Your result for Which fantasy writer are you?...
Ursula K Le Guin (b. 1929)
1 High-Brow, -19 Violent, -3 Experimental and 5 Cynical!
Congratulations! You are High-Brow, Peaceful, Traditional and Cynical! These concepts are defined below.
Ursula Kroeber Le Guin is definitely one of the most celebrated science fiction and fantasy writers of all times. Her most famous fantasy work to date is the Earthsea suite of novels and short stories, in which Le Guin created not only one of the most believable societies in fantasy fiction, but also managed to describe a school for wizards almost three decades before Harry Potter. Although often categorized as written for young adults, these books have entertained and challenged readers of all ages since their publication.
Le Guin is no stranger to literary experiments (see for example Always Coming Home(1985)), but much of her story-telling is quite traditional. In fact, she makes a point of returning to older forms of story-telling, which, at her best, enables her to create something akin to myth. One shouldn't confuse myth with faerytale, though. Nothing is ever simplified in Le Guin's world, as she relentlessly explores ethical problems and the moral choices that her characters must make, as must we all. While being one of those writers who will allow you to escape to imaginary worlds, she is also one who will prompt you to return to your actual life, perhaps a little wiser than you used to be.
You are also a lot like Susan Cooper.
If you want some action, try Michael Moorcock.
If you'd like a challenge, try your exact opposite, C S Lewis.
Your score
This is how to interpret your score: Your attitudes have been measured on four different scales, called 1) High-Brow vs. Low-Brow, 2) Violent vs. Peaceful, 3) Experimental vs. Traditional and 4) Cynical vs. Romantic. Imagine that when you were born, you were in a state of innocence, a tabula rasa who would have scored zero on each scale. Since then, a number of circumstances (including genetical, cultural and environmental factors) have pushed you towards either end of these scales. If you're at 45 or -45 you would be almost entirely cynical, low-brow or whatever. The closer to zero you are, the less extreme your attitude. However, you should always be more of either (eg more romantic than cynical). Please note that even though High-Brow, Violent, Experimental and Cynical have positive numbers (1 through 45) and their opposites negative numbers (-1 through -45), this doesn't mean that either quality is better. All attitudes have their positive and negative sides, as explained below.
High-Brow vs. Low-Brow
You received 1 points, making you more High-Brow than Low-Brow. Being high-browed in this context refers to being more fascinated with the sort of art that critics and scholars tend to favour, rather than the best-selling kind. At their best, high-brows are cultured, able to appreciate the finer nuances of literature and not content with simplifications. At their worst they are, well, snobs.
Violent vs. Peaceful
You received -19 points, making you more Peaceful than Violent. This scale is a measurement of a) if you are tolerant to violence in fiction and b) whether you see violence as a means that can be used to achieve a good end. If you aren't, and you don't, then you are peaceful as defined here. At their best, peaceful people are the ones who encourage dialogue and understanding as a means of solving conflicts. At their worst, they are standing passively by as they or third parties are hurt by less scrupulous individuals.
Experimental vs. Traditional
You received -3 points, making you more Traditional than Experimental. Your position on this scale indicates if you're more likely to seek out the new and unexpected or if you are more comfortable with the familiar, especially in regards to culture. Note that traditional as defined here does not equal conservative, in the political sense. At their best, traditional people don't change winning concepts, favouring storytelling over empty poses. At their worst, they are somewhat narrow-minded.
Cynical vs. Romantic
You received 5 points, making you more Cynical than Romantic. Your position on this scale indicates if you are more likely to be wary, suspicious and skeptical to people around you and the world at large, or if you are more likely to believe in grand schemes, happy endings and the basic goodness of humankind. It is by far the most vaguely defined scale, which is why you'll find the sentence "you are also a lot like x" above. If you feel that your position on this scale is wrong, then you are probably more like author x. At their best, cynical people are able to see through lies and spot crucial flaws in plans and schemes. At their worst, they are overly negative, bringing everybody else down.
Author picture from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UrsulaLeGuin.01.jpg
Take Which fantasy writer are you? at HelloQuizzy
_respond? (11)
07:57:00 AM, Sunday 13 December 2009
-
Guess who actually managed to apply for a job? Me.
_
respond?
(6)
03:57:24 PM,
Thursday 10 December 2009
-
Resisting the urge to write tl;dr on one of my student's papers. She did this same thing with the last paper where the whole thing is very stream of consciousness and she repeats the same thing over and over. In this case, one whole page which serves no purpose except to repeat the methods in the discussion for an unclear reason.
_
respond?
(9)
03:03:02 PM,
Tuesday 8 December 2009
-
Last Monday I taught my last class and submitted my manuscript to the federal agency. And then Wednesday I had a microbial food party with my students (yogurt and mushrooms and kimchee and beer) and got all of their final papers. And then Friday my manuscript was approved by the federal agency and submitted to the journal. So now was supposed to be Liz's month to relax and get her life back.
Except:
1)My advisor was so delighted with my revisions on the last paper, she thinks the next paper could be done this month, and was so sure of it she went ahead and proposed a special issue of the journal we hope to submit it to and solicited a whole bunch of other papers all to be done this month.
2)The whole "oh my gosh I might not have funding next year and need to be applying for jobs right now thing"
So now it is Liz's month of revising her teaching statement and researching obscure liberal arts colleges while simultaneously grading 36 papers by Wednesday and revising her manuscript for this journal special issue.
Luckily, this can all be done from home. The job hunt is going to be easier than it might, because there are so few jobs out there to apply for that it won't be possible for it to consume that much time. And I have recently chatted with some people whose level of grad school burnout makes me look naive and optimistic in comparison. But it is definitely not going to be the month I had envisioned.
_
respond?
(1)
06:42:21 PM,
Monday 7 December 2009
-
If you have ever read Michael Berube, and you remember when Jamie was a little kid, or you just like to read happy stories about people with disabilities making their way in the world, you need to read the World-transforming Jamie News. And then you need to smile and say, "The world is pretty awesome."
_
respond?
(1)
06:32:24 PM,
Monday 7 December 2009
-
We got a very light dusting of snow last night, that has disappeared as the sun came up.
_
respond?
08:43:09 AM,
Sunday 6 December 2009
-
Manuscript submitted. Going to see Girlyman tonight. woot.
_
respond?
(3)
03:15:48 PM,
Friday 4 December 2009
-
Just found out that if the fellowship I applied for doesn't come through, I may not have funding for next year because the department is reconsidering funding for all 6th year students. Now applying for jobs in earnest. There are some good ones out there, and I've been more than ready for the real world for qite some time now, but I really wasn't planning on doing this now.
_
respond?
(10)
03:28:06 PM,
Wednesday 2 December 2009
-
In the past Remi and I have posted nice things about each other on our blogs on this day, planned dinners out, even attempted trips out of town. This year, we both totally forgot. 12 years is a long time for things to be good.
_
respond?
06:55:40 PM,
Tuesday 1 December 2009
-
Manuscript # 1 is off for final internal review at Government Agency of My Co-author. Since it has already undergone reviews by two of the best of the best in this process, I am hoping both the final review from the agency and the journal review process will be quite painless. I have been working on this paper since Fall 2005. I ought to feel a huge burden lifted. But it's been so tedious and slow that I'm not quite there with realization that it's mostly over. I don't know that the burden will be truly lifted until the day it's finally published.
_
respond?
(5)
12:22:57 PM,
Monday 30 November 2009
-
A tangent in a discussion of Latinos in academia about why we don't include Suriname, Guyana, or French Guiana when we talk about Latin American countries (most citizens are non-Spanish/Portuguese speaking descendants of Javanese, Indian, or African slaves, native people, or Europeans none of whom themselves identify as Latino) led to me reading too much about the People's Temple and Jonestown. Apparently, Jonestown rates up there on the list of things most folks in the US know about, but the details about the relationship with prominent Americans, the USSR, and the CIA, the involvement of the government of Guyana, the murder of Congressman Ryan, and the sheer horror of what happened had never completely registered with me. Thanks, Wikipedia, for filling my mind with horrors.
_
respond?
(2)
11:44:55 AM,
Friday 27 November 2009
-
For the wonders that astound us,
for the truths that still confound us,
most of all that love has found us,
thanks be to God.
I know I've posted the whole thing before, but the punchline of this hymn gets me every time.
_
respond?
10:31:40 AM,
Thursday 26 November 2009
-
Kitties!
_
respond?
(5)
07:59:32 AM,
Wednesday 25 November 2009
-
Part of joining a community is that we come together in sadness, yes, but we also come together in joy
_
respond?
(2)
09:42:57 PM,
Sunday 22 November 2009
-
Validation is a lovely short film starring TJ Thyne from Bones:
_
respond?
(2)
07:23:34 AM,
Sunday 22 November 2009
-
The next person who approaches me with "Just World Theory" will have to explain David's death. After a few minutes of trying, I'll punch them in the face, and then they'll have to use Just World Theory to explain that, which should be easier.
In other words, I really really hate funerals for people my age.
_
respond?
(3)
06:00:10 PM,
Friday 20 November 2009
-
In view of how the health benefit services industry operates and how insurance product design responds to broad regulatory intervention aimed at reshaping product content, we conclude that the treatment exclusions required under the Stupak/Pitts Amendment will have an industry-wide effect, eliminating coverage of medically indicated abortions over time for all women, not only those whose coverage is derived through a health insurance exchange.
And no, it's not worth the sacrifice of the civil rights of half the population to get a weak healthcare bill that doesn't do half of what we really need anyway.
_
respond?
08:07:44 AM,
Thursday 19 November 2009
-
Just got an email regarding the annual meeting of one of my professional societies this summer. "Santa Fe is a walking town and we will use up to 5 venues to accommodate the meeting, so put on your walking shoes."
Awesome. I can't wait. Another meeting where I will be too exhausted to do anything besides go to talks and lie in my hotel.
_
respond?
(13)
03:36:53 PM,
Tuesday 17 November 2009
-
This is what academia ought to be like.
_
respond?
12:57:51 PM,
Tuesday 17 November 2009
-
Is graduate school a cult?
_
respond?
(11)
09:32:45 AM,
Saturday 14 November 2009
-
Pretty awesome. Via here which is also pretty awesome.
_
respond?
(1)
11:22:53 AM,
Friday 13 November 2009
-
The recent upswing in my blogging is at least partially explained by this. Seriously, if I could just hide in my bead with a pillow over my head (like the cats have been) I would.
_
respond?
(2)
09:31:46 PM,
Thursday 12 November 2009
-
Dear Yahoo,
Everybody is leaving your mail service for Google's, because yours sucks. I only use it as a throwaway now, and it sucks even for that. Fancy ads on Hulu and rebranding aren't going to help with the fact that your mail service sucks.
Love
Liz
PS--your search engine sucks too
_
respond?
(1)
08:33:18 AM,
Thursday 12 November 2009
-
I love my student who screwed up and is totally apologetic about it and asked for help in a way that said she understands that I may not be able to do anything at this point and knows that it's her fault. If only more students cared as much as she does and were willing to admit their mistakes.
_
respond?
12:24:36 PM,
Wednesday 11 November 2009
-
So I hadn't actually said my plan for InaDWriMo. This week I intend to:
1) Tweak hydraulic models for paper #2
2) Finish data analysis for paper #2 using model results
3) Data mining for paper #1
4) Actually set up a meeting with my committee member about paper #1
_
respond?
(1)
09:07:13 AM,
Tuesday 10 November 2009
-
I never knew there was a name for it: Just World Theory. If we could stomp that out, we'd all be a lot happier and be able to treat each other with a lot more empathy and compassion.
_
respond?
(4)
08:14:48 AM,
Tuesday 10 November 2009
-
In spite of everything, I still think he's a really good man
_
respond?
06:57:03 PM,
Monday 9 November 2009
-
A professor in our department who I from time to time have need to ask questions of has a Scandinavian letter in his name. He is as far as I can tell thoroughly Americanized, whether born here or immigrated as a kid, but obviously his parents were Scandinavian and named him thusly. So, am I rude for just using the vowel without an extra mark when I write to him?
As a comparison when I email Latino colleagues, I generally leave out any accents, although I put them in in formal, non-email, settings like when they're my co-authors on a paper or talk, and if I ever had a co-author with a Scandinavian letter I would do the same thing.
_
respond?
(3)
09:23:13 AM,
Monday 9 November 2009
-
So I'm sort of doing InaDWriMo. By the end of November both of the articles that have been near publication for 2 years will actually be submitted to journals. Careful readers will note that those 2 years nicely correspond with the 2 years my body declared war on itself and tried to destroy my life.
InaDWriMo will be followed by International Liz Doesn't Go To Work And Tries To Remember How To Enjoy Life Month.
_
respond?
(1)
06:33:32 PM,
Sunday 8 November 2009
-
Those poor people
_
respond?
05:05:40 PM,
Sunday 8 November 2009
-
Re: Flashforward:
It's about time somebody actually questioned their fate and acted to permanently alter it instead of standing around wringing their hands and whining. It was really hard to believe the whole world could possibly be that passive.
_
respond?
(6)
06:06:40 PM,
Saturday 7 November 2009
-
I don't know who it'll be. But it'll be someone. Someone in power is finally going to state the obvious truth that gay marriage is absolutely necessary, and they're not going to put it up for a vote, because that's not what you do with basic human rights. You don't let six wolves and four sheep vote on what to have for dinner (or in this case, what, fifty-two wolves and forty-eight sheep?).
The National Guard will stand outside the courthouses and force you to grow the hell up, and you will be remembered in history like those sad ugly white people yelling at the black kids coming to class.
Sometimes a good rant is the right thing.
_
respond?
(8)
08:27:34 AM,
Thursday 5 November 2009
-
Just discovered from a series of google steps that started with Claude Levi-Strauss that Mr. Raditsa's papers are collected at the Harvard Library.
_
respond?
11:35:55 AM,
Wednesday 4 November 2009
-
I have to admit that I'm at least thinking about this. Part of it is simply homesickness, part of it is a continued abiding passion for the Program and its goals, part of it is really loving interdisciplinarity and never feeling quite at home as just an ecologist, part of it is missing big questions and feeling really uncomfortable with some of the pragmatism necessary in my work, part of it is that I actually think I might be good at it and in a different way from many tutors, and part of it is just to see if I could get an interview.
_
respond?
(15)
09:13:15 AM,
Tuesday 3 November 2009
-
It's one of those years when Protestants celebrate All Saints Day on All Saints Day. My congregation sings this hymn every year, beloved and cheesy, not one I knew before, and probably the only hymn to contain the words shepherdess and fierce wild beast.
I sing a song of the saints of God,
patient and brave and true,
who toiled and fought and lived and died
for the Lord they loved and knew.
And one was a doctor, and one was a queen,
and one was a shepherdess on the green;
they were all of them saints of God, and I mean,
God helping, to be one too.
They loved their Lord so dear, so dear,
and his love made them strong;
and they followed the right for Jesus' sake
the whole of their good lives long.
And one was a soldier, and one was a priest,
and one was slain by a fierce wild beast;
and there's not any reason, no, not the least,
why I shouldn't be one too.
They lived not only in ages past;
there are hundreds of thousands still.
The world is bright with the joyous saints
who love to do Jesus' will.
You can meet them in school, on the street, in the store,
in church, by the sea, in the house next door;
they are saints of God, whether rich or poor,
and I mean to be one too.
_
respond?
(6)
08:59:35 AM,
Sunday 1 November 2009
-
Things I have learned in the past few months about managing a large scale ecological study:
1)One person should be in charge of planning, logistics, and data management. That person should not be doing field work or have any other job responsibilities except making sure everything is organized and done as required.
2)All sites should be ground-truthed by people with authority over the project before anybody else goes to the sites. Sites that are questionable for any reason, or simply don't meet the study criteria, should be rejected right then.
3)All sites should have clear, unique names that are tied to a geographical point that can be double checked in the field. For, say, a stream study sampling at road crossings, actually naming the site after the stream and road crossing would be a logical choice.
4)GPSs are only as good as their satellites and operators. People unfamiliar with GPSs shouldn't be expected to get vital data using them. Locating a single point on a small stream using a cheap GPS with bad resolution is a waste of time, and frustrating. A map-literate person making a point on a map is much more useful.
5)All methods should be tested on a subset of sites, bracketing whatever you're measuring, before deployed on a large scale. Even the smallest tweak after the fact can ruin everything and waste literally months of people's time.
I'd like to say I won't make these mistakes when planning a project of my own, but of course I will.
_
respond?
(2)
12:25:41 PM,
Thursday 29 October 2009
-
