Though you'd be forgiven for thinking so if you thought that this was what academia is supposed to be like (check out the "classroom" shot at :33):
There's no comment thread to the NY Times piece, but I'm pretty sure the following is what's being said wherever the piece is linked to a unsympathetic audience (I've now read a lot of comment threads on adjunct issues):
- This guy should get a real job.
- This guy should move away from NYC.
- This guy shouldn't have had a kid.
- Any smart person would have KNOWN that getting a Ph.D was a sucker's game and avoided it in the first place.
- You want real problems? Look at someone Doing Job X/Recently Downsized but Neceessary Job Y/Trying to sell Credential Z!
He does, as they say, look the part, a Grady Tripp manqué. The part, though, has changed beyond recognition. The story that needs to be told? How the least valued participants in the academy are the ones entrusted with giving entering college students the critical writing, reading, and thinking skills that will lead to their upward mobility.