I hate everything.
I needed a 4.0 semester GPA to get my cumulative GPA to a 3.6 and graduate magna cum laude.
My grades came in this morning. Three As, and one A-… which makes my semester GPA a 3.98, and my cumulative GPA a 3.58.
I LITERALLY MISSED GRADUATING MAGNA CUM LAUDE BY TWO-TENTHS OF A GODDAMN GRADE POINT. WHAT THE FUCK DID I DO WRONG?! WHY DID I GET A FUCKING A-?! I DON’T FUCKING UNDERSTAND I AM A GIANT FUCKING GODDAMN DISAPPOINTMENT EVERYTHING IS AWFUL I LITERALLY MUST HAVE GOTTEN A FEW POINTS OFF ON A TEST SOMEWHERE TO GET AN A- SERIOUSLY JUST A FEW FUCKING POINTS AND NOW I HAVE RUINED MY ENTIRE LIFE GODDAMMIT AUGH AUGH AUGH AUGH AUGH
- Professor: So, here's a map of Germany... I'd like you to fill in as many of the states as you can.
- Classmates: ... lol wut
- Me: *furious scribbling*
- Classmates: ... idk
- Me: *slams down pen* DONE
- Classmates: ...
- Professor: ...
- Me: WHERE IS MY PRIZE, BITCHES
SOMEONE IS PLAYING ANIME IN THE STUDY CARRELS
WE CAN ALL HEAR YOUR SHIT
USE YOUR FUCKING HEADPHONES THIS IS A SILENT STUDY AREA
fuck i think it’s hentai
I just left the safety of my study carrel to go to the restroom…
…and one of the custodians came in to change the garbage bags. She looked at me and said, “damn, girl, I haven’t seen you in awhile, I thought you graduated!”
So I said, “no, not yet—soon, though. May!”
“That’s good. I always see you around, you’re always studyin’. Good for you.”
Proof positive that I spend way, way too much time in this library.
Re-starting my historiography again…
Now with 99% added snark, because I’ve quit caring.
When discussing the study of women in the Third Reich, two names are repeated often, and loudly: Claudia Koonz and Gisela Bock. The disagreement between these two scholars is famous in its own right, enough that it has been given a name; however, scholarship on the relationship between German women and the NSDAP extends far beyond the bickering of Bock and Koonz.
I get really snarky when I write reviews of articles…
“The first thing that Jules D. Prown does in his article “Winslow Homer in His Art” is to specify what, exactly, he believes art history to be (“by interpreting a work of art as a statement from the past we can learn something about both the culture and the individual artist who brought the work into being”) and raises the issue of artistic intention and possible misinterpretation when no evidence of intent outside the object itself is present. This is an interesting statement to put forth first, because he proceeds to blatantly ignore it in the following thirteen pages of text. His argument, which he clearly outlines in a series of bullet points, is that Homer had both a conscious and unconscious investment in his art and that the unconscious elements of his work could be read to arrive at an understanding of Homer’s psychological makeup and philosophical beliefs. There is nothing inherently wrong with this argument, other than that it relies solely on the opinions and amateur psychoanalysis of Dr. Prown and is therefore not only unprovable but entirely subjective.”
 Jules D. Prown, “Winslow Homer in His Art,” Smithsonian Studies in American Art 1, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 31.