I don't disagree with you, Paul... and so, since I don't have anything
else to add at the moment, let's hope there will be other responses.
This could turn out to be both interesting and useful... and I am sure
Marcus is happy that his session continues to be top billing on CGF! AS
they say, no publicity is bad publicity ;-)

David.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Harrison [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
>Sent: 06 February 2007 12:55
>To: D F J Wood; [log in to unmask]
>Subject: RE: Alan Badiou and Human Geography
>
>
>As no one else seems to have anything to chip in...
> 
>Dear David,
> 
>as someone who has been accused a number of times, both 
>seriously and not so seriously and both publicly and 
>privately, of doing work which was (and maybe is)  irrelevant, 
>exclusionary, elitist, fashionable nonsense and so on I am 
>perhaps more sensitised than I should be to comments about 
>academic fashions and theory, now however I don't let it worry 
>me (that much), its really not much of a hardship. I do 
>continue to wonder what such an accusation is actually does 
>however, what is its perfromative efficacy as it were. As to 
>your comments;
> 
>1. papers and name checking. I am not going to defend any 
>particular journal or anything here and i have a great deal of 
>sympathy with your point, blind refereeing is by no means a 
>perfect system and without editorial control can be easily 
>misused and abused, still... In terms of positioning in papers 
>I agree however i think this is less a matter of 'fashions' 
>than of specific styles of academic papers, i.e. a progress 
>piece pretty much demands an extensive review, most other 
>geography journals demand some kind of positioning. This 
>approach is quite unlike a journal such as Angelaki where you 
>can - or so it seems to me - plunge straight into your topic 
>and trust the reader to be aware of the relevant issues. 
>Personally I dislike doing extensive positional literature 
>reviews, I always feel you end up doing a disservice to those 
>whose work you have to write about so rapidly, however such 
>sections of papers can be very useful in all kinds of ways, 
>and good synthetic overviews and works of exposition can be 
>innovative in their own right.
> 
>2. writers on the event, no doubt your right about the 
>tradition and debates of which Badiou's writing is part, but 
>again doesn't this mitigate against the idea that reading him 
>and working on him is somehow simply an attempt to be 
>'fashionable'? My guess is that most people going to his work 
>are doing so for a reason, to see what he says about Deleuze, 
>to find a different way of theorising the political moment, to 
>think about the role of art, and so on. Again I still don't 
>know who these people who are just in it for the cultural 
>capital are and - as the discussion here proves - the capital 
>gain really isn't that much. 
> 
>3. Reading & speaking other languages; who could be against 
>it?! I however, due to being crap at school and growing up in 
>a monolingistic setting, do not speak any other language than 
>this one. Does this inhibit my understanding of the people I 
>read? Certainly. Does that mean I shouldn't read them? Surely 
>only the most hidebound Heidegger scholar would insist that 
>you cannot read the books unless you read them first in German 
>(and then the Greeks in Greeks, the Romans in Latin and so 
>on). That is not to say that one shouldn't make an effort and 
>be aware of the issues involved, the various contexts from 
>which the works emerge and so on, that is all basic 
>scholarship, however I don't hold fidelity to the text as the 
>highest prize.
> 
>Yours,
> 
>Paul
> 
> 
> 
>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 11:22
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Alan Badiou and Human Geography
>
>
>
>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.
>>
>>
>
>
>