“You could graduate with a fantastic gender studies degree, engage with a diverse range of subjects, and never even discuss *feminism* at all. There's just so much more out there.”
This is pointless, you’ve just appointed yourself the arbiter of what is an isn’t worthy of study, are now claiming you could have a gender studies course that…
“You could graduate with a fantastic gender studies degree, engage with a diverse range of subjects, and never even discuss *feminism* at all. There's just so much more out there.”
This is pointless, you’ve just appointed yourself the arbiter of what is an isn’t worthy of study, are now claiming you could have a gender studies course that ignores the entire scope of feminist thought, but no it’s not just “teach stuff I like, don’t teach stuff I don’t”
And yes, Butler’s prose is laughable but then so is much post colonial theory or indeed anything rooted in post modernism & critical theory, but the idea that the solution is Rufoesque illiberal indoctrination the other way is both a failed strategy in terms of changing anyone’s mind and goes against any principles of academic freedom.
Lastly how is “the solution is conservative replicating the terrible ideas of their opponents” in any way helpful long term. Any likely response is just going to a race to bottom to capture legislatures and change institutions to fit the preferred ideological position.
Well, let's say every music studies department in the country stopped teaching all other music and decided that Britney Spears was the central figure of all music and should be valorized as a quasi-deity throughout the curriculum. If you got into the weeds, you might learn about some other '90's pop stars whose hits were written by the same group of Swedes, but nothing else was permitted to be taught.
And I came in and said, hey maybe let's teach musicology and music theory as the foundation, and for artists we focus on maybe we drop Britney and do some of the heavy hitters instead. Maybe a little Bach and Mozart. Maybe some Duke Ellington and Charles Mingus. Maybe explore some other world musical traditions.
And you say no, it's perfectly fine to teach Britney Spears as the center of all music and '90's American pop songs can form a complete music curriculum, no need to learn anything else. It's important because she's popular and influential, don't you know. You simply must take "You Drive Me Crazy" as a serious work of art, and anyone who says otherwise is "appointing themself as the arbiter of what is and isn't worthy of study". And anyone who wants to teach anything else is "just dismissing stuff they don't like" and is also somehow a conservative.
And frankly Britney is a better musician than Judith Butler is a philosopher.
“You could graduate with a fantastic gender studies degree, engage with a diverse range of subjects, and never even discuss *feminism* at all. There's just so much more out there.”
This is pointless, you’ve just appointed yourself the arbiter of what is an isn’t worthy of study, are now claiming you could have a gender studies course that ignores the entire scope of feminist thought, but no it’s not just “teach stuff I like, don’t teach stuff I don’t”
And yes, Butler’s prose is laughable but then so is much post colonial theory or indeed anything rooted in post modernism & critical theory, but the idea that the solution is Rufoesque illiberal indoctrination the other way is both a failed strategy in terms of changing anyone’s mind and goes against any principles of academic freedom.
Lastly how is “the solution is conservative replicating the terrible ideas of their opponents” in any way helpful long term. Any likely response is just going to a race to bottom to capture legislatures and change institutions to fit the preferred ideological position.
Well, let's say every music studies department in the country stopped teaching all other music and decided that Britney Spears was the central figure of all music and should be valorized as a quasi-deity throughout the curriculum. If you got into the weeds, you might learn about some other '90's pop stars whose hits were written by the same group of Swedes, but nothing else was permitted to be taught.
And I came in and said, hey maybe let's teach musicology and music theory as the foundation, and for artists we focus on maybe we drop Britney and do some of the heavy hitters instead. Maybe a little Bach and Mozart. Maybe some Duke Ellington and Charles Mingus. Maybe explore some other world musical traditions.
And you say no, it's perfectly fine to teach Britney Spears as the center of all music and '90's American pop songs can form a complete music curriculum, no need to learn anything else. It's important because she's popular and influential, don't you know. You simply must take "You Drive Me Crazy" as a serious work of art, and anyone who says otherwise is "appointing themself as the arbiter of what is and isn't worthy of study". And anyone who wants to teach anything else is "just dismissing stuff they don't like" and is also somehow a conservative.
And frankly Britney is a better musician than Judith Butler is a philosopher.
"And frankly Britney is a better musician than Judith Butler is a philosopher."
HA! That's savage and a great comparison. I've enjoyed your pushback in this thread both for its sharpness & civility.
Yes, we’ve already established multiple times over your personal view.
I just happen to think it shouldn’t be the criteria for what’s worthwhile of being taught across academia.
Neither do I.