Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:02:12 -0400
Message-Id: <199706100202.WAA114692@pilot14.cl.msu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
From: garciara@Pilot.Msu.Edu (raymond garcia)
Subject: bad writing redux
well now, it seems that i am seen as defending something that those who
claim to know say is "bad writing," or incomprehensible communication acts.
or rejecting the need for the exposure of "bad writing."  nothing could be
further from the truth.  if we could relax our own certainty about what
constitutes coherent communication for just a moment, maybe we could see the
"bad writing contest" for what it is--an attack on a certain approach to
writing ("post-modernist") and/or on certain fields in which it is popular.
all but one of the "winners" adopt this approach, and most are lit crits,
english profs, or, heaven forbid, the folks into the dreaded cultural
studies.  this cute little "bad writing awards" thing was nothing more than
an ideological screed masked by a rhetorical claim to represent coherent
communication.  
     ask yourself why there are no other styles of writing represented.  is
it because the pomo wankers are the only incoherent academics writing today?
if the answer is yes, thou art kidding thyself.  there is no shortage of
gibberish in academic journals, certainly not in sociological journals.  and
yet, as a discipline, we have no "winners" recognized for their talents, nor
any other disciplines or approaches aside from the obvious targets.  boy,
what a representative sample (supposedly a main tenet of sociological
research) this "bad writing awards" had!! 
     i don't dispute the posting of this thing in the first place (because
it is kind of funny), just the validity of the argument the awards are based
on.  somebody else recently posted another rip on "postmodernism" which was
much better, as it was not based on some disguised political agenda
(apparently transparent to the coherent communication crowd).  it was a
parody, and it was damn funny.  maybe it's time we stopped taking ourselves
so seriously.

                                         r garcia

p.s.--you know, the "bad writing awards" committee (or whatever) couldn't
resist taking a swipe at the SOCIAL TEXT folks, by connecting the alan sokal
charade to "bad writing." without getting into sokal's duplicity, i'd just
like to point something out.  there has been considerable whining of late
about the loss of tenure track jobs in academia, the use of temps to teach,
and the miserable job market of late.  i use the term whining because i see
very little action connected to it.  this contrasts greatly with the folks
at SOCIAL TEXT, who have been very active in setting up conferences to
address the situation, spearheading union organizing drives (including
unions for temps and adjuncts in academia), and publicizing the issues.
they recently devoted an entire issue of SOCIAL TEXT to YALE's busting of
last year's t/a strike and their unwillingness to recognize the legitimacy
of the grad student union, seen within a broader context of the crisis of
academic labor.  they are also devoting an upcoming issue to similar themes.
this from "postmodernists" who allegedly think everything is relative, and
are ahistorical, apolitical, and nihilistic (and write really badly, don't
forget).  of course, you'd never hear about any of this over the
self-righteous din about bad writing.