Is "jargon" jargon, was Re: dead topix

t byfield tbyfield at panix.com
Wed Dec 15 09:19:13 PST 1999



> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 11:37:50 -0500
> From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>


> >Carrol Cox wrote:
> > >
> > > So if you really want to get rid of jargon, you are going
> > > to have to discover a way to give a 3-week equivalent
> > > of a Yale education to people who barely got through
> > > high school.
>
> Missed this the first time around. I don't agree. One of the benefits
> of a Yale education, at least in my experience, is the exposure to
> how the bourgeoisie thinks and acts. I can look, act, and talk like
> them even though I find them largely repellent; this is a useful <...>
> skill for both going undercover at their conferences and knowing how
> to address them on the rare occasions when they invite me. But also
> an advantage of a good formal education is, or should be, the
> capacity to take complex ideas and talk about them in relatively
> simple language. You don't need 20 years of schooling to understand

what he said.

yale did seem like a weird example, since it's notorious for being a bastion of some of the least comprehensible writers working in american academia in the past thirty years.


> the basics of Marxian class analysis; chances are you've experienced
> them every day of your life, but never heard them analyzed as such.

i'd settle for something much, much simpler: people realizing that the disembodied and polarized 'issues' the 'media' present don't match the world they live in.

as a side observation, this is one thing the net--whatever the hell it is--is good for. it's got all kinds of pitfalls, but it's striking a major blow against the cartelization of 'public discourse': captured networks, localized media markets, broad- cast models, technical barriers to comparing representations.

cheers, t



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list