So...what do folks think (if ya do think about such things) about individual or group resistance to being held to rigorous scholarly/intellectual disciplinary practices depending on who is calling for such...let's call it "excellence" in work? #genuinequestion
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @aewaiwhy
I think rigor is often weaponized. To be certain we maintain and further the insights of our methodologies and theories, but not fetishize an external epistemology that determines the “scholarly merit” of our work.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @DrDadabhoy
But *whose* scholarship? Is all "scholarship" necessarily utterly destructive of subaltern intellectual work because "Western" is the invisible, constant qualifier of "scholarhip"?
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @aewaiwhy
Yes I agree that by capitulating to the form and thing we call scholarship we are already implicated in reproducing settler colonialist ways of knowing. Does it matter however if the gaze the subject is oppositional to it? Great questions to work through.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @DrDadabhoy
That's a great question. One issue arising now is the (re)definition of our ways as "resistance," which is reactive & defined by colonization (Fanon's critique). I wonder if an oppositional gaze is necessary, tho. Are other metaphors better: semantic ambiguity heard differently?
3 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 3 tykkäystä
I can’t wait to see what you do with this. I’m going to keep thinking about this more, took 
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.