When in conferences the talker acknowledges another scholar in the audience, or even one not present, he not only acknowledges the greatness of the other, but at the same time he raises his own status, firstly by his own connection to the other, secondly by putting himself in a position where he is fit to judge on the others merits. Sweet.

Finally a row of breakthroughs. Many thoughts mixed up, try to keep head straight. And I know I should write here more often. Cant decide who I would like to have as my supervisors. Have been seeing Jack a couple of times. One Sunday where he gave me a friendly lecture at Café Nero, and one Thursday morning straight after that. I e-mailed him my project description on Tuesday and sms’d him yesterday and called him today. No response on either. Don’t know what to believe. At the Thursday meeting I asked him to write a recommendation for Havlandet, and he said he had to cover his back. He didn’t know enough about it yet. I asked him what he need to know. Cant remember if he answered it properly. That means that there is still no solution to the formal matter of wether I can do Havlandet or not. I have been really stressed, and that must be one of the reasons. Last night, lying in bed I got into such a state, and decided if they give me more BS about this and don’t respect and trust my choice of taking on Havlandet, I will quit the fellowship programme. Grete is right when she says research should be fun. I don’t have much fun with it at the moment. I must try to get Jack on the line sometime this week.