Whoops, Gareth slipped up. He should have known that humour (unless it some



knowingly satirical and excluding observation about the work of a French



philosopher) is not a geography thing: if we researched the geographies of



humour, we would do it humourlessly: there is no humour of geography [I can



feel the scholarly refutations gathering...]







Strange that we admire characteristics such as satire, irony and



preposterousness (see recent post about Adam Curtis' films) in the work of



others but have little or no place for these in our own earnest analysese?







Context: Terry Eagleton's personal grumpy old man piece will not be funny -



even in part - to everyone... But that itself is worth a bit of reflection



rather than polemic. Moreover, the fact that Prospect asked him to write it,



and that he agreed, is at least culturally revealing and worthy of academic



consideration.











-----Original Message-----



From: A forum for critical and radical geographers



[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Selyf Morgan



Sent: 09 June 2011 10:16



To: [log in to unmask]



Subject: Re: If Eagleton ruled the world







Ye Gods Gareth, why? Why would we find it interesting? Is it because he is



being ironic? Is it because he is having little rant about little



annoyances? Is it because his comments about Donald Trump and Nick Griffin



are jokes at the expense of two human beings just like you and me? Is it



because he seems to have a thing for a young actress?  Is it because you



don't like his sense of humour? There remains a list of other declarations



to query all of which seem to be personal, and presumably intended to be



funny. Do you disagree or agree with all or most of these? Could you tell us



which ones? 







Or..is it because the piece actually shows him not to be worthy of being



'flavour of the month'? Has he transgressed your rules of conduct as an



academic/ commentator/ joker/ politician?







You don't suggest what it might be apart from abstracting three examples for



us to consider. Do you know what you think - either positively or negatively



about him - that might enable you to clarify why we should be interested in



that article? You have provided an ambiguous posting that seems to be



pointless unless you are trying to insinuate some meanings into the article.



You dont declare what your meanings might be and I think we should be told.







Selyf