(no subject)

[felis_ultharus]

Have arrived. Continue to believe. These are good things.

Looking out the window at a rainstorm, from my parents' fairy-tale cottage in Saanich.

Looking forward to seeing node357 tomorrow :)

EDIT: I meant "live" instead of "believe". I have heard of "Freudian slips" before, but that was almost a "Jungian slip" :)

Comments

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

LJ just deleted one of my insightful posts ever. Grr.

I was trying to say that I like Nic. He's always been tolerant of my beliefs. We debate, but we debate as equals. Nic's cool.

My frequent rants here are the rants of someone whose beliefs are frequnetly mocked, patronized, and belittled -- of a person who's feeling increasingly isolated in a field where intelligence and "intellectual rigour" are more and more associated with a philosophy whose metaphysical foundation he does not share.

It's a daily struggle to clear and keep a place for myself in that program, and many days I'm not sure it's worth the effort. If my beliefs were respected, I'd be fine, but they're not, at least not by a growing number of students who are becoming increasingly narrow-minded.

So far, it hasn't been a problem with the faculty. But I'm all too aware that the intellectual climate is becoming more and more narrow, and if a professor does fail me for non-conformity, I'm not sure the academic review would be in my favour. Things are that bad now.

Nic does respect my beliefs. So does Emily. But Nic's evangelism is frightening, because I'm aware of some of the scarier aspects of Postmodernism, and I'm scared of what it'll do if it leaks out.

I'm worried about the slums of queer theory, much of which is, paradoxically, homophobic.

I'm worried about the attacks on "liberal humanist values" that include uncompromising attacks on free speech.

I'm scared of the moral relativism, which is often used now to justify the murder of queers in mostly-Muslim countries.

I'm scared because postmodernism shores up dehumanizing psychological theories that can result in people being drugged for non-conformity (in spite of Michel Foucault's famous attack on institutionalized psychiatry).

I'm scared because Bush's goons are already using PoMo arguments to justify their empire.

And I'm scared that I'm more likely to wind up working at Macdonald's than for a university, because my view of literature is opposed to the dominant one.

None of these things is Nic's intention. But these are part of what he wants to unleash on the world. Regardless of his intent, regardless of his approach, these things are part of the Postmodern package, and it means decades -- and in some cases centuries -- of setback for so many of the things I believe in.

I'd never hate you for your beliefs, because I know you'd extend me the same courtesy, my friend. If others extended me the same courtesy, I wouldn't come across as so bitter here :/

[scottevil.livejournal.com]

I understand completely, but do you think I'm a post-modernist? I just wanted to be in his conference because we get along and he's been able to make boring material more interesting. That's what I'm really going to need for this upcoming course.

But really, isn't this post-modernist thing getting old? When's pre-post-post-modernism going to arrive on the scene?

The important thing I've learned from my courses this semester is that it's not necessary to concern myself with biographical and historical etc. details when writing about a text. If I can back up my readings with textual evidence, then it's valid, and so far I've been getting As. I don't know what you call what I describe, but it's liberating because it allows me to do some real independent thinking when writing a paper. And the thinking part is where I really do well.

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

Sorry. I thought that's what you were trying to tell me in very diplomatic fashion.

*embarrassed*

I wouldn't mind sharing the scene with postmodernism. There ought to be room for a variety of approaches to keep things moving in English Lit. Problem is, there's no diversity. I don't like to think of my Saulist humanism as post-postmodernism, merely an equal alternative I happen to prefer.

I understand. And there is a kernel of truth to what Barthes says -- you can't really know for sure what someone is thinking, and some authors conceal their intentions. Queer authors throughout history, for instance, afraid of persecution.

My problem is that it ties the hands the other way. I'm almost not *allowed* to quote the author on their work, when it supports my point.

And at the grad level where everything has to be heavily researched, that means ignoring all the interviews, and only reading the work of other critics -- the death of the author means the tyranny of the critic, not a return to my own thoughts, which would have to be there either way :/

(I hope I don't come across as strident or anything in my views. It's so hard to tell iin cyberspace, where there's no tone of voice. I guess I'm just in the habit of over-explaining :/)