I read with much excited anticipation that Professor Stephen Muecke has
made an extended and detailed contribution to Wikipedia on
ficto-criticism. When I get there this is what I find:
This literature-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by
expanding it.
What happened to Professor Muecke's contribution? I read this Wikipedia
policy which in effect a-priori excludes our much anticipated extended
entry since our Stephen here is in fact one of the international leading
practitioners of ficto-criticism and as such, since he has to talk about
himself even if indirectly which is to say what he also does as a
ficto-critical writer, his comments must be excluded. I think to myself
I could add something to this literature stub and refer also to
Associate Professor Anna Gibbs in doing so but must think again since I
am again effectively silenced. I was a student of both Stephen and Anna
and myself a practitioner of Ficto-criticism so yet again I am censored
from any involvement in this Wikipedia proclaiming the freedom of
knowledge. I have no right to speak in this forum!
So, interested as I am in immanent critique in relation to
ficto-criticism and how this may be done I turn to the article in
Wikipedia on Immanent Critique and read that Hegel was the inventor of
such a practice, making a vague reference also to Marx. What! I
proclaim; is this sort of forgetful ignorance. Have not the writers who
have invested in their Ego Ideal Knowledge (that of the Father) not read
Kant's book on the critique of reason! Does not reason critique critique
reason? Is this not immanent critique? Or do we have here the ass in
Nietzsche's Zarathustra, carrying the heavy burden of Apollo as such a
forgetfulness against the light footed forgetting of Dionysus.
Perhaps here I can speak. But alas no. Having invested in a
ficto-critical writing of Hegel against Schelling in my 1990 (post)
graduate thesis within a limited economy of Kantian demonology I cannot
now speak. This is Wikipedia policy. I cannot speak in my own voice,
even if a first person voice speaks with free indirect discourse with
nothing to loose, no redundant moments, here. Freedom is just another
word for nothing left to loose. Wikipedida allows no such freedom.
An economy of the slave against the freedom of a master. This is the
freedom Wikipedia in all dishonesty offers as a false freedom of
multiple ignorance which is slavery against the singular freedom of an
Epicurean truth!
|