Friday, February 26, 2010

The Valence of Pantyhose

So, I will read my paper tomorrow, and now I'm not only worried that I won't be able to answer people's questions, but also that I won't even understand people's questions. It's been too long since I studied theory, so if someone asks a question with any of these words--metonymy, Barthes, or valence--I will just blink at them.

But even more puzzling than all of the theory and related jargon is the surprising number of women wearing pantyhose. This is really difficult for me to understand since I chose my profession for two main reasons:

1. I like to read.
2. I don't like to wear pantyhose.

Yet there they are: pantyhose. And ladies' suits.

Huh.

5 comments:

The Thirty0Something Bride said...

Wait. WHAT? You're at some sort of booky lit conference thingy and your PEERS are wearing pantyhose?

I'm really confused. Painfully so.

Wait, what state are you in?? That could make a big diff.

Good Enough Woman said...

I am in Utah. And you're right. I think my location is skewing the fashion choices of this demographic. But I'm also wondering if there is something unique about eighteenth-century scholars that makes them prone to pantyhose wearing.

Amstr said...

1. I've never known any panty-hose-wearing 18C scholars, but all the ones I've met are male, so that might make a difference.

2. Are they also wearing MAKE-UP? What?

3. You make me laugh.

TKW said...

You are gonna be brilliant, friend! And pantyhose are the devil's minion. For sure.

Contemporary Troubadour said...

I love your criteria for your job choice. They largely match mine.

Rock that paper in your non-pantyhosed legs, GEW!