It’s been a busy week and I’m just now plowing through the end of this book. Not too long to go- I’m in “Movements.” I’m presenting tomorrow so I am just gonna throw out some ideas about the second half. In terms of striving to map a ideology or progression I’m kinda with her. The partisan debate can ignore vital signs (although there is something to be said for the dialectic). In the introduction she does a lot of interesting speculation on the inability of policy and reflection to adequately assess the present or the past. Considering Kevin’s endorsement this morning and the endeavor of this class, it seems apt (even if classless) to draw comparisons to McCain and Obama. A quick comment on leadership. McCain is more the black/white, good/evil, Reagan era. In a world of New Media (let’s forget everything else for brevity’s purpose) this approach is dangerously inadequate. While Obama is by no means Tsing’s ideal, he is an attempt at balance in approach to multi-faceted situations- a step way from stare down competitions. Most voting for McCain, I suspect, truly believe in the black/white.
Anyway, as for form in Tsing’s book- it is garish, not environmentally conscious (as in it is much longer than the material warrants), and condescending. It’s one thing to condescend academics or your subjects or your readers… but to do all three? Obnoxious. Here, drawing back on earlier readings, is exactly why it is important to have a firmer methodology for academic work. As I read, I am tempted to critique it as a journal or memoir. In which case she would not be doing very well. Actually, to be honest, it would be better if it were a journal and least then I might pretend she didn’t realize other people were going to read it. I’m thinking specifically about “Weediness” and on…. who knows, I’ll go finish it now and maybe change my mind but her writing is irritating when she veers away from academic topics.
