Oh, come. Let's not give Derrida-ish wankers the same rights as us humans.
On 13 Oct 2010 19:30, <supriya.n...@gmail.com> wrote: (Apologies for top-posting, via phone) If a lay reader's criticism of a theorist's language is legitimate, is a layperson equally right to criticise technical language in a scientific discussion that her education has not equipped her to follow, as obtuse? If so, can I bring up the criticism the next time a Silk thread begins on developments in, say, physics, or computer science? If not, why not? Is it because cultural theory owes it to laypeople to be less academic, or to adopt more egalitarian stances? If this is so, why should it be strange that a theorist talks about her own identity in a talk which, going by its title is about -- herself? Why does her choice of name or her reference to her background come up out of context as a matter for discussion? Genuinely curious. Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel -----Original Message----- From: Sruthi Krishnan <srukr...@gmail.com> Sender: silklist-bounces+supr... Reply-To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Subject: Re: [silk] The subaltern studies collective? > Or more...
