A bit lost

Since the beginning of this course, I have struggled to come up with meaningful responses to our readings. In her response to this month’s readings, Anabelle notes that her “main issue when speaking about abstract things like ‘critique’ is the way these things don't really connect with what I do or how I live.” I think the problem Anabelle identifies here is one of the sources of my difficulties. So much of my experiences as an academic have consisted of making whatever part of academia I am in contact with work for me (as much as that is possible), without thinking of the larger context in which I am situated, if only because it is difficult to connect the larger context with the everyday of my academic life. Obviously, this colloquium is helping me to shift my approach to academia, but I still feel a bit lost during our discussions of abstract concepts like ‘critique’ or ‘tradition,’ and still more lost during our discussions of the past, present, and future of the university and the humanities. I can’t help but think that this course would be so much more useful to me if I were a newly hired faculty member (wishful thinking!), or even at the end of my doctoral studies. I feel as though I’m being asked to consider the state of a profession when I’m not yet a professional—only a trainee. I also feel a bit like the Alice of the Disney adaptation of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, when she begins by happily following a well-marked path only to discover that it is being swept up in front and behind her, leaving her with a tiny square of path and no idea where she is, where she is going, or how she is going to get there.

My particular difficulties with this month’s reading stem from the fact that I’m not particularly interested in politics or current events (which, as my supervisor pointed out, is in fact a political stance), so I feel totally unequipped to discuss the affair of the Danish cartoon (it sounds like an Agatha Christie novel when phrased this way: The Affair of the Danish Cartoon... but I digress) even though I do actually remember (albeit vaguely) when it came up in the news. The best response I could come up with would be something similar in content to but far less eloquent in style than Camille’s question: “Does cultural critique have any obligation to respect other epistemological systems, especially in postcolonial or transcultural situations? What does critique loose if we answer this question in the negative?” My instinctive answer would be yes—critique does have an obligation to respect other epistemological systems, but my reasons for answering in the positive come down to something like “it’s just good manners” or “why can’t we all play nicely,” which isn’t particularly ‘critical’ or even helpful in this context. Is there anything wrong with a little cultural sensitivity? Does it prevent us from engaging in a productive critique? Seriously—I don’t know, please tell me.