The Misdiagnosis of Critique.

Eve Sedgwick's diagnosis of "theory" as "paranoid" has been utilized to authorize a range of critical interventions, including the most recent call by Rita Felski for a new era of "postcritique" (2015). The status of Sedgwick's essay in shaping contemporary discourse—"arguably the origin of the read...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Criticism Vol. 61; no. 2; pp. 191 - 218
Autor principal: Ashtor, Gila
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wayne State University Press Spring2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=137659375&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 137659375
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00111589
        CIS
      jtl: Criticism
      issn: 00111589
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Spring2019
      vid: 61
      iid: 2
      pid: 426
      pub: Wayne State University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        137659375
        10.1353/crt.2019.a730036
      ppf: 191
      ppct: 27
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 374KB
      tig:
        atl: The Misdiagnosis of Critique.
      aug:
        au: Ashtor, Gila
      su:
        Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky, 1950-2009
        Felski, Rita
        Hermeneutics
        Queer theory
        Critical discourse analysis
      sug:
        subj:
          Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky, 1950-2009
          Felski, Rita
          Hermeneutics
          Queer theory
          Critical discourse analysis
      ab: Eve Sedgwick's diagnosis of "theory" as "paranoid" has been utilized to authorize a range of critical interventions, including the most recent call by Rita Felski for a new era of "postcritique" (2015). The status of Sedgwick's essay in shaping contemporary discourse—"arguably the origin of the reading debates" (Love, 2017)—makes it a crucial site for exploring the current denunciations of "critique." In spite of the tremendous popularity of the "paranoid" diagnosis, there has been a total absence of any attention to the "queer" context of Sedgwick's essay. The disregard for this queer context is significant for how it facilitates the habitual misreading of Sedgwick's critique. However, rather than attributing strategic decontextualization to the agenda of contemporary "postcritical" readers alone, my own inquiry is interested in how Sedgwick misdiagnoses her own intervention and, specifically, the ways in which Sedgwick's particular framing of the problem—as between "paranoid" and non-"paranoid" reading—fatally constrains any useful hypostatization of critique's limitations. In addition to a close engagement with the terms of Sedgwick's "paranoid" diagnosis, this essay contextualizes Sedgwick's intervention in hermeneutics, and Queer Theory specifically, in order to challenge the two major avenues of Sedgwick's critical reception: in the reading debates, as "reparative" against "theory" tout court , and by Affect Theory, as beyond sexuality and therefore "post-psychological." In an effort to sharpen the terms of the current reading debates, this essay further locates Sedgwick's intervention in a broader tradition of "practical critiques," by which I mean interventions made by critics against a theoretical apparatus that seems, to them, to compromise the "quality" of reading. This essay maps contemporary critical discourse onto two categories, "sociological" and "speculative" reading, in order to explain the differences between interpretive paradigms.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Criticism is the property of Wayne State University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Criticism
      holder: Wayne State University Press
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2019
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N