Case Notes for the Impeachment of an Ability Traitor: A Textor’s Inquiry

Abstract

These case notes are a response to “An ability traitor at work: A treasonous call to subvert writing from within.” The notes analyze Holbrook’s treachery despite her own admission of guilt. The inquiry is meant to provide firmer grounds for impeachment. The main accusation is that, as an able teacher and writer, Holbrook appears guilty of a trahison des clercs. The case writer is, like Holbrook, a textor, a weaver of threads, a fabricator of texts. The four main allegations woven into the text examine Holbrook as a writer who apparently betrays the essay form, a traitor who disrupts the view from nowhere, a promoter of assemblage as another betrayal of writing, and as a treasonous producer of a “dis/comfort text.” The main outcome of this textor’s inquiry is that the only treachery committed by Holbrook is more apparent than real.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ash, T.G. ( 2002, November 16). Truth is another country. The Guardian, pp. 4-6.

Atwood, M. ( 2002). Negotiating with the dead: A writer on writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Baker, C. (Ed.). (1981). Ernest Hemingway: Selected letters 1917-1961. London: Granada.

Badley, G. ( 2010a). Academic scribbling: A frivolous approach? Teaching in Higher Education (in press).

Badley, G. ( 2010b). Valuing essays: Essaying values. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 15(1), 103-115.

Badley, G. ( 2009a). Academic writing as shaping and reshaping. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 209-219.

Badley, G. ( 2009b). Academic writing: Contested knowledge in the making? Quality Assurance in Education, 17(2), 104-117.

Barthes, R. ( 1968). Image-Text-Music (ed. S. Heath) London : Fontana. (Original work published 1977)

Cohen, J.M. ( 1958). Introduction to Montaigne’s essays. New York: Penguin.

10.

Culler, J. ( 1983). Barthes: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

11.

Derrida, J. ( 1978). Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences. In Writing and difference (Trans. A. Bass, pp. 278-294). London: Routledge.

12.

Derrida, J. ( 1979) Scribble (writing-power; trans. C. Plotkin). Yale French Studies, 58, 117-147.

13.

Eddington, A. ( 1921). Space, time and gravitation. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.

14.

Fine, A. ( 2004). The viewpoint of no one in particular. In W. Eggington & M. Sandbothe (Eds.), The pragmatic turn in philosophy. New York: SUNY Press.

15.

Freire, P. ( 1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York : Penguin.

16.

Holbrook, T. ( 2010). An ability traitor at work: A treasonous call to subvert writing from within. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(3), 171-183.

17.

Kincheloe, J. ( 2004). Introduction: The power of the bricolage: expanding research methods. In J. Kincheloe & K. Berry (Eds.), Rigour and complexity in educational research: Conceptualizing the bricolage (pp.1 - 22). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.

18.

Lévi-Strauss, C. ( 1966). The savage mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. (Original work published 1962 )

19.

Montaigne, M. De. ( 1958). Essays (Trans. & intr. J. M. Cohen). New York: Penguin. (Original work published 1580).

20.

Nagel, T. ( 1986). The view from nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press.

21.

Putnam, H. ( 1981). Reason, truth, and history. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.

22.

Richards, P. ( 1986). Risk. In H. Becker (Ed.), Writing for social scientists (pp. 108-120). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

23.

Rorty, R. ( 1998). Truth and progress: Philosophical papers (Vol. 3). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

24.

Rorty, R. ( 1999). Achieving our country: Leftist thought in twentieth-century America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

25.

Usher, R. ( 1996). Textuality and reflexivity in educational research. In D. Scott & R. Usher (Eds.), Understanding educational research (pp. 33-51). London : Routledge.