Ruminations and stuff.

Rejection never gets easier. I got another rejection of my temporal capital paper (I think this makes it the third one). Most of the reviewers' comments revolve around "What's the point" and "others have talked about time in this way before". Maybe trying to make in-roads for groundbreaking theories isn't the point. Maybe the point is to demonstrate how something that we feel and know work in the real world, and talk about those dynamics within that particular situation. Maybe there will be theory-building, maybe it'll be theory affirming, or maybe there doesn't need to be theory at all. Maybe it could just be another way to understand this crazy world we live in.

The revelation that the temporal capital theoretical framework development may totally be a "duh" sort of thing, and maybe doesn't need a paper to explain it, is liberating. Maybe what I need to do is not make new theory (because the more I think about it, the more I don't think temporal capital, differentiation of temporal autonomy and temporal control across different groups and individuals, is really groundbreaking. It's assumed), but rather familiarize myself in studies of temporality and power. After all, my dissertation really looks at power dynamics through the lens of temporality in the health care system. It doesn't have that much to do with this esoteric term, temporal capital, and more to do with people's lives and real situation. It is a more grounded approach.