While you work on your final self-eval, etc., a little food for thought (vegan, of course):

How Far Should We Carry the Logic of the Animal-Rights Movement?

Kelefa Sanneh reviews “Animal Liberation Now,” by Peter Singer; “Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility,” by Martha Nussbaum; “Fear Factories,” by Matthew Scully; and “Our Kindred Creatures,” by Bill Wasik and Monica Murphy.

It’s an interesting survey of recent work in “animal rights” that follows more of the liberal/pragmatic strain of philosophy rather than the French theory strain we read (Deleuze-Guattari, Derrida, Haraway, Wolfe). But very interesting to see the problems that arise when jumping off from the egalitarian notion of common “rights” rather than the “limitrophy” of Derrida.

Hasta luego, and have a great summer!

A bit early, I’m posting the final questions for the supplementary essay (for A Contract Students Only). A few notes:

Answer ONE of the four questions

Follow directions carefully: download the file and write the response on the template. Other file formats are fine (Pages, .pdf, whatever).

Due Wednesday at 5pm via email. One day late gets you a “minus” and more constitutes a breach of contract and bumps you to a B contract.

Here’s the template and GOOD LUCK: 306 exam template

Prior to discussing Derrida’s essay tomorrow, I wanted to share the wonderful obituary that Professor of Religion Mark Taylor (one of my early mentors at Williams College) wrote upon Derrida’s death in 2004:

Opinion | What Derrida Really Meant (Published 2004)

Op-Ed article by Prof Mark C Taylor says Jacques Derrida, who died last week, will be remembered as one of three most important philosophers of 20th century, along with Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger; says no thinker in last 100 years has had greater impact on people in more fields and different disciplines than Derrida, and no thinker has been more deeply misunderstood; explains what he meant by deconstruction; drawing (M)

Taylor nicely lays out the stakes of Derrida’s philosophy, often accused of undermining all foundations for ethics and moral judgment, as an enterprise deeply invested in moral and even religious questions. We see this in the very late essay (2002) that we’re reading together, where he goes “back to the beginning,” in a sense, troubling foundational moments in the mythic heritage of Western thought, asking us to rethink our ideas about what it means to be “human” and “animal” at once, what it means to use language (or be used by it), and what it means to “thicken,” as he says, the boundaries between concepts, rather than make defending them a life-or-death proposition.

All this is especially relevant this week, as we see colleges and universities turned upside-down, with college administrators ushering in police and expelling/suspending/encouraging arrest of students, staff, and faculty engaged in peaceful protest.

I can’t help but think of the high profile rats have gotten in Mayor Adams’s tenure. Meet the Rat Czar, who addresses herself to the manifestation of rattus rattus (Public Enemy #1)** as “becoming-rat”:

Mayor Adams Anoints Kathleen Corradi as NYC’s First-Ever ‘Rat Czar’

Mayor Adams Anoints Kathleen Corradi as NYC’s First-Ever ‘Rat Czar’

** Actually it might be billionaires who pay an average of 8.2% federal taxes, due to making a vast amount of their income from investments.

As fate would have it, the NYT served up a very Deleuze and Guattari-themed bit of culture today. [nope: not gonna rest until you get your free CUNY subscription].

The practices described unfold within what its 20 participants call a “polycule” based in the Boston area, in what seems to be a neologism that steals from D+Gs molecular/molar distinction. They are committed to sharing, yes, sex, but also dwelling space, intimacy, some possessions and money, in some cases legal marriage, and more, but very much within a subsuming meta-rule that refuses the kind of contracts, promises, and exclusions that characterize what D+G call “filiation,” the “arboreal,” rooted identity, and so on.

Look, I’m pretty boring (arborial, even) in my actual life, for better or for worse. But it is fascinating to see how these ideas from D+G from 1980 and from the rarified air of “theory” have percolated out (or rhizomatically propagated themselves) into culture in this form (and in many others).

I haven’t finished the study questions yet, but I highly recommend you read this brief but extremely helpful summary of the excerpt we’re reading from A Thousand Plateaus. It’s kind of unfair for me to drop this material on you, when we haven’t read at least the intro of the work (it’s in the Norton, for those who want to go the extra mile), but this piece gives us enough light to read by, glossing terms like “minor” and “minority,” “rhizomatic” and “arborescent,” “molecular” and “molar,” etc. in D/Gs work.

You would also do well to read the headnote to D and G in the Norton: it’s also pretty brief and gives a great overview.

Finally, and on a lighter note, here’s a link to a performance of “Ben,” the title cut from the soundtrack of the film Ben, which is the sequel (!) to the killer rat film, Willard (!!) that D/G mention. Michael Jackson, ladies and gentlemen, at fourteen. What an incandescent talent, whatever came afterwards. Also, I’m pretty sure I had that groovy wide-collar shirt.

No Title

CLICK TO SUBSCRIBE: http://bit.ly/1reuGJV Follow us on TWITTER: https://twitter.com/scream_factory Follow us on FACEBOOK: http://on.fb.me/1ojljJS Willard Stiles (Bruce Davison, Insidious: Chapter 4) is a young man with a big problem. He lives alone in a crumbling house with his ailing mother (Elsa Lanchester, Arnold, Bride of Frankenstein).

Someone (I can’t remember who) was asking to see the syllabus, etc. for my 252 that has a climate fiction theme. Here goes, and see you tomorrow:

https://engl252fa23.commons.gc.cuny.edu