Five Poppens & a PhD: The PhD: First Year Reflections

Daddy's #1 Fans

Hello, everyone!

Larissa asked if I would write a blog post for this month for a couple of reasons, but the main reasons were to let you all know how life is going within the PhD program and my direction for future studies. I’ll discuss life after the first year of a PhD in two sections: “We Will Rock You,” “Lean on Me.” For the future studies section, ~~I don’t have a song title that fits what I’ll say just kidding I actually do have a song title~~ I’ll discuss what’s “Just Around the Riverbend.” :)

We (Brite) Will Rock You (Zac)

While the Fall semester was certainly difficult, it paled in comparison to the work I had this past semester. I took an additional class (three classes instead of two classes in the Fall semester), I had harder professors, and much, much more work to do. More reading. More writing. More of everything. For the first few weeks, I managed to keep my head above the water fairly well. But by about the fifth or sixth week, the waves were growing larger and I was taking longer to surface after each surge. For one of my courses, I needed to write three papers - two during the span of the semester and then also a final paper at the end. It was a learning experience I would need - but didn’t want.

I consider myself a decent writer - better than some, but far from the best. I can communicate fairly well and given enough time, I also edit my papers adequately. Not this first paper. This paper was a disaster. It did not help that we had vague directions for the paper (despite several attempts to clarify), but I place the blame squarely on my own shoulders. It was rushed. It was last minute. And I hoped for the best.

The best was NOT what I received. I got a B- on that paper. Most of you just thought, “Oh, well - that’s not such a terrible grade.” But this is PhD land. My funding is based on my GPA (that only affords for an A- and B+ every now and then); receiving a B- was terrifying. It also was a huge blow to my ego. Receiving THREE PAGES of notes on how I was unclear, how my argument had "unrecoverable" flaws, and how I needed to improve was even more demoralizing. I didn’t read the comments on that paper for at least three weeks. But then, after mustering up the courage to read the comments, I realized that the professor was not wrong. My argument was weak and had many flaws. I was too rushed in my articulation of the topic. I missed several intriguing avenues to develop my argument. And that’s when I realized that I needed to “fail” and see where I needed to improve. Was this how I wanted to grow as a writer? Of course not! This hurt, and I don’t like pain. But I began asking myself this question: “Do I want to be a better writer?” The answer was a resounding “yes.” But it would mean changes. I needed to look squarely at myself in the mirror and take a long, hard look at my strengths AND my weaknesses. Was I willing to deconstruct what I thought was “good” about my writing in order to become better? I was (and still am) willing, and with some time and distance from this event, I can say that my writing has improved. This story (relating to this particular class) doesn’t have a happy ending - I still only received a B in the course, but I learned infinitely more than if I had just had a string of A papers handed to me without any critique.

Lean on Me

After a year of PhD work, I can safely say that I am at one of the best schools to become a scholar. Not because we have world-renowned scholars, even though we do. Not because this is the best area to live, even though it is warm (too warm!), friendly, and inviting here. Brite Divinity School is the best place for me because of the colleagues I have met here in the first year. Quick fact: before coming to Brite, I had almost no training in methodology with respect to biblical interpretation (using concepts and theories to read biblical texts). This is not to say that my previous training isn’t helping me (it certainly is), but it has not helped me much in the short term of this first year. As a result, I have felt unbelievably stupid this first year. I have pages and pages of notes from my classes - far more than I should - because I am furiously trying to remember everything that is said so I can go look up names, movements, and theories later on because I have absolutely no idea about what anyone is talking about. This is hyperbolic but you can understand my anxiety. Enter the PhD students at Brite. They have been friendly, welcoming, and ridiculously helpful as I have begun to immerse myself in methodological work. Some have given me incredibly insightful tips: “<Professor> likes it done in this particular way - make sure you write your paper using those same sections as well.” Others have simply spoken kind affirmations to me as I have traveled through this first year. Despite all my internal insecurity and anxiety this first year, I continually felt as though I belonged at Brite because I was welcomed and befriended by the students here. And for that, I will always be grateful.

Just Around the Riverbend

I chose the song title from Pocahontas (her real name was Rebecca Rolfe, FYI) because I completely agree with the sentiment of the song: every time I emerge around the riverbend, I see new adventure. When I first came to Brite, I was very interested in studying wisdom literature. Then, by the end of my first semester, I had changed gears to pursue metaphorical theology. And now, after a full year, I have changed my mind yet again: I am now interested in imperial-critical studies. What’s that? It’s something that sounds far more complicated than it actually is (though I mean no disrespect to the field).

In the New Testament, people have long recognized the figure of Rome, but have largely relegated the empire to the background of the story. If the New Testament gospels and epistles are characters on a stage, imperial-critical studies suggests that Rome is not some background or backdrop to the story functioning as some contextual scenery but is an active character on the main stage with everything else happening in those texts. The New Testament texts, according to this particular way of reading, are in response to Roman power and the imperial cult that saw the Roman Emperor as a living deity. This completely changes the way we read those texts.

Enter the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible. The New Testament only deals with one empire - the Romans. But the OT deals with three: the Assyrian, the Neo-Babylonian, and the Persian empires. And the best part is that not many scholars are working in this field (relatively speaking). This way of studying/reading fulfills everything I want in a PhD and for future teaching: it engages with real power structures and provides a way to talk about faithful responses to present day empires (i.e., the American empire); it deals with close readings of the sociolinguistics of the OT; and it’s a new-ish field that has much work to be done. The combination of these aspects has made me incredibly excited to pursue this new trajectory. Will it hold my scholarly interest? I suppose I’ll have to wait until I emerge around the next riverbend. ;)

But you didn’t come here only to read about me. Check out the pictures and videos below to see what our family has been up to lately!