Neri/OT: Intro/Theorising

[Talisman]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" <nkafkafi at y...> 
wrote:
> But I begin to suspect you aren't familiar with my own Faith 
>posts. If not, you can find them in 116369, 116370, 116371 and 
>116373. These posts present my view of Faith and theorizing, using 
>an actual new theory as a test case.

Talisman, rubs her weary eyes and dips her quill in a vile of 
smoldering liquid:

Dear Neri,

Thank you so much for the four lengthy posts you proffered for our 
illumination.  As I read them I was struck by the subtlety and depth 
of your workmanship.  Knowing that many of the most scandalous 
theorists have had the dubious benefits of advanced education, you 
courteously held your rudimentary lessons in the hermeneutic cycle 
to a minimum within the vast expanses of  "Mind-linked!Snape
Mk.1," posts 1 through 4.  

Why then, I paused to ask, did you exert yourself in this extended 
satire, when you could have initiated the great unwashed to the 
salubrity of employing a corrigible hypothesis, refined and 
ultimately validated (or not) by reference to the text, it's 
structure, and even relevant externalities, in as many words? 

I think I've finally got it: In comedy, timing is everything.   
Right?

Another important lesson you brought home with stinging clarity was 
that endnotes are a deplorable convention to employ in this 
format.  Although I don't believe I have ever been in danger of 
committing such an error, I hope that your sacrifice will enable 
future generations to avoid this pernicious trap for the unwary.

Moreover, by burying your citations to canon at the end of 
interminable verbiage (requiring scrolling not to be undertaken 
without sufficient quantities of Dramamine) and excising all 
relevant context, you achieved in one swoop a credible mimesis of  
both those who omit canon altogether, and those who contort it for 
their own preferences.   

Additionally, failing to provide page numbers for your cites 
cleverly reveals this as an annoying roadblock for the reader who 
wishes to verify your analysis.  Let's just hope you haven't 
inadvertently encouraged the Philistines by your efficacy. 

And, by building your airy epic on a foundation of highly suspect 
statements, made by known dissemblers, in contexts where they might 
been seen to wish to mislead, you reinforce that all-important need 
to relate the parts to the whole, quite nicely.

But the coup de grâce, really, is your exposé of Faith for what
she is.  While she may have started out as a noble ideal, she has 
long since fallen into the wrong hands. I'm afraid our Faith has an  
unfortunate tendancy to rely on the intellectual kindness of 
strangers, which has left her little more than a leering whore, all 
too willing to satisfy the personal preferences of her instant 
client.  

Apparently you like a lot of leash in the beginning.  So we see 
Faith obediently give you as much latitude as you want. She finds 
some of your most gymnastic syllogisms credible and praises you for 
spinning pure fan fiction to knit together improbabilities. Indeed, 
she is most amazingly elastic throughout the arduous labors of your 
epic. Nonetheless, at the end, when it serves your purposes and 
pleasure to receive the spanking, she dutifully whacks you in the 
ass. 

Never was there so clear a demonstration of the dangers of trusting 
Faith for an honest opinion.  For Faith, all tricked out in the 
frippery of objectivity and truth, in fact emanates from the minds 
of individual readers. 

These readers are products of the prevailing ideology of 
their society, bound in an inferior position to forces that 
dictate their mores and attitudes. By and large they conform, 
thoughtlessly, comfortably, without even perceiving the cage. The 
ability to achieve freedom, or the individual initiative of an 
unpolluted perspective, is rare.  To the extent an author is able to 
exhibit this, it can only be acknowledged by readers who are 
likewise able to penetrate self-deception at a much deeper level 
than merely loving their theories too much. 

In the majority of cases, where readers cannot penetrate the 
profound saturation of ideology, mistaken as it is for verity, they 
will merely "appropriate" (a historist's term of art) the
text, which is to say they will cause it to conform to their own 
comfortable assumptions and preferences.

It is axiomatic to say that most readings are mediocre, conformist 
and therefore, bound in ideology.  In the context of this series, we 
could say these appropriations are Muggle readings. 

Because the norm is determined by the conforming ideology, piercing 
insights are necessarily outliers.  Crazy ideas promulgated by 
lunatics.  "Misfits," as Rowling calls her wizards, who see
what Muggle eyes can`t see, and accept what Muggles explain away. 
(E.g.The lists of ways Dumbledore has "screwed up" or whispers
that Rowling must have erred again: so sad that she's so poor at 
characterization.)

Yes, and if ridicule won't shut them up, bring out the pitchforks,
the stake, or a good rope. 

Though eventually even the  hoi polloi come to see that Earth 
revolves around the sun.  (Usually after the theorist is good and 
safely dead.) To the extent that they must, the masses will be seen 
absorbing radical ideas slowly and only after constructing careful 
explanations that will protect the larger social construct from too 
much upheaval.

The problem is not that Faith is a bitch, but that she is 
everybody's Bitch.

Inasmuch as Paul Ricoeur has been invoked, perhaps you were 
actually advocating a more vigorous role for his alternate 
character, Suspicion. Rather than being something to avoid,  
Suspicion is an essential tool for piercing self-delusion.  
Suspicion is not Faith's enemy, for he may well be the only
entity with a chance of making an honest woman of her. Though, as he 
emanates from the same source, there is no guarantee.

So, while it's kind of you to employ Faith so vigorously, in
hopes of disabusing deluded theorists, you mustn't allow it to cause
you to neglect yourself, or Charity for that matter. Who reminds you 
to begin at home.

Thanks so much for the lovely tips,

Talisman
For the Fellowship of the D.U.S.T. (Dumbledore Undercover 
Surveillance Team)