Re: 'deconstruction' of C. Geertz (fwd)

Danny Yee (danny@STAFF.CS.SU.OZ.AU)
Fri, 4 Aug 1995 12:40:29 +1000

Our resident Peacock (Robert Johnson) writes:
> This is no flame. If you don't want to read my analysis of the
> work of Clifford Geertz, just hit the delete button.
> My analysis of his work will include Clifford Geertz in the
> subject header, as I assume the responses thereof. I'm sure
> even if you were to join the discussion you would live through
> the experience, as well as learn something concerning theory,
> methodology, postmodernist critique, and the freedom that internet
> will give humankind to question the status quo, canon, and
> consequences of fashionable nonsence in anthropology.

I await the Peacock's analysis of Geertz with interest. What he
has posted on the subject so far is hardly "analysis", however,
and definitely qualifies as a flame (an ad hominem attack with no
substantive content). To be quite honest, I have yet to see him
produce a single argument or idea worth any attention -- all the
interesting material he posts has been taken from elsewhere.

As for Geertz, I find much of his work rhetorically impressive but
low on substantive content. He's a lot of fun to read, however, and
some of his stuff is important. (The very fact that _The Religion of
Java_ and _Agricultural Involution_ have been subjected to so much
criticism is an indication of how signficant they were.) The idea
of the Peacock comparing himself to Geertz is just laughable.

Danny Yee.