You’d think that if you turned up to a seminar having not done the reading, you’d keep quiet and listen, wouldn’t you?
And you’d think that if you turned up the next week to a seminar having done the WRONG reading, you’d keep quiet and try to understand, wouldn’t you?
You WOULDN’T ask inane questions, make bold assertions on what Mackie and Moore are talking about, and argue with everything the seminar tutor is saying, would you?
Because you don’t know what they’re talking about. Your inane questions don’t relate to the text. Your bold assertions are actually the complete opposite of what the scholars are saying. The seminar tutor has studied this stuff for years and knows what he is talking about. You, you smelly, ignorant, lazy prick who hasn’t even bothered to prepare for the seminars have NO CLUE what you’re talking about.
It was especially galling when last week he came out and boasted about having not read the reading, when I had spent seven hours preparing the presentation and had a minor mental breakdown over it, sobbing and contemplating quitting University. But seminar boy comes in and makes stupid comments and shows his ignorance of the text, but still tried to rule over the seminar and demonstrate his cleverness, which actually just leads the discussions away from what is actually relevant and what we need to know to pass our exams and stuff.
Seminar boy, you are a cock.
1 Comment
October 28, 2009 at 2:05 pm
The tutor will already have seen through Seminar Boy’s bluff.