In reference to the comments about all this intellectual decay being traced back to the French theorists: The feminists criticized the theorists like Derrida and Foucault precisely for being theoretical; the feminists then posited their own theories, which were rooted in the material world, the “body,” because women as birth-givers are necessarily more connected to the body. This is a presumably female way of thinking. Hence, “phallic logic.” Thus, the feminists themselves presented logic and theory as masculine and body and emotion as feminine. In their mishmash, however, they used many of the tools of these deconstructionists in their own deconstructions of privileged masculine writing. (Yes, feminist “scholarship” is full of contradictions.) So I disagree with posters who claim that Oprahization came from the postmodern theorists. They, instead, were criticized by feminists for being coolly removed from the very real suffering of the “other” in her body.
Judy R’s, Lisa’s, and Mary Jackson’s charges of “sexism” are predictable. The takeover of English departments by women en masse I think is in large part responsible for the loss of esteem for the discipline. It was not that way when Allen Tate could write about the role of the “Man of Letters.” But scientific studies back up my generalizations about women as a group. Notice, again, that I did not say that women–and yes those besides myself–are incapable of earning advanced degrees, teaching, and even running departments and schools. Socrates said it and Larry Summers said it: women are wired differently. That’s why there aren’t as many female engineers and tycoons.
And, yes, I am arguing for a return of the “man of letters” as the dominant mode to restore dignity to the study of literature. The femiinists are driving away potential English majors. Perhaps, female domination in an intellectual endeavor is a bad thing. Think about other group dynamics. When women get together they talk about fashion, relationships, gossip. Think about a bridal shower or girls night out. Conversely, what do men do? They focus on activities that involve goals, competition, rules–in other words, sports.
In the humanities, at one time, one idea was tested against another, the common goal of truth or a correct interpretation was aimed for, and a commonly held set of rules refereed the enterprise which was conducted through vigorous debate (rather than crying). Maybe this is, as the feminists claim, a masculine way of proceeding. But in the realm of higher learning it is the superior way.
