In this episode, I welcome Kirsty Sedgman, academic and author of On Being Unreasonable. We talk about Kirsty's fascinating route into her current academic role and what encouraged her to write a book about unreasonableness. We also discuss the tricky subject of what is considered "reasonable" within academia and how we can push boundaries to create our own meaningful paths.
In this episode,
Kirsty Sedgman
talks about her book On Being Unreasonable: Breaking the rules and making things better. She also briefly discusses her earlier works Locating the Audience and The Reasonable Audience.
You can also find out more about working with me at www.thephdlifecoach.com and find a transcript at www.thephdlifecoach.com/podcast.
Transcript
Vikki: Hello everyone and welcome to episode 40 of the PhD Life Coach and we have another guest with us this week. I am super excited to introduce Kirsty Sedgman, the author of On Being Unreasonable, which we're going to be talking about in this episode. So welcome Kirsty. Thank you so much for coming.
Kirsty: Thank you for having me.
Vikki: No problem at all. So we first found each other on Twitter when we were talking about all things mindset and I came across your book and I mostly thought I'd read it just because it looked really interesting. But the more I read and the more I thought about it, the more I realized how much it applies to academia. So thank you so much for coming today. So maybe let's start, why don't you tell people who you are and what you do?
Kirsty: Of course. Well, I am a lecturer in the theatre department at the University of Bristol. My specialism is audiences. So I do study theatre audiences and live performance, but my interest goes beyond that to think about audiences in every aspect of social life.
So I guess the elevator pitch, the kinds of things that I do is whether it's watching something like a Brecht play or a political phenomenon like Brexit, I am endlessly fascinated by how we can watch the same event unfolding, but come to such radically different conclusions about what it means. So I really study value construction in action, but I do it by studying language use in action as a discourse specialist. How we reach for words to describe experiences that so often we consider to be indescribable and how we make sense of the world through the things that we watch and read and hear.
Vikki: Amazing. And how did you get into doing this? We had a little chat beforehand and you took a slightly circuitous route. So maybe tell us a bit about that.
Kirsty: Yeah, so I was meant to do my PhD at Birmingham. But that was the year they were changing the AHRC's funding model, so there was no funding available that year and at the same time, we were moving to Wales and for my proposal, I was googling audiences and I came across Professor Martin Barker at Aberystwyth, which is just down the road from where we were moving. So I asked him if we could have a chat, and it turned out that he was pretty much the world leading expert in audience studies, working in predominantly in film and television, studying mass media audiences.
And we had a lovely, very long chat. One thing led to another, and before I knew it, I was doing a PhD at Aber into National Theatre Wales, which was just forming at that time. So I studied audience’s responses using Martin's methods, but dragging them into live performance. And then I finished my PhD in, I graduated in July, 2014. I had my first baby Monty in August, 2014. And somewhere in the middle of those two dates, I was made redundant for my zero-hours teaching position.
So I stranded in mid Wales with a brand new baby, no job and the traditional advice suggested that unless I very quickly found probably another zero hours teaching post, or if I was lucky, a 10 month position somewhere in a university, my academic dreams were dead. But I couldn't uproot my family and move them across the country for tiny bits of teaching that just wasn't a possibility for us and Aber was already a two hour round trip. The nearest, the second nearest university, I guess, was Bangor, which would probably be a five hour round trip from where we were living, so that didn't seem on the cards either.
So instead I did maternity leave, I wrote the PhD up into a book and then I launched a research consultancy doing the same kind of audience research, but in industry predominantly for arts organizations who were trying to prove the impact and the benefits of their kind of participatory artwork. So I did that for a couple of years.
Vikki: And so with that, sorry, before you tell the rest of the story, I find that fascinating because you say so many people will have thought and have told you that your academic career is over at that stage and things. Did you believe that? Did you think okay, not going to be able to do university stuff, I'm going to do this? Or did you see this as something else that you could do that might be part of a, a different academic journey?
Kirsty: Well, this was quite a while ago. 2014, now. Nearly 10 years. Oh my goodness. And the market then was very bad. But it's nowhere near as bad as it is now. So I need to acknowledge here, of course, that we are in a particular time and place where higher education as a sector has disintegrated.
But back then we were still told the same things. We were told how difficult it would be. We were told that we'd probably need to travel around the country for multiple part-time or zero hours jobs before we landed the promised lectureship. And even then, that absolutely was not a given. But I think there's always a kind of necessary arrogance to people who have to get through to the end of the PhD.
You have to convince yourself that, “yes, I know it's going to be hard, but my work is good. I believe it deserves to be out there”. So I realized very quickly after having Monty, I guess that totally disabused me of those lingering notions that, “okay, but if you are good enough and if you work hard enough, there probably will be a job”, because I immediately realized, we're all good.
I was going to interviews with dozens of other candidates, talking to them about their work and going, oh my goodness. We are all doing amazing, such different things. It's actually very difficult to see these people as a competitor because I'm working on audiences, that person over there is working on robots in theatre. This person is working on sound and voice. The research is so different.
It really does depend on what each department happens to be looking for. You really do realize at that point, how many of us there really are out there scrambling for so few jobs.
So yes and no. I did believe at first, if I just did these things right, then I'm was more likely to be successful. But I think it was that cold shock to the system emerging from the PhD with a new baby in the middle of nowhere. Impossible even to travel for conferences, that made me see the situation in a whole new light.
Vikki: And how did you realize there was scope for the research consultancy? Because often when I coach students who come from an arts and humanities background, part of their struggle is that part of them believes that what they're doing is only interesting and only a value within that really narrow academic context. So how did you see that that was a possibility for you?
Kirsty: It was a complete accident. I was, I remember it really clearly. I was sitting in an armchair breastfeeding Monty with one hand on my laptop with the other. And I was thinking I need to do some kind of research that has nothing to do with National Theatre Whales, some kind of audience theatre based research so that I can get this book out and then I can start thinking about journal articles.
But in the meantime, I need to publish some kind of shorter form versions of my research, but I think I need to work on something a little bit fresh. And then as I was sitting there scrolling through Facebook and advert popped up for a performance by Midland Creative Projects and Bloodaxe, which was in Coventry. Just a few days of performances, taking a poetry anthology published by Bloodaxe and turning it into a performance with actors on stage performing a range of poems. And that just happened to be the exact thing that I'd studied for my undergraduate dissertation with Bloodaxe books and Midlands creative projects. So I thought I'll just email them and see if they want a bit of free audience research.
I can go to Coventry, I can take Tom, my husband and the baby because I was still obviously breastfeeding. So they were great. And I went and did just a few questionnaires and I got some really interesting data and I wrote them up a little report all for free. I didn't even realize that consultancy research was a thing until the producer of that show emailed me going, “oh, I hear that there's some people in Wales who want some arts impact consultancy evaluation work. Would you be interested? Shall I put you in touch?”
So I went and met with them, and honestly, I had hesitations because impact is a very complicated thing, both for us as academics, but also within the arts. There's a real… it's a double bind where just like us as academics, arts organizations too need to prove the transformative outcomes of their arts Council funding. They need to prove success in really limited ways in what Eleanora Belfiore calls a bullshit model of arts advocacy. So I had some concerns about being complicit in that system. And then I went and talked to them and I thought, “actually, no, this is exactly what I've been doing.” Trying to talk to people, trying to get a sense of those rich, complex value systems in action as people reach for and arrive at value judgments. I can still do my research.
All I then need to do is take those metrics of success, snip 'em out of the much more rich and deep and complex data, and do a little report and give it to the Arts Council. But I can also feedback that much richer kind of information to the project teams themselves in a way that might actually help them to think more deeply about the invitation that they're offering to participants and their working processes and what works for some people and what doesn't for others.
So that was kind of my brand. It was an accident, but I started doing that and I pitched myself to organizations in that way. I can do the bullshit advocacy work that the Arts Council requires, taking those metrics of aesthetic experience that absolutely can't be measured, but we can pretend so that we can get the data that the Arts Council needs.
And that you need to then secure future funding. But I can also give you this much more detailed depth of knowledge about human encounters with art.
Vikki: I love that because I think, you know, you talked about impact to universities and then there's impact in this sort of sense, but it's true across so many different things. You know, I've been involved in assessing impact of training programs and how do we actually see whether they lead to sustain change in people's perspectives and their behaviours and so on afterwards and things like that. And then a charity I'm involved with looks at the impact of their political advocacy and how can they measure, when they do particular things, how do they measure whether that actually changes the public's perceptions or MP's perceptions or whatever it is. So I think it's such a wide ranging area and as you say, this balance between the kind of measuring the stuff that's easy to measure but doesn't tell you a lot versus getting deeper into it. So how did you go then from there? What happened after that? How did you end up where you are now?
Kirsty: Well, I did manage to get a couple of articles out over that couple of years when I was in the No Man's land and I had the book under contract already. So I just had to transform that from the PhD thesis into a monograph that people might actually want to read. And that was Locating the Audience, which is all about how people found value in National Theatre Wales. And they're actually, I tackle the impact question and I argue that we tend to think about impact in those bullshit advocacy terms as if it's an end point, as if it's something fixed and finite that, because that's the only way that we can measure it.
But actually, of course we know that value is a process. Impact is a process, and those values that we get out of… whether it's the value of our research or the value of an artistic event, they continue to evolve as we continually think about them. And those impacts make their way further into the world. So I was publishing things like that and doing my Arts impact evaluation, and suddenly I started getting interviews for actual lectureships. And I remember taking Monty again.
Vikki: Hang on, sorry. Backtrack around the country. Backtrack. Sorry. You ended up getting interviews, getting interviews for academic jobs, but that meant you started applying for them.
Kirsty: Yeah. Oh yeah.
Vikki: So backtrack a sec. How did, so you were applying throughout this?
Kirsty: I was applying and in the first year or so. Very few bites. But then as the arts impact evaluation work started to take hold, and as I started to work with a broader range of organizations, despite the fact that I hadn't been teaching in an academic post or connected to a university in any sense whatsoever, I didn't even have an academic email address. I was applying for lectureships and suddenly I was getting interviews.
I was taking Monty usually with Tom, dragging them all around the country. And I set myself a rule that I couldn't be taking part-time positions. They had to be permanent. Full-time lectureships, but that we could move anywhere that would take me. And I remember that there was one interview after about a year and a half of this where I was sitting having a chat with the fellow candidates and one of them was grilling me and going, “okay, but you must have a temporary position as an academic institution. Okay, well you must be an honorary person at an academic institution?”
“No, no, I, I am not connected in any way with the university.”
“Well, you must be teaching, you must be doing some guesting.”
“No, I'm not doing any kind of academic work. I'm doing research consultancy.” And at one point they stopped and went, “well, why are you allowed to be here?” This is not what we're meant to be doing. And they didn't mean it nastily. In fact, they told me that they had desperately wanted to have a baby, them and their partner. But they had been told, you can't do that until you get a permanent job. And I think there was a sense that, well, but you haven't done any of the things that we're told we have to do.
How are you still an attractive candidates? And it turned out that the reason was because I was researching and I was building industry contacts and I was working in an impact sector and those are things that universities valued over and above the kind of set regimen of you cannot stop teaching or you'll be out of the game.
There was a real sense that, “oh, you can pick up teaching again later. I'm sure those skills won't have gone rusty.” In the meantime, you have been able to do these things because you weren't sucked into having to devote all of your time to zero hours teaching for very low pay.
Vikki: And so when did you then land your job?
Kirsty: Well, after a couple of years and many, many, many applications and about, I think probably about 20 to maybe 30 interviews for various lectureship posts at various universities, I decided that I was also going to apply for a postdoc. So I saw an email come in about British Academy postdocs. I didn't know they existed. I had no idea what I was reading, but it sounded great. I thought it was a kind of apply for this postdoc through a university. And if you get it by the university, then they will give you a postdoc. No, obviously, it was one of those emails that was, we're inviting you to apply for a postdoc through the British Academy. Didn't realize that at the time.
I whipped up on the spot, a postdoc idea at Bristol and with my lovely, amazing colleague, Catherine Hindson’s help, and it went through the works. It made it through the internal process and then I got through the first round. Felt like a miracle, but then the British Academy that year had not been actually allocated their government money.
So they sent us an email going, we have ranked you all, we've made a decision about who to offer postdocs too, but we can't tell you. We can't tell you where you've come in that ranking. We can't tell you if you've got it. We're waiting to find out what kind of funding we might have, if anything. And I thought, “oh, well that's that then.”
And then a job came up at Bristol, at Exeter and at Birmingham. So I applied for all three of them and I got interviews for all three of them. The first of those was Bristol. So I went there and I did the initial presentation, which normally I found very difficult because of nerves. Actually, that one went really well.
And then it was 10 minutes before the interview was due to start, and the email pinged into my inbox telling me I'd got the British Academy funding. And Catherine came down the stairs going, “it's time for your interview now.” “Catherine, I'm got money. I'm doing a postdoc. What do I do?” She went, “ok. Are you ready for your interview now?”
“No.” “Ok. Pull yourself together. Go in the room, do the interview.” So somehow the first question, I fell apart, but I just managed to scrape myself up off the floor, pull it together, deliver the interview. I was looking at Catherine going, should I, um, I'm not going to tell them. Should I tell? No. Okay. You are not telling them.
So I won't tell them. Didn't tell them. Turned out, Catherine didn't tell them until after they'd done all the interviews and they'd made the decision and the chair had said, right, so we're offering Kirsty the job. And then she said, well, you'll be very delighted to hear that she's got a postdoc. Also, they worked it out and said I could do three years of postdoc and then I could start the lectureship thereafter, which was really a dream.
Vikki: Amazing. And how long ago was that now? That was in 2016. And so how did this… so you mentioned your other book, and we will link to that in the show notes for people that are interested in the more kind of academic side of the writing as well. But where did the idea for On Being Unreasonable come from?
Kirsty: It was a project that I accidentally started all the way back in 2014 when I had Monty. And suddenly I found myself a professional theatre goer, unable to actually go to the theatre, at least without the ability to detach my breasts and leave them behind. And I started to think about how, for me, that was a temporary exclusion from theatre.
But for people like Jess Thom, the amazing Tourette's hero activist and performer who did a show backstage at Biscuit Land. I think it was actually that same year that I had little Monty and I could bring him into the theatre for the first time. Because as somebody with Tourette's, with physical and verbal ticks that have been in the past deemed to be a disturbing distraction in the theatre, Jess Thom decided that all of her performances were going to be relaxed, which means that you can come and go if you need to.
The lights are up, you can bring babie. Noises and disturbances are welcome as a normal part of being human. And it was the most amazing experience. And I just started to think about this relaxed performance, extra live movement and how it's emerging at the same time as the upsurge of a term ‘theatre etiquette’, which was in newspapers, it felt at least, once a week used as a kind of catchable phrase for the critics and other audiences to bemoan the state of audience in today, increased bad behavior in the theatre, the idea that audiences need to be retrained into silent reverence.
And I thought this is really fascinating that these two things were emerging around the same time. There seems to be some kind of anxiety here. And then I put it away in the flurry of the consultancy and the job, and then I didn't think about it again until I had Sully in 2017. I hope that's right. He’ll be really mad if it’s not. Yes. 2017 and I thought, I'll just write an article about this, about theatre etiquette and the idea that there is a reasonable way to behave in the theatre and where those norms of silent reference came from in the first place.
I'll just write a small article that will be fun, A nice little side project. And then the small article became my second academic book, the Reasonable Audience about theatre etiquette and behaviour policing. And I thought, well, at least now I'm done. That came out in 2018. I can now stop thinking and obsessing about reasonableness because I've said what I needed to say, but then lockdown happened.
We all got locked up in our houses and suddenly I saw that word reasonable everywhere. And before I knew it, I had pitched this idea to an agent who actually had approached me a few years before and we'd been in touch and we kept talking about various ideas and nothing had come of it. And I mentioned that I really am furious and infuriated by the fact we keep using this word reasonable and unreasonable, but we don't interrogate what we mean and the complexities.
And he said, write a book about it. And then it snowballed and Faber bought the book. And then I had to write it.
Vikki: Nothing like a bit of pressure. Love. Wow. Yeah. How exciting. One of the things that struck me with the book is just the whole range of different settings that you apply this idea of reasonableness to. Before we get on - I promise listeners, we are going to talk about academia and how this applies to that in a second - just give people a flavour of the, kind of, the range of different things you've talked about within the context of theatres and within the context of Covid and the lockdowns and things. But give people an idea of the range of different things you talk about in the book.
Kirsty: Of course. Well it absolutely emerged from my research into theatre audiences and how we negotiate reasonable behaviour, within the theatre auditorium, but the book is not about that at all. That was just the starting point for investigating one big question, which is what does it mean to feel like we are a reasonable person with the right to tell other people how they should behave?
And when is that really a pro-social urge to make public space better and cleaner and more equitable for everybody, but also who gets excluded when we cling too tightly onto behavioural norms that might be built for a particular time and place. They might be obsolete or out of touch.
So some of the specific things that I explore in the book is everything from breastfeeding in public, which is my starting point for the book, and it's the opening to the intro and how we draw that line between appropriate and inappropriate, and particularly who feels that they have the right to decide those things, often on our behalf.
To whether it's okay for women to apply makeup on trains, which to some people is absolutely fine, and to others, is completely unacceptable, to reclining seats on an airplane, which is one of those debates that reemerges over and over again. Is that okay or not? And if not, why did they recline in the first place?
And then from those more kind of micro aspects of social interaction to the big defining questions of our age, like everything from civil behaviour in our neighbourhoods and the acceptable levels of noise and disruption and mess, and how certain people seek to stamp all of those out and where that came from in the first place to acts of civil protest.
Because that was one of the things, of course during lockdown, and that uneasy year from 2020 onwards, we saw protesters fighting for essentially civil rights being branded unreasonable. And I talk about how I was in Bristol when the Colston statue came down. I was there at the Kill the Bill protest, watching a police car being set on fire.
So I wrestle with the ethics of protest and how protestors always seem to get branded unreasonable and where we should draw that line and again, who should get to decide that to civil debate? And my big question of, if I am a believer that words have power, which of course I am because I've made studying words my entire life's work, then why often does talking about things fail to solve those big social problems and bridge those increasing societal divides.
Vikki: Absolutely. And I think that really shows the breadth of it. I, I was really fascinated how it jumped between all those different things, connecting them together and also the side of how you showed how it's also embedded into our structures as well. So I really enjoyed the parts about - enjoyed, is that the word? - I found fascinating. The parts about the law and the notion of a, a, what a reasonable person would do, using that for legal judgments and where that's come from. So yeah, for anyone listening, you haven't read it, I will be linking to it in the show notes. Go and get it. I found it absolutely fascinating.
So let's tie this in then. So, you've talked about your own academic journey and the sort of decisions that you've had to make along the way. How do you tie that to this notion of what's reasonable and unreasonable within the kind of context of, I guess, academic career planning?
Kirsty: The reason that I started studying reasonableness rather than say one of its synonyms, like acceptable or appropriate, is because when I started to dig, I realized how deeply that word is embedded in our moral philosophical norm. So as you said in our legal judgments, how we judge other people and how we judge ourselves. And I really feel that I have been judged by other people, but also that I have judged myself according to those inbuilt standards of reasonableness throughout my whole academic journey because, I have struggled to pull apart those voices in my head that are saying, well, this I think is what you want to do now. This is what you'd like to work on. This is how you'd like to organize your career.
I've been struggling to peel that apart from the voice that tells me what I should do. Because those normative models - this is what I explain at length in On Being Unreasonable - that those normative ideals about the kind of life we should live and the kind of career we should pursue are so embedded. They're in the air that we breathe and the water that we drink. It's really hard to think outside of those structures of thought.
Vikki: And so where do you see that? So if you are looking at newly graduated PhD students, as you were when you were in Wales, and thinking about what to do next, what are the sort of “reasonable” things that you see people assuming that they have to do?
Kirsty: The things that I was specifically told, not by Martin himself, but you know, you go to endless workshops and seminars for early careers and the things that we were told, I think it's pretty old advice. It is publish a couple of articles, ideally by the time you finish the PhD. And I didn't do that because I'd got the book under contract.
But that's the other thing I told to do, get the book under contract and I really struggled to see what could be an article and what could be a book until I defined what the book would be. And then I peeled off a couple of articles. So I did that in the wrong order. But roughly speaking, I did it according to that plan.
Published those things. They should be coming out by the time you're finishing the PhD or within a year. And then you need to get back into university. Find a university that will take you and cling on, no matter the cost to you, to your mental health, and to your physical and financial wellbeing. And do that for as long as you need because this is the price that we have to pay.
So I really felt the panic of not doing that and feeling actually that I was unable… In fact, I said earlier that I told myself I could only apply for permanent jobs. I broke that rule once because I was in such a panic. Monty was a few months old. I hadn't started the consultancy yet, and I was just thinking, that's it. It's all over. And then a job came up. It was a 10 month teaching fellowship, so I emailed them and said, I do have a baby. I probably can't return to work in the timeframe that you want, but I could probably start a couple of months later, which would've been actually far too soon, I think.
But I felt such panic and desperation that I put it out there, and I got a very carefully worded email coming back that said, of course we will not discriminate against you, but we really don't want to be put in that position. The implication was, please don't apply, and I definitely at that point, had bought into the sense that it probably was a losing game now because other people were following the rules and I wasn't.
And there was a sense that, well, if I have to do it, probably you need to also. But it turned out that the things that I didn't do, not having to get sucked into those teaching roles where you have to give 150%, meant that I had enough time around being the sole child carer to be able to advance the publishing, to be able to forge those industry connections and to actually work on a wide range of extremely exciting research projects that I could then spin into a narrative of academic success, albeit adjacent to, rather than inside academia.
Vikki: And I love that, that connects really... So my regular listeners will know, a couple of weeks ago I had an interview with Holly Prescott, who's a PGR careers advisor, and she was talking about academic adjacent careers. So I love that we've now had somebody on who's actually been doing that and has used that as routes back into academia as well.
What I think is fascinating though, when you talk about these messages of what's reasonable and things at the beginning of people's careers and that route that you need to take to get into academic career. So I see parallels further through careers as well. So in my academic career, I often feel… I about to say I feel guilty. Do I feel guilty? I was extraordinarily lucky in the way my career worked out. I stayed in the same place the whole time. I got offered a postdoc out the back of my PhD. I got offered a lectureship out the back of that and just. Stayed put. So in some ways you'd think I didn't have these sorts of things and I certainly didn't have the insecurity and the moving around and those sorts of things.
But what I did have was an absolutely massive love for teaching and for teaching innovation and student support. And I reached a point in my career where people were saying to me, you have to spend less time doing that stuff, Vikki, and focus on getting your grant, focus on getting your publications, because that's how you're going to get promoted.
All this stuff is lovely. We want our students to be looked after. It's important, but it's not your route to progression. And like you, I found that uncomfortable and I was a bit like, well, but, but why? Because I'm good at this student stuff and that's really important. And thankfully, the right people were in the right places at the right time, said, no, there is a future in that.
So this was in like, I don’t know, 2005 or something like that. There is a future in that and ultimately I switched over to being a teaching focused academic and promoted up a teaching leadership role and ironically went all the way to full professor on it. But certainly at the time it was something that I was absolutely told that that route was not a route that would get me promoted.
So I think it's really interesting how, in lots of different ways this narrative that there's one way to do it is not true and not helpful. You know, I, I spent a lot of time trying to convince, okay, yeah, I can do less of that. I can do less of that stuff. Yep, that's fine. I can write my grant. I can write my grant. And really beating myself up for the fact that I didn't really want to, and that, that that wasn't where my strengths lay.
Kirsty: Absolutely. There are three things that institutions actually care about, and those are publications profile. And prestige. And there are ways to get those three things that don't require you to have to eat the crumbs that academia will throw at you.
And I have since, I've been on a number of panels about alternative routes back into academia. I've spoken to people who couldn't get any kind of academic job so they went and got a job in the theatre industry until they were in a really quite exciting position, in a really exciting company. And then they were hired back into an academic profession as a professor.
Because actually that was seen to be a massive draw, that kind of high profile, you’ll work with somebody who actually has these industry experiences and a PhD. And that's not to say that now the rules have changed. So instead of the old rules, you need to follow these new rules and then you will succeed.
Absolutely not. I do think that it's a way to reclaim some of the power that academia is actively stealing from us and delighting in having stole from us because it's created a massive potential workforce that they know that they can call upon at any moment and pay peanuts, and we'll still have to say thank you. But as well as reclaiming that power to be able to do the work that is still meaningful for us and perhaps adjacent to academia and still using all of those tools, I just want to be really clear that I'm not saying that if you then do that, you'll absolutely be able to pig piggy hop. Is that right? Piggy hop piggyback. Jump back into the academic profession.
What I'm saying is, we're often told that it absolutely won't happen, and I'm a case study of how it absolutely can, but I'm not saying that it absolutely will because my, if anyone decides to quote this in future, I'd love you to call it the Sedgman Theory of Academic Jobs, because my theory is the academia for post PhD life, it's like a slot machine.
You can pour your money and your time and your energy into the slot machine, and there's never going to be a guarantee that you'll get that big payout. The likelihood that you will get that payout gets higher the longer that you can hang on and keep feeding in those coins. But of course the ability to feed in those coins requires the privilege to be able to hang on.
But you can do absolutely everything right, you can follow all of those rules and then do more besides, and you still might not get a job. That pay might not come before you run out of coins.
Vikki: So what advice do you give?
Kirsty: I think for me, what I wanted, what I wished that I'd had when I was sitting there in Wales with a tiny baby alone being told that my lifelong dream was over, what I wish I'd known is that there are so many things that we can do because universities want us to do so many things.
They want us, sure, they want us to write the academic publications, but I've seen people be hired without even the book under contract. They want us to bring in funding and grants, but I was able to show that I could do that through a consultancy route. So I was able to say, well, I've brought in, to myself, to my own business, this much money, and I can continue to do that through your consultancy services if you'd hired me.
I didn't have to necessarily get the postdoc. In fact, they offered me the lectureship before they realized I got any grant funding whatsoever. But also they want us to do now, universities, they want us to do all of these other things. They want us to bring prestige to the institution. So my backup plan was I thought, okay, well if I can write academic stuff, I could probably do some journalism at some point.
And that obviously is also part of that arrogance that I talked about, because journalism is not easy and it's not an easy career to break into, but there are things that you can do if you're at home alone with a baby. You can send out pitches relentlessly. That is a power that we have. Twitter, albeit possibly, and it's last gasp now, I hope not, but things like social media have given us the ability to build our own platforms.
Again, these are not easy things to do, but if we can do them, If we can find a way like my friend Ellie Mackin Roberts to become a TikTok star and speak to tens of thousands of followers about her research in this public engagement way. Those are things that universities value too. And again, that's not to say that we then need to go off and have to do even more stuff in order to probably still not get that big slot machine payout, but it means that we don't have to be trapped within their rules because their rules are broken.
I have a friend who is right in that situation. She's got the academic book out there. She's got so many articles, she's very well known and well respected in our field. She did a prestigious postdoc for four years. That was the gravy train. And now she has spent the past two years applying for job after job after job and all we've managed to do is throw the measly crumbs of zero hours teaching at her as a sector.
It's appalling. The rules are broken. But I joke with her that, oh, you just need to do one more thing. That's the narrative. Just if you just, if you just get a book, now you've got a book. If you just article now you've done that. If you just do edited collection and chapters, people inviting you to know done that too. Public engagement. Yep. She's done a radio program. You can do everything right. And that payoff still might not come, and that might be the most depressing thing I've ever said, but I'm hoping that knowledge at least, can liberate us from feeling that then we have to do all of those things.
There are other things that we can do. So the advice that I wish I'd been told is just pick the work that is meaningful for you.
Vikki: I love that because it's a little bit like, I don't spend lots of time in arcades, but you can use the slot machine thing. Sometimes you just have to accept, this is the money that I'm going to spend in my arcade and I'm going to enjoy it.
And if I get a payout happy days, that's fabulous. But if not, I've put my, you know, I've put this money into having bit of a giggle in the arcade. And I think sometimes if we can plan our careers a little bit more like that of, okay, this may or may not lead to an academic role in the end, but in the meantime I'm going to do something that sustains me, that feels meaningful to me.
Where it's stuff where I feel like I'm bringing my strengths and talents to it, then at least we are not just sort of either writing it off entirely and going, “it's all broken. I can't possibly”, or going, “okay, I'm a little puppy and I'll try and tick all your boxes”.
We can go in the middle and go, okay, it's broken. I'm good at this stuff. I'm going to do this stuff. Might lead there, might lead somewhere else. That's interesting too. Yeah. Either way I can make it right for me.
Kirsty: Yeah. And one of the things that I'm most passionate about is I do a lot of informal mentoring for PhDs and early career people. And I have so many conversations where people say, I know that I have to write an academic book from my PhD and I have to publish it with one of the big academic publishers who will sell it for 80 pounds.
And then the people I want to read it won't buy it, but I know I have to do that. And I say, you do not have to do that. What if, instead of publishing that book with an academic publisher, what if you found a way to get it to the people you actually want to read it? What if that's the thing that you prioritize and there are agents out there who will help you turn your very specific academic work into more broadly relevant writing.
That comes with a trade off. My book is stuffed with footnotes, so it's not like it's a completely unresearched or referenced piece of work, but it is written for that big broad audience. I couldn't nerd out into the minutia of theatre and theatre audiences there because it had to speak to all of these other subjects. so you could do that if you want to, but if you really want to nerd out, but you still want to get it out to a broader range of people, there are smaller publishers that are for trades. Like in my discipline, Salamander Street Press is a trade publisher that is set up just to publish books to normal people. Paperbacks sold at reasonable prices about theatre and live performance. And then even academic publishers now are seeing the need to add a trade arm.
So I get the Bookseller magazine, which I would absolutely recommend for anyone interested in learning more about how publishing as an industry works. And they're calling it trade adjacent places like Manchester University Press has just hired an editor to properly launch a trade arm. So those are academic books, but very carefully packaged for non-academic readers as well because they're speaking to those broader things. So there are ways that you can still talk about the specific topic that you are interested in and go into detail and depth. Perhaps writing it in a way that isn't just accessible for academics in your discipline, those valuable interdisciplinary conversations that academic books can give us.
But if you want your book to be read by a broader range of people, whether it's the public, whatever that means, or people in the industry themselves, there are ways that you can do that. And suddenly when I tell some people that, they go, oh, am I allowed to do that? I think sometimes we just need permission to break those rules.
Vikki: Well, we just need to hear from people who know about these other ways of doing things. Because one of the things I see a lot with the PhD students that I coach is they get all their advice often from people who have taken the very traditional route through. And so those people are saying, oh, you do this and you do this and then that happens because that's what happened to them. And they don't necessarily see all the people that that didn't happen for.
And often I'm afraid they assume that the reason it happened that way for them was because they were really good rather than because they were in the right place at the right time or they conformed to a particular part of society or whatever it might be, and so PhD students are getting that really limited view.
So I think one of my biggest things would be, you know, you talked about Twitter and things like that, is getting out there as, whether you're a PhD student or an academic who's just, who's in a job but is, you know, perhaps precarious or not sure where they're going next, is getting out and getting on Twitter and talking to different people because there are so many people that have done different routes to all of these things that other people might consider unreasonable or whatever, you know. I have people asking about my route because they're still universities. Birmingham was actually quite progressive in terms of the teaching focused promotion routes and things.
We had those before a lot of universities did, but there's still lots of universities where people are like, the promotion criteria just doesn't even make sense, because it's taken the research promotion criteria, deleted the word research and put in the word teaching and other than that is exactly the same.
So even just hearing from, you know, I've had a pretty traditional career in many ways, but on that teaching side, even just hearing from something like that, people are like, oh, I can do it like that. And so I think that kind of talking broadly and seeing the different possible reasonable journeys that you can take is, is so important.
Kirsty: Yeah. And of course the vast swirling vortex of anxiety that is the REF makes all of this a lot more complicated. Because there are big questions about whether if you write a more accessible book, whether it's a full on trade book like my On Being Unreasonable, or if you maybe write something for that is definitely academic, but it's not published by an academic press and therefore isn't peer reviewed in that same way, if it will be REF-able.
And that's not easy to answer because actually it really depends. If you're sitting in front of an interview panel, each person is going to have a very different view. But I know a lot of people who've gone down the kind of public scholar route. A lot of them have written books that haven't been peer reviewed because they're out there with the big trade publishers and yet they are still making their way into REF because they're based on original research and therefore can go into the research category and/or because a lot of these people are pitching them as impact case studies, which actually bring in, I think the figure I heard was about 300,000 pounds for a four star impact case study, something like that.
Vikki: It's huge. And we are just starting to see what the next REF will look like and how that will be configured. Cause even within the REF people have either inaccurate or out of date ideas about what they need to be doing.
So one of the things that REF did was actually say producing fewer publications, but higher quality ones, is better than a massive shopping list of 30 articles. But there are still, I'm constantly working with academics who still believe that actually the quantity, the length of their publication list is crucial.
And that's not even coming from REF that's coming from somewhere else in academia. And so even sort of making sense of these competing pressures, I think is, is a challenge in itself.
Kirsty: Yeah. And if your monograph is absolutely academic in nature and you want to talk to your fellow academics using that particular register, which is technical language that we've developed to be able to communicate a complex ideas to people who already have that higher starting point of knowledge, great.
Do that. But if you are only thinking that I'll write an academic book, because it's what I need to do, maybe just reconsider if something else might be more meaningful for you. Perhaps you might want to write a trade book instead, turn your PhD into a public facing book. Strip out a lot of the scholarship from it.
Carefully seed it in there amidst a more narrative kind of storytelling register and then write a couple of academic articles, which will be weighted the same for two 8,000 word articles, 16,000 words. If you do two of those, there'll be weighted the same as an academic monograph that often would be 80 to a hundred thousand words might be.
So there might be ways that are better for you and for your research and for the people you want to reach with your research that could still look extremely attractive to a hiring or a promotions committee. Because the kinds of conversations that I'm having about my trade book, it's quite hilarious given that On Being Unreasonable is all about the starting point is that we have very different ideas about what is reasonable, so how can we figure out what's right. When you talk to one person, their common sense, obvious ideas about what's clearly the right way to do things is actually going to be quite different from the person next to them. But everyone believes their own value judgments are definitely the reasonable ones.
It's really ironic then that the conversations I've had about this book and whether or not it's REF-able are so wildly divergent from person to person to person. Someone says, obviously you can't REF it, and another one goes, well, why couldn't you REF it?
Someone goes, oh, do you know what? Probably won't make a great impact case study because the outputs and outcomes are so diffuse and nebulous and other goes, no, you absolutely could turn that into a brilliant four star impact case study, so there is no consensus about what is the right way to do things.
Vikki: So you get to decide the right way.
Kirsty: Exactly. And that's the only empowering thing that I have left in this bin fire that is academia. I just cling onto we do have some power at least to decide our own narratives and paths, but we have to be able to decouple that very loud voice in our head that goes, no, there is only one right way to do things from being able to decide actually, well what do I want to do? That's the thing that I found hardest. I asked myself constantly, do I just feel like I should do this or do I want to do it? Do I only want to do it because I feel like I should do it?
Vikki: I love the notion of decoupling there because one of the things my clients often say is, oh, I just need to stop thinking those thoughts because I know they don't help me and I want to think this instead. And we often talk about how it's really hard to stop thinking habitual thoughts, especially when you're working in a sector that historically and currently is reinforcing these all around you. But this notion of decoupling that just because you think it's true, that there might be a right way to do it, there are other things that you think are true too, that there could be other ways.
And we haven't got to stop thinking that there's a right way yet. We just need to spend less time beating ourselves with that stick. And over time you'll probably stop believing it quite so strongly. But I love that, I think that picture of just decoupling from it. That can exist. I'm going to have that narrative because people have put that narrative in my head in the sector for years. That's fine. But I also believe this other stuff too. Yeah. And I can make this work.
Kirsty: And you can't, you have no control over who you'll be in front of when you're at interviews or putting your CV in front of promotional panels. You might get somebody who looks at your trade work or maybe public engagement, journalistic writing, if that's where you want to go and then they might say, this person isn't a real academic, not for us.
Or you might get someone who goes, wow, what an asset to the university this person will be with a name like that. Reaching all those people, I can see how they could leap in and get started making the best impact case study we've ever seen.
Vikki: Yeah. Absolutely. And that's where, you know, when people don't get jobs. Yes. Reflecting on our own performance and whether there's things that we can enhance and things, but remembering that the sort of amount of variation that comes depending on who's on your panel. And often it says a lot more about that particular combination of you and your particular things with them and their particular things, and whether that was a match in that particular circumstance, rather than… I see a lot of people making it mean something about them that if they didn't accept me, that means I'm not good enough.
That means I'm not cut out for this. So I'm going to take you slightly different direction. So one of the things in my last couple of episodes of the podcast has been about preparing for the academic summer and you know, is this time where in theory at least we have more flexibility than we usually do and that means that we get to make a bunch of decisions.
And one of the things, in fact that brought me to you originally was this idea that people have different assumptions about what you have to do in an academic summer. What's expected of you, what you should do, and all of those. And I just wondered if you had any thoughts about how this idea of being reasonable or unreasonable can come down to that sort of micro level of planning as well?
Kirsty: Yeah. Well one of the things that I should probably say here is that I'm currently staring down the barrel myself of six weeks summer holiday. And when I started doing PhD teaching, I remember that we tended to be all wrapped up and finished and free to work on our own stuff around the end of May.
The academic semester this year is just refusing to die, and partly that's because of the marking and assessment boycott, but also because there has been this teaching and admin creep into the summer. Which means that for me and for so many other working parents, the end of teaching is now colliding and threatening even to overlap with the start of the school summer holidays.
So what is reasonable for me now is actually a lot less than I might previously have hoped in terms of even time to be able to work. And that's one of the things on being unreasonable, explores, of course, the inequity ease. When we decide that only one way of living together, of being together or working or of organizing our own lives is reasonable, what we're doing then is failing to consider that other people have alternative needs that might make that reasonable way of working absolutely impossible.
And personally, I have definitely hit the point of burnout, which is something that people have been warning me about forever. I just feel like I'm not even sure I can do any academic work or any work whatsoever this summer. The thought of trying to barricade myself in a room again, while my children who are extremely anxious and I think actually have separation anxiety post covid are hammering at the door, literally crying for me, they're eight and five now. We should be past this, but we're not.
These are things that people don't necessarily see unless we talk about them. And that's not to say that, of course childcare is the only pressure or disadvantage that people are facing. Other forms of caring responsibility of always get in the way and need to be taken seriously too. But I just don't know what I can actually reasonably do this summer that will be productive at all. Maybe what I need to do is to stop and recover, but then I feel this tremendous sense of anxiety even saying that out loud.
But perhaps that's the only reasonable thing. Obviously I'm really fortunate to be in this position that I can think about maybe taking a break, but also it feels like the REF is coming up fast now and I haven't managed to write really anything academic for a couple of years, since lockdown, since everything fell apart.
I'm not sure if I have any useful advice other than we have to be kind to ourselves, but also we have to accept that that kindness is not always a possibility because I know that some people have to work through burnout just to survive.
Vikki: Yeah, and I think you say you have nothing useful to add - I think sharing stories like that is useful in and of itself, even without sort of specific advice as to what you could do about it. I think knowing that other people feel like that is super important for people to hear. You know, the group coaching that I do, one of the things that they like my coaching, but the thing they like more than anything is hearing that other people have challenges that are similar to theirs.
So I think even in and of itself that it's useful for people to see somebody who is living the dream in all metric senses, it's still really challenging and still a whole bunch of decisions to be made.
I think the one point I would challenge is that people can't be kind to themselves. I think one thing I would really encourage anybody listening to this is to remember that kind can be a whole bunch of different things. Kind doesn't have to mean. Turning off absolutely everything and sitting in a bubble bath with your candles and meditating for 48 hours kind can be just telling yourself that what you're doing is enough. That if I can give two hours today, then that's bloody brilliant and I'm so proud of myself for giving those two hours. And look at me being a rocking academic mom doing this. This is wicked.
Rather than spending those two hours telling yourself that you are being a terrible mother because you should be out there. And then when you are with them telling yourself you are a terrible academic because you should be in there writing.
So for me, kindness can look like looking at the things that we say to ourselves. And if we do decide that we have to work through things that are difficult, how can we do that in a way that makes us feel supported and valued? And. And all of those things.
Kirsty: That's great advice. You should be a coach. [laughing]
Vikki: [laughing] I’ll consider that now. We couldn't possibly have an episode where we're thinking about the balance between reasonable and unreasonable in the current climate without talking about the strikes and the marking boycotts and things like that. So how does your work sort of inform and reflect on what's going on there?
Kirsty: Well, one of the things that I do in my academic role, I work in as an impact coordinator for the school. It's my admin role and so I get to talk to a lot of people in my university and of course I know a lot of people who are not in my university, and there is just a general sense by a lot of people of why should we bother? Why should we jump through these hoops and do the things that you tell us that we need to do when structurally, as a sector, you seem not to care too much about your staff.
And for me, I am having those very same feelings and questions and it's part of that moral exhaustion, I think, that is making it hard to think about what the next steps might be, what my summer might look like. I just, I, I don’t know how to make myself care if I feel I'm working in a workplace that doesn't care about me.
But the answer for me, again, it's to return to that question of what is meaningful for me. I feel now more than ever, this is why I wrote the book. I'm not on this podcast and I didn't publish a trade book as some kind of awful grift or self-aggrandizement. I really hoped that writing this book might offer readers a way to think more carefully about the world and the question of how we relate to each other as humans and what we want public space to be like, and how we can figure that out in a world where increasingly it feels like we're so divided we can't even talk to each other. That felt meaningful for me.
Vikki: Absolutely.
Kirsty: And I don't know now that that project, which has taken been about a decade in the making, it now feels like it's come to an end, and I'm trying to figure out what I should do next, and all I keep thinking is I just have to figure out a way that the next project feels as meaningful as that.
It's probably going to be a small academic article about something niche, but at its core, I have to feel that it's important because arts and humanities research, I so believe no matter who you're talking to, no matter who you're writing for, we're doing it because we believe it matters. So figure out the what matters to us.
Vikki: Absolutely. I absolutely think that it starts some really important conversations that people have. So when I was an academic, obviously we had, there were strikes and there was marking boycotts then. It wasn't on the same scale that it is now. And it was something that I don't think we had very nuanced discussions about at all.
You know, I look back and I didn't strike when there were strikes. My department was not a very politically active department for want of a better phrase. Only a couple of people did strike, and I think I avoided thinking about it, if you see what I mean. And I hid behind the, “I want to do what's best for my students”, but kept that in quite a short term, what's best for my students.
And it would be, I don't know. It would be self-aggrandizing to say if I went back it would be different next time because who knows what I would be brave enough to do. I think the people that are out there taking pay cuts and so on because they're participating in this stuff are showing a level of resoluteness that I just think is really impressive.
Who knows what I would do if I went back there, but certainly seeing all of this happen and reading your book absolutely makes me reflect more on where that line sits between what's best for people in this short term bit at the moment, because we all feel terrible for these students that haven't got their results and things, but what's reasonable in the long term in terms of standing up for and protecting the sector.
Kirsty: Yeah. And I do write in the book in chapter five, which is called What? No, not Whatever Happened to Public Reason. That's chapter six. It's called, uh, where We're Going. We Don't Need Rhodes. Like Rhodes the statue. Rhodes Must Fall Campaign. I write about strikes as part of civil disobedience and there I draw on the acres and decades of careful scholarship that is explaining why civil disobedience and the withdrawal of labour has to be seen as a fundamental part of democracy.
It's part of the only power that we have as workers to be able to fight the encroachment of inequities. And of course, I've then been really interested to read the discourse that's swirling around the various strikes this past year, and how quickly the media, the centrist media, which I call out at length in the book, which probably wasn't the best decision given that I now in retrospect wanted them to review it favourably.
But I do call them out for that very canny rhetorical manoeuvre that happens every time any kind of protest or strike occurs, which is to paint the protestors as unreasonable. And what happens then, of course, is that is just a way to put off making any kind of change. And that's what we're seeing in the university strikes.
The narrative is the bosses care about students and therefore are mitigating the impact of the strikes on students, while lecturers are trying to disrupt students education versus our narrative, which is I am currently MABing, my 50% ongoing deductions for the rest of time have started and I'm not sure what's going to happen to my mortgage in this period.
And our narrative, of course, is while we're doing this and we're making this sacrifice because we care about students and because when I started doing this kind of university teaching a long time ago now, I used to have more time. Not enough time necessarily, but more time to be able to talk to students who are in distress or who needed more academic support to help them to work through their ideas.
And this past year I've had literally a line outside my door all day, students just coming and going, do you have five minutes? But I've already got two students waiting in the corridors. I'm foregoing my lunch breaks to try to squeeze enough people in. There are still people at the end of the day who I can't give that necessary help to.
And it is producing an intense moral distress in myself and in my colleagues and friends. And we're doing this, I certainly am doing this, for the students, but that narrative, by and large, is not made clear in this instant swerve into their being unreasonable language.
Vikki: Yeah, absolutely. And I think sometimes what gets overlooked in that reasonable-unreasonable decision is the difference between what is accepted to be reasonable at the moment versus what is seemed to be reasonable in the long run. You know, people keep referring back to things like the suffragettes and how they were hated, and in their time they were seen as incredibly disruptive and, you know, the public were really, really anti it. And now in some way, when the kids learn about them in schools, they're held up as these like brave heroes.
And it's like, you weren't saying that at the time. Um, and it, I think that's a really hard thing to balance when you are in the midst of it now.
Kirsty: Absolutely. And I rely on those, again, decades of brilliant scholarship by people who study histories of protest to show that at the time these protest movements are emerging, whether it's the Civil Rights Movement or the Suffragettes, or Stonewall, or the 504 occupation for disability rights. At the time, whatever actions protestors take to fight for a better, more equitable world, whatever they do, those methods are denounced as unreasonable in their time.
But afterwards, if it's shown that their cause was morally just, and that they truly were fighting against deeply immoral, morally unreasonable injustice, then suddenly all of those concerns about even really violent protest actions like the blowing up of hospitals or third class packed train carriages, suddenly those actions are seen to be just justifiable because they're the only way that they brought about change.
And yet, every single time that narrative resets itself, and we're seeing that now. One of the things that has really sickened me is the response to the cricketer who's carried that Just Stop Oil protestor bodily off the pitch. And the unreasonable narrative absolutely is in place. He is a hero and the protestor is the villain in that narrative. I use Howard Zinn's foundational 1970s work on civil disobedience to explain that this narrative is topsy-turvy. We need to flip it on its head.
Vikki: Yeah. Absolutely. I could talk to you all morning about this stuff. Thank you so much for coming in today. If people… I'm sure everyone is going to want to read your book after this discussion, so, remind everyone what it's called and any places you want them to find it other than the big obvious place that they might find it.
Kirsty: Of course, it's On Being Unreasonable: Breaking the rules and making things better, and it's out now with Faber and can be found in all good bookshops and also some bad ones.
Vikki: Perfect. Thank you so much for coming in. Thank you everyone for listening and see you next week for what will be my last episode before taking a bit of a break over the summer because I have decided that that is reasonable.