Not sure who here will enjoy this, but my latest review for Strange Horizons... kind of eviscerates a mess of an academic book? A work of literary analysis attempting to fit science fiction into a #History of #Philosophy that Hegel and Lukács applied to other narrative forms?
My review at least gives a taste of academic writing, & explores the perils of publishing pressures for academics. Never mind the bollocks (er, academese): sometimes analysis *is* junk.
#SFF #Books
http://strangehorizons.com/non-fiction/science-fiction-and-narrative-form-by-david-roberts-andrew-milner-and-peter-murphy/
what is the purpose to analyze a genre under a filter or lens? I am referring to a “history and philosophy” as you put it
@MLClark
I will add, though, that I think more everyday readers should know how much academic writing is junk - because when people like J Peterson rise to prominence, much is made over any "serious" writing credentials they have (like an academic publishing credit). Maps of Meaning is absolute crap - but a lot of folks don't have the background necessary to recognize how many flaws exist in the work *and* the flaws in academic publishing that allowed it to get through in the first place.