Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!
We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. A generous donor is matching all donations of $100 or more! So please donate now to double your punch!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

When Academics Fail Us

They have hearts but do not understand, eyes but do not see. They have ears but do not hear. They are worse than lost cattle. These are the heedless ones.

— Qur’an 7: 179

What is it like to listen to Noam Chomsky and not understand a word he’s saying?  Just ask Stanley Fish, the pre-eminent literary scholar and purveyor of reader-response criticism.  Fish’s recent editorial in the New York Times uses Chomsky’s speeches given at Columbia University to mount an attack on the academic left by claiming Chomsky for his own purposes.

Fish has long been a professional apologist of ivory tower impartiality.  One of his most widely-read books, Save the World on Your Own Time has this to say about the precise work of academics:

“To academicize a topic is to detach it from the context of its real world urgency, where there is a vote to be taken or an agenda to be embraced, and insert it into a context of academic urgency, where there is an account to be offered or an analysis to be performed.”

As a major proponent of reader-response theory, Fish, like many of his colleagues, has devoted his career to abstracting knowledge production from larger political questions and more importantly from moral, actionable imperatives.  Instead of the sort of scholar-radicals who write for these pages, Fish extols the age-old armchair elitist, freed from the turmoils of the world to “solve puzzles” in comfortable detachment.

Reader-response theory traditionally asserts no fixed meaning to literature.  Texts and ideas, therefore, have no real importance.  That belongs to the elite community that does the interpreting.  This may explain how Fish can listen to Chomsky criticize sources of undemocratic power–from education privatizers and the stock market to exorbitantly priced universities and the US military–and never mention it in his description of the final speech.  Instead he lauds Chomsky for his moderate views on democracy, which Fish denigrates as “universally accepted truisms.”  He writes: “It would be hard to imagine someone on the other side standing up for social arrangements that had the effect of undermining a citizenry’s welfare and violating its rights.”  Maybe it’s just hard to imagine if you’re a quietist literary scholar.  Fish’s “reading” of Chomsky illustrates everything that’s wrong about not just literary theory but also the academy itself.  Of the former, Chomsky has said:

“I’ve dipped into what they write out of curiosity, but not very far, for reasons already mentioned: what I find is extremely pretentious, but on examination, a lot of it is simply illiterate, based on extraordinary misreading of texts that I know well (sometimes, that I have written), argument that is appalling in its casual lack of elementary self-criticism, lots of statements that are trivial (though dressed up in complicated verbiage) or false; and a good deal of plain gibberish.”

Of course in some circles there’s no such thing as misreading texts.  These scholars look askance at people like Edward Said for daring to assert that there’s a “real” Islamic world versus that of Orientalist stereotypes.  Using “constructivism” to assert that reality is simply ideology (while ignoring the suffering of people who must live in that reality), scholars like Fish short-circuit their students’ ability to grapple with real problems and imagine concrete solutions.  As a result, they reap the rewards from increasingly market-driven universities and colleges with little interest in teaching students how to think critically.

This is why I think Fish and his ilk are dangerous.  I’m not an academic, I’m a high school teacher.  I went through a ton of higher education: a total of ten institutions from the Ivy League to the community college, from literature and religion, to folklore and history.  I’ve been taught by scores of professors.  And throughout all of that I came across one professor who dared to question undemocractic power at its institutional source.  One.  I read Chomsky as an undergraduate but knew him simply as a linguist.  It was only when I began teaching in a public high school that I had a student there who gave me a copy of Chomsky’s Profit Over People.  I will never forget the rage and betrayal I felt at realizing that for all those years so many of my teachers had failed me by following Stanley Fish’s path.  I was open-minded enough to finally listen to what Chomsky had to say not because of those professors but rather thanks to a select group of high school teachers I’d had who understood that you can’t divorce politics from pedagogy.  Like them, I operate on the frontlines of the social struggles endemic to our time.  We teachers can’t afford to seclude ourselves in academic monasteries, divorced from the economic and political impact of an increasingly unjust and paranoid system of control.

Sartre wrote that if we are in a war, we choose that war by accepting it or not accepting it.  Howard Zinn said the same thing when he titled one of his books, You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train.  To a large extent, the academy–which should be leading the educational world–has failed us by clinging to neutrality, which is essentially a choice to accelerate into dystopia.  Scholars like Fish have robbed their students of the capacity to envision alternatives by denying them knowledge of critical historical conflicts and contemporary issues.  By isolating art and knowledge from the quest for peace and justice, they inhibit their students’ ability to develop into moral and democratic agents in an immoral and increasingly oppressive system.  My job may not be to convert my students to my political views.  But I certainly need to teach them that there is a struggle going on and what’s at stake.

Fish is a scholar of Milton.  Perhaps he remembers the words from Paradise Lost:

“Awake, arise or be for ever fall’n.”

Mark Graham is a high school teacher in the Lehigh Valley. He’s books include: How Islam Created the Modern World and Afghanistan in the Cinema. He can be reached at his blog, Intense World.

.  

More articles by:
October 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
The Middle East, Not Russia, Will Prove Trump’s Downfall
Ipek S. Burnett
The Assault on The New Colossus: Trump’s Threat to Close the U.S.-Mexican Border
Mary Troy Johnston
The War on Terror is the Reign of Terror
Maximilian Werner
The Rhetoric and Reality of Death by Grizzly
David Macaray
Teamsters, Hells Angels, and Self-Determination
Jeffrey Sommers
“No People, Big Problem”: Democracy and Its Discontents In Latvia
Dean Baker
Looking for the Next Crisis: the Not Very Scary World of CLOs
Binoy Kampmark
Leaking for Change: ASIO, Jakarta, and Australia’s Jerusalem Problem
Chris Wright
The Necessity of “Lesser-Evil” Voting
Muhammad Othman
Daunting Challenge for Activists: The Cook Customer “Connection”
Don Fitz
A Debate for Auditor: What the Papers Wouldn’t Say
October 22, 2018
Henry Giroux
Neoliberalism in the Age of Pedagogical Terrorism
Melvin Goodman
Washington’s Latest Cold War Maneuver: Pulling Out of the INF
David Mattson
Basket of Deplorables Revisited: Grizzly Bears at the Mercy of Wyoming
Michelle Renee Matisons
Hurricane War Zone Further Immiserates Florida Panhandle, Panama City
Tom Gill
A Storm is Brewing in Europe: Italy and Its Public Finances Are at the Center of It
Suyapa Portillo Villeda
An Illegitimate, US-Backed Regime is Fueling the Honduran Refugee Crisis
Christopher Brauchli
The Liars’ Bench
Gary Leupp
Will Trump Split the World by Endorsing a Bold-Faced Lie?
Michael Howard
The New York Times’ Animal Cruelty Fetish
Alice Slater
Time Out for Nukes!
Geoff Dutton
Yes, Virginia, There are Conspiracies—I Think
Daniel Warner
Davos in the Desert: To Attend or Not, That is Not the Question
Priti Gulati Cox – Stan Cox
Mothers of Exiles: For Many, the Child-Separation Ordeal May Never End
Manuel E. Yepe
Pence v. China: Cold War 2.0 May Have Just Begun
Raouf Halaby
Of Pith Helmets and Sartorial Colonialism
Dan Carey
Aspirational Goals  
Wim Laven
Intentional or Incompetence—Voter Suppression Where We Live
Weekend Edition
October 19, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jason Hirthler
The Pieties of the Liberal Class
Jeffrey St. Clair
A Day in My Life at CounterPunch
Paul Street
“Male Energy,” Authoritarian Whiteness and Creeping Fascism in the Age of Trump
Nick Pemberton
Reflections on Chomsky’s Voting Strategy: Why The Democratic Party Can’t Be Saved
John Davis
The Last History of the United States
Yigal Bronner
The Road to Khan al-Akhmar
Robert Hunziker
The Negan Syndrome
Andrew Levine
Democrats Ahead: Progressives Beware
Rannie Amiri
There is No “Proxy War” in Yemen
David Rosen
America’s Lost Souls: the 21st Century Lumpen-Proletariat?
Joseph Natoli
The Age of Misrepresentations
Ron Jacobs
History Is Not Kind
John Laforge
White House Radiation: Weakened Regulations Would Save Industry Billions
Ramzy Baroud
The UN ‘Sheriff’: Nikki Haley Elevated Israel, Damaged US Standing
Robert Fantina
Trump, Human Rights and the Middle East
Anthony Pahnke – Jim Goodman
NAFTA 2.0 Will Help Corporations More Than Farmers
Jill Richardson
Identity Crisis: Elizabeth Warren’s Claims Cherokee Heritage
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail