In the neoliberal academy, scholars must regularly create multiple texts (e.g., statements about research agendas, CVs, tenure-related research narratives) about themselves and their work to produce themselves as subjects whose research can be described, quantified, and slotted into commonly accepted categories (e.g., fundable, high impact, quality, data driven). In this article, we question what is lost when it becomes natural and desirable to be recognizable as a singular and coherent brand within neoliberalism. Specifically, we make coherence visible as a mechanism of neoliberal audit culture rather than a stable scholarly goal. To do that, we engage with various textual strategies and media that enable us to think of and enact coherence differently again and again. We hope working both within and against coherence as a mechanism of neoliberalism opens a perpetual sensitivity about authorship, ownership, and coherent scholarship and welcomes the unknown and unforeseen in our academic careers.
BaccoliniR.MoylanT. (2003). Dark horizons: Science fiction and the dystopian imagination. New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
BanselP.DaviesB.GannonS.LinnellS. (2008). Technologies of audit at work on the writing subject: A discursive analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 673-683.
3.
BrownW. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism’s stealth revolution. Brooklyn, NY: Zone Books.
4.
ButlerJ. (1997). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York, NY: Routledge.
5.
ButlerJ. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge.
6.
CannellaG. (2015). Qualitative research as living within/transforming complex power relations. Qualitative Inquiry, 21, 594-598.
7.
CaputoJ. (2012). Teaching the event: Deconstruction, hauntology, and the scene of pedagogy. Philosophy of Education, 17, 23-34.
8.
CaputoJ.DickinsonT. W. (2012). Education as event: A conversation with John D. Caputo. Journal for Cultural and Religious Theory, 12, 25-46.
9.
DaviesB. (2005). The (im)possibility of intellectual work in neoliberal regimes. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 26, 1-14.
10.
DaviesB.BanselP. (2010). Governmentality and academic work: Shaping the hearts and minds of academic workers. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 26, 5-20.
11.
DerridaJ. (1974). Of grammatology (SpivakG. C. Trans.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Original work published 1967).
12.
DerridaJ. (1992). Force of the law: The “mystical foundation of authority.” In CornelllD.RosenfeldM.CarlsonD. (Eds.), Deconstruction and the possibility of justice (pp. 3-67). New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
DerridaJ. (2002). Negotiations: Interventions and interviews, 1971-2001 (RottenbergE. Ed. & Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
14.
FoucaultM. (1996). The masked philosopher. In LotringerS. (Ed.), Foucault live: Interviews, 1961-1984 (pp. 302-312). New York, NY: Semiotext(e). (Original work published 1980).
15.
FoucaultM. (2000). Power (FaubionJ., Ed.). New York, NY: The New Press.
16.
FreemanJ. (1989). Layers of meaning: The multiple readings of Dada and surrealist word-images. In FreemanJ. (Ed.), The Dada and surrealist word-image (pp. 13-56). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
GirouxH. (2002). Neoliberalism, corporate culture, and the promise of higher education: The university as a democratic public sphere. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 425-463.
HerrmannA. F. (2012). “I know I’m unlovable”: Desperation, dislocation, despair, and discourse on the academic job hunt. Qualitative Inquiry, 18, 247-255.
22.
HeybachJ. A.SheffieldE. C. (Eds.). (2013). Dystopia and education: Insights for theory, praxis, and policy in an age of utopia-gone-wrong. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
23.
HolliganC. (2011). Feudalism and academia: UK academics’ accounts of research culture. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24, 55-75.
24.
HoodJ. (1985). The lone scholar myth. In FoxM. F. (Ed.), Scholarly writing and publishing: Issues, problems, and solutions (pp. 111-125). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
25.
HoyD. C. (2005). Critical resistance: From poststructuralism to post-critique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
LatherP. (1994). Dada practice: A feminist reading: Reaction to Stephanie Kirkwood Walker’s review of “Getting Smart.”Curriculum Inquiry, 24, 181-187.
28.
LorenzC. (2012). If you’re so smart, why are you under surveillance? Universities, neoliberalism, and new public management. Critical Inquiry, 38, 599-629.
WelchmanJ. (1989). After the Wagnerian bouillabaisse: Critical theory and the Dada and surrealist word-image. In FreemanJ. (Ed.), The Dada and surrealist word-image (pp. 57-95). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
