Guest post: A New Academic Field
Guest post by Jonathan Gallant
Contemporary academia in the US is blessed with a wealth of programs that start with the word “Critical” and end with the word “Studies”. I hereby announce a new discipline which will interrogate the history, sociology, hermeneutics, and astrology of all these programs. Our new discipline is called Critical Studies Studies, and its monographs will appear in our own scholarly journal, to be called Studies in Critical Studies Studies. We intend this journal to take its place in high-powered scholarly publication, alongside such outstanding examples as Social Text, the Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, the Journal of Progressive Policy & Practice, Hypatia, and Gender, Place & Culture. We will require “positionality statements” with every submission—in fact, we welcome submissions that contain nothing but the authors’ positionality statements. And, like our colleagues at similar leading journals, we will never quibble about such obsolete issues as repeated publication or duplicative language.
We will soon advertise positions in this new discipline, with preference going to members of minoritized racial, ethnic, sexual, transgender, transanimal, and transvegetable communities. In the interest of Inclusion, we will employ cluster hiring so as to staff our field exclusively with members of these communities. Every member of a minoritized community will feel him-, her-, they-, zher-, or it-self to be fully majoritized in the exciting new field of Critical Studies Studies.
Brilliant!
If the subject for study is “critical studies” and you intend to do so ‘critically’; then surely your studies should be called “critical critical studies studies”? :)
No, I’m pretty sure that would be another field entirely. It would need its own department and building. Instead of halving the pool of grant money between the two, I’m certain that funds would be doubled. With just a bit of time (and very little real effort), we could soon have an even larger number of scholars writing volumes and volumes of opaque, impenetrably jagon-laden prose with even less connection to anything in the real world (or of any value) than ever before. The tenuousnes and irrelevence of this scholarship would reach beyond homeopathic levels of dilution, with not even a trace of knowledge or fact appearing in the oceans of ink used to print it.
The editorial boards of its journals (yes, plural) would not have been taken in by Sokal’s original classic paper. They would have rejected it as shallow, simplistic, and laughably amateur, panning it as being little more than the equivalent of a Dick and Jane story in its hegemonic, normative linearity, and aggressively naive intelligibility.
My only question: when do we start?
I got ChatGPT 4 to write an article for this journal:
Title: The Meta-Metanarrative: Navigating the Labyrinth of Critical Studies Studies
Abstract
This paper introduces the newly formed discipline of Critical Studies Studies (CSS), a meta-analytical approach to understanding the burgeoning field of studies prefixed with “Critical” and suffixed with “Studies”. By examining the historical evolution, sociological implications, hermeneutic frameworks, and even the astrological influences on these programs, CSS aims to carve a niche in the academic landscape, offering insights into the meta-discourses that shape critical pedagogies and methodologies. This inaugural submission to the journal Studies in Critical Studies Studies outlines the necessity of such a discipline, its methodological approaches, and the potential it holds for reshaping academic discourse.
Introduction
In an academic climate teeming with critical examinations of various social, cultural, and political phenomena, the proliferation of “Critical” prefixed studies has led to the inception of Critical Studies Studies (CSS). CSS stands as a reflexive mirror, aiming to scrutinize the foundations, trajectories, and impacts of critical studies programs themselves. This paper delineates the contours of CSS, arguing for its indispensability in understanding the meta-discourse surrounding critical studies.
The Genesis of CSS
The genesis of CSS is rooted in the observation that critical studies, despite their diverse focuses, share common methodologies, theoretical underpinnings, and even ideological biases. However, what lacks is a critical examination of critical studies themselves: their origins, evolution, methodologies, and the societal and academic impacts they have fostered. CSS emerges as a response to this lacuna, proposing a systematic investigation into the meta-level narratives that critical studies construct, perpetuate, and challenge.
Methodological Framework
CSS employs a multidisciplinary approach, intertwining historical analysis, sociological inquiry, hermeneutics, and astrology to explore the fabric of critical studies. This framework allows for a comprehensive understanding of the forces that shape critical studies programs, including their academic lineage, societal reception, interpretative practices, and even the cosmic influences that may guide their theoretical orientations.
The Importance of Positionality Statements in CSS
In line with the editorial policies of Studies in Critical Studies Studies, this paper emphasizes the significance of positionality statements in CSS research. By foregrounding researchers’ positionalities, CSS acknowledges the subjective lenses through which academic inquiry is conducted. This practice not only enriches the analysis by integrating diverse perspectives but also aligns with the reflective ethos of CSS, fostering a scholarly environment where self-awareness and transparency are paramount.
Conclusion: CSS as a Critical Mirror
CSS offers a unique vantage point from which to view the landscape of critical studies. By examining the examiners and critiquing the critics, CSS not only enriches our understanding of critical methodologies and their societal implications but also prompts a self-reflective turn within academia. As CSS continues to evolve, it promises to contribute to the ongoing dialogue about the role and impact of critical studies in shaping contemporary academic and social discourses.
This paper, as a foundational piece in the inaugural issue of Studies in Critical Studies Studies, invites scholars to engage with CSS not as a mere academic curiosity but as a crucial endeavor for the critical examination of criticality itself. Through CSS, we may begin to unravel the complex, layered narratives that underpin the academy, fostering a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the intellectual currents that shape our world.
Indistinguishable from the real bullshit.
Or, possibly, fostering a gigantic pile of unraveled wool no one knows what to do with.
This is the break I have been waiting so long for as a transgiraffe.
(IMPORTANT NOTE: I only identify as a giraffe on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. Hope that won’t prevent me from being accepted into the CSS Program.)
love it….when they can’t support their thesis but know the right buzz words. Ibram Kendi ticks off almost all of the boxes for top admin if you don’t exclude him for being a member of the cisheteronormative omnivorous patriarchy…or incompetent at being an adminstrator.
I am not seeing any lenses here. Surely, when examining critical studies studies or even more the critical study of critical studies studies we should doing it as ‘best practice’ dictates via some lens or other, as for instance Lacanian psycho-analysis! Only when viewed through a variety of such lenses – queer theory, post-structuralism or critical theory itself, to name but a few –can critical studies studies, let alone the critical study of critical studies studies be characterised by the appropriate multi-perspectival pluralist critical perspective. Of course any attempt to critique these lenses would be deeply problematic, and indeed ‘uncritical’ since it would involve imposing a mono-logical, mono-perspectival, one might say *mono-lensical* narrative on a scholarly endeavour (or set of endeavours ) that has played such major role in bringing about the rich vibrant and diverse democratic culture that is characteristic of the modern era and that has rendered the modern academy so widely beloved and respected by the lay public.
Mr President we must not allow a
mineshaftlenses gap!Judith, is that you?
:-)
What a coincidence…
https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2024/04/16/the-baffling-bull-behind-title-ix/#respond
Thanks for sharing this brilliant idea ;D