Academic research in the humanities

And even beyond academia, in the humanities in general. I know they're supposed to the humanity's last's vestige (is that even the right word?) of values, forward-thinking, enlightenment, and so on, but, often, it seems that, while that may have been the ideal at some point, common practice and the people practicing that practice are interested only in personal advancement.

Narrow-mindedness is the name of the game. Self-publicity. Pretending to be involved in academic discourse, while totally ignoring any other field or work that isn't directly related to yours, and even then reading just that one passage you really have to and never really making sure that you understand what that person wanted to say.

I hosted a very (very) distinguished English prof in my department (one of the many servitudes of a budding academia wannabe) in a discussion concerning the essence of art. He mentioned a wonderful study, so wonderful, in fact, that it had a bibliography with thousands of items in it.

What does that mean?

Does it mean the person who wrote the study READ those entries, or cared what they had to say? I only means he put them it. And the fact that there were so many of them? What of it?

Anyway, I got sidetracked.

The point is: All the people who I admire and consider real thinkers, who dare to actually inreact with other people's work, are the most marginal figures in my department. I dare say in the university as a whole.

So am I to "brace myself" and plow through all that in the hopes that my research would nudge the right person the right way... There was probably another option there, but I can't really think of it right now.

So it goes.