134 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Janice Fiamengo's avatar

Very interesting. I've seen a combination of these at work:

Definitely #1. Feminists were hired in the 1970s because the liberal humanists who dominated disciplines like English and Art History were open-minded, said things like "Well, it's not my cup of tea at all, but it's an interesting perspective and shouldn't be shut out of academia." In time, of course, feminists insisted that anyone who was NOT a feminist should be shut out of academia.

#2 is absolutely the case. In the literature departments I worked in, I found that many literary specialists, especially in the younger cohorts, were not very interested in literature. But they were definitely interested in using literature to promote their pet social theories, which made them seem far more dedicated, more serious, and more socially conscious (not to mention hipper) than their dull colleagues who worked on Milton's color symbolism for 10 years (I did know a marvelous scholar who pursued this angle).

#3 in spades. There are a lot of power-hungry weirdos, smart in school but hopeless in life, hungry for a theory that allows them to persecute others in the name of social justice.

Expand full comment