Dear Committee Members

Julie Schumacher’s Dear Committee Members, is an epistolary novel entirely composed of letters of recommendation (LORs) written by a beleaguered professor of creative writing and literature at a small, underfunded liberal arts school (appropriately named), Payne University. Through the satirical and hilariously written letters and ironic sign-offs, Schumacher cleverly reveals the bureaucracy and internal politics of higher education and the academic world, specifically relating to the decline of the liberal arts in American universities.

            Tasked with writing letters for his students, colleagues and acquaintances, we learn about both the professional and private life of the protagonist, Professor Jason T. Fitger, over the course of an academic year. Throughout the novel, he is most concerned with his favourite mentee, Darren Browles, a student in whom he sees a lot of himself. Fitger repeatedly tries to secure a residency for him in order to get Browles the funding needed to continue his novel, which Fitger believes, is a masterpiece. He writes letters to his colleagues as well as to his own literary agent, Ken Doyle. We witness his many failed attempts, and in most of his letters, his passive-aggressive comments about the changes in the English department – the construction on their floor, the hiring freeze, the search for a new chair (and also the fact that the current chair is a professor of economics) – show his frustration over the slow decline of the liberal arts and creative writing in general, as well as his one-promising writing career.

In addition to suffering from the increasing marginalization of his department, things are more complicated by his past and personal relationships with the people in his academic circle. Both his ex-wife, Janet, and his ex-lover, Carole, work in the same university. He also writes letters to Eleanor, a woman who went to graduate school with him and with whom he also had a relationship. He asks personal favours from these women and also tries to reconcile past blunders (usually making it worse). After many failed attempts to land him a residency, Fitger is forced to send Browles’ manuscript to his former professor, Hanf, who then claims his work as his own in an interview. Towards the end of the academic year, Fitger finds out that Browles has committed suicide. He expresses his guilt, wondering whether he misjudged his work because he saw a lot of himself in Browles. Fitger starts a scholarship in Browles’ name, with his own money and with Eleanor’s contributions. The book ends with Fitger’s hopeful optimism for the upcoming academic year and sees it as another chance for self-improvement and growth.

Despite the humorous and witty tone of the novel, it does shed light on a number of issues in contemporary academia and higher education, from the expected tenure and financial problems, especially in the liberal arts departments, to the failure of even promising young graduates to be able to find their way in a job market that does not necessarily value the rigors of intellectual life and creative endeavor. The question of what purpose does higher education serve in this day and age is floated around in the novel. Fitger’s passion for creative writing and desire to keep his department from becoming obsolete is overshadowed by the politics in his institution – the lack of funding, the hiring freeze and the endless requests of LORs, which seem like useless paperwork. Like many other disciplines in the liberal arts, his English department is under siege and administration could not seem to care less. It seems like the ‘education’ aspect of the university is buried under the disarray that Fitger is forced to deal with in his department. In contrast to that, in the novel the economics department seems to be thriving, being given all the attention and funding. Any institution’s decision to give more preference to certain programs over others will, as a result, impact the future of those programs and in doing so, could impact future students’ decisions and educational experiences. Referring back to the question of who decides what education is, it seems like the administrative oversights and preferences could impact and maybe even dictate the choices of future students. Moreover, the rising costs of college degrees and the poor job market is highlighted in the novel through Browles’ struggle, an issue that a lot of students face today, especially Canada, having one of the highest tuition fees in the world. Although a light-hearted novel, it does ends with Browles’ suicide. Whether or not it is directly related to his academic struggle, the novel does raise the issue of the increasing student debts paired with the lack of job options for students with liberal arts degrees. If the purpose of education is to improve one’s life then there is a serious oversight somewhere in a student like Browles’ educational experience.

In contemporary academia today, there is an unspoken understanding about liberal arts degrees, which is that they do not guarantee a job. This is highlighted by the many LORs that Fitger writes for his students who are applying to jobs not commensurate with their degrees (some even basic, minimum wage jobs). However, Fitger does make it clear that he believes (most of) his students are well-qualified or even over-qualified for those positions. He mentions in one of his LORs that students of creative literature have honed important traits such as patience, resourcefulness, imagination and empathy, raising the idea that a formal education can help students develop important traits, life skills and build character, instead of only serving the purpose of increasing job opportunities in their specific fields.  

In addition to the emphasis of mathematics and sciences, the novel also hints to the rise of technology changing the education field today. This is symbolized in the book by Fitger’s frustration of using the automated forms to write his LORs instead of the usual email. His responses to each question are cut off due to the short word limit; however, we see towards the end of the novel that he adapts and is able to complete the LORs by keeping the responses short and concise – the opposite of how an English professor would typically want to write an LOR. In a way, this symbolizes his acceptance of the change in education and acknowledges that his department is on the same path as this – a steady decline.

To conclude, given the format of the novel, it is a very one-sided story. The other characters feel one-dimensional as they are given to us through Fitger’s filtered perspective. Additionally, Fitger’s biases about his own department and other departments may have persuaded him to omit some details. Having said that, Schumacher, very cleverly, sheds light on some important issues in contemporary academia and higher education, and I would recommend it to anyone with a sense of humour.