Here I am at my office, writing this entry in the gaps between 5 or so minute numerical simulations that I remember taking much, much longer back in the day in grad school. I am redoing figures for a paper at the request of the publisher (not a referee) so that they're higher quality. This is part of the page proof from Hell, because not only am I spending a lot of time fixing the figures but there are also things in the text that neither my student nor me nor the referee caught that I saw while reading the page proof. I was like "Oh fuck!" At least I caught this before the paper's in print. (Because the figures my student had given me were too large, this is also one of my few papers not on the arxiv.) Stuff like this is my worst nightmare (or would be if already actually in print). The referee rubber-stamped the paper, and getting some comments is always better. It gives a chance to not only make the requested improvements but also to take a look at things and find bugs made difficult by the coma-inducement of proofreading many times in a relatively short period of time. Now, of course, I am doing this at the pageproof level, which means that because of the magnitude of changes, I will need to go through a second round of proofing. The graphics were made by a since-graduated student, and at this point, I basically need to do this myself.
Many of the journals (this one especially) yell about the possible delay in publication and expenses that an extra round of proofing costs. (I think this cover letter is left over from olden days just a bit. Hell, this journal lists a couple people on their editorial-board masthead who have been dead about five years! [It might actually be 4, but I am not making this up and there are no nontrivial exaggerations here.]) I apologized profusely to the publisher because this will still cause extra work on their part (although nowhere near the extra work on my part).
This whole thing is one of the many stressful things on my plate at the moment. Another thing only got added yesterday (a non-academic thing). A new pile of shit keeps hitting the fan for me in one way or another every week, and I think I'm now at close to 10 weeks in a row on this. (And many, or perhaps most, of the old ones aren't resolved yet.) I really can't take this...
Anyway, that was the rant that had nothing to do with the entry I intended to write.
So, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame inducted some new members recently. They are Black Sabbath, Blondie, Miles Davis, and Lynyrd Skynyrd, and Sex Pistols.
Here are some brief comments:
Black Sabbath: I'd like to take this moment to recall the game Six Degrees of Black Sabbath. (I've never actually played and don't know enough to be any good at it.)
Blondie: This is the only selection among this year's inductess that's part of my paradigm. Blondie is one of those bands from the punk-new wave transition era. They were extremely influential, especially when it comes to females who rock. Their lead singer Debby Harry is now over 60! [Well, over 60---not over 60! :) ]
Lynyrd Skynyrd: Play "Freebird"! :P
Sex Pistols: They were very influential and consequently highly deserve their selection, but I think their music completely sucks. (That said, numerous bands that I really like count the Sex Pistols among their primary influences.) I do like some of their song titles, however. ("Anarchy in the UK", anyone?)
No comments:
Post a Comment