respond, because a nutty old coot doesn’t pitch me this sort of softball every day, and so, for kicks, I took on the voice of a fictional assistant:

Mr. [redacted],

Thank you for your fan letter.  Unfortunately, Dr. Kreuter does not have time to respond to every message he receives.  However, as his personal assistant, and the primary person responsible for the bulk of his correspondence, I will pass along your praise to Dr. Kreuter.  He always enjoys hearing from fellow Iowans! He also always appreciates hearing when an article or column strikes a resonance with an astute reader. 

Cordially,
[redacted]

Personal Assistant to Dr. Nate Kreuter
Western Carolina University

PS–I should inform you that, despite some of the allusions of your letter, Dr. Kreuter is most definitely not a Republican.  He has voted a straight Klingon ticket ever since he moved away from Riverside, Iowa (Future Birthplace of Captain James T. Kirk) for the last time in 2006. I have his voting records and Klingon Party registration cards in my filing cabinet, for future inclusion in Dr. Kreuter’s archives. 

That is, I believe, the only way to respond to incoherent correspondents.

Here’s a string of the columns I’ve written since my last inventory, including the Bloom response:

Learning Time Management (5/30/12)

Pushy Textbook Publishers (5/14/12)

Professorial Discretion (4/23/12)

Gaming the Grad Stipend (4/9/12)

Managing the Anticlimaxes (3/26/12)

Tilting at Windmills (3/12/12)

The Accidental Therapist (2/22/12)

E-mail Boundaries (2/6/12)

Professors vs. Zombies (1/25/12)

Be Your Weird Self (1/13/12)

Go Native, Be Happy (12/19/11)

Booze and the Young Academic (12/5/11)

You Aren’t the Exception (11/21/11)

Friends and Friendly (11/8/11)

Why I (Usually) Wear a Tie (10/24/11)

The article that I was cited in is: Dean, Deborah. “Shifting Perspectives about Grammar: Changing what and how we Teach.” English Journal 100.4 (2011): 20-26.

I skimmed along until I found the moment in the article where I had been cited by the author.

And then I was dismayed, dismayed because what the citation attributed to me is not my own unique work, and indeed is work that I never have nor would attempt to take credit for.  So, I’ll explain, and offer a correction to the author of the article.

Dean’s passage reads: “In a recent conference presentation, Nate Kreuter noted another element that may be part of the future perspective. When we go online, he explains, ‘Information is not in short supply. Attention is.’ He suggests that one key to effective communication in this new writing space might be style-an idea that should inform future shifts in perspective.”

Those familiar with Richard Lanham‘s work will immediately recognize that the ideas attributed to me by Dean are really Lanham’s ideas, the ones he articulates at length in The Economics of Attention.  I don’t recall the exact details of the conference presentation of two years ago, except to say that I am sure of two things: 1) that I certainly would have referenced Lanham in the presentation, and 2) that I attributed Lanham’s ideas to him.

In many ways, Dean’s understandable error, but error nonetheless, illustrates the risks of citing a conference presentation.  Usually delivered verbally and without leaving an enduring video or audio recording, scholars are apt to misremember or misconstrue a conference presentation after the fact, particularly since most of us are not trained in the methods of responsible journalism.

Frankly, I’m also a bit surprised that English Journal‘s blind reviewers didn’t, 1) nix the idea of citing a conference presentation for which there is no enduring record, and/or 2) recognize immediately that the ideas incorrectly attributed to me are in fact the quite famous thesis of Richard Lanham’s most recent book, especially given the fact that Lanham is quite important to the field and that I, well, am not.

I have been an evangelist on behalf of Richard Lanham’s work for some time now.  I’m happy that his ideas on the economics of attention (incorrectly attributed to me by Dean in this case) are finding purchase with a range of scholars.  I do believe, from what I observe in the world, that Lanham’s notion that attention, rather than information, is what’s in short supply in the information economy, is correct.  And that the notion is correct has potentially dramatic consequences for rhetoric and rhetorical instruction.  And while I have evangelized widely on behalf of Lanham’s idea, I certainly couldn’t take credit for it.