[Vwoolf] "The triumph of theory"

[Danell Jones]

I think theory can be useful when it is used with precision. However, 
there is an unfortunate amount of scholarly work in which theory 
substitutes for clear thinking and ends up producing sloppy ideas and 
mangled prose. Moreover, to suggest that theory alone offers challenging 
thought creates a false dichotomy.

Why do you suppose these enormously gifted writers are so adverse to 
theory?  I believe that question is worth thoughtful consideration.

Danell



On 7/12/2013 4:03 PM, Laurie Reiche wrote:
> But Derrida is delicious! Although I understand it is soooo uncool to 
> think so. And sooooooo uncool nowadays to suggest that being an 
> "intellectual" might be a good and adventurous thing to be!---and that 
> one can be compassionate and a doer of good deeds even if she/he 
> /loves/ crazy/wild/ weird Derridean-Cixousian-(?) Celanesque, etc. 
> words and the wonder-/full/ labyrinthian land of philosophy and 
> theory. Oh dear, it is so easy to make fun of the extreme-literates 
> while the world aorund us becomes a place where no one reads a 
> book...etc. etc....I'd rather go to a party where the colorful 
> confetti of theory is raining down on my head than be in a dull room 
> of ---well, of /unchallenging/ thought...? I'm too sleepy to 
> articulate my own thoughts at the moment! Cheers, laurie
> On Jul 12, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Stuart N. Clarke 
> <stuart.n.clarke at BTINTERNET.COM 
> <mailto:stuart.n.clarke at BTINTERNET.COM>> wrote:
>
>> /Theorists are still in triumphalist mode, cocky, bandwagoning along, 
>> a surg­ing band, confident in job security and intellectual prestige 
>> -- THES/
>> //
>> *Get to the staff-graduate seminar last night?*
>> Oh yeah. Very tasty.
>> *Really?*
>> We had this bleeder from some old and ancient university talking 
>> about what he called 'the incidence of poverty in North-East England'.
>> *Not another toss-pot empiricist?*
>> Right down to the charts and correlations.
>> *So you let him have some?*
>> Oh yeah. Soon as it was question time, up jumps Big Stan and asks how 
>> he managed to speak for a whole hour about power in the post­modern 
>> world without one mention of Foucault.
>> *Nice one*
>> And when he said he couldn't see what Foucault had to do with the 
>> 'basic facts of poverty', Knuckles Paul comes straight in with 'what 
>> precisely do you mean by "basic"? How "basic" is "basic"? Is it more 
>> "basic" than "fundamental"'?
>> *Gave him a real going over then?*
>> Not half. He started blustering about 'basic' having something to do 
>> with minimal nutritional standards as laid down by some agency or 
>> other. But absolutely no critical analysis.
>> *Essential crap.*
>> Basically. And so bang on cue up gets Mad Ralph and smacks him round 
>> the head with a Derridean metaphysics of presence.
>> *Ooh - Aah - Derri - Dah!*
>> Right on. And then while he's still picking himself up from that one, 
>> Razor Kathy nips in sharpish with her usual trope on Kristevan 
>> heterogeneity.
>> *And it's all over bar the shouting?*
>> Oh yeah. A vote of thanks from the chairperson. Brief round of 
>> ap­plause. And then our lot all go down the boozer for some brand 
>> name lager and a few ironic choruses of 'Ere We Go.
>> *Typical sort **of academic evening then?*
>> You could say that.
>>
>> (Laurie Taylor)
>>
>> <clip_image002[2].jpg>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Vwoolf mailing list
>> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu 
>> <mailto:Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu>
>> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/vwoolf/attachments/20130712/ca14852a/attachment.html>