This article will be cleaned soon. Many thank to Ms. Liu for allowing this article to be placed here. [jwalsh@u.washington.edu] Mon Jun 10 07:33:50 1996 From: Catherine Liu > > On Thu, 6 Jun 1996, Catherine Liu wrote: > > > Thanks to John Young's posting, I found Sokal's page and downloaded the > > (in)famous article. Upon a quick perusal, I would have to say that if > > this had been a paper from one of my students I would not have accepted > > it. > > > > I'm no scientist, but let's talk methodology -- I have come across > > students in the Cultural Studies Department here who flatten out their > > references and make wild generalizations like Sokal and I tend to send > > them back to rewrite and include at least five sustained pages of close > > reading of one of the works in the bibliography. This is a first step to > > some kind of discipline. It's obvious that what Sokal has done is > > satirize this particular practice of non-reading. He has picked quotes here and there > > and pastiched them together with a kind of left-leaning ideological glue. > > The problem is however, that Sokal himself is guilty of levelling all his > > citations into one terrifying, undifferentiated mass of text. Derrida = > > Donna Haraway = Stanley Aronowitz = Luce Irigaray = Albert Einstein = > > Neil Bohr. It is effective satire, in a way, because it does address > > itself directly to certain practices in cultural studies, but Sokal steps > > in it himself. (what was that smell?) > > > > In his expose in Lingua Franca, Sokal writes as if all of the *post-modern* > > theory he cited was equivalent in some way, thus committing the very sin > > of intellectual laziness that he accuses The Social Text Editors of. His > > satire is therefore symptomatic insofar as it reproduces the very problem > > that he would like to condemn. > > > > Sokal satirizes the stupidity of endless analogical relationships -- > > scientific formulae become illustrative of theoretical positions, but he > > himself is making equivalent radically heterogenous discourses. Aronowitz > > is radically incompatible with Derrida, as we all know. > > > > The fact that Aronowitz and Ross saw fit to publish this piece (of > > something) is revealing, however, and I find myself in the ironic > > position with graduate students of demanding from them a level of rigour > > that editors like Aronowitz and Ross would not appreciate. So am I really > > preparing them for the profession? I wonder sometimes, given the climate > > of things. It is easier right now to pass by making liberational claims > > for all sorts of bizarre ideas that sound politically progressive. > > > > I'm even more disgusted with Ross and Aronowitz right now. They are > > giving theory a bad name, and being sanctimonious about it too. They > > aren't to give up easily their positions as leaders of the left, I'm not > > sure what to do . > > > > In the meantime the Alan Sokals of the world will pat themselves on the > > back for having spoken in the name of "humanism" and "objective reality." > > Sokal then "comes out" as a leftist too. > > > > What a mess, > > > > Catherine Liu Department of French and Italian University of Minnesota - Twin Cities > > >