[WS:] He is a good guy (he used to be at JHU, btw) and so is Chomsky, Zizek, Jared Diamond and score of other academic personalities. I did not say they were 'full of themselves," or anything personal. I said that my sarcasm was aimed at the 'genre' - which means a certain form of talk that has become immensely popular in the American academe and increasingly so overseas - which can be described as guru-centric (after Huczynski's concept of "management gurus" Management Gurus: what makes them and how to become one", Routledge, 1993.) This form of talk, which by no means is limited to the left - it is immensely popular in business schools, political science, economics, sociology etc. - is typically centered on a star/celebrity performer entertaining educated audiences with a talk show (often heavily illustrated with elaborated power point slides) on an academic subject. The talk show is certainly academic as it has a lot of theory, facts, graphs and numbers and usually (but not always) good information, but its main functions are to impress the audience - entertainment if you will - and to promote a book (or books) by the speaker.
I am not saying that this hi-brow entertainment function is wrong - it is no different than other forms of entertainment and probably more socially useful than many other forms. My point is that is has become the dominant form of academic discourse, and other forms become less and less relevant. It is the same type of complaint as saying that news became infotainment. I'd like to keep these two separate. It is a matter of aesthetic preference, if you will. As I said, I am an old coot that grew up in an environment where not everything had to be popular and entertaining.
Wojtek
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Alan Rudy <alan.rudy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Who do you see Harvey competitively pissing against? I've seen him many
> times and he's a kind and appreciative critique even when he's strongly
> disagreeing with folks... I don't always agree with him but he's someone you
> can disagree with, unlike other academics you and I both know.
> Have you ever seen the guy talk? Have you ever met him? Do you know his
> personality, are you sure he's full of himself?
> Good data man that you claim to be, is your intended sarcasm rooted in
> knowledge or deductivism?
> Are you sure you're not reading your preconceived notions of what just
> _must_ have been happening there into it?
> If you don't want to find out what actually happened, what the character of
> the event actually was, what Harvey's presentation of self was, how people
> actually experienced it, and you don't trust Chuck to see through the veil
> that kept him from understanding that what was going on was an academic
> pissing match, then it's not sarcasm, it's self-satisfied snark. (I know, I
> do this more often than I'd like myself.)
> It seemed immediately obvious to me - well versed, as I'm sure you are, in
> the structure of academic presentations - that the opaque outline presented
> at the start of Chuck's notes was Harvey laying out the structure of his
> approach so that the subsequent material could be interpreted in light of
> the trajectory laid out... trying to help folks see material in context and
> ask questions about specific points relative to their role int he
> overarching argument rather than as free-standing elements distinct from the
> others in the presentation. We missed both the presentation of the form and
> the fleshing out of the content, simply because there were abstractions
> doesn't mean it was BS.
> It also sounds like, from Chuck's presentation, that this was a more
> intimate presentation where he could more or less assume he was preaching to
> a variant of his usual choir and could speak in more shorthand as a
> result... something I'd imagine he'll do less of in the major presentation
> linked at the bottom of Chuck's message.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Rudy: "In short, its quite easy to ask for clarification, for an
>> explanation,
>> without this snarky tone."
>>
>> [WS:] My intention was to make a sarcastic remark, not to ask for a
>> clarification. I am an old coot and I know academic pissing contests
>> in and out - it is not about explanation but about personality.
>>
>> PS. Sarcasm was not aimed at Chuck (whose postings I enjoy,) but the
>> genre in general.
>>
>> Wojtek
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Alan Rudy <alan.rudy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > WS, Chuck took notes at a lecture and shared them, notes are incomplete,
>> > cursory skeletal outlines, they do not represent a comprehensive
>> > representation of the content or artfulness of a talk... well, mine never
>> > are, perhaps yours are "essentially" different. He even said that some
>> of
>> > the talk put him to sleep...
>> > Rather than slap at Chuck, Harvey and the folks at the presentation,
>> isn't
>> > it possible to imagine that the lived experience of the lecture wasn't
>> > obscure?
>> > In short, its quite easy to ask for clarification, for an explanation,
>> > without this snarky tone. I'm sure Chuck'd try to oblige, he's a pretty
>> > nice guy in my estimation. The faux ;) and BS self-attribution of
>> > "essentialism" are simple assertions of some kind of
>> > rolling-your-eyes-at-the-obscure-intellectuals superiority... why would
>> > anyone want to respond to questions posed in that manner?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> [WS:] Sorry for not being able to discern artfulness in this form of
>> >> talk - that is what years of working in data mining do to you :) - but
>> >> what exactly does all this mean? That is, other than showing
>> >> erudition of the speaker and maybe the audience? In my narrow-minded
>> >> "essentialist" world, the role of theory is to explain i.e. turn
>> >> obscure into obvious, not the other way around. Can anyone explain
>> >> what is the purpose of this generalized four-section wide intellectual
>> >> edifice?
>> >>
>> >> Wojtek
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Chuck Grimes <c123grimes at att.net>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Harvey presented, under a description of his approach four sections.
>> The
>> >> > first was the axiomatic level where Production was the top generalized
>> >> > level, then below Distribution, and Exchange---which are fed back into
>> >> the
>> >> > top level. He considered this something of fixed form, an abstract
>> >> > architecture.
>> >> >
>> >> > The next area he considered not in terms of a fixed architectonic, but
>> a
>> >> > flow in the sense of thermodynamics. The central form was the flow of
>> >> money,
>> >> > composed of labor value, rents... I lost him here, almost nodding out.
>> He
>> >> > wrote out a relational equation of balance that essentially said, if
>> any
>> >> of
>> >> > these factors is stopped it stops the flow, and shit breaks down.
>> >> >
>> >> > His third category was the dynamic of interlocking systems which
>> included
>> >> > technology, social relations, conditions of daily life, relation to
>> >> nature,
>> >> > an ideological system and its discontents, and others. The basic idea
>> was
>> >> > the presentation of the categories of potential change that animate
>> the
>> >> > system and which Capital mobilizes. The condition was that if these
>> >> > interdependent factors are not simultaneously addressed, change on our
>> >> side
>> >> > fails.
>> >> >
>> >> > The fourth section was on Geography, the wide field of application,
>> which
>> >> > for Harvey the urban environment was central. The city was center
>> place
>> >> in
>> >> > its dialectic with nature, as landscape was the locus of
>> >> change-revolution.
>> >> >
>> >> > The latter was really interesting and I definitely woke up for this
>> part,
>> >> > since my ex-wife was a city planner, worked for Berkeley city
>> government,
>> >> > and we had talked endlessly about this dialectic between city and
>> >> country,
>> >> > Berkeley and Yosemite, the take over of local business by national
>> >> > franchise, the nastiness of the Chamber of Commerce and its feudal
>> land
>> >> > system...
>> >> >
>> >> > The crowd were all graduate students, old timers something like me,
>> and
>> >> the
>> >> > young professional turks. This was a fine view of actual, living,
>> >> breathing
>> >> > left. Very glad I got off my hermit(internet) ass. It was really nice
>> to
>> >> be
>> >> > around smart people. These folk have no idea how lonely it gets in the
>> >> > bullshit that passes for life in the US. I want to debate
>> >> Darwin---fucking
>> >> > kiss my ass.
>> >> >
>> >> > The questions were interesting. The first was about the role of
>> >> > proletariat---standard issue Marxism.. Havery redirected the
>> >> understanding
>> >> > of who the prols were, in caspule, the makers of cities. He used
>> several
>> >> > other examples like the obvious disaffect intellectuals...
>> >> >
>> >> > The DOE library is under current occupation---who knew? The guy
>> sitting
>> >> next
>> >> > to me was an archaeologist on staff in Geography whose period, place
>> was
>> >> > ancient Peru. We chatted about the Peruvian collection below the
>> Hearst
>> >> > women's gym and swimming pool, a Julia Morgan building, which worries
>> the
>> >> > archivialists---as it fucking should below many tons of water.
>> >> >
>> >> > Patrick Bond turned me on to this lecture, but he was very distracted.
>> We
>> >> > only exchanged a few words of greeting. I have to say, the most
>> beautiful
>> >> > thing geography does is maps, fabulous maps that track the
>> rotten-right
>> >> > through its Mason-Dixon territories. If you notice these traces follow
>> >> the
>> >> > central river systems of the US, the Mississippi, Ohio, and Missouri.
>> >> What
>> >> > does that mean?
>> >> >
>> >> > Then there are the scatter diagrams of blacks and minorities in major
>> >> urban
>> >> > centers, or the crop intensity plots of the California landscape. The
>> >> > landscape creates the gigantic wealth of California because it has
>> >> virtually
>> >> > every productive eco-system from SEA rice paddies to grasslands for
>> live
>> >> > stock to valleys of custom Tuscan grapes for wine, cheese, and wheat
>> >> plains
>> >> > for bread. It has three giant natural ports in SF, LA, and San Diego.
>> The
>> >> > idiots that run this state have never seen it. The river systems that
>> >> flow
>> >> > into the Sacramento Delta create something compariable to the ancient
>> >> deltas
>> >> > of yore. Well that's the conceptual level of the geography of
>> California;
>> >> >
>> >> > I have gone on about this because there is a lot of intellectual life
>> in
>> >> > Berkeley, but it is incrediably difficult to keep track of. You have
>> to
>> >> > evolve a system of some social sort I never mastered to follow all the
>> >> > goings on. The Berkeley Planet sure ain't the New Yorker or the NYT.
>> >> >
>> >> > For those around the bay area here is the link to David Harvey's big
>> >> public
>> >> > lecture:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://events.berkeley.edu/?event_ID=32976&date=2010-10-08&tab=all_events
>> >> >
>> >> > Summary. Wurster Hall 112, 4pm. Parking. Go to the concrete parking
>> >> > structure on Bancroft a block below College in front of Kroeber Hall
>> and
>> >> > cheat anyway you can. It is a short walk from this parking structure
>> to
>> >> the
>> >> > Architecture and Design building of Wurster---a souless Le Courbusier
>> >> > modular structure. I assume this lecture will be a book lecture on The
>> >> > Engima of Capital. Of course it is popular because art and
>> architecture
>> >> > students are too stupid to grasp the abstract concepts. I hate the
>> idea,
>> >> but
>> >> > that is about right.
>> >> >
>> >> > CG
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ___________________________________
>> >> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> ___________________________________
>> >> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *********************************************************
>> > Alan P. Rudy
>> > Dept. Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work
>> > Central Michigan University
>> > 124 Anspach Hall
>> > Mt Pleasant, MI 48858
>> > 517-881-6319
>> > ___________________________________
>> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>> >
>>
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *********************************************************
> Alan P. Rudy
> Dept. Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work
> Central Michigan University
> 124 Anspach Hall
> Mt Pleasant, MI 48858
> 517-881-6319
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>