All the Difference
August 3, 2009
Recently, I discovered that pretty much every social critique I have been exposed to at Berkeley belongs on a continum of theories located in the overarching “discipline” known as “critical theory”. This has been a most exciting discovery, as now I can finally, FINALLY get a gestalt picture of how all of these different thinkers fit together on bigger scale. The reason why this has been an excruciating and frustrating ordeal is because critical theory is a conglomeration of most–if not all–of the social science and humanities type disciplines, including Economics, Political Science, Linguistics, Anthropology, Ethnic Studies, Literature, Sociology, Psychology, etc. Most notably, the fields of Philosophy and Rhetoric seem to form the most central foundation of critical theory, and the rivalry between the two disciplines supplies most of the richness that arises out of this study.
As much as I am excited by this newfound discovery, however, I am also quite aware of the potential pitfalls of jumping headfirst into the misty realm of abstract theory. First off, because critical theory is so interdisplinary, trying to learn it all comes at the risk of learning everything in the most shallow sense. It also means I won’t have time to dig deep in the various theoretical discussions unless I devote myself to such a practice for the rest of my life. Secondly, being able to call out a theoretical gesture and the counter-arguments is not a skill that is handy for finding a job–no employer is going to be impressed by my recognizing a certain theory as being particularly “Foucaldian”. This means that I will be accumulating impratical knowledge that won’t be used except in nerdy conversations about the state of the world. And thirdly, always being critical about the things I “consume” may be good on a personal sense (for my own clarity’s sake), but it will probably alienate me from the general public and the dominant tides of our consumer culture.
Basically, this means I will have to be prepared to some sacrifices. After all, the law of the “Opportunity Cost” says that doing one thing means you must give up something else. Spending a lot of time understanding the trajectory of various thinkers and building this theoretical scaffold will surely take much time. At the same time, I cannot be guaranteed that I will learn anything to satisfactory depth. To add insult to injury, the material I learn cannot be applied in any pragmatic way to provide for my financial security. Essentially, it has all the negative stereotypes of being a philosophy major without the institutionalized reputation of philosophy.
And so, with the ambivalence and uncertainty that Frost expressed at the proverbial crossroads in the woods, I will announce a similar, if cliched, sentiment as I embark on this path down critical theory:
“Two roads diverged in a wood–
and I, I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.”
August 3, 2009 at 6:24 pm
hi
may i suggest, to make it all less overwhelming, you start off with an intro of literary or media theory. this way you can get a brief gist of all the main categories of critical theory (with which you can pick and choose which ones are most interesting to you and delve deeper in those particular fields), AND the theories are applied in ways that are at least practical to the extent that they can give you concrete bases for analyzing the world around you.
critical theory is overwhelming because in essence it is semiotics, and that in itself is overwhelmning. but, you see, a critical theorist is not a theorist criticizing the all-encompassing totality of the world, they have areas of concentration. so yeah, studying and learning critical theory will give you a shallow knowledge of all disciplines, but that shallow knowledge will really propel the intensity of knowledge you will gain from your preferred area(s) of theory.
August 3, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Hey, nounvsnoun, thanks so much for the tip! The reason why things were so overwhelming was because all my classes took their respective stabs at critical theory from their particular perspectives/concentrations without providing the overarching picture. I was never told I was studying a particular component of literary or media theory, and so I had no way of knowing I should take an intro class on theory (if it is even offered at all). I have since done some research and found some excellent intro books on the subject. Thanks again for the response! Are you studying critical theory by any chance?
August 8, 2009 at 6:43 am
lol. you never cease to amuse me
August 8, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Who says philosophy majors don’t have the means of providing financial security for themselves? I think in the end, one’s ability to do well on a job all comes down to one’s critical thinking and decision making skills. Both of which are intangible assets that can be acquired whether you are a humanities or engineering major.
August 9, 2009 at 6:38 am
Very true, George. Unfortunately, it’s not just the lack of skill that burdens the philosophy/critical theory majors, but also the ambivalence in participating within the status quo. There is much to complain about in contemporary society, particularly when it comes to the field of business (where much of the money sits). The alternative to business, it seems, is something more sheltered, like academia. But even academia is becoming increasingly corporatized for the sake of funding (research, budget concerns, lack of resources for public institutions, etc). Financial security probably won’t be too big of an issue if I’m willing to take any job, but what if I’m hoping to make changes to the systemic processes? I must be empowered by the system in order to participate in remaking some of its functions; yet, to be empowered means I first have to pay my dues and partake in the process itself. It is this situational irony that has resulted in much political stasis and personal ambivalence. But I take your point. In the mean time, I’ll just ride with the uncertainty and see what opportunities come in the future.