Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Willkommen bei Scribd!

  • Uncritical Reading

    Hochgeladen von

    api-3750208
    11 Ansichten14 Seiten

    Originaltitel

    UncriticalReading

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Verfügbare Formate

    PDF oder online auf Scribd lesen

    Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

    Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

    Dieses Dokument melden

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Als PDF herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    11 Ansichten14 Seiten

    Uncritical Reading

    Hochgeladen von

    api-3750208

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Als PDF herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    von 14
    Uncritical Reading Michael Warner 1 Sadents who come w my literature cles fnd, ead in al the ways ‘hey are supposed 1. They iden wih characters, They ill in love With authors. They mime war chey tke to be authorized sentiment They stock themeles with material for showing fo for performing clas membenhip. Taey shop around among tse publics vonring nwo social wold of fanod and gekdom. They warm with pride over the national hesage. They tla dhe exc and tke weassurance in the familia They condemn as boring what they doa aleady recognize “They look fr representacions that wil emedat gra by giving them pie eliages" They cultivate reverence and psy. They ty smicipate what the vacher wants, atd sometimes to one-up the ether students, They grope forthe cchés tht they are ste the fet comes down co. Thee atention wanders the skim: they skip around. They smack pages with pink and yellow highlighter, They ge caught up ia Suspense They laugh; they ery They get aroused (and stay quit about iin clas), They lose themselves in backs, distracting themselves from ‘veything ce, especially homework like the reading sgn ‘My works cut out for me. My jo ico tach them critical scading, bout these modes of thir acu reading —and one cou ist cou less more—wil end vo be clasifi asuncrial eeading, What dos it ean o teach critical reading, as opposed tall other kinds of reading? ‘Are ther any other nds chat can or should be taught? Difete caches might have difrent ides ofow odo cial ead- ing, but the ai of opposition is fundamental ro out ison role Whether we are propounding new crim, deconsoction, or cule sedis, our common enterprise isto diipne seudems out oftheir uncritical abiss ino cra reading—whatever we mean by shat (Ciicalveadng ste fll ideology of leaned profes, dase 0 hat we seldom fa the need wo explant. My own departncne rues ofall envring raduae eadets 3 coun called “Cri! Reading” We lone specify anything about what wl eaughe inthe cour ow could ve) The asumpuion i tha any of ou fac can be usted to eonvey the general idea—and no ne shouldbe burdened with expressing “The Comal English department webpage begins with what Tks to be «pica mision statement: "The Deparament of English eaches analytical and cal reading acid and elfective writing and studi in the values and problems of human experince and eulture” Like mose institutional prose, this proclamation iso careflto avai controversy and lneurtrpfthae ewap eli banality. Tre, is comsquen tal banal: bec the critical profésion has come to undentand ‘elf primarily a teaching “aaltcl and rita reading" some other jusication: For the profesion -nowably the tak of teaming a presigious heritage or canon—have proven dificult w sustain, once they have come m9 be sen 3 ancl. But forthe mos part what i siking abou this language i the apparent consensis behind i. And although the selF-conception ofthe dipline scans perversely ang nse wo all che ways our sents stay read, tas worked quite vell—at es ehoughour the wentith century legate the pro- fasion, With very sifren inflections over the past century the nor mative program of cial reading ae allowed ratte department (0 tall themecves as providing a basi element of eduction, ‘widely fl disenchantment wih the idea fier, which dens in 4 technologically changing climate increasingly encounter as archaic ‘Cel, the idea resonate lar beyond ou own profesional das As we esr tie of dermonsaing, modern lieratar sil allo ble bad alin, Doi ead like Quote, ike Emma Boar ike Ginny Wess “Therich overdcteemination of uch bles in modcenty allows oma in ouseles ste bees ofa heroic pedagogy the end of which i not the eanamisi of 3 canon eh catechisic incorporation offic and Psi, but an ope future of penn and colecive libration of fil t= inenship and hiswvial belonging, To quote another recalingly bland rallying en: “Cea Itercy mean making one self preset apt of moral and poi projee tht link the produion of meaning © the Reading 8 posi for human ageny democratic community, and eansformaive social aon,” We are here, we ike ell our sents co av yu fom habit of uncial reing tha ate naive imate, ncamined--or ‘worse. Doi ed ik chien, ike action readers on the beh, like ‘coop, like fundamentals, like nconalis, like antiquarian, Uke consumes lik ideologues, ik exits, like tourists, ke youre Critical eding is evdenely dese wih social meaning: But ts sg- nificance for modernity sem dificle wo pin on any empitilly esrbable practice of reading. Why sc apparel the case hue any tiple of actual reading that we can observe in the world counte a8 ‘unreal? And how could ic neverihlest seem that professors of iet= sure regard the rial ainda 2 necessary implication of reading ial? Asspicion begins suggest itl Isc reg realy read ing at al Ts i an ideological description applied to people who ase properly sociated into 2 polite! culture, regardless of how (or vhethe) they read? Or, gracing a ide more in chasis et noe 20 ‘uch a eading practice a8 a notional derivative ftom a prog uncrc- cal reaing tha ie must postin oder o eas? Is tase of rereading, ‘or discourse about rang rather than reading pr)” Doc it aie the Lind of liberal openness to sl questioning and reflective expliia sion shat could theoreially take any practice of reading sits occasion? (Oris emote ikea discipline, secking replace the ray and wntained practices of che merely iterate with culated and habeus dispoi- tion ota by means of another eof practice? Iso, an those ses ‘of reading be anaomize, or placed in a hisory of tae practice? IF ‘he ater is this reading culkore one ofthe Frmal-hisoical conditions fof what counts ascii reson? A heroic pedagogy canbe founded on textual tecinigues because of an imputed relacoship bemveen the prictce of reading and etal reason, bue what i tha lationship? “The enormous shadow of wnciveal reading sugges anoder set of problems aswel. Within dhe cute of etal reading ean seem that all the forms of uncritil eeading—ideniecon, sel ores, reverie, encima, enchsiam, Ira, avesion, diseacion—are tungstematic and disorganized. Uncial modes of reading, i would sem, ary deiniion neither eelletive nor analy. They mus thee fore prove untenable, ransrite into che material Feri read ing-when summoned t the bar of examination, Uncscial waling it ‘would sce, is nave; by is mature it cannot ati the coherence ofa normative program of eding It cannot consrae a alsa © wha is called crcl reading. Hence the ready consennax: I che choice is between crdial and uneridcal reading. who ould befor hele? Bue what fis ue, a we suppose, ha excl reading she only way ro suture textual pracce with reflection, reson, anda nommuive Aliscipline of subjectivi? If we begin vo understand cri reading not simply asthe coming:nwo-telleivity of reading, but a very spec set of form relaonships then ic might be easier wo ecogae tal modes of reading and reletion on tealing a8 something other than prethoore cally uncridal. The mos obvious candidates for such 3 program of “uncial” reading ae various sles of religious reading, But they are ‘ot the only ones (An interesting point of compan woald be porno- graphic reading, whick becomes a developed and ui prac inthe petodof cca reading’ ascendancy)® “Were to aime that crt eaing just name for any secon ‘cious pace ofrealing, This asurpeion creates sever nds of ll cout at once: Ie tums all reading into the unctal mateal fora ‘cerrecding horizon of teflectveslprting: by natural crcl reading a mew election ic obscures rom even ot ow view the rther labore forms and dicplnes of subjecvry we practice and inculcate icuniveralizs the special Form of modernity that units philology with ‘the public sphere; anit blocks rom view the existence of othe cules of teazualan, In these ways i could be elle mistake or an ideology, bur of eoune i it abo the inemal viewpoint of «culture with is own proactive intense, ts own dinincrive pardon, enabling even this ‘sy for bee or wore. “Among che cris who have noticed che importance of wha is wt allyl undhougt as uncrtalreading is Eve Kesofiky Sedgwick. In a suggestive polemical esay published a the introduction 10 Nwe- Gazing, she agus thar the dominant modes of scademic rim have fed oto an essentially paranoid suspicion of eexual attachment Sedgwick’ polemic ager a spice of academic movements; bit | suspect that most of what she ecorate ax paranoid could be describ as an extrme casein which noems ofthe cial have hypertrophied and become conspicuous. For reasons that migh be varoas—-sich as the compestiveposoning of professional discourse, which invites ws tense that our own eral rections will be more cal than ‘those of our aniipared, imaginary crve—the cite adopts a projec tively agressive defensvenes in ication the objec of iis, Sedgwick denies as the base ements of paranoid reading (1) an anccputory aversion co surprte, taken atthe only scurry of know edges (2) 2 mimetic teflesvey in which de etc is seen as making cexpliica ater or hidden reflesvty in she txt (3) a stong insistence fon sexing everthing in che es of ts cenrl suspicion: (4) an iner- ‘stony in negative aes: and (5) an appasenly bounds th in che Alicacy of exposure. All ofthese can be sca ae hcighrened versions of fone of another normative project ofthe crcl per se, though the degre of exogertion is more vicble in some such a (4). The fist an xia anecpatory knowingnes,isofen han to dsingish in prac tice from ordinary crv distance—ac lest when distuncation ie aken 1 the necesary route to knowlege dat thestned by auachment, Incorporation, of volsemens, and where the objec af analysis is rol jee with some anticipation ofthe cits aemptto got distance oni The second, an eitng ofa latent releivty ature wo the objet, fea clove cousin ofa Romantic cca amumprion I wil run ater in connection with an observation by Waker Benjamin. The ast fh in erin 36am act of exposure or demystifiaion, is an ate of faith in publicephere forms sled wo wht Ihave elsewhere called prinsiple of supervision In paranoid ccs i as become an imagi- ary and unmediated exposure, « power of mete knowingness. This ‘dh in exposure i often impli in wha goes by the name eign, making ber polemic aginst crcl cam, Sedgwick also seeks to atculie legitimate and promote a lose aay of alesatve com mentary forms among queer acm, which she groups under he ame “reparative reading.” Rearative reading styles im her view have in common a rhetoric of attachment, investment, and fancy about tir extualoccsions. For Sedgwick, thee represen ways of reading tha have been avoided or stigmatized as uncial. Tey ate certaialy rot prencupd with cca distance toward shir inerpretve objec Bu ie teparsive reading sutured program of reading oF expla tion? For the most past Sedgwick describes ita local, deal, and tungyscmaied, Even the patterns she singles out have this psa ehar acter, such 2 wllngness to describe fragments or passages without a toa schematization ofthe tet For this eaton, Sedawik’s reparative sealing seems ro be defined les by any project of ts own than by its recoil fom 2 manically programmatic intensification ofthe eric t ‘snot so much a method 3 principled) avoidance of method A tathes diferent pictare of evel reading and its uneritial oer «an be glimpsed inthe work of anthropologist Saba Malncod, ven though Mahmood it noe especially concerned with text Where ‘Sedgwick ses an exapgrrate cits being countered by patal prof ‘ct ofanachment and revit, Mahmood in avery different comext daw comtaet berwsen a eical ethic and another, ral sytem, often deemed uncritical, but equally xganized and methodized asa tical project. Ina searching analysis ofthe women's mosque move _ment in Egype, Mahmood shows its practical and ethical matt iy tecntially mistecogized hy feminists For thom che prsit of utonomized agency through ctcalrelloction is taken wo be che only legiimate form of subjectviy. Maheood works with women wha spire to be “saves of God." This apparent abneption of agency in ict sien out to be pursued by an elaborate program of rection, ssl practice, mutual coneesion, commentary, reasoning, habicformation, ‘nd corporal dicpline—in short, a culkivation of pier, Mahmood argues that piety inthis content cannoe be seen as an uncritical atci- fede, 0 survival of premodern tadition, oF pasty, or uncflesive conformity ic mast rather be een as an ethical project here “ethical” 's understood inthe terms of the later Foucault) that has a5 its end parculr conception ofthe human being. This conception is fund ‘mentally incommensurable with dat oferta izensip. And here Mahmood dr archer conclusion. Is not enough do extque ‘or itil reading ofthe piety movement, for this eaves unquestioned reiely whacis at sake namely che way the eniaming of knowledge 2 rial premppose project for being a cern kind of person. The ftandaid of the cdcal, Mahmood sugges, could and should be arochiaied intra aa ethical cpline of subjectivity rather han 2 he tanspareat medium of knowledge? ow could we extend Mahmood’ insight about che cccal to an understanding of crcl reading and is relation ro other, puraively unreal codes of reading? Mahmood does not here atalye the tesmull ars. Bot she dos note as germane eo her analysis tha the picts preference For recitation as mediation of Quranic text has 10 lo with the culcivasion ofa diated vemporalieyo inert mndane time and reframe daly routine. Recation and audion, in other son, ae taken i this coneat ro be tchniqes oat fo the incl cation of virtuous habies—nor asa pucaiely primordial “oral” chat would be the residual other of eras The imporane poine ia Mahmood: analy, hough enor just 2 diferent technique of txt. procesing, oa diferent atade about the ret abject, buts dleent Kind of subject to which the technique i vented, (Ceca ending and uncreal eaing, in this asin, would need to be distinguished not 10 much on che bass of diffrent technical methods, aoe ae reflective and unreecive versions ofthe mete pro cessing of texe arc, but as concracing ways in which various tch- niques and forms can be embeded in an etical problematic of sabjece formation —in the cae of tical eading, one arened of dom and autonomous agency agnnse the ckground of a modem sacl imaginary. In the contrast beeen esa iberal seelarism and the pity of the mosgite movement, the diference can be very deep ined, ia way mace newy salient by the current politica But where clues of retulsm and thee chal projects ae noe thrown ino such vid contrast by the conte of englabing sugges, i might be cary to mis the maanees by which reading pracces ae ‘embedded within and oxganized by ecicl projects for cultivating one kind of peron or another The broad contrase Mahmood deans becwsen secular erica and 2 specific waditon of blame piety in ‘other words, might be only the beginning leading sto recognize thac 2 gest varie of tex practices and ethical projects have been consol ‘te ce aiid to, the pine of cca reading—wih every thing le being le wothough as uncritical “Ta pose the problem of erica and uncial rein in this way i sslencw questions ut what count as cri, what ic might he shore than for, whic dsine projct might be caughe up inthe tar of the nc, nd how diferen eicl orientations might infec dierent ars of commentary or practios of tearobjectifiaion and texan ion. This of course fa vast project. eis not my intention to uerake these in any thorough way. can ncther give fl abs of che inde ‘of agency and sbjecivity shat have various pine been cased asext- ‘elo unerical oe show in dtl how they have been conceit ‘Eien extual are.Be can ry eo sggest some way ha thee gus ios can reframe exiting scholarship in the hiory and theory of read ing. Inthe remainder of shi say’ T eis some of the ain topo in scent sedis of the history of reading in order eo poe, rather than answet thi question: how hae vatious aro commentary and rites of textendering come oe inked to the eh projects organized on ‘he ax of he crcl andthe uncritical? Aad what might we sein his story iwe did no take rel seating 2 a nvixibe norm? " Swprisinghs given the volume of recent schoaship on the history of reading, I bave found no hisoy of the protocols and norm foe «dis line of ccal reading as such. Maybe chis should not be suprising Since lieray ces tend 0 think of crcl reading asthe necessary orm of ay sel conscious reading, chey seldom imagine tas the kind of prac tice that might have—as T think it does—a history. an intergenic mani of fons, dscpline.Hisorc of reang have been dominated ther by inquires ino the material forms of texts or by the sore of sim ple csifatons cat can be made by ouside observers without reer fence «© the normative oremations of readers (eg “entensive" vesus atesive”reling, sent or voclize, ce). les noe immediatly lar how httory of what count acta reading might be imagine, ‘wat leave reading disciplines night be miecogived as uncial ‘Thanks to he energies of some very inventive historians of the books however, ther isa lrge literature hat might be related to this topic: These historians have produced 2 new paradigm in which reading is understood as a highly variable pratcs, intimately ela cd to the mavrst organisation of texts. They have denaturzed ‘many of our assumptions about what it means to read. And thsi essential in grasping what critical or uncritia reading could mean, since the mental image of critical reading seems to requte at mini= mum clear opposition berween the text objec and the reading sub- ject—indeed, critical reading could be ehoughe of a¢ an ideal for maximising chat pelare, defining the reader freedom and agency asan exprcsion of distance fom a tex that must be objected a benchmark of dstanciation, Uneritieal Reading 2” ‘hiss precisely the src f assumprion abou what tens ate ad hove readers approach them (induing this idea thar texs are objects that readers “approach har the new historias of realing dispute. They have shown the centres of invasions inthe formalization of exly nsigable reese behind such a picture. Guglielmo Cavallo and Rogee (Charen thee survey of dhe ne histories of reading, not that here Isevidence fom scary asthe fourth or even fife cents BCE of“ reading syle capable of reading through a text and periting aren tive consideration, examination and probing of what was being ead.” “The great library of Alexandra, they note, gives evidence of specialized practices of entexmlization and the raonaliation of acces: lear univer bcae eas dedicated wo the presenation of ook of all ages and fom the ete known words ic wis onl bee the two contned wa tobe reduced to onder and wo acm of da tiicaton «that enable them to be aranged acing eho, wok an! content. That aniverliy and rani however, we ily dependent on wrvngs tha could be altd cell ope, pt ina book, cxeorzd and placed with other books. (10) (ur history migh evdendy be along one, if we dink of eel reading thie broad, Buc what doct "evaluated ctvcly” mean hex ‘This story usefully emphasas the material conditions for the object ‘ation and segmentation of discourse thar ate resupply he ideal of vical reading; and the contributors vo Cavallo and Charters book add enn eve, sch the trip of the codex format in adigiry to the elimination of pie continua inthe ate Middle Apes. ‘This scholarship har the grese advange of reminding us cha what wwe call erica reaing presupposes forme for textual objectification and a web of soil reations around ex objects. When ancient Greeks appointed reades-—in some ess saves—vhose tae war to vcaize texts of les or monuments so that audcors mighe reflex on them, ic would not have ssemed obvious tha the act of reading elf ad a ct ical orientation.” great many techniques of enraculzation have 10 be laminated together ro enable the fee movement of eal eal tion in relation oi objeces® Bur did rccal evaluation appear sche incytable meaning ofthe new procedures of text objection? And 2 cnael Warner could thar mean dhe sme ching forthe monks of Alsandria and for modern sents “The modern idea of ervcal reading cleatly dens on avery ld tr lion tha has gone under other names for most of hieor: Martin Irvine sees the tata! eueure of Wesem Burope a having had a emirkable continu fo more than 1200 year in the ares grommet ‘cae of the learned. Mest of the forms of emtexaination that ate now Simply taken foe granted inthe word tx developed ove this long it~ cory of guonmarca, with ts fourfold division ofthe semis imerprecan- ai: lio (cules for consteuing and eeciing)s enersio (cues for incepretaioa, including topes, topics, symtak and semantic) emendae Fo les for authenticating and correcting) and dic (vation)? “The modern idea of cial eading reorganies his eraiion,enflding the ase thie ofthe for eategores. And thee are many fetus of the Scholarly textual cule that of couse came to be paradigmatic of ‘until reading. For example the performance of rial reading ata made offre agency requires that ic nor be son a tit application of rules, inthe manner of grommatc. Ba because gommatie Reale 2 fundamental zelation between 2 sytematized analytic metlanguage and its coved entexulized objects critical reading could mowly the ‘mecapragmatic framework while maining moa ofthe older forms of ‘extual objection. The modem ides also continued the pattern in _prnmaice of imagining the wpecilized techniques of lieracy atthe ‘model of 2 much broader normative program —the fi of the liberal as. "Leaning, interpretiion, and rligius understanding,” levine ries, “weeall defined inthe terms of he lage ld of discourse that spreal ou from the practice of grammmtica in schools, bares and seritria"™ ‘Whar we mean by ec eaing obviously as deep roo, some phases of which (uch a humanist philology) have been sea with ‘more attention than others! The phrase cca radig ive, though commoaly taken by us ince amoral kind of reading—tight, ree Senalle ee an good, but ofen not mich more specific tan that — is, however, a ratively een coinage, is cuzent seas Being dificult ‘of before dhe eightecds century. ccan be dey seen it Romantic esthetic philosophy, where already i is fased with the concep ofthe Uncitial Resting 2 work of ar. This was demonstrated in a baliane work by the young, ‘Waler Benjamin ‘The immanent tendency ofthe wok nd, azcontingy he tnd for in immanent cris ae he eflsion tha isa basi aa imprnedin sFrm, Yeti in th, aoe so much sadard of judgment and foremost, the foundation of complet ier ‘nt kindof eicn—one whichis ot concerned with jing, and ‘whore emer of ry lie nein te etalon ofthe single wok but in demonsrating i elation all other works ad, imat tthe ies of ar. Civ of work is ets i fection, which ly ati elvien, old the gen ofthe reflection da i ima nent the wok... Fore value of wok depends leon whether ic makes its immanent eg position” With this conception of art, Romantic deepened the ideal of cial reading, a opposed to any other kindof reading, making, ic sem lke the unfolding ofthe necetry ofa tell From cis point the adjective evita acqutes a new since This conexprion res, however, on eater developmen sch 8 the apparent univeraization ofthe cal role inthe public sphere.” Ics imporance vo our pedagogy alos cerinly bas to do with cven ler velopment in the ate niezcrth and ely entree since ie cplicaes and makes possible the kind of discourse hat constitutes the profession isl. The critical reading we teach, in other words, might be lange projected fom our own rculatory paces. Tsp ies indeed an ewontial element oferta reading hae the oder be imagined 5 producer of dlacoure. Citcl reading i his cones, means discipline of commentary projected as immanent to reading, Butea explanation must go father dhe selP inert of profesionalzd rts is insuicient te exphin how a pofesion oriented ro che reaching of eric reading could jus uel aa necessity wo aonpeosionals. ‘Obvious, more iat sake than mere rext-proceing, at one cetteme, or the virosc texas of profesional itis, atthe ther tetteme, Because the techniques of dancatng knowledge ae ied ro ‘subjectivity forming aterisoward freedom and have comet define a Michael Warner agency in modern cata, 2 discipline of rita reading can dew on the widest cltral-historcal meanings of crits reson. We can se ‘his in fmmanvel Kane's “What is Enlghtenmiene,” which devs so much fom the idea ofeicl ceding “Ie is so easy wo be immature” Ihe exclaims in the second paragraph. “ICT havea book o have unde standing in place of me need not make any efor tall.” Kant ‘onerass this immature, replicase reading withthe public wse of ra 00, of which hie supreme example ies man oFlaring desing the cre sealing public.” His asumption, evident thatthe readers of ‘ha public mate ead diferety from the immature person The efor thac Kant chought readers should make in order to ted for themselves cakes oa, for him, the coloration of the rest of his proj cx cial reading i an image ofa certain kind of cia reason. And ‘hac asocation has let imprint. Kanes English ansaors wed the French word rtigue ro ranslate the German word frit thus rext- ing within English diflerenceherween criti and ertigue Thismay have been done ro capture the special Sense of drt in Kan a (i ‘Walter Benjamins phrase) “an esoteric term for che incomparable and «completed philosophical standpoint; bur its subsequene wage is much Broader Ever since, erica eading has been identified with an idea! of criiqe a negative movement af dsancation, whether ofdsen- ‘agement of repation, (eoncally this mighe be most tue within ‘uur suds, which often prides ise n ant-Kaninis) The 2 pre deal of continuity berween Kant pice of erica sealing and dominant ideologies of engin wenith-

    Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen