Alright, I'm getting a little tired of the misuse of the word "zen." Zen is a type of meditative practice, and a school of Mahayana Buddhism. To say you are hoping for a moment of "zen" is like saying you are hoping for a moment of "bistro" when you are going out to dinner. I think you mean mindfulness, or self-awareness, or, simply, serenity.
 

Now, indeed, you have harshed my buzz. But you can not stamp out the power of Monday Morning Zen. I looked for answers on this website—http://www.ibiblio.org/zen/faq.html—and I found them. I shall continue to use zen to mean, well, pretty much what I want it to. I believe that to do otherwise would be contrary to the spirit of zen.
 

Agreed, Richard. Pointing that out is about as cool as that guy who always has to remind you that it's not an "ATM machine" or that Xerox shouldn't be used to describe all copiers. I'm never sure what's worse, the fact that they think you don't really know that or the fact that they think you really care. Like the kid telling the teacher to dot the "i" before he/she can even finish the sentence. My generation has a word for those correction-happy jokers: boo. There, I think I found some good Zen just then.
 

I disagree. English is a great language. Why not use it correctly?
 

The departure of the Civil Rights Center from Harvard is picking up some heat. It's now University spokesman Longbrake who has been tasked to reply to inquiries on this issue. Why? What are the concerns? Are there issues that should best be left uncovered?

http://www3.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO35478/
 

Orfield is talking more openly about his move. UCLA is more diverse and open to diversity. Who isn't?

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=516082
 

Orfield is talking more openly about his move. UCLA is more diverse and open to diversity. Who isn't?

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=516082
 

Orfield is talking more openly about his move. UCLA is more diverse and open to diversity. Who isn't?

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=516082
 

what happened at the education school at harvard? all of a sudden the pictures became more diverse

http://gseweb.harvard.edu/
 

The NYTimes picked up the story of the more permanent farewell. And Edley is talking...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/30/us/30ucla.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
 

Is Bombardieri onto another Bomb?

A blogger below suggests she is not. Yet it is puzzling that Harvard would loose the Civil Rights Project without a fight. Maybe the news that Bombardieri and others will eventually find is that the CRP is leaving BECAUSE of the treatment they received from Harvard. Like pink slips for all Center's staff in June? If that is the case, who was responsible for the pink slips?

"* The response of the spokesman from the GSE seems necessary when aprpeciating the context of Ms. Bombardieri's regular coverage of Harvard. She seems both eager and ambitious in her efforts, but at times, borders on overreaching. In her article on Orfield, one gets the sense that she'd like to suggest the reason for his departure as being something other than 'academic,' looking for something provocative when, in fact, there isn't. My guess is that she was late to pick up on this story, and considering this, could only fashion a piece that spoke of the (potentially negative) impact to Harvard, and implicitly, how such a move might be symptomatic of ongoing challenges facing the University."
 

Well, here's a question: was the Civil Rights Project something the HGSE or Harvard was in a position to fight for, or perhaps more to the point, did Orfield want a fight over this?

If this is akin to a custody dispute, what claim would the University have when understanding Orfield's motivations for making the move to UCLA?

It's not as cut and dry as people would like it, or otherwise make it out to be.
 

Anon 9.48, your point is unclear. If Harvard wanted to find out whether they could counter UCLA's offer to Orfield they could have just asked him what it would take to keep him. Did they? If they did not, why not? Did they consider making his wife, now tenured by UCLA, an offer? Doesn't Harvard routinely and increasingly do these things to attract academic couples? If this was not done in this case why not?
 

Please don't be so candid. It's fairly clear it seems. A Professor who directs a major research center marries another Professor who lives on the West Coast. Anyone in academia would understand they would be exploring options where they could live together.

Harvard just sits and waits, knowing some options will develop, hopefully far away. They do. Harvard offers nothing to the wife. The result? the Professor announces he has to leave. Harvard says too bad, we'll miss you.

Sounds like the predictable result of a well executed strategy to get rid of an unwanted Professor and his Center.
 

Larry Summers was also a great executor of strategies with predictable results. Eventually some of those caught up with him.
 

"Sounds like the predictable result of a well executed strategy to get rid of an unwanted Professor and his Center."

I love a good conspiracy theory, but come now.