Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

The Origins of Professor Xtreme

Published: Thursday, August 26, 2010

Updated: Thursday, August 26, 2010 07:08

David Nemeth

CANNONballs! I’m such a lucky guy, and so very fortunate to have met more than my fair share of interesting people over the years. My father tops the list. He was a born and raised in the heart of hunkydom on steep slopes overlooking Youngstown’s vibrant valley of smokestacks and steel.

During school hours, Dad fed coal to furnaces inside a mill along the Mahoney River. He grew up as tough as the nails and rails that were forged and stamped out there beneath the billowing concrete chimneys. Youngstown was a lot like Toledo in its prime. Soot in the air and gyres of foam in the river meant another paycheck was on the way. Everyone employed breathed deeply over that and ignored the consequences.

A man of steel, my Dad was an amateur boxer, a footballer and a heck of a numbers runner -- until Pearl Harbor shuttled him far away into the South Pacific. This unexpected overseas adventure (in addition to his having met and married my Mom) likely saved him from becoming just another late-Depression Y-town mobster.

Surviving under canvas in the sweltering heat of hostile, jungle-covered islands like New Caledonia, New Guinea, Espiritu Santo and Fiji, Dad rose to every occasion and earned the rank of Captain on a field commission. I keep an old photograph of him wearing a grass skirt, holding a bottle of beer and smoking a Lucky Strike.

Dad never spoke much of his war experience other than to say he was for a time the personal bodyguard and Jeep driver for a gung-ho general named “Sandy” Patch. Eventually, I was able to piece together a patch-quilt story of him killing many enemy soldiers and suffering deep remorse. It was soon after the war that he discovered, through self-hypnosis, how to contain those ghosts of war that might otherwise have driven him crazy.

When Dad returned from the war he walked through the front door and into my life as a complete stranger. I met him then, this most interesting fellow. I was four years old. From that day forward he threw himself headlong into the American Dream. He vowed to help heal the ravages of polio and leveraged the GI Bill into a college education and a sweet career of professional physiotherapy.

It was in his spare time that he began also to study the hypnotic arts. He practiced on me throughout my childhood. In the evenings, after dinner, he would swing a ring on a string in front of my face and ask me in his sonorous voice, “What do you want out of life today, Jimmy?” and then proceed to attempt to provision me with that item or experience via his power of suggestion.

The results of his experiments were as often as not satisfying and long-lasting. To this day, for example, my glass of ordinary tap water tastes just like ice-cold Coca-Cola©. Dad eventually became a certified hypnotist. Sly Stallone was one of his classmates.

There are other folks on my list, both great and small. In 1996, while participating in a grandiose “World Philosophers Meet” convened in Poona, India, I found myself seated facing the Dalai Lama at close quarters. He borrowed my five cent Paper Mate© ball point pen to autograph some books and then returned it to me about an hour later. While I am not yet convinced the Dalai Lama is a Holy Man I can attest from this first-hand experience to his honesty. Incidentally, that nickel pen has yet to run dry of ink! Come by my office and I will show it to you.

Further down my list and less renowned (but hardly less interesting) is a pleasant fellow named Roy I met early one morning around dawn at the Baker Street Restaurant and truck stop in far eastern Indiana. That place is open around the clock and has the best biscuits, gravy and trucker toys north of the Mason-Dixon Line. He was interesting to me mainly because he conversed fluently in proverbs and nostrums (which are almost — but not quite — the same thing).

For example, on first greeting Roy he responded to my “Good morning!” with “The early bird gets the worm!” to which I replied without hesitation, “The second mouse gets the cheese.” I like proverbs, too, you see. In that way we hit it off. We shared a window booth and traded pithy wisdoms from around the world as powerful Peterbilts and classic Kenmores rolled across the parking lot outside, their chromium-covered duel exhaust stacks belching diesel and glistening in that morning’s sunshine.

By noon Roy and I had ritually bonded, finally entrusting each other with our very favorite proverbs. It was high time to cash out and seek our separate paths through Life. Who picked up the check? Roy said “He who pays the piper calls the tune,” and I countered “He who sups with the Devil should have a long spoon!” So we smiled, called it a draw and split the bill.

In case you are wondering: My favorite proverb on that day was “The sun shines even in a rat hole.” His was “There are few in the world that can resist the urge to help their rice plants grow.” Today I like his best.

Here at the University of Toledo the Jacobs Administration, capping four years of futility on the academic front, is on the verge of dismantling our venerable College of Arts and Sciences and transforming it all or part into a “School of Sustainability.” This term, “sustainability” is a euphemism for “development” and a vaguely green rationale for continued economic growth and reliance on technological fixes to remedy technological disasters. Oil spills, global warming and such are viewed by crass developers as opportunities for making more profits.

Further technological disasters are accepted by such evil clowns as collateral damage along the road of progress. Their favorite nostrum for a stalled economy is “A rising tide lifts all boats.” Thus, relentless, cancerous growth is portrayed as natural and necessary for improving the human condition.

I believe there is an ethical alternative to the instrumental/rational arguments for a sustainable future. I call it “enlightened underdevelopment” and it involves creating a world society that can “resist the urge” to pursue an economic growth model that continually depends on promoting selfishness, usury and profiteering while accepting starvation, war and poverty as business as usual.

Interested? Come by and talk to me. Don’t forget to ask to see that pen.

—David Nemeth is Professor Xtreme and can be contact at david.nemeth@utoledo.edu

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

48 comments

1st Mike
Thu Sep 2 2010 09:10
Just wanted to note that the last poster is not the one who was posting extensively earlier.
Mike
Wed Sep 1 2010 17:26
Dear professor "Xcrement", I can not wait to read your next column!
Anonymous
Wed Sep 1 2010 16:12
Ryan, Nemeth is a faculty member, not a student. Though I can easily see why you'd be confused.
Anonymous
Wed Sep 1 2010 15:44
... "in cahoots" buckaroo ...
Ryan Sullivan, PhD
Wed Sep 1 2010 15:01
If I was a member of the faculty of A+S, i would be incredibly angry to have a person like Nemeth becoming the "voice" of the college. With students like this, who wouldn't want to college to be gutted.

I think that Nemeth and Jacobs are in cohouts together. Jacobs wants to college destryoed and is using Nemeth to make the college faculty seem immature and not worthy of respect.

Anonymous
Mon Aug 30 2010 07:57
It is fascinating the lengths many of the commentators on here go to to not answer even straightforward questions. You've got to think they have reasons and it is bizarre how they won't tell anyone their reasons for their views. If their students provided this level of detail in their classes no doubt they would fail them.
Anonymous
Mon Aug 30 2010 01:49
CANNONballs!
Chuckles
Mon Aug 30 2010 00:39
Go to bed. When you wake in the morning, ASK THE AUTHOR :)
Mike
Mon Aug 30 2010 00:19
K, I'm going to take this last opportunity to try and illustrate my point.

"A simple example of the “destruction” of the A&S college can be seen in the creation of the Geography PHD program. Are you familiar with it? Spatially Integrated Social Science. Do you believe that cultural geography matters? "

This example is anything but simple. It doesn't help me understand what "destruction" means at all. Cross-departmental collaboration, that's destruction? The expansion of CAS programs, that's destruction? I've heard of this program, but have no idea what its relation is to cultural geography (I suspect you are quite familiar with both).Are the program and cultural geography in competition or not? How so? Why do you assume that your audience would know any of this. You may suspect it, but as a courtesy (and certainly out of practical concern) you would want to clearly spell this all out, right?

Don't you find it troubling how so many questions and confusion plague these few sentences alone, as well as what this means for public advocacy you do (toward whatever goal)? You suggest I'm missing out on some separate discourse (again, I'm curious as to what discourse you mean), but how can I even begin to know a separate discourse exists (let alone be interested in it) if it hides behind this poor communication?

And, as far as this PhD program example goes, this is the *first* attempt at any elucidation of the destruction question that has been hazarded here by anyone after thirty-some posts - an issue that should have been dealt with in the column.

Chuckles
Sun Aug 29 2010 23:45
A simple example of the “destruction” of the A&S college can be seen in the creation of the Geography PHD program. Are you familiar with it? Spatially Integrated Social Science. Do you believe that cultural geography matters? With your constant usage of words like EVIDENCE, etc. You are missing out on a separate discourse in terms of philosophy and methodology. You are right to cease adding comments as nothing is being accomplished or truly discussed. If you cared at all about anything other than defending your belief without understanding a very interesting/differing point of view- you would have stopped writing long ago and discussed your questions with THE AUTHOR.
Anonymous
Sun Aug 29 2010 23:12
What?
guardians of humanity...pithy
Mike
Sun Aug 29 2010 22:40
I appreciate the offer for the e-mail, Dr. Nemeth and "Anonymous", but I will instead post this last entry (I have no interest in prolonged harassment) on the issue.

Look, all I want to see here and everywhere else from UT community members discussing important issues of the day is a responsible mode of exchange that deals thoroughly in evidence, careful expression of ideas (and an attached willingness to clear up confusion instead of changing the topic as well as admit wrongs), reasons, exhaustive context and civil restraint. I am tired of seeing comments on this site and elsewhere as well as public statements (e.g. columns, statements at meetings, etc.) from administrators, faculty, students, staffers, etc. that wouldn't pass muster in *any* liberal arts course worth its salt. I fear for the state of this university when people set aside critical thinking wholly in favor of bald assertion, obfuscation, and pithy comebacks.

Take the post below this one as an example. Not only does it use this "PPP" term and the concluding aphorism without any explanation their meaning, it includes this pathetic attempt to address my earlier question "What is the relationship between UT administrators and the spoilers of our environment":

"What’s the connection between the above and the administration? Focus on technological advance (= money) and the continued dismissal and discrediting of the humanistic (humane) facet of academia directly- life metaphorically."

"Focus on technological advance" = What does this mean? Focus on research monies at the expense of teaching? Focus on making students technocrats to prop up the future economy? Focus on revenues from intellectual property and patents? There is no clear indication at all, despite the topic's major significance. Without care in expression, one wonders what the value of this comment and the author's opinion is at all.

"continued dismissal and discrediting of the humanistic (humane) facet of academia directly- life metaphorically" = Does this mean the often touted destruction of the A&S college? Where is the evidence for this? Nemeth makes a similar claim in the column and has been stating it at public meetings as a foregone conclusion with no careful attention (that I've heard) to showing how this is the case. If he sees something troubling in the emerging Directions 2010 document or a particular university policy, why not point to it (that is actually quote it, interpret it and cite it)? If it has to do with the proposed reorganization of the college, he hasn't demonstrated how it is imminent despite its status as a proposal, what he means by "destruction" (loss of staff, loss of academic prestige, loss of external funding, or what?), and how what he suspects will happen is reasonably captured by this definition of "destruction." And, in any case, if doing any amount of this takes up only part of a column, it's not being done properly.

If Dr. Nemeth wants to write a column about any of this, I ask not that he respond to any particular question(s), but that the way in which he responds to or writes whatever is characterized by a significantly greater degree of circumspection and care, allowing those who are interested in any of these topics (for example, students who freak out when they hear that their college will be "destroyed" and wonder how that will affect their degree) to know *precisely* what Nemeth means and how he reaches whatever conclusion.

If we can't do this (or worse, if we won't do this), then the academic enterprise is already lost and we deserve not only no university, but also no society (that is, if we are unprepared to train our students to be informed voters and guardians of humanity).

Chuckles
Sun Aug 29 2010 21:32
Before venturing to comment, I had to dictionary.com amalgamative (I must try to use it in a conversation today!). While most input was beyond asinine, in that they held no relevance to the article written- some were just too rich to ignore! “I have a commitment to intellectual virtue..” - wankwank. “He doesn’t want to add more people to his cause?” - the only true cause I think Dr. Nemeth really holds is creating conflict that pushes people to deconstruct the prevailing positivist paradigm (PPP).

Unfortunately philosophy is not my forte, but I found it an entertaining and concise article that offers an ethical alternative to the mainstream mentality that progresses towards enlightenment via the pain of others. What is it? Hell if I know, I have to email him. What’s the connection between the above and the administration? Focus on technological advance (= money) and the continued dismissal and discrediting of the humanistic (humane) facet of academia directly- life metaphorically.

I recommend that anyone that hasn’t had the privilege of taking one of Nemeth’s classes get their academia ridden pull-ups out of a bunch, and treat yourself. Even if your views don’t alter, your arguments will improve.

“There are no facts, only interpretations…”

Anonymous
Sun Aug 29 2010 19:39
Mike, Dr. Nemeth gives his e-mail address and asks that you contact him. Maybe e-mail him your questions and see if he'll answer them in his next column. I doubt he will, and even if he addresses them I doubt he'll offer much more than he has, but it might be worth a try. You could also post the same letter in this comment section, or simply e-mail your comment from 18:27 to him.
Mike
Sun Aug 29 2010 19:14
More diversion, huh? Nope, it's because I have a commitment to intellectual virtue, having had the good fortune of avoiding classes taught by the lot of you. My heart goes out to those who weren't so lucky.
Anonymous
Sun Aug 29 2010 18:42
That is most likely because you are paid by the Jacobs Team as part of its well-funded psychological defense unit to do this all night.
Mike
Sun Aug 29 2010 18:27
Still, after all of this, it's assertion assertion assertion and no argument.

How is the letter thin? (silence)

How is a proposal to reorganize the college justify assertions that it will for sure be destroyed? (silence)

How are the programs Nemeth criticizes "big on fluff but small on substance"? (silence)

How is it that UT administrators and the forces that spoil nature can sensibly be mentioned in the same paragraph about "sustainability"? (silence)

How is not making "ANY racial slurs" tantamount to a blog post not being troubling for a) the wary attitude it expresses about a large group of students and b) the tenuous nature of its underlying assumption (that all urban students are alike in their academic preparedness)? (silence)

I feel like I could do this all night.

zigway
Sun Aug 29 2010 17:25
There are no racist comments by Nemeth in the first place. This detraction is just an attempt to marginalize. The letter you refer to is thin thin thin.
Anonymous
Sun Aug 29 2010 15:56
Students are taking Dr. Nemeth to task for his arguments with no facts or citations.
Anonymous
Sun Aug 29 2010 15:55
Zigway,

I went back and looked. The very same blog where Dr. Nemeth made the "urban" comment has a letter from Dr. Ashley Pryor calling on Dr. Nemeth to take back the comments. To my knowledge she's not an administrator. Or i just everyone who disagrees with Dr. Nemeth a wanna-be administrator? That seems a convenient way of not having to deal with the actual arguments made that you disagree with. You accuse others of ad-hominem attacks on Dr. Nemeth and others because they disagree with what he is saying, but you're doing exactly the same thing. You're accusing people you disagree with of being "wannabe administrators" a term you've filled with negative connotations.







log out