UNCLE KEVIN V. THE WORLD

 

Ted Genoways, the alleged glory hound, bully

Danielle Steele, get out your typewriter.  This will be your best novel yet, and you won’t have to make anything up.

Setting:  The University of Virginia.  Thomas Jefferson, UVA founder, modeled UVA’s architecture on Rome.  Violence and chaos reigned on campus when the nation’s first nonsectarian university opened in 1824.

Edgar Poe, one of the first students due to the fact that he was the charge of wealthy guardian John Allan, experienced first-hand the madness, writing to Allan, “You have heard no doubt of the disturbances at the College. Soon after you left here the Grand Jury met and put the Students in a terrible fright—so much so that the lectures were unattended—and those whose names were on the Sheriff’s list traveled off into the woods & mountains, taking their beds and provisions along with them.  There were about 50 on the list, so you may suppose the College was very well thinn’d. [the college had 135 students].”

And, again from Poe in the same letter: “Dixon made a physical attack upon Arthur Smith…he struck him with with a large stone on one side of the head, whereupon Smith drew a pistol (which are all the fashion here) and had it not miss’d fire, would have put an end to the controversy.”

So much for Thomas Jefferson’s self-governing experiment. 

Poe quietly learned what he could at the UVA, leaving without a degree, and left rural and aristocratic VA for the metropolitan north, where he earned fame in Letters, rejecting greased palms and superficial prestige, earning his bread the old-fashioned way, with genius, honesty and hard work.  Poe had no degree, and is remembered for what he wrote, not for prizes or awards.  What an odd idea!

Thomas Jefferson, the gentleman farmer (and slave-owner) liked the fact that Virginia had no cities—he liked things aristocratic and rural, except when he was shopping in Paris; never one to visit the north, the soft-spoken Jefferson would no doubt have smiled knowingly to himself had he lived to see Virginia leave the Union in 1861.

But the UVA did eventually go on to glory, though one of its bumps in the road was hosting T.S Eliot’s infamous speech against the Jews in the 1930s.

Kevin Morrissey, who took his own life on July 30, was, by all accounts, an honest and hardworking managing editor of the Virginia Quarterly Review. Morrissey had a job which he could not give up; he had a mortgage to pay; UVA was his ticket in a Virginia landscape of UVA and little else.   Morrissey had expertise and experience, but he was a man without a degree in the very heart of the credentialing industrial complex, the University of Virginia, whose president, John Casteen III, brought in a salary close to a million, and where everyone in town, it must have seemed to Kevin, had a masters degree.  Kevin’s position was sort of like one of the servants who ran Monticello…you run Monticello, but you’re a…servant.   You are a servant because you don’t have an MFA.  These are strange times in which we live; the analogy is a strange one, but true.

Outgoing UVA President John Casteen III was an English major at UVA in the 1960s, earning a Ph.D., where he moved on to be an English professor at U Cal, Berkeley in the 1970s.  Casteen traded in that heady experience to be admissions dean back at UVA; in the 80s, Casteen worked as Education secretary under VA governor Chuck Robb during the Vietnam vet and future intelligence committee senator’s ‘cocaine and playboy bunny affair’ days.  In 1990 John Casteen became the president of UVA.  He and his staff raised a lot of money for the college.

In 2003 Ted Genoways was hired as editor of the VQR as president Casteen gushed that the 31 year old had “energetic intelligence and visionary thinking.”  Mr. Genoways has an MFA from UVA and the masthead cites his poetry prizes first and foremost.   Using half-a-million dollars of $800,000 that was sitting in a VQR fund when he arrived, Genoways added color photography and splashy graphics to the magazine.  He also tapped into international crisis journalism with the extra cash, to give his magazine a prize-winning look, as well.  I’m not just a poet, I also report on Afghanistan.  The “on-the-ground” reporting in the VQR is hardly blockbuster; the magazine reads like dull AP wire, with strategically placed photos of the posed natives in crisis, taken by young, attractive photographers for their CV’s, who then fly around as heroes to plush speaking engagements at universities sponsored by media corporation clubs, such as the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, for which Genoways spoke in 2007 at U Cal Berkeley.  The VQR’s readership is tiny, and trying to turn a school magazine into a National Geographic or a Washington Post with a temporary influx of cash, plus a big salary for Genoways playing ‘great poet plus ace reporter’ on the taxpayer’s dime, is quixotic at best, and corrupt, at worst.

John Casteen IV, the president’s son, is also a poet, and a friend of Genoways, and Ted Genoways published himself and his friend John in the VQR Poetry Series, formerly the University Georgia Press Series, the competition series which Foetry.com exposed as corrupt; Genoways taking over the disgraced press to disgrace it in his own way.

The bullying by editor Genoways no doubt stems from his missionary, megalomaniacal quest to manufacture credentials out of thin air and create importance out of nothing. 

Grab for the brass ring, if you must, but should you step on people while you do?

The president’s office failed to respond when Genoways treated Morrissey like a servant, ordering Kevin to stay home for a week and not speak to his fellow workers.  This is barbaric, and should have resulted in Genoways’ immediate dismissal.

After Morrissey’s death, Genoways hired a high-powered lawyer named Lloyd Snook, who has been debating former VQR employees on-line, charging there is a grand conspiracy to punish Genoways. 

In 2009 Genoways befriended a wealthy 24 year old UVA donor, Alana Levinson-Labrosse, who recently became VQR staff and Genoway’s office buddy.

Are you still with me, Ms. Steele?

Maria Morrissey, the late managing editor’s sister, is defending her brother’s memory and called Genoways to clarify whether he (Genoways) did indeed email Kevin right before he died to berate him (which seemed to be his usual practice) for endangering the life of a reporter in Mexico.  Genoways, too busy to answer his own emails, pawned that task off on Morrissey.

How is that reporter in Mexico doing, I wonder?

Has Genoways saved him yet?

This tale of woe, reported by Dave McNair in a well-researched article, began with foetry—and became something far worse.

Prediction: Ted Genoways will continue his career as a successful editor.  Because… he has the creds. And that’s just the way it works these days.

 

30 Comments

  1. Al Cordle said,

    August 19, 2010 at 9:30 pm

    I’m not so sure Genoways can survive this one. Then again, according to Lloyd Snook, Genoways is at Breadloaf this week. Business as usual. I hope Snook didn’t take this on contingency because there’s a helluva lot of things Genoways probably forgot to mention.

    I’ve started linking up all the Genoways / VQR posts from my personal blog and Foetry. Have a look:

    http://bit.ly/9E0qBd

    • thomasbrady said,

      August 20, 2010 at 1:49 pm

      “And, believe me, we know of at least two cases more egregious than anything ever reported on Foetry.” —Ted Genoways to Alan Cordle, 2005

      Have these ever come to light?

      • Al Cordle said,

        August 20, 2010 at 10:02 pm

        Maybe he already knew he was going to take over the University of Georgia series and publish his own book as well as just-retired UVA President’s son, John Casteen IV’s.

  2. jimmy said,

    August 19, 2010 at 10:29 pm

    That dude looks scary

  3. August 20, 2010 at 12:21 am

    This is the most sordid shit in the history of the MFA era of poetry. One of the most nepotistic, nakedly self-aggrandizing gigs in the academic-literary complex has led to this? Who would have figured.

    Nice summary. Also, I’ve been reading your stuff for quite awhile and this is one of your most interesting gratuitous EAP insertions of all time, a literary genre which you invented and are the uncontested champion of. Tom Brady/Monday Love could drink anybody on the planet under the table in a round of “Six Degrees of Edgar Allen Poe.”

  4. thomasbrady said,

    August 20, 2010 at 2:00 pm

    Thanks, Al; that’s great stuff. There were some really sharp folks on foetry.com, and I’m still in awe of them. It’s too bad that site was shut down.

    Ted’s “interview” of you intimated psychosis: I want to ask you about Kathleen. I want to ask you about Kathleen. I want to ask you about Kathleen.

    Steven Ford Brown’s letter deserves another look:

    Response to “Contesting the Poetry Contests” by John
    T. Casteen and Ted Genoways

    I’d like to extend thanks to John Casteen and Ted Genoways for their thoughtful piece on reforming the world of literary contests and pressures in academe to publish or perish. Although, I would like to point out what I think are several inaccuracies.
    Alan Cordle, the founder of Foetry.com, first issued a call in April of last year for reform of the literary contest system. Continued calls for reform since have fallen on deaf ears. Queries about judging and winners and how the process works at numerous literary competitions went unanswered. Letters at that time were also written to AWP, the Association of American University Presses, directors of the press at the universities of Georgia and Iowa and the presidents of the universities of Georgia and Iowa. Except for a brief comment about the excellence of writers that graduate from Iowa and the fact that “it’s a small world” from the Director of the University of Iowa Press, there were no responses from any of the individuals and organizations letters were sent to.
    A request was made to the University of Georgia Press for a twenty-year list of anonymous judges for the annual poetry series competition. Upon being denied the list by the University of Georgia another request was made through a formal Open Records Act request to the Attorney General of the state of Georgia for release of the records. The official documents released by the University of Georgia with the assistance of the Attorney General were used to compile the information about the poetry series competition and judges posted at Foetry.com. Upon request Associate Counsel Maria Lukas of the University of Iowa Office of Legal Counsel released the names of the judges for all the Iowa Prize competitions for the past five years. While the judges were not necessarily anonymous at Iowa, the names of judges and affiliations were not prominently advertised by the University of Iowa Press or announced on their website along with contest guidelines. Judges for the nationally advertised Iowa fiction and poetry competitions the past five years were all affiliated (graduates, former and current teachers) with the University of Iowa Writers Workshop. The four winners of the 2004 poetry competition and 2005 fiction competition are all University of Iowa graduates, former teachers and a current employee (English Department) of the University of Iowa. The Iowa fiction series is funded by the National Endowment for the Arts. The Iowa poetry series is funded by fees from a national pool of writers who submit to the contest.
    While I believe what Mr. Casteen and Mr. Genoways are suggesting fits nicely with what Mr. Cordle has been saying for the past year, the more elemental problem has to do with the numbers of graduating writers with MFA degrees each year. There are simply too many writers for the publishing community to publish. The follow up question would be, why are there so many MFA writing programs? Having raised the question, I’ll leave it to wiser minds to debate the merits of the current MFA system in American universities.
    Lastly, I don’t think it should be a shock that writers submitting manuscripts with entry fees to nationally advertised contests consider themselves consumers and believe that Consumer and other laws apply to the acceptance of these monies by literary presses and organizations to fund literary competitions. In the past there have been numerous instances in which a judge from a prestigious Writing Program selected a former student –or someone they have a close relationship with- for one of the literary contest prizes. The only problem with that scenario is another 750-1,000 writers sent in manuscripts with entry fees attached (often totaling as much as $15,000-$25,000). That is what Foetry.com documents.
    I do not speak for Mr. Cordle -but know him from our private correspondence- and Alan Cordle is eager to work with others to reform what is a bad system for publishing younger writers who want credentials for jobs. But after a year of efforts at Foetry.com the Casteen/Genoways piece is the first time these issues have been raised from inside the system. Other than the media, which has done numerous stories on this issue (The Baltimore Sun, Boston Globe, The Oregonian, The Portland Tribune, The Detroit News, The Daily Iowan, The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Guardian (UK), In Higher Education.com, The Los Angeles Times, Mobylives.com, The Providence Journal, The San Francisco Chronicle, etc.), no one within the “system” has been responsive to calls for change. AWP has been silent on this issue. Mr. Genoways, with Mr. Casteen at the Virginia Quarterly Review, can do a great deal to assist further in a civil discussion by parties both inside and outside of how the system can be reformed.

    Steven Ford Brown

    • Al Cordle said,

      August 21, 2010 at 4:35 am

      I had forgotten how great this letter is. SFB is both tough and smart. It’s too bad Casteen and Genoways didn’t take heed.

      As for Genoways’ bizarre fixation on my wife, I have a few theories. My newest is that he knew she is sensitive. She’s been badly bullied before. Either he knew that outright or had a feeling, and he knew that I would fight back. So he went after her. It was easier.

      • thomasbrady said,

        August 21, 2010 at 12:11 pm

        The Genoways/Casteen offer to fight the disease is what medical research surely sees in certain cases—enemy cells masking themselves as helper cells.

        Fascinating when poetry publishing morphs into military intelligence.

        Among the foets and organizations like AWP and MFA programs there apparently was a tug of conscience due to the work you and foetry.com were doing, but the problem foetry.com was addressing at the moment must have been so entrenched, that panic set in, and the rationale reached for was that everyone was a foet, including you and Kathleen, somehow. Ted wanted to be sure you admitted that you were “more than a librarian.” You must have been a writer who wanted to get published, in his eyes, because all foets are just that: writers who want to get published, and therefore there is no problem. Objectivity and standards and fairness are impossible, and Ted was going to make sure you understood that, that you were guilty, too, that everybody was guilty, and only the good and strong who operate on some higher, nietzchean super-man level (like Ted or Janet Holmes or Jorie Graham) win.

        But there was one more piece of objective evidence that must have really bothered Ted (and others), and a foetry.com regular writing on foetry.com mentioned this: the ubiquitous ads in VQR at that time for writing contests and MFA programs featuring guest-faculty, prize-winning poets. How, the foetry.com writer wondered, could Ted possibly be sincere in addressing the problem when his magazine’s ad base was part of the problem? The foets (with a tug of conscience, with an awareness that OK, there was a problem) thought: there are more important issues in the world than poets cheating as poets, world issues so important that they dwarf poets cheating as poets, and this was when Jorie told the ‘feeding the homeless man in Harvard Square’ story and when Ted began trying to turn VQR into the Washington Post. The strategy was: if you’re losing at home, take your battle overseas. That strategy will come back to bite you, however, and sometimes in big ways.

  5. Tattooch said,

    August 20, 2010 at 6:20 pm

    THE DEAD HAVE A WAY OF RETURNING

    by Ted Genoways

    the way an echo returns:
    only partly.
    In this way, he left himself
    in corners, between the pages of books,
    his thin frame slipping through windows
    cracked open, becoming in place of himself

    his shadow, the way a word
    whispered in darkness
    seems without source or direction
    disappearing so completely into silence
    he wondered
    was it word?

    or something deeper?
    something like feeling the earth shift
    not in tremor, but the slow movement
    of drift. In the way of geology films
    speeding the action forward
    so eons pass in seconds,

    so he imagined himself
    sliding into this darkness,
    both past and also present,
    into the chance that he might touch
    the echo
    and vanish, yet

    he becomes a hundred children.

  6. August 20, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    [...] Another Letter to the Chronicle by Steven Ford Brown [...]

  7. August 20, 2010 at 11:05 pm

    As I was reading this post I got a mental image of a pioneer family out on their back porch. Beyond them, in the yard, were five or six hungry wolves drooling and licking their lips. The pioneer mother slapped her arm and said “My, the mosquitoes are bad tonight.” Her husband slapped his neck and replied “Yes, they are!”.

    Maybe it’s just because I received my September issue of Poetry today, but things may be much worse than you think.

    If ever there was an analogy for Nero’s fiddling….

  8. Tattooch said,

    August 22, 2010 at 12:00 am

    BLAZE

    by Ted Genoways

    The earth is peppered with holsteins.
    Coals in their eyes clutch the last glimmer
    of fire. Rising out of mesquite and clods,
    smeared with mud, they answer our calls,
    moaning one long vowel,
    that tongue-drunk song they know.

    We bang a bucket and honk the horn.
    Each cow groans a drawled response
    but, if we step too close, ducks and stumbles.
    This is the moment everything happens,
    the deep sigh we take, spotting the last cow,
    before closing the gate and counting heads.

    They sense it. We are here to brand.
    These are not my cows.
    When spring comes and trucks to load them,
    I will be gone. The work of slaughter
    belongs to others I’ll never meet.
    We do our part, each one. We light the fire.

    We lift the calf. We know hotter
    means less pain, and we hold the head away
    so they don’t twist or kick.
    But this heifer struggles. Not knowing the blood
    ahead, she cries out anyway.
    I cover her eyes with my hands.

  9. thomasbrady said,

    August 22, 2010 at 5:09 pm

    So far, one (negative) comment on the quality of Genoways’ poetry on the Hook blog, (“Jake” 8/22) mentioning a line from “Blaze” quoted above, and if literary criticism is more than New Criticism, I suppose this is legitimate; the terms “genius” and “sociopath” are being used by commenters re: genoways, so I suppose his poetry can be used as evidence, though New Critics might cry foul. Evidence of what? it might be asked. And isn’t reading genoways’ poetry at this hour rather in poor taste? That’s a tricky one. Where does poetry, or critical judgment of poetry fit here? Does criticism of poetry demand that we build an edifice to the poet, or just the poem? “Blaze” is a classic case of a poet using a loaded subject to consciously reflect a certain moral sensitivity on the part of the poet while using stock lyrical devices—the poem is a rather complex projection of Poor Taste and Poor Aesthetic Judgment. It was published over 10 years ago. Another critic might say this is a powerful lyric expression on a real and powerful topic. One would assume that poetry would naturally repel any sort of evidence we might be looking for here, but is this admonition fair? What is allowed here?

  10. thomasbrady said,

    August 22, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    One more look at this, from the 8/19 scarriet post above:

    “The president’s office failed to respond when Genoways treated Morrissey like a servant, ordering Kevin to stay home for a week and not speak to his fellow workers. This is barbaric, and should have resulted in Genoways’ immediate dismissal.”

    This comment below, by ‘brendan wolfe’ on 8/20, from the Hook web-page comments, speaks to this issue, easily one of the most concrete and damning pieces of evidence against genoways:

    Writes Jack M: “Why wouldn’t Morrissey be at a meeting to discuss the future of the VQR under the VP for Research?”

    It’s my understanding that the VQR staff wondered this as well. As Dave McNair’s correction above suggests, Waldo Jaquith asked that question and, in the process, apparently offended Ms. Levinson-LaBrosse. What followed this meeting, I think, is an excellent example of workplace bullying:

    On July 19, Ted Genoways e-mailed Kevin Morrissey informing him that he had been accused of “unacceptable workplace behavior.” He then told Morrissey he could not come in to work; if he was at work, he must leave; he could not attend several already-scheduled meetings; he could not communicate with staff; he could not do any work unless expressly assigned by Genoways; and from home he must work normal business hours. (When Morrissey informed Genoways, by e-mail, that for technological reasons he was not able to do from home the work assigned to him, he received no response.)

    Genoways did not explain what “unacceptable workplace behavior” Morrissey was accused of. Instead, Genoways, who was out of the office for the week, told Morrissey he would investigate and then meet with Morrissey the following Monday. To my knowledge, during that time Genoways did not interview Morrissey, Molly Minturn, Sheila McMillen, or Waldo Jaquith in order to investigate the truth of the allegation. To my knowledge, he did not inform his supervisors in the president’s office that he had taken action against Morrissey. To my knowledge he did not inform Human Resources either. He did not inform other staff members. Finally, Genoways told Morrissey that if he failed to comply with his instructions he would face disciplinary action.

    Apparently Genoways meant disciplinary action above and beyond being sent home for a week without explanation.

    To my knowledge, at a meeting with Genoways on Monday, July 26, with a representative of the president’s office present, Morrissey still was not told why he had been sent home. There was no evidence that any investigation had occurred. During the last week of his life, Morrissey sent Genoways at least one e-mail with several questions he needed answered in order to complete his regular duties; there was no reply. Then on Friday, July 30, Morrissey received an e-mail from Genoways telling him that his actions had possibly endangered the life of a Mexican journalist.

    This was all in the Hook’s story, more or less. And it is no attack on Genoways personally to call this unacceptable management, even bullying. Nor is it to claim that Genoways is to blame for Morrissey’s death. It is merely to state, as I understand them, the facts of those two weeks — mostly absent what I think was a slow and sometimes almost shameful reaction by the university. And it’s hardly a one-time incident; rather, this was part of a pattern, a record of which should exist at the university dating back at least three years.

  11. August 23, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    That poem blaze appears to be about branding beef cattle–since they are destined for a spring slaughter. But Holsteins are a dairy breed.

    • thomasbrady said,

      August 23, 2010 at 5:46 pm

      Good catch, Briggs.

      We shall certainly run this by Ted’s attorney…

    • Al Cordle said,

      August 25, 2010 at 11:50 pm

      This kind of sloppiness (Holsteins!) is typical of Genoways’ writing, whether poetry or prose. I’m certain the awards for VQR had little to do with his own words or editing.

      One mistake that stands out is in a VQR essay he wrote about South Africa, referring to Pretoria as the capital. In fact, there are three. Pretoria is the executive capital. He also mentions being driven past shantytowns. It’s too bad he apparently didn’t bother to visit the townships, as I did in 2007. He might have learned something about the country and its people. Instead, the first sentence of his essay demonstrates his disregard for other cultures and his careless research.

      Don’t even get me started on his “Finnish-American” poems. It’s like reading about generic paper dolls. I would have been happy to share my experiences in Finland with him. Perhaps he should have read my wife’s first book, based on her Finnish father and other Finns in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

      • thomasbrady said,

        August 26, 2010 at 1:44 pm

        Al,

        This whole sad Morrissey affair points up how right you were to bring foetry to the world’s attention.

        On the hook blog, writers published by Genoways in the VQR are defending Genoways. Writers who did not work with him, who did not know him like the VQR staff did, but who were given an opportunity to publish in a snazzy magazine because Genoways was raiding the fund he inherited, are coming forward to say, “Leave this guy alone! He’s swell!”

        But “meanwhile” (Aug 25) sees through it:

        “Many of Genoways’ emails have been released. It’s interesting to contrast his written word to his staff with the internet comments of so many contributors to VQR. The emails certainly make him look to be a complete jerk.

        Apparently the thinking is that if you are nice to the talent, it doesn’t matter how you treat those that work “beneath” you.

        It seems to me that good writers should be more perceptive than this.”

        And “Whateva!” (Aug 25):

        “To all the “contributors” to VQR and Ted Genoways’ friends – I applauded your rush to defend Mr. Genoways as “a great guy”. But face it, you were not in the office with him 8 to 10 hours a day. You see him as the person you send articles to, the guy next door, the “friend” who has never raised his voice. You don’t live with him, you don’t work DIRECTLY for him. For all practical purposes, if you work with/for someone, you LIVE with them at least 8 hours a day. So while I repeat my statement of applaud for your efforts…the emails from Mr. Genoways to his staff are ON PAPER, the requests from help from the ENTIRE staff (less the pet intern he kept in his office) and eye witness accounts of Mr. Genoways day to day dealings with his staff speak volumes more than “well, I go to his house for BBQs and he NEVER acts that way!” or “I just wrote an article for him and he was GREAT!”…. Both the articles from the Hook and Mr. Bissell stated the office environment was TOXIC, to both the staff and Genoways. How did it get that way? The fact that they (the staff) went to John Casteen’s office and were told “Creative people aren’t expected to be good managers; deal with it.” shows Casteen’s “stick my head in the sand” or to “totally ignore this, I am on my way out anyway…won’t be my problem in a couple of months” attitude. Casteen’s attitude contributed to the toxic atmosphere. Genoways was in a MANAGEMENT POSTION, therefore the expectation should BE that he MANAGE people. When all management of staff was taken away from Genoways and given to Morrisey, that should have been a very HUGE RED FLAG that was NOT heeded by UVa but that is of no surprise, their track record lately has not been one to brag about. So when you jump to his defense after all this time (Tom Bissell included), it may come off as sounding “after the fact” and more of a “cover my butt, will ya? Or I won’t accept anymore of your articles, invite you to my BBQs, etc. Okay, again I am off the soapbox. Next?”

        This is classic foetry behavior: Stepping on people while you ‘go for the glory.’ And on closer inspection, it’s not even glory they are going for.

        I believe the bullying is a symptom of the underlying emptiness, not a reason for ‘oh this guy may be a jerk, but he cares about the larger picture and he gets things done.’

        Tom

  12. thomasbrady said,

    August 25, 2010 at 9:26 pm

    From a recent Hook comment on the Genoways/Morrissey scandal, we see more ignorance of the true nature of plantation owner Thomas Jefferson:

    “It is clear, from reading the many stories of workplace discrimination and harrassment at UVA, that something very wrong in that large organization has been wrong for quite a while.

    Many in the Charlottesville community routinely refer to UVA as ‘the plantation’. What would that image involve: overseer bosses, employed to get results that maintain the privileged lifestyles of the lords and ladies, might have few restraint against their own covetousness, and their own anger, and may care little about those who do the real work. Southerners are raised to be a bit extravagant (we’ll admit), but local people who call the University ‘the plantation’ mean it truly, and not as an extravagant image. It is still ‘the plantation’ to persons and communities of color, lesbian and gay communities and their families, those who do the grunt work and routine work that allows the University to operate, and others, who are shockingly underrepresented, underemployed, and under the heal of obvious bias, discrimination, and disrespect.

    Strange, isn’t it, that at the home of the aspirationally democratic Jefferson, that many in the local community regard his creature, the University of Virginia, as ‘the plantation’?”

    Actually, the part of the Thomas Jefferson connection is not “strange” at all…

    Far stranger is why Genoways has been allowed to remain as editor of VQR…

  13. August 27, 2010 at 12:57 pm

  14. August 27, 2010 at 1:38 pm

  15. Jilly said,

    August 28, 2010 at 6:07 pm

    “The earth is peppered with holsteins.”

    ?
    ?
    ?

    • Al Cordle said,

      August 31, 2010 at 5:36 pm

      Peppered. Wasn’t that the verb used to describe Dick Cheney shooting his friend in the face? The friend who had to apologize to *him*?

      • thomasbrady said,

        August 31, 2010 at 5:44 pm

        I think Genoways was trying to invoke the farm…peppers…as in plants that grow on a farm…oh yea, he’s seriously a “genius” alright…

  16. thomasbrady said,

    August 31, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    ABC News and NY Times have picked up Genoways the bully story, no Winter issue for the VQR,

    Foets unchecked. Ugly.

  17. thomasbrady said,

    September 14, 2010 at 4:28 pm

    Another piece in the Times quotes not only Genoways briefly, but his buddy Casteen III, son of the former UVA president. The article does not mention Genoways and Casteen’s foetic connection. Also left out of the piece is the specifics of Genoways banning Morrissey from the office and all contact with his co-workers for a week for no discernible reason.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/books/11quarterly.html?emc=eta1

  18. thomasbrady said,

    October 6, 2010 at 7:35 pm

    http://www.c-ville.com/index.php?cat=121304062461064&ShowArticle_ID=11802709104518816

    The latest on Genoways…

    Read the comments to this article: they are ferocious and often spot on…

    • October 7, 2010 at 1:50 pm

      Holy Smokes. This makes me so glad I quit trying to become a mediocre academic literary professional in order to pursue being a marginalized political activist and a mediocre mixed martial artist. You just don’t have to deal with too many Trustafarians at the gym, and you get to punch them in the face or choke them out if they do show up. You’ll run into some of them in the activist circles, but they are generally too embarrassed to act entitled around the rest of us.

      Really, it sounds like Genoways is a very sweet guy. Not merely a deaf dog owner, but he also really took the time to reassure that rich girl that she was “more valuable as an employee” than as somebody who hands out checks for roughly three times the journals annual budget. Not sensitive to his staff, you say?

      To be fair, I am so bigoted against rich people that I can’t begin to read this story from an unbiased position.

  19. March 18, 2011 at 2:28 am

    [...] Another Letter to the Chronicle by Steven Ford Brown [...]

  20. thomasbrady said,

    March 18, 2011 at 2:31 pm

    Interesting piece in the Chronicle this month:

    http://chronicle.com/article/The-Intellectual-as-Courtier/126640/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,253 other followers

%d bloggers like this: