New Discovery: The Saw Doctors

I first time I saw the Saw Doctors was at the Chicago Celtic Festival in the fall of 2004. I had never heard them before but a few of their songs stuck in my head for a few years. At the end of the spring semester one of my professors commented to me about the band, knowing my affinity for all things Irish. Most recently, while at work, I noticed some of their tunes on the shared iTunes network at work. After a few virtual spins I was hooked. They remind me of a college/party band, along the lines of Jimmy Buffet, but their social and cultural commentary is pointed, on the ball, and identifiably Irish. Their most recent stuff seems a bit more mainstream, a bit slicker, and, dare I say, over produced, but on the whole these guys write great tunes, have a great sense of humor, and a unique worldview. They don't delve into traditional Irish instrumentation, an occasional accordion seems to be the closest they get, but the motifs of exile, home sickness, social frustration, and others reinforce some of the accepted (read: nationalist, except the anti-Clericalism really) ideas of what is Irish (see Kerby Miller). By no means does this reflect quotidian Irish life, but catering to your audiences' expectations is what sells records - on both sides of the Atlantic. So to put my musical and intellectual snobbery aside, I give the Saw Doctors a big thumbs-up (hopefully Roger Ebert won't take exception to the use of his trademark "thumbs" rating).

4x6 Cards

A quick tip for studying for exams: use 4x6 cards. Get a stack of blank cards, enough so you have one for each source on your reading list. Across the top write the Author's last name, the full title of the book, and I put the year of publication in the upper right hand corner. On the next line write "T:" followed by the thesis of the book or article. I try to keep it rather concise, no more than two lines on the card. Next, write "A:" and list all of the main arguments, sub-theses, or other pertinent information from the book. The bottom four lines on the card I use for methodology "M:" and relevance "R:". Just like you don't need to read the whole book to understand it's historical context and relevance, you don't need pages of notes on each work. When it gets time for your exam you're not going to remember much more than you can fit on a 4x6 card anyway, if that. This method is revised from the one I used for my minor field reading list, with the most important change being relevance. By thinking about some of the broader themes each work addresses while you're studying it prevents you from having to go back and re-consult items. I find the 4x6 card method useful because it allows you to physically move texts from one grouping to another and assess how adding or subtracting a given work affects the trend you have established. It also helps to see the cross-pollination and layers involved between areas of history such as nationalism, culture, identity, colonialism, etc. Finally, always remember to consult book reviews on the works you read for you list and compare others' thoughts on the book to your own? If theirs don't make sense it creates more questions and provides insight into the field. Book reviews also help you get through your list quicker, which, in turn, provides you more time to actually study your notes rather than cramming in as many books as you can at the last minutes. I've found that an average of two works per day got me through my list fairly quickly (I had already read or was familiar with about half of the 130 or so books on my major field list and notes I had on those sped up the process even more).

Graduate Students and Faculty

In the history department at my university at least one graduate student is selected to sit in on faculty meetings. However, the process by which this individual is selected, what their role is at faculty meetings, and their obligations to the faculty and their fellow graduate students is in no way publicized. It seems both logical and fair that these requirements be clearly spelled out and accessible to all faculty and graduate students. Furthermore, just as graduate students elect their representatives in the department's History Graduate Student Association, so too should they be able to vote for their faculty representative. This restores transparency to the entire process and makes the elected individual responsible to his or her peers for communicating pertinent information regarding the status of the department. If the proceedings of the meetings is deemed too confidential for the general graduate student population, then what is the point of even having a student representative? I believe that establishing a presence in the department is critical for continued excellence in graduate studies. I intend to raise these issues with the department's Graduate Program Director; I will report back on my findings when I have more concrete answers.