Search This Blog

Monday, April 19, 2010

Why Objectivity?

As much as I liked and appreciated Sloop’s lecture and article, I could not help but wonder “so what?” Sloop gathers discourse, but does not form an opinion on the material that he collects, which, for me, leaves many questions unanswered. Going into the Caster Semenya I had many thoughts about who defines gender, even in athletic settings, but when leaving the lecture, as informational as it was, I had the same questions. I think the reason that the group was never able to discuss the “What Lips These Lips Have Kissed” article is testament to the unanswered questions the group had. In the academic medium, opinion, from the critical theory we in English 397 have studied, seems to be imperative and obligatory, yet Sloop offers none. I have tried to consider reasons objectivity being advantageous, but critical theory class has taught me to be critical. And so, I suppose I fail to see the importance of objectifying the discourse, so, any input to enlighten my ignorance would be greatly appreciated.

1 comment:

  1. I had the same feelings about his presentation and the discussion with him during our class. After the question I asked after the lecture, which he left mostly unanswered because he didn't want to give an opinion, I couldn't help but feel like the lecture had no other purpose than simply collecting all the discourse in one place. Each question that formed in my head seemed useless because it involved some sort of opinion on Dr. Sloop's part. His presentation made me really consider what was discussed, but created questions I couldn't get answered by Sloop himself.