Raw, adjective: 11. unprocessed or unevaluated: raw data.
Did you see this article in today's NYT?
I remember being, like, 14, and doing the math in my head as I dreamt of being the fabulous Professor Rach someday, standing at the front of a lecture hall bedecked in sequins and tweed and inspiring legions of admiring students with my brilliant orations on theory and Marx and literature and existential angst. Even then I realized there'd be this convenient flux from Baby Boomer professors right about the time I hit 30, meaning that I could easily step into the vacuum created by so many radical academic retirees and become the next late great scholar woman.
Heh. That was before I realized a career in academia these days looks more like burn-out and vocational market-driven mentalities and emphases on business and careerism and pressure to publish and serve on bullshit committees and, oh yeah, illiterate technology-fried students who don't give a shit about the niche theories you've devoted your life, your twenties, and a $100,000 PhD program to. Things change.
But anyway, this is a good article about this whole phenomenon that is really coming into play now. I dig it particularly because it looks at a couple of sociologists, one of whom grew up steeped in Marx and activism, the other of whom is of this new empirical bent. (I don't like the way they're gearing the social sciences for faux-legitimacy by emphasizing scientific method bullshit. But that's another story.) Also, Mari, they're in Madison at the U of W. And they make fair mention of the way that careerism and donors have laid heavy footprints in state universities of late. (Hello, University of DuPont, I'm thinking of you situated there on that brick campus in Newark owned by MBNA and Gore!).
Anyway, read it.
The 60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire (NYT)