[csaa-forum] RE: tone of public discourse, Windshuttle et al csaa-forum Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1
Jonathan MARSHALL
jonathan.marshall at ecu.edu.au
Fri Apr 1 15:59:53 CST 2005
RE: tone of public discourse, Windshuttle et al csaa-forum Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1
Dear colleagues
Again I find myself more than somewhat alarmed by the nature on content of the discourse occuring within this forum. Possibly I am misunderstanding the purpose of this forum and what it is that we in cultural studies and history can collectively agree upon. As I recall however, one of the things that started this debate was the attack on cultural studies by those ill informed individuals who claimed it was not a proper, formal academic discourse with rigorous standards of accuracy and debate.
If we can in fact collectively agree that cultural studies IS a proper academic study, I am not only surprised by Danny Butt's email, but I am very disappointed that the editors of this forum have allowed it to be republished. To discus on line in a formal academic newsgroup the sexual proclivities of a fellow academic whose ideas and practice we happen to disagree with is, frankly, extremely offensive and does a great disservice to us as academics, cultural studies as a discipline and this email group as a forum for rational academic debate and the sharing of ideas.
Possibly Butt is advocating something along the lines of the surrealistic schitzo-criticism advocated by Deleuze and Guattari and I have no doubt that his statements were intended in a playful, comic vein. This is however not, to my mind, the appropriate outlet for such discourse. Butt's website most assuredly is and I for one (and doubtless many others on this list) am very pleased it exists and I read it with great enjoyment on a regular basis. However, unless we intend to turn not only the subject of cultural studies but its discursive and analytic form into a kind of neo-Dadaist activity outside of the realm of rational debate, then such offensive discourse should be kept at least nominally distinct from at least the tone of debate here and in the academy.
I cannot therefore agree strongly enough with the horror with which Ben Hourigan greeted Butt's suggestion that "Rather than arguing politely, we must meet Windschuttle in the spirit with which he goes about his work: prejudicial, over-the-top, and focussed on the man and not the ball." To stoop to conquer not only brings disrepute upon those who allow themselves to be seduced by such blantantly unethical pragmatism, but it strips us of our most powerful weapons --- our critical faculties.
Despite this, I rather like all of Butt's suggestions regarding pranks to play on Windshuttle. But this is precisely what they are: pranks, anarchistic acts or public events which have more in common with overt aesthetic comedy than an academic critical attack. As such, while they may help cast Windshuttle as a figure of ridicule, but they will do nothing to unmask his pretense of academic rigour.
In conclusion therefore, I would again exort everyone --- including the editors of this newsgroup --- to exert restraint and to continue to uphold the standards of academic, ethical and discursive excellence upon which I for one would insist that cultural studies and cultural criticism should remain based,
Yours sincerely
Dr Jonathan Marshall
Research Fellow
Edith Cowan University
________________________________
From: csaa-forum-bounces at darlin.cdu.edu.au on behalf of csaa-forum-request at darlin.cdu.edu.au
Sent: Fri 1/04/2005 10:51 AM
To: csaa-forum at darlin.cdu.edu.au
Subject: csaa-forum Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1
Send csaa-forum mailing list submissions to
csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
csaa-forum-request at lists.cdu.edu.au
You can reach the person managing the list at
csaa-forum-owner at lists.cdu.edu.au
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of csaa-forum digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Windschuttling (Danny Butt)
2. Re: Windschuttling (Ben Hourigan)
3. Re: Windschuttling (Danny Butt)
4. Seminar of Prof Susan Smith, Centre for Cultural Research,
UWS, 28April (Chris Gibson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:58:48 +1000
From: Danny Butt <db at dannybutt.net>
Subject: [csaa-forum] Windschuttling
To: csaa-forum <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>, fibreculture
<fibreculture at lists.myspinach.org>
Message-ID: <BE71A488.2166A%db at dannybutt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
(with links at
http://www.dannybutt.net/weblog/2005/03/31/windschuttling/ )
It doesn't take long being back in Australia to find some of our finest
academic minds again preoccupied with The Australian and Keith
Windschuttle's "Tutorials in Terrorism". I see that Keith's need to prove
his superiority over people by making shit up about them is going global.
The Internet has truly revolutionised Keith's practice. He can use the
potential visit of an overseas political figure like Toni Negri as a
springboard to reproducing US conservative wire service reports on Ward
Churchill. No need to read their books, even! Or is Keith worried that his
strip-mining of Australian racial prejudice has exhausted even The
Australian's ability to get a story out of it? The Australian, heroically,
will not let the facts get in the way of providing "balanced" coverage of
academic matters, and Keith is always ready to provide "the other side of
the story" to those who are biased by their knowledge of what they're
talking about.
It's admirable (and surprising!) that Negri has taken the time to correct
the errors in Windschuttle's characterisation of him, in the letter Brett
Neilson has circulated. However, let's be realistic about how interested The
Australian is in clearing Negri's name. Then there wouldn't be a story!
Now, last time I suggested on csaa-forum that arguing with The Australian
about Cultural Studies was a questionable use of time for young scholars, I
was characterised as taking some position of not believing in a broader
public culture. Far from true! I just think that The Australian is not only
ideologically partisan to the point of ridicule, it has no interest in the
kinds of arguments in the academy (with my respect to the people on this
list who bravely advance those arguments within those pages anyway).
If you start taking it seriously, over time your brain cells go a bit soft,
and it starts sounding plausible when Greg Sheridan makes repeated
ridiculous comments this week against the "academic and quasi-academic
institutions'" hegemony on foreign policy commentary that is "out of touch
with Australian people and the Government." (Tellingly, the online version
is accompanied by a close-up of a US flag - WTF?) Hmm, yes, *scratching
beard*. Those people specialising in foreign policy obviously know far too
many foreigners to be trusted. Or the UN oil-for-food report ends up on the
front page two days in a row, and you start talking about it, while the
US-lied-about-WMD report showed up twice on page 5, so it never quite hits
the water cooler.
Remember, as Lachlan Murdoch put it in his Andrew Olle lecture, News Corp's
media is " a forum for opinions, emotions and shared convictions that
strengthen us all when we need strength most." " Will we stand with our
national leaders, on both sides of parliament, as they seek to bring justice
to the cowards that murdered our countrymen and women? Or will we allow
ourselves to be misused as a forum for division, effectively undermining
community strength and cohesion when our country needs those qualities
most?" Yes, he's asking you, Negri! Are you with us or against us? We know
where Keith is.
So you misunderstand! My point is not to ignore Windschuttle and The
Australian, but to not project the ideals of the reality-based community
onto them, with our meddlesome divisions and cowardly undermining. Rather
than arguing politely, we must meet Windschuttle in the spirit with which he
goes about his work: prejudicial, over-the-top, and focussed on the man and
not the ball. Of course, compared to Bolt, Windschuttle is perhaps even
easier to develop strategies against, so here are a couple party-starters.
Remember, being a nice guy didn't get Henry Reynolds anywhere.
1) In his newly syndicating vein, Windschuttle must be up for that great
Australian tradition, the hoax. I would suggest a fake conservative
think-tank located under a .org domain and hosted in the U.S. There are so
many real ones indistinguishable from parody that he'll never know. Surely
someone in the US could host a phone line for it and give him a call. Given
Windschuttle's relentless self-aggrandisement, I'm sure he'd bite on a
report highlighting the "important and unassailable contribution" Keith has
made to uncovering the left-wing bias in Australian Universities,
particularly certain "falsehoods around Australian history". Pepper the
report with lies. Wait until he uses them in his next self-published
masterwork on "The death of the Australian academy" before revealing the
hoax.
2) I don't think Windschuttle has actually talked to a person-of-colour (let
alone an aboriginal person) so there must be a fetishistic dynamic at work
here for him to be so uptight about race. I'm sure there's an opportunity
here for a cute non-white agent provocateur (with a cast-iron constitution,
unusual taste, and/or great commitment to the cause) to get Windschuttle
saying something *very* dodgy on tape. A bit of the old Justin Harrison
treatment would follow. For a good performer, the 60 Minutes advance alone
would clear the HECS debt. In fact, I'm sure Windschuttle is the type of guy
to have blackmail fantasies, it would be his dream come true. No, I don't
enjoy thinking about Windschuttle having sex either. But desperate times
etc.
Quite honestly, I have to wonder what Keith's going to get into a flap about
next. Aboriginal Australians, Native Amercians, aging Italian Marxists...
perhaps the disability studies community should be getting worried.
--
http://www.dannybutt.net
adventures in cultural politics (weblog) - http://weblog.dannybutt.net
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:27:31 +1000
From: Ben Hourigan <mail at benhourigan.com>
Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] Windschuttling
To: Danny Butt <db at dannybutt.net>
Cc: csaa-forum <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>
Message-ID: <8a9db32d97b02865557fe149f9477d1c at benhourigan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
On 31 Mar 2005, at 12:58, Danny Butt wrote:
> Rather than arguing politely, we must meet Windschuttle in the spirit
> with which he
> goes about his work: prejudicial, over-the-top, and focussed on the
> man and
> not the ball.
Danny, I really hope you're joking. We must *absolutely not* argue in
prejudicial, over-the-top ways, relying on ad hominem attacks.
Arguably, we already do so, and your most recent contribution to the
list contains evidence in point:
> I don't think Windschuttle has actually talked to a person-of-colour
> In fact, I'm sure Windschuttle is the type of guy to have blackmail
> fantasies
If it comes down to Windschuttle's mistakes, prejudice, and personal
attacks versus our own, then all either side would be doing is filling
the media with garbage. Such tactics are laughable at best.
Ben Hourigan, B.A. (Hons) (Melb.)
mail at benhourigan.com
Phone: 04 2291 6341
http://benhourigan.com
>
> (with links at
> http://www.dannybutt.net/weblog/2005/03/31/windschuttling/ )
>
> It doesn't take long being back in Australia to find some of our finest
> academic minds again preoccupied with The Australian and Keith
> Windschuttle's "Tutorials in Terrorism". I see that Keith's need to
> prove
> his superiority over people by making shit up about them is going
> global.
> The Internet has truly revolutionised Keith's practice. He can use the
> potential visit of an overseas political figure like Toni Negri as a
> springboard to reproducing US conservative wire service reports on Ward
> Churchill. No need to read their books, even! Or is Keith worried that
> his
> strip-mining of Australian racial prejudice has exhausted even The
> Australian's ability to get a story out of it? The Australian,
> heroically,
> will not let the facts get in the way of providing "balanced" coverage
> of
> academic matters, and Keith is always ready to provide "the other side
> of
> the story" to those who are biased by their knowledge of what they're
> talking about.
>
> It's admirable (and surprising!) that Negri has taken the time to
> correct
> the errors in Windschuttle's characterisation of him, in the letter
> Brett
> Neilson has circulated. However, let's be realistic about how
> interested The
> Australian is in clearing Negri's name. Then there wouldn't be a story!
>
> Now, last time I suggested on csaa-forum that arguing with The
> Australian
> about Cultural Studies was a questionable use of time for young
> scholars, I
> was characterised as taking some position of not believing in a broader
> public culture. Far from true! I just think that The Australian is not
> only
> ideologically partisan to the point of ridicule, it has no interest in
> the
> kinds of arguments in the academy (with my respect to the people on
> this
> list who bravely advance those arguments within those pages anyway).
>
> If you start taking it seriously, over time your brain cells go a bit
> soft,
> and it starts sounding plausible when Greg Sheridan makes repeated
> ridiculous comments this week against the "academic and quasi-academic
> institutions'" hegemony on foreign policy commentary that is "out of
> touch
> with Australian people and the Government." (Tellingly, the online
> version
> is accompanied by a close-up of a US flag - WTF?) Hmm, yes, *scratching
> beard*. Those people specialising in foreign policy obviously know far
> too
> many foreigners to be trusted. Or the UN oil-for-food report ends up
> on the
> front page two days in a row, and you start talking about it, while the
> US-lied-about-WMD report showed up twice on page 5, so it never quite
> hits
> the water cooler.
>
> Remember, as Lachlan Murdoch put it in his Andrew Olle lecture, News
> Corp's
> media is " a forum for opinions, emotions and shared convictions that
> strengthen us all when we need strength most." " Will we stand with our
> national leaders, on both sides of parliament, as they seek to bring
> justice
> to the cowards that murdered our countrymen and women? Or will we allow
> ourselves to be misused as a forum for division, effectively
> undermining
> community strength and cohesion when our country needs those qualities
> most?" Yes, he's asking you, Negri! Are you with us or against us? We
> know
> where Keith is.
>
> So you misunderstand! My point is not to ignore Windschuttle and The
> Australian, but to not project the ideals of the reality-based
> community
> onto them, with our meddlesome divisions and cowardly undermining.
> Rather
> than arguing politely, we must meet Windschuttle in the spirit with
> which he
> goes about his work: prejudicial, over-the-top, and focussed on the
> man and
> not the ball. Of course, compared to Bolt, Windschuttle is perhaps even
> easier to develop strategies against, so here are a couple
> party-starters.
> Remember, being a nice guy didn't get Henry Reynolds anywhere.
>
> 1) In his newly syndicating vein, Windschuttle must be up for that
> great
> Australian tradition, the hoax. I would suggest a fake conservative
> think-tank located under a .org domain and hosted in the U.S. There
> are so
> many real ones indistinguishable from parody that he'll never know.
> Surely
> someone in the US could host a phone line for it and give him a call.
> Given
> Windschuttle's relentless self-aggrandisement, I'm sure he'd bite on a
> report highlighting the "important and unassailable contribution"
> Keith has
> made to uncovering the left-wing bias in Australian Universities,
> particularly certain "falsehoods around Australian history". Pepper the
> report with lies. Wait until he uses them in his next self-published
> masterwork on "The death of the Australian academy" before revealing
> the
> hoax.
>
> 2) I don't think Windschuttle has actually talked to a
> person-of-colour (let
> alone an aboriginal person) so there must be a fetishistic dynamic at
> work
> here for him to be so uptight about race. I'm sure there's an
> opportunity
> here for a cute non-white agent provocateur (with a cast-iron
> constitution,
> unusual taste, and/or great commitment to the cause) to get
> Windschuttle
> saying something *very* dodgy on tape. A bit of the old Justin Harrison
> treatment would follow. For a good performer, the 60 Minutes advance
> alone
> would clear the HECS debt. In fact, I'm sure Windschuttle is the type
> of guy
> to have blackmail fantasies, it would be his dream come true. No, I
> don't
> enjoy thinking about Windschuttle having sex either. But desperate
> times
> etc.
>
> Quite honestly, I have to wonder what Keith's going to get into a flap
> about
> next. Aboriginal Australians, Native Amercians, aging Italian
> Marxists...
> perhaps the disability studies community should be getting worried.
>
>
> --
> http://www.dannybutt.net
> adventures in cultural politics (weblog) - http://weblog.dannybutt.net
>
>
> _______________________________________
>
> csaa-forum
> discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
>
> www.csaa.asn.au
>
> change your subscription details at
> http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:12:08 +1000
From: Danny Butt <db at dannybutt.net>
Subject: Re: [csaa-forum] Windschuttling
To: csaa-forum <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>, fibreculture
<fibreculture at lists.myspinach.org>
Message-ID: <BE71B5B8.2167E%db at dannybutt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
On 3/31/05 1:27 PM, "Ben Hourigan" <mail at benhourigan.com> wrote:
> Danny, I really hope you're joking. We must *absolutely not* argue in
> prejudicial, over-the-top ways, relying on ad hominem attacks.
Ben, you can relax. I don't think you're his type.
Seriously, I should follow that noting that any characterisation of Keith's
person in that the post was of a satirical nature. Of course, I know nothing
of Keith Windschuttle's sexual habits (thankfully) and they should merely be
taken as a "sexing up" of his textual strategies rather than implying
anything about his actual behaviour. (Thanks to C. for the legal advice :7).
Regards
Danny
--
http://www.dannybutt.net
adventures in cultural politics (weblog) - http://weblog.dannybutt.net
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 18:02:53 +1000
From: "Chris Gibson" <ChrisG at fbe.unsw.edu.au>
Subject: [csaa-forum] Seminar of Prof Susan Smith, Centre for Cultural
Research, UWS, 28April
To: "csaa-forum" <csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au>
Message-ID:
<88DD51542A23F1428A5F6AB2E36FF992E33526 at emumail.fbe.unsw.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
apol's for cross-posting and Sydney-centrism.
-----Original Message-----
From: iag-list-bounces at flinders.edu.au
[mailto:iag-list-bounces at flinders.edu.au]On Behalf Of Kay Anderson
Sent: Thursday, 31 March 2005 12:15 PM
To: iag-list at flinders.edu.au
Cc: ccr at uws.edu.au
Subject: [Iag-list] Seminar of Prof Susan Smith, Centre for Cultural
Research, UWS, 28April
This is to inform members of an upcoming seminar to which they are warmly invited.
Cultures of (Housing) Markets
There is a growing interest among sociologists, anthropologists, human geographers and others in the way markets work. Rather than taking the economics of markets for granted, these scholars have emphasised the social and power-filled character of markets, drawing attention to their passions as well as their rationality. This paper, which is about the way housing markets work, is part of that new tradition. It uses (housing) examples to draw attention to the differentiation and diversity of markets, highlighting their performativity, emphasising their heterogeneity, and - most importantly - identifying the multitude of normative ideas and practices that are and could be built into them. Exposing the cultural diversity of (housing) markets belies their economic essentialism. Recognising that markets are made not given raises the possibility of revising their ethics: of harnessing their emotional energies, reformatting their economy, and rethinking their social role.
Date: 28 April
Time: 2-4pm, followed by afternoon tea
Venue: UWS, Parramatta campus. Room to be advised. Please phone CCR office (9685 9600) or email ccr at uws.edu.au for map of campus, direction details, etc
Susan J. Smith is Professor of Geography at Durham University. She is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and a member of the Academy of Social Sciences in the UK.
Professor Kay Anderson
PhD Geography (UBC)
Centre for Cultural Research
University of Western Sydney
Parramatta campus Building EBa
Sydney, NSW, AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 2 9685 9669 or 9685 9600
k.anderson at uws.edu.au
Postal address:
Locked Bag 1797
Penrith South DC NSW 1797
http://www.uws.edu.au/ccr
_______________________________________________
Iag-list mailing list
Iag-list at flinders.edu.au
https://listserver.flinders.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/iag-list
______________________________________________
Dr Chris Gibson
Senior Lecturer
Geography
University of New South Wales
NSW 2052
Australia
Ph: +61 2 9385 4393
Fax: +61 2 9385 4507
cgibson at unsw.edu.au
Staff homepage:
<http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/staff/Chris.Gibson/>
Convenor, IAG Cultural Geography Study Group
<http://www.iag.org.au/cultstudy.html>
Hon. Secretary, Geographical Society of NSW
<http://www.gsnsw.org.au/>
------------------------------
_______________________________________
csaa-forum
discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
www.csaa.asn.au
change your subscription details at http://lists.cdu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/csaa-forum
End of csaa-forum Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1
*****************************************
More information about the csaa-forum
mailing list