Skip to main content

Confessions of a Intellectual

By Saqib
I find Boyd's account of his struggles within the university sphere both revelatory and sobering in many ways. In the article, he quotes Knoblauch's critical question, "Is critical teaching [and scholarship] anything more than an intellectual game in such circumstances?" Perhaps we all feel a certain tinge of dissatisfaction with the hypocrisy of enjoying the material benefits of a system that we wholly disagree with. Not to sound too critical of the article though, at a certain point it does read like a page of 'dear diary', but maybe that's just me. Perhaps this is symptom of overinflating the idea of the classroom as a site of resistance. Not that it can't be, but it has its limits. I feel that some academics may romanticize the classroom in the way certain conservatives romanticize the free market as a place where magic happens. Once you realize these limits, you may feel a sense of disenchantment that he echoes in his piece. As critical theorists, one shouldn't make this mistake. Helping to get students to question the system they are in and publishing papers critiquing it are important, no doubt, but if you really believe the system should be changed, your actions shouldn't end at the classroom and the journal. Do what you can within your sphere of influence, and don't let the system tell you that you need to only stick to certain circles and your responsibility is fulfilled.

Why are you critical thoerists? My argument is that this is a moral question, a question of conscience. And I feel this week's readings have brought the topic full circle.

Comments

Saqib said…
Sorry, I hope I didn't sound too maudlin.
April 24, 2010 at 10:02 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Purdue's Professional Revolutionary

By RK
In light of the discussion we had during our advisee meeting on Friday about being strategic in our means as critical scholars I was struck by the words of Lenin who emphasizes the role of the intellectual. He says, "The history of all countries shows that the working class, exclusively by its own effort, is able to develop only trade-union consciousness, i.e., it may itself realize the necessity for combining in unions, for fighting against the employers and for striving to compel the government to pass necessary labor legislation, etc. The theory of socialism, however, grew out of the philosophic, historical representatives of the propertied classes, the intellectuals." (pg. 74) This idea of the bourgeois socialist intelligentsia as an instrument of raising consciousness and fomenting dissent is an ideal one I am sure but in contemporary times we, the academics, forming a substantial part of the "intellectual elite", occupy a unique position which forces us into ...
6 comments
Read more

Echoing Malcom

By Saqib
Reading Malcolm X's speeches, it is clear that he points to a historical trend in the process of obtaining independence from tyranny. In other words, history shows that people must be committed to overhauling the system and prepared to sacrifice for a great cause. The trouble comes in overcoming the anesthetization of the natural impulse that people have to change their surroundings. I feel that this is incredibly difficult in the modern world when entire industries have been created for the sole purpose of distraction and self-indulgence. Has that impulse changed? Is it still there? Sometimes I think that when people become so self-absorbed and ignorant of rampant injustice, they will only react when its too late. For instance, there have always been economic disparities but public anger only sets in when their houses are foreclosed and savings wiped out. Revolution then becomes the last refuge of the hopeless. Is there any point to calling for revolution when the only precursor t...
2 comments
Read more