| |||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
With her trademark wit and style, Ronell prepares us for this post-critical critique right up front: "Stupidity exceeds and undercuts materiality, runs loose, wins a few rounds, recedes, gets carried home in a clutch of denial-and returns. Essentially linked to the inexhaustible, stupidity is also that which fatigues knowledge and wears down history." And more, still from the very first page: "I hesitate to say here what stupidity is because, eluding descriptive analysis, it switches and regroups, turns around and even fascinates.... While stupidity is 'what is there,' it cannot be simply located or evenly scored." Right at the beginning stupidity is both linked to "the most dangerous failures of human endeavor" and also associated (via Nietzsche) with the promotion of "life and growth"--it's linked both to error (where philosophy would like to keep it) and to sheer thought (the near stupor and extreme surrender involved in the poetic act).
There are sections in the work that are explicitly political, where Ronell zeros in on the "secret beneficiaries of stupidity's hegemony," examining, for example, the invention of the word moron, a label meaning "a little below average," which routinely has been slapped on immigrant children to justify holding them back. But Stupidity makes a larger (less explicitly and more astonishingly) political gesture: it exposes a kind of "transcendental stupidity" that appears to operate structurally, at and as the very ground of our being and of our being-with. Though stupidity is usually something that is loaded up and pointed at others, in the name of truth or morals or whatever, Ronell brings it home, redescribing it--to switch metaphors--as a kind of over-arching dome within which all claims to knowledge and intelligence take place. The ethical implications of this observation are profound. Though an imperative to understand does and must remain operative, one is not capable finally of *having understood* (fully). Indeed, Ronell suggests that the only possible ethical position may be: "I am stupid before the other."
"From the culture that has been inscribed by Marx and Nietzsche as being inextricably involved with stupidity - German "culture" has brought us Simplicius Simplicissimus, the Taugenichts, Eulenspiegel, the schlemiel, and other literary cognates of historical dumbing - we also have, owing to Robert Musil, a number of intense reflections on what constitutes stupidity, its figural status and serial developments as something of a concept."
I kept reading waiting for the other shoe to drop. For the self-irony to be acknowledged. For the book to become interesting and readable; humorous. It never happened, and I came to the horrible realization that this was, in fact, a dead serious, completely impenetrable, unreadable book on the subject of stupidity. As such, I can only deem it stupid.
Not only that, but it is full of jargon and obscure jargon and unexplained literary references, an example of academia at its most loathsome and most removed from the real world.
It reminds me of the words of a much better commentator on foolishness, John Ralston Saul (whose books I all recommend most highly), regarding the degredation of language by philosophers and other specialists.
"The example of philosophy actually verges on comedy. Socrates, Descartes, Bacon, Locke and Voltaire did not write in a specialized dialect. They wrote in basic Greek, French and English and they wrote for the general reader of the day. Their language is clear, eloquent and often both moving and amusing. The contemporary philosopher does not write in the basic language of our day. He is not acceptable to the public. . . . This means that almost anyone with a precent pre-university level education can still pick up Bacon or Descartes, Voltaire or Locke and read them with both ease and pleasure. Yet even a university graduate is hard pressed to make his way through interpretations of these same thinkers by leading contemporary intellectuals..."
Somewhere in the process of reading about and buying this book I saw Avital Ronell described as something along the lines of a leading contemporary intellectual. This book certainly establishes that in my mind...
|