My Photo


Roll Call

Become a Fan

« Bolaño's 2666, Part I: "They supplied the stamp of ultraconcrete canonical literature, a nonspectulative literature free of ideas, assertions, denials, doubts . . ." | Main | What is it, with students and, with commas? »

Thursday, 20 November 2008


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How not to use Theory's Empire:


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The Necromancer

I'm more a stick man myself. Or is that straw?


I'll just invoke the Ron Paul of literary theory instead of being lured in by cheap [Stick] gags: SOKAL WAS RIGHT!!! LOLZ.


I'm not entriely clear on how this google proofing thing works, but you (or your Valve clone) are now apparently the third hit for "carrot theory." This is the first. It's almost carrotian in its intrickasies.

Rich Puchalsky

I have to argue against this the same point that I used to argue against critics of Theory's Empire -- you're reifying an anthology into an argument. Of course, the essay that you're quoting seems to have done this too -- it includes "In Theory's Empire" rather than "In so-and-so's essay in Theory's Empire." But that's no reason to accept this error. Theory's Empire is a collection of arguments, some good, some dismissive.

I can't even agree with calling it an abuse of the collection. Some of the essays in TE were just as bad, if I remember rightly. Some were good. It's not an abuse of a collection of essays against neoliberalism if someone quotes the authoritarian essay that was included. It's just a sort of citational failure.

Adam Kotsko

Maybe you can continue to advocate Theory's Empire despite this article. After all, I continue to advocate the Bible in some sense, even though its primary public role in America is to serve as evidence in favor of denying rights to homosexuals.

The comments to this entry are closed.