(August 2014)
Dense.
This is a compendium of two of Chomsky’s
older books, from when he was primarily known for his linguistic work rather
than his political stuff. It’s not an easy read, as reflected in
the fact I began it sometime in March. It starts, in
Language and Responsibility, with wider thoughts on public and
political discourse which are still bang on the money, then in the middle
section dips down into Generative Grammar, which I’m utterly unqualified to
talk about, and finally in the last third (i.e. most of
Reflections on Language) segues with an almost jarring seamlessness
into the settling of academic scores, which is always fascinating for the neutral
observer.* Especially when the more comprehensible sections are delivered in a
tone so patronizingly pompous as to be almost physically tangible. At this
point I’ll refer you all to
Sayre’s Law.
From what I’ve read of and about his more
recent political works it’s impossible not to have a healthy amount of respect
for Chomsky as a thinker and activist, but to be honest the main benefit of
reading this will probably be that I can now truthfully answer ‘yes’ the next
time anyone asks if I’ve read any of his linguistics material. Just so long as
there’s not a follow-up question…
*This is sarcasm.
There's a collection of interviews that took place with Chomsky right after the commencement of the second Gulf War where he mostly casually talks about the role of the U.S. in the world in the near future, and ten years later there isn't much he was wrong about at that time...
ReplyDeleteThe collection of interviews is a book called "Imperial Ambitions."
I suppose if I read "On Language", it'll be for the same reasons you have ;)
I should read more of his political books, mostly it's been in the forms of article or extracts. I should definitely read some complete books. There are bits in this about the manipulation of the media and the range of tolerated dissent that still ring true four decades later, sadly.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete'The reason the fights in academia are so bitter is because the stakes are so... small.'
ReplyDeleteChomsky. Props to his political writing, though as many a left-academic, he's forgotten the point is to convince people with communicative writing.* That's only been a problem since long before Orwell wrote essays about British champagne-socialists. His linguistics? Neither am I wanting follow up questions, though having read précis of it** I'll better understand it than if I'd read it from the horse's ass, but it doesn't seem to mirror, you know, empirical evidence.
*Late Chalmers Johnson's a better read, among others.
**How I managed not to fail a course on Hegel. 'Oh, it's not profound and difficult, merely very poorly written and protected by a cult.'
"as many a left-academic, he's forgotten the point is to convince people with communicative writing."
DeleteAs luck would have it, I was in a discussion about Richard Dawkins just the other day ;)