Monday, April 7, 2008

I Will Survive

Just popping in from hell month (affectionately!) to throw a few notes your way:

1) If you liked my last EMP paper, I am going to be there again this year. Rachel Arnold and I will be presenting a paper on pop songs used as campaign songs. The paper will probably show up around these parts in the future.

2) Generally I think Stanley Fish is a tool. But apparently if you give him 40 years to think about something, he can come to a pretty reasonable conclusion on it, at least if his article about postmodernism is anything to go by. It's pretty close to what I think about all them Frenchies these days: they weren't trying to disprove rationalism or claim that physical reality doesn't exist, they were just pointing out the socially constructed nature of things and kinda leaving it at that. I don't know if that's what they were actually trying to do, but it seems like the sensible way to think about them. That said, though, there were significant differences between them, and they're important. In retrospect, we can probably call Derrida and Baudrillard the Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin of theory: provacateurs who probably didn't mean all of what they said, and don't really need to be taken seriously, even if some people do. Barthes is kinda the Robin Williams: playful and entertaining, but harmless, if occasionlly annoying in the repetativeness of his schtick. And Paul de Man is just crazy.

But--and not to be a grad student talking about Foucault here, but--Foucault is genuinely important and generally right. His histories applied the deconstructive mindset to concrete and meaningful subjects, and what he turned up helped make strange questionable truisms. In a way, what he did is basically what Gallileo did; both questioned widely-held assumptions that had a real effect on people's lives. But where Gallileo did it with geography, Foucault did it with language. And that has to be attributed, at least in some small part, to the Frenchies, or at least the environment they whipped up.

I go on about this because the rection to Fish's post is just baffling. Comment after comment complaining about postmodernism! Who knew? And this is why I point out that not all French theorists engaged in the kind of rhetoric Fish is talking about (and people are complaining about). There were some that did do legitimate work that really called into question certain things. Many people would, I suspect, agree with Foucault's take on mental illness. It's unfortunate that certain theorists have given the whole enterprise a bad name, but it's really confusing how, after Fish spends a good number of words laying out a reasonable position, people still get really worked up about deconstruction. I mean, it sucks that the one dude went to McGill and had to read Derrida, but I think most English departments these days provide ample opportunity to engage in traditional studies of literature. All the postmodernists went off and formed critical studies departments, didn't they? Oh, what do I know. Maybe Foucault isn't even part of this group.

3) I had previously posted about how much I liked the video for Mariah's "Touch My Body," but I only now realize that I really like the song too! It's dirty but assertive, the melody is really strong, and I like that Mariah's standing up for both her own sexuality and her control of the situation. The sweet way she sings "I will hunt you down" is amazing. I think it's my single of the year right now.

4) Oh yeah: thanks, Universal, for making my entire BYOP post a moot point by removing "Becky" (and two other songs) from the final version of Get Awkward. You are a bunch of enormous cameltoes.

Labels: , , , , ,

6 Comments:

At April 8, 2008 7:14 AM , Blogger hillary said...

All the postmodernists went off and formed critical studies departments, didn't they?

Um, no.

 
At April 8, 2008 9:25 AM , Blogger Mike B. said...

Maybe it just seems that way. But, like, the dude from McGill in the comments section would probably have been pretty happy with your course of study, right? The death of the canon doesn't mean no one can learn about the canon. They might not require everyone to learn The Faery Queen now, but you can still take a course that'll cover it in most English departments.

 
At April 9, 2008 12:07 AM , Blogger Dave said...

Interesting point brought up in [endorsement] Daniel Radosh's new book "Rapture Ready!" about evangelical pop culture in the US -- evangelical tourist attraction etc. people have actually absorbed the word "postmodernism" to privilege the experiential aspects of their (seemingly crappy) tourist attractions! For them, "postmodernism" is pretty close to Stephen Colbert's "truthiness." I think and hope the coinage of that word is an important step (further) away from pomopomopomopomo, even in its pop-cultural manifestations, but it'll hang around like a wet fart in academia as long as adults who should know better can continue to blow students' mind with convoluted writing masking incredibly poor reasoning.

I like the idea of comparing Baudrillard to Michelle Malkin, just cuz it feels so good, but I don't understand why any of these people need room to "provoke" anyone. I also have a hunch that Foucault isn't at all doing what the rest of 'em are doing, but aside from Foucault himself, I haven't read enough of any of it to make much of a general statement beyond something like "this shit is, like, Michelle Malkin bad" [Baudrillard]. (Usually once I have that revelation I'm not keen on second chances -- I remember a teacher in undergrad having us pore over Dinesh D'Souza to demolish his reasoning and better understand where his position might be coming from, and in admittedly surprising ways, but I still think it was basically a waste of class time.)

One of my favorite quotes from filmmaker Hollis Frampton is that he doesn't want to be known as a "structural" filmmaker because it's too French!

 
At April 9, 2008 12:11 AM , Blogger Dave said...

*sounds too French, blow students' minds, etc. Examples of what one teacher might call SLIPPAGE. This is not a comment box.

 
At April 9, 2008 12:12 AM , Blogger Dave said...

(Actually, I guess it is a comment box.)

 
At April 10, 2008 9:11 AM , Blogger hillary said...

1. The course that covers The Faerie Queene isn't even offered very frequently at UGA, in an English department that is relatively large and conservative.

2. Just because you're covering something canonical doesn't mean you won't also do it in a stupid way or be made to read a bunch of poorly written semi-deconstructionist texts.

It's all enmeshed still. I wish they would go off and form their own department.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home