FWIW, I have heard exactly the dismissal of work as being out-of-date at
RGS-IBG and other events for these reasons, and I think we are all very
aware of the amount of positionality and name-checking that often
appears to be required to get an article published in certain journals -
I've seen pieces (from both ends of the refereeing process) end up being
75% 'knowing your place in academic geography' and 25% new empirical
work and thinking... but I agree it's not wise to generalise from these
instances. Just trying to keep the debate moving along...
BTW, I mentioned the names I did because these are some of the important
people who have written about 'the event' which is the topic of (IMHO)
Badiou's most important recent work. If we are to discuss Badiou, it is
surely worth realising that his work on the event is not isolated but
part of a renewed stream of interest in the topic and in the philosophy
of process (which, yes, also includes David Harvey, with his concern for
Whitehead and Naess and others).
And yes, I do think it is important that Anglophone academics speak and
read other languages, and make efforts to improve their capacities in
these areas and I too suffer like most of us from a cosmopolitan deficit
(one day my Japanese will be good enough... in the meantime, French
remains the only other language in which I am academically capable!).
David.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Harrison [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 06 February 2007 11:06
>To: D F J Wood; [log in to unmask]
>Subject: RE: Alan Badiou and Human Geography
>
>
>Dear David - (and everyone else whose still reading) - I
>really didn't want to get tied up in this debate but I feel I
>have to respond to your email, my question is quite simple;
>who and where are the people 'advocating Badiou as 'the latest
>thing' which we must all read to be proper fashionable
>critical geographers' because I really don't know who they
>are. Also do 'they' have some kind of hive mind and all say
>the same thing? Whoever they are they seem to have a lot of
>influence and annoy a lot of people, however the only person I
>have read in print in geography to directly advocate reading
>more Badiou is David Harvey in his recent missive in
>transactions, surely this isn't who you had in mind? (Equally
>don't you think its a little odd to make a statement like that
>following the name checking paragpgraph which proceeded it?).
>Equally what are these 'latest fashions'? This kind of
>language presupposes a homogeneous discipline and that just
>isn't the case, there are people working with all kinds of
>concepts and writers and I don't think I've ever seen anyone
>who was serious about their work turn around and simply
>dismiss someone for being 'out of date'. Equally have just
>attended an interdisciplinary conference it is clear that
>different sub-disciplines move through different literatures
>at different times and often for very different reasons, no
>one I met at the conference saw this movement simply as one of
>succession. Personally, the 'fashonability' or otherwise of my
>work is not a great concern of mine and I trust my peers to be
>able to judge work by different criteria. Sorry to respond in
>this way David but i think this idea of academic really needs
>breaking down a bit as it obscures far more than it reveals.
>
>Paul
>
>ps. - I thought your performance on the moral maze a few weeks
>ago was excellent, I enjoyed listening to you put Melanie
>Philips in her place.
>
>
>Dr. Paul Harrison
>Department of Geography
>Science Laboratories, South Road
>Durham, DH1 3LE
>
>t. +44(0)191 3341893
>f. +44(0)191 3341801
>
>________________________________
>
>From: A forum for critical and radical geographers on behalf
>of D F J Wood
>Sent: Tue 06/02/2007 10:41
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Alan Badiou and Human Geography
>
>
>Some random and immediate thoughts...
>
>Badiou's work on 'the event' is at least as interesting as
>Deleuze's, which is to say, significantly less interesting
>that Whitehead's and more recently the brilliant Stengers, who
>has the virtue of being a better communicator of ideas than
>either Badiou or Deleuze. Of course both read better in
>French, and this at least has the virtue of immersing the
>reader in the philosophic- and language-world into which they
>speak (including the grounding in semiotics that Latour points
>out so many Anglophone academics lack), but I wonder how many
>here are actually able to do so, especially those advocating
>Badiou as 'the latest thing' which we must all read to be
>proper fashionable critical geogaphers...
>
>It isn't Badiou I have any problem with, but rather the
>continuing cycling of academic fashion, particularly prevalent
>in Anglophone geography, which continually tries to position
>individuals or groups as being ahead of the game in a kind of
>academic oneupmanship - no that I am accusing the organisers
>of having this motivation. As some of our Spanish and Swiss
>colleagues have pointed out, this seems rather amusing from
>the non-Anglophone world. I sometimes wish we would
>concentrate on producing work that made sound philosophical
>and empirical sense rather than continually reaching for
>bit-seized chunks of the latest trend to make yet another
>theoretical turn... I think I am agreeing with Simon Batterby
>about usefulness.
>
>David.
>
>
|