tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post6710697122479438586..comments2024-03-10T20:46:19.274-04:00Comments on In the Middle: Let's FAIL together, yeah yeah YEAH! *Cord J. Whitakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06224143153295429986noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-17374311902814873842012-10-07T02:06:12.708-04:002012-10-07T02:06:12.708-04:00I'm interested: is it really the case that the...I'm interested: is it really the case that the disciplines aren't already cooperating a lot? I see it everywhere and throughout time. Jonathan can you explain what about your vision is new (if I'm right in taking you to be saying that)?<br /><br />Also: how is "transnational, transglobal cultural studies" any less of a discipline than "English"? If it's just another disciplinary formation (as I think it is), is it any the worse for that? Why the worry about disciplines? I don't see it. Whatever name you put on what we do, there's great stuff going on all over the place, whether folks do transglobal oceanic and disability studies or the rules governing the Middle English alliterative long line--right? Surely it's not a choice between those two: we want both! (Right?) --Lawrence WLanglandinSydneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02076779340305316211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-71368134243201734052012-10-05T21:25:08.972-04:002012-10-05T21:25:08.972-04:00@Jeffrey: Yes, thanks for that! Sympathy, a "...@Jeffrey: Yes, thanks for that! Sympathy, a "feeling with" among disciplines -- as you've suggested -- is certainly something I'm after here.<br /><br />@Anonymous: I do appreciate that you see my intention really is confraternity across disciplines, I do want to stress that that bit on the grandiose hypothetical renaming of English is at its core a call for intellectual *humility* -- I write above that we would NOT be so "bold" (presumptuous) to ever re-name the department in that way, and that there are *manifold* (not just two!) reasons this is the case. Yes, I truly do appreciate that English departments shouldn't simply presume they can do all the important things that other disciplines do. In that hypothetical renaming I was more trying to convey how a number of "English" departments have become so internally diverse (some might say incoherent!) so as to act as a sort of humanistic and institutional "kitchen sink" umbrella category under which many types of intellectual pursuits can and do occur -- varied pursuits that extend way beyond the purvey of just "studying literary texts written in English."<br /><br />As a medievalist "housed" in English who works on multilingual texts, I am well aware that other disciplines -- language and literature departments, linguistics (social and historical), history, philosophy, and many others -- perform very real and important work and English should not act as a humanistic discipline that somehow "bulldozes" or subsumes others. In stressing confraternity, I'm earnestly trying to convey this sense that we are all in the same boat, and we should *talk more to each other* and bring our many respective modes of intellectual inquiry into conversation -- and, hopefully, put our heads together in meaningful ways to pursue shared endeavors. Creating this sort of intellectual confraternity is risky -- and can indeed provoke entirely legitimate and understandable forms of pushback -- but I do think it's worth a shot.Jonathan Hsyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13214201468052661183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-33680492395003888882012-10-05T17:20:43.789-04:002012-10-05T17:20:43.789-04:00Are there really only two problems with English re...Are there really only two problems with English renaming itself "Global Literary and Cultural Studies and Theory"??? The intellectual arrogance that fantasy implies is staggering. And yet surprisingly typical. <br /><br />Academic disciplines and the departments structured around them play an important function that many English scholars probably fail to recognize: they defend smaller disciplines against the encroachments of large ones that imagine the skills they teach are somehow translatable to the world. <br /><br />I know that isn't the intent of Jonathan's post. In fact, the intention appears to be the exact opposite: confraternity. <br /><br />Still, it's important to remember that the dismantling of the university may be at the expense of disciplinary differences and modes of intellectual rigor that are immensely important to the study of the Middle Ages.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-25314230807316213972012-10-05T16:41:51.287-04:002012-10-05T16:41:51.287-04:00Thanks for this thoughtful call to companionship, ...Thanks for this thoughtful call to companionship, Jonathan! In my own portion of the plenary I used the Greek "sym" (as in feeling together, sym-pathy) in a way that I hope resonates with what you've written here: shared endeavor, yes, and shared affect as well.Jeffrey Cohenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17346504393740520542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-78748811895135407032012-10-05T16:35:41.675-04:002012-10-05T16:35:41.675-04:00jh, certainly there is still much, tho less than e...jh, certainly there is still much, tho less than ever, freedom in tenure and yet not much evidence for widespread changes/experimentation in the life's-work of many (most?) profs. <br /><br />As for a stronger/louder megaphone I see no evidence for this.<br /><br />And sure inside and out but what will such efforts be measured against? <br />all good stuff to be wrestling with... <br />-dmf <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-80734470881067957702012-10-05T15:27:11.512-04:002012-10-05T15:27:11.512-04:00@Eileen: Little did you know that I actually *impl...@Eileen: Little did you know that I actually *implanted* that post-BABEL Facebook dream in your brain, "Inception"-style.<br /><br />@dmf: yes, that is a big and important question. Kaiser's talk on "hippies saving science" made the great point that some people can innovate and take bold intellectual risks (at fist) out of necessity, precisely b/c they aren't "gainfully employed" or don't have access to mainstream institutional structures. When it comes to your question re: people within the academy, the level of risk-taking and "un-tethering" one is willing to pursue certainly depends on the individual. Academic tenure (at least the way it works in the US) was supposed to be in place precisely to enable people to take risks. And in many ways you could say you're able to create a stronger platform (louder megaphone) to agitate for change if one holds a secure, "legible" academic position. I guess I'd say it's both/and - we can agitate for change from within and from without.Jonathan Hsyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13214201468052661183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-80022175466657349352012-10-05T14:13:20.920-04:002012-10-05T14:13:20.920-04:00http://ttbook.org/book/carol-dweck-psychology-fail...http://ttbook.org/book/carol-dweck-psychology-failure-and-success<br />-dmf<br />failure/experimentation as part of learning is vital, see the related works of Donald Schon on training reflective practitioners. The looming question seems to be how literally/far will folks be willing to go beyond the yokes (and the perks!)of the academy?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-26466512718649639332012-10-05T12:29:11.587-04:002012-10-05T12:29:11.587-04:00It's like you read my mind/heart, or something...It's like you read my mind/heart, or something.Eileen Joyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13756965845120441308noreply@blogger.com