Via An und für sich, Stanford UP’s blog is hosting a series of posts this week thinking back on the now completed Homo Sacer series (schedule here). First up is Adam Kotsko’s considerations of Agamben’s digressive style.
Most of this offers good advice (h/t Christina Daigle on FB): don’t have titles that are too punny or silly, really pay attention to your abstract and first couple of pages, realize if you cite someone and we editors need ideas for reviewers, they might be used first, etc. But I would say the first rule is to read the darn journal before submitting–it’s amazing how many desk rejects are just simply because it’s not a fit for what the journal publishes. This below is a bit strong:
Do not — repeat, do not — complain to the editor about the reader reports you receive. (Find a friend, a mentor, or a therapist for that.)
Don’t complain, but you can defend your work without being defensive: give an argument (we try, but don’t always screen well bad reports), but don’t pretend editors won’t roll their eyes when you suggest your work is simply being oppressed by mean referees.
At LARB here. Oliver argues for two philosophical (read: ethical/political) implications of recent applications of Title IX in American universities:
There are at least two profound philosophical implications to be drawn …First, educational institutions are held responsible for creating the environment allowing, if not fostering, sexual violence; or, conversely, and more to the point, they are held responsible for creating an ethos fostering women’s education, which is not possible when one out of four college women is sexually assaulted and gender-based violence is a constant threat. The new use of Title IX marks a dramatic change in the attribution of responsibility for sexual assault and rape. …Second, the use of Title IX in cases of sexual assault on campus switches the focus away from individual victims to gender-based violence. Rather than single out women as random targets of assault, or, as it happens too often, blame them for their own attacks through suggestions that they were asking for it by wearing provocative clothes, behaving in certain ways, or drinking, the focus shifts to the environment in which women are under a constant threat of being sexually assaulted.
Stuart Elden has a short piece in India Today, ‘The legacies of the Leave EU vote’: Article in India Today on ‘The legacies of the Leave EU vote’ | Progressive Geographies