Elizabeth S. Anker, Associate Professor of English at Cornell University and Professor of Law in the Cornell Law School, discusses her book 'On Paradox' and critiques the role of paradox in left intellectualism. She argues for a theory toolkit that escapes the traps of paradox and explores alternatives to critical theory. Topics include the paradox of rights, challenging the liberal understanding of money, and the limitations of trauma theory.
Trauma theory can limit our vocabulary and dominate discourse on victimization and injury, potentially discrediting certain forms of trauma.
The constant focus on highlighting exclusion in humanities fields can lead to infighting and hinder productive engagement with other pressing issues.
The style of reasoning through paradox in critical theory can become routinized, reinforce the power structures being critiqued, and be easily appropriated by different groups.
Deep dives
The Dominance of Trauma Theory and Its Limitations
Trauma theory arose in the academy in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, gaining popularity as a framework for understanding and addressing trauma. Initially focused on the trauma of the Holocaust, it drew from psychoanalysis and deconstruction. While it has brought about positive changes in our understanding of victimization and injury, it has also been critiqued for dominating our discourse on these issues. By becoming the dominant framework, it can limit our vocabulary and leave little room for other perspectives. Additionally, there is a concern about how trauma theory can be hijacked and used to discredit certain forms of trauma. Trauma theory draws from an understanding that trauma endows victims with privileged insight, but this can lead to a paradoxical expectation that pain and suffering have inherent ethical value.
The Problematic Paradox of Exclusion
The project of giving voice to exclusion has become a pervasive aspect of humanities fields, but it can also create problems. The constant focus on highlighting exclusion can lead to infighting and internal divides within these disciplines. It also prevents critical judgments about the severity and magnitude of different sites of exclusion, hindering the prioritization of resources and action. Furthermore, this logic of exclusion being applied universally can obscure the differences between various forms of exclusion and hinder productive engagement with other pressing issues. Additionally, this approach can be easily appropriated, leading to misappropriation and the perpetuation of exclusionary practices.
The Paradoxical Nature of Critical Theory
Critical theory, particularly its style of reasoning through paradox, has had a significant impact on academic fields. This approach, originating from aesthetic theories and literary studies, has influenced discussions on gender, rights, and modernity. However, there are limitations to this style of thinking. It can become routinized, leading to predictable conclusions and a reluctance to engage in critical judgment. It also tends to reinforce the power of what is being critiqued. Additionally, this approach can be easily appropriated, misused, and co-opted by different groups. By recognizing its limitations, scholars can supplement this style of thinking with other approaches to foster more nuanced and constructive analysis.
Questioning Legal Skepticism
There is a pervasive skepticism of law within certain humanities fields, which can hinder productive engagement with legal systems. This skepticism often leads to a dismissal of the value of law and a distrust of its ability to address social injustices. However, this stance can limit the potential impact of legal action and prevent critical analysis of the complexities and nuances within legal systems. By questioning this skepticism and engaging with legal frameworks, scholars can more effectively address social and political issues.
Critique of Trauma Theory
The podcast episode explores the critique of trauma theory and its limitations. Trauma theory is often seen as focusing only on specific, isolatable injuries, neglecting more systemic forms of injustice and harm. This narrow definition can exclude certain injuries from being recognized as trauma and neglect the pervasive nature of violence and injury in everyday life. Moreover, trauma theory tends to use a recurring formal logic that levels and erases meaningful differences between trauma experiences. While trauma theory emphasizes the unverifiability of trauma, it may hinder our ability to engage in documentary labor and recognize normative differentiation. The episode highlights the need to move beyond trauma theory and consider alternative approaches that focus on broader conditions of harm and contemplate the right actions and fight for justice beyond the confines of intelligible injuries.
Confessional Mode in the Classroom
The podcast episode discusses the prevalence of the confessional mode in trauma theory classrooms. This pedagogical approach encourages students to confess their own experiences of injury as a way to authorize their voices and gain a speaker's position. However, this confessional mode can trivialize injuries and overlook the complexities of trauma. It also assumes that symbolic change within the classroom will translate into real-world action, which may be overly optimistic. The episode raises concerns about the effectiveness of this type of pedagogy and suggests that consciousness raising in the classroom needs to go beyond confession and address broader questions about justice and effective strategies for change.
Elizabeth S. Anker joins Money on the Left to discuss her provocative new book, On Paradox: The Claims of Theory (Duke University Press, 2022). Anker is Associate Professor of English at Cornell University and Professor of Law in the Cornell Law School. In On Paradox, Anker contends that faith in the logic of paradox has been the cornerstone of left intellectualism since the second half of the twentieth century. She attributes the ubiquity of paradox in the humanities to its appeal as an incisive tool for exposing and dismantling hierarchies. Anker, however, suggests that paradox not only generates the very exclusions it critiques but also creates a disempowering haze of indecision.
Tracing the ascent of paradox in theories of modernity, in rights discourse, in the history of literary criticism and the linguistic turn, and in the transformation of the liberal arts in higher education, Anker shows that reasoning through paradox has become deeply problematic: it engrains a startling homogeneity of thought while undercutting the commitment to social justice that remains a guiding imperative of theory. Rather than calling for a wholesale abandonment of such reasoning, Anker argues for an expanded, diversified theory toolkit that can help theorists escape the seductions and traps of paradox. In our conversation, we explore strong parallels between Anker’s call for a reparative “integrative criticism” and our own constructive hermeneutics of provision.
