I've been waking up most weekdays around 5:30 to go to Boot Camp from 5:50-6:50. This means that I hear a lot more NPR than I used to. This morning, a segment on Neko Case was on first thing and she was in the studio working on this song with a line "where did I leave that fire"? It immediately stuck with me because her explanation of the lyric was something to the effect of finding yourself lost and unable to get to something that you used to feel confident in. 
This seems to be the theme of the week since a friend and I were just talking the other night about how I seem to not be celebrating the completion of my master's degree enough. I met up with a fellow graduate last night and was both saddened and comforted in knowing she felt the exact same way! It's certainly not because we didn't work hard enough or something like that. 
After a few days of reflection I'm thinking that it has more to do with the fact that graduate school totally breaks down your confidence through many years of writing that is constantly critiqued and rarely celebrated. And the critique is nearly always received from a distance: comments from the professor posted online in response to blackboard or blog posts or written comments on a paper that are handed to you at the end of class to read once you are all alone and can absorb the comments in the most isolated setting. This process of turning something in and then receiving feedback weeks later without any real dialogue naturally built into that process has made me feel as though I've lost the ability for self-assessment in some way. I feel that once I've turned in a paper it becomes the professor's own property to interpret, comment against, destroy, celebrate, whatever.  I feel like I get lost somehow in that.
I converse with professors regularly and perhaps more than most. It's not that dialogue isn't happening. What's not happening is dialogue within the process of assessment. There seems to be a strict divide between the classroom experience of sharing commentary and sharing openly in office hours, on the one hand, and the substantial feedback on the writings which ultimately determine one's grade, on the other hand. In the classroom or in office hours, people are for the most part polite and may choose what they say more carefully since someone is sitting right there and able to respond immediately to their challenges, inquiries, etc. However, when someone is reading a paper away from the student and grading, it is meant to be more "objective"...but this form of objectivity seems in fact to objectify the student and their ideas as opposed to contextualizing how this piece of writing fits in with the student's overall contributions, insights, or quite frankly, his/her real capacity for deep and sustained intellectual thought.
There is a major dichotomy between the active dialogue between professors and students and the passive interactions between readers (i.e. the professors) and writers (i.e. the students) that I certainly have not paid a whole lot of attention to as a grad student. I haven't been able to see the significant difference between those two relationships while I was in the thick of it, and I think that is why when graduation came, it didn't quite feel like success. All I could feel about it was that I hadn't quite mastered all of the things that I had hoped to and was inundated with the negative memories of harsh (or what seemed like terribly harsh) criticism on my papers. Basically, I felt like I had failed in some way even though I was supposed to be showing my success. 
Now that I am gaining some perspective again, I've got to go find that fire...and hold onto it so that I don't repeat the same mistakes by losing such an enormous amount of confidence when I return to school as a PhD student in September or overly objectifying students' papers once I am in the role of professor.
