• The running group isn’t that academic, either •
[1 MIN READ]
Academic types have a way of thinking about things they know or want to understand in the space of other existing knowledge. Why else would they spend so much energy reading and investigating the work of other academics? If someone else has written and done similar work, they then embrace the standards of academic writing to cite that work. Armchair academics, or ones functioning informally, don’t need to work so hard; even while it is gratifying to be able to reference relevant information.
I’ve been attending the Growlers Group Run (before it even had that moniker), since 2011 when I first started my running journey. Then when I started anchoring the group in 2018 and sending out weekly reminders, I started writing an early incarnation of these Cerebruns. Years later (last Saturday, in fact), I heard the justification for writing them. It’s what I had been thinking all along; I just needed to hear another person put it into words, too. The statement came from a movie-director-turned-writer during an interview about their book: “…It came out of me because it needed to come out of me, which is how you become a writer in the first place.”
There you go. I write these because they need to come out of me. As for academic citation style, that’s for academic writing, which this ain’t.
-CtCloser (Calvinthe), “Negative split or positive splat” #dothedue
I lose you, you lose me (Nod to Art Garfunkel)
FINE PRINT
¶Text and photos (unless otherwise stated): Calvin Wang (Wäng), CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. ¶Cross-posted: (1) Facebook JRC Growlers Group Run (2023’04’26’W Run Message), (2) GGR email list, (3) Cerebruns by CtCloser. ¶This website posting: Cerebrun with added caption.
iCandybyWangC 