Previous post may have been a bit of a downer but, while I’m not 100% (what even is that), I’m doing a lot better now! Got a plan in place to systematically get chapter 1 on track. Chapter 3’s draft has been submitted. Introduction and conclusion outlines are written, not submitted. Updated outline for like…everything as some of my arguments have sharpened a little bit. Still looking good for Fall 2026 graduation 🤞!

I’ve been diving back into a lot of Knox for chapter 1 as I work to finish it up; an unfortunate side effect of having anything to do with Scotland or Mary Stuart. Although I do not like him in the least, it’s a joy to use him. Inevitably, when quoted, this brief conversation happens:

Quote used: “As John Knox had forewarned us…of all dangers that he foresaw to ensue our enterprise…”¹

Person, confused: “Is this him writing or someone else?”

My petty ass: “Oh no, it’s him - he wrote about himself in the third person.”

Now, what Shantelle is having a problem with, is not creating a central note station, saving page numbers, or even just basic note taking skills so that when I put “note” for a footnote (intending to go back to my notes to confirm) I know who the hell said it, when, where, ANY detail. But, as World of Coke thinks, I’m nothing more than a clown (BioShock style, obvs).

Anyway. Goal: Get my note-shit together. Even if I put in placeholder footnotes, I will AT LEAST (PLS) put in a source. Even though it’s fun to go line by line of Knox’s smug self-importance over and over again, I’d rather avoid it.

Current Status

• Intro - 10% (outline, not submitted)

• Chapter 1 - 50% (working on new draft from feedback)

• Chapter 2 - 60% (still sitting, waiting for new draft)

• Chapter 3 - 75% (full draft submitted)

• Conclusion - 10% (outline, not submitted)

¹ John Knox, The History of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland (ed. William McGavin), 179.

In the span of two months I’ve traveled far more than I have in the past year plus. My thesis sits on my computer, in my planner, in books and articles spread across devices and paper. I have done almost (if not) zero work on it for…longer than I should have.

~It’s called burnout~ But also I’ve got that strong imposter syndrome going on. I don’t know how to research, structure a paper, or find things to cite. Where should I put this primary versus the secondary? I should cite this birthday because “common knowledge” isn’t a monolith (right?) but then, who would I cite since every source has that information? I’m obviously doing this incorrectly - someone must have already covered this - because it’s all literally right there in the primaries written by the person (and it’s not like my subject area is all that understudied).

There is no upper in this - sorry. It’s not a letter in which I list my faults and then find, through the light of god/coffee/cats, my way solidly on ground that has been tread before. I’m just a girl, sitting with slightly shaky support, upset at the gatekeeping that has permeated this field that has not been seen fit to adjust, to make it more accepting and open to those who aren’t familiar with academia.

I’ll keep plugging along (duh, I want that silly piece of paper) but damn, it feels bad to be in this position.

I’m currently in a standoff with my thesis.

Or staring contest but that isn’t as gripping a way to start.

The thesis’ goal is three chapters plus introduction and conclusion. I’ve polished a good part of chapter 2 (thanks conference deadlines) but still need to expand. Chapter 1 has a full draft completed, but I found myself losing momentum when plugging in references, so it needs polishing and proof. The last chapter, an analysis of Scotland’s reformations against the confessionalization paradigm (and measuring the Lords of Congregation and Mary Stuart’s inputs) is absolutely empty.

I have the sources, the outline, the end goal, and yet each time I open a book the words sit there and force my eyes off the page. I find random bits that would be helpful and immediately sigh, not caring if anything gets done. There is excitement about this creation process - even though I’m still terrified none of this is original regardless of the constant searches to confirm otherwise - but every single time I try to work, my brain resists. The work remaining feels manageable in theory, but when the word doc pops up or the source opens, all ability flees my soul. I’d give my current progression a D+ right now. Not failing, but might as well be (especially if I want to graduate in Fall 😅).

Let’s end on a happier note: before the Society for Reformation Studies conference at Cambridge began (and while I was rushing to make edits on the chapter 2 presentation version), a letter from Cecil popped up when googling something unrelated. He was, as usual, complaining about Mary but this time his grumps gave evidence of her silent strategy regarding religion in Scotland. Thanks, bud 😊

Current Status

• Intro - 0%

• Chapter 1 - 50%

• Chapter 2 - 50% (in a totally different way)

• Chapter 3 - I don’t know her

• Conclusion - 0%

As an introduction to my very serious work as a historian that really likes connective history, I offer a (re)post. In this essay I will discuss why The Spectator is, in fact, just an eighteenth-century version of the CW TV show Gossip Girl (the original - I don’t have exposure to the new iteration). I realize you may scoff at the thought as The Spectator, after all, is quoted in dictionaries and therefore must be a very serious and respectable periodical. However, it just so happens that at its core The Spectator spends a great deal of time exploring the rumor mill of the Upper East Side – err, England. Since I’m already mixing metaphors, let’s get into the main points as to why The Spectator = Gossip Girl.

Authorship

Now, I won’t talk about the ways in which I fully disagree that the Gossip Girl could have been *spoiler* Dan, but regardless, in both media there are multiple people contributing to the proverbial grapevine backed by the central person/people. In Gossip Girl, texts and emails were sent by students at Constance Billard School for Girls and St. Jude’s School for Boys for Gossip Girl (AKA Dan, supposedly) to share. The Spectator, a bit further behind in technology, received letters from readers as far as the magazine’s long arm could reach, often deposited into, literally, the mouth of a lion at a local coffee house. These were then published in future issues by essayist Joseph Addison (just like Dan) or Richard Steele, under pen names.

Topics

As we know, The Spectator and Gossip Girl are from wildly different centuries, but the core subject matter remains the same. The hearsay from both covers significant events of their time, such as interpersonal drama, big events, even politics. An aside, if you think high school didn’t have politics, you may not have gone to public school and I’m jealous. The influences of the time are clearly seen in the writing and imagery of both – as most media is wont to do!

Gossip

Lastly, the origin of my interest in this historical odd couple is the simple fact that they both fully, and wholly, feature gossip. We may not think of eighteenth century’s – or any other time besides our own – writing as gossip, but let’s be real: gossip really means to chat, spreading information. We often apply our own connotations (negative, moral, or gendered) to terms like gossip, obfuscating the original, rather amoral, definition. The people reading and contributing to The Spectator are people just like us: they have interests and experience events that influence their lives and topics of conversation. Indeed, this trendy publication covered all the hottest topics and people of the day, such as Queen Anne’s reign (reminiscent of Queen B, GG fans?) alongside local scandals that aren’t as well known today.

In Closing…

The Spectator and Gossip Girl might seem worlds apart, but they share a surprisingly similar center. Both serve as mirrors (or megaphones) to their societies, reflecting the intrigues, scandals, and everyday dramas that captivated their audiences. By examining these two seemingly opposite entities, we can see how people, and the art of gossip, has evolved yet remained fundamentally the same - showing that human nature’s fascination with the lives of others transcends time and tech. So, whether you’re reading about the latest scandal in eighteenth-century England or the newest drama on the Upper East Side, remember that gossip is a timeless tradition, shaping our understanding of society, propelling our lives, and making things a little more fun.

XOXO,

(not) Gossip Girl