糖心Vlog

Critical comeback

Published on
February 28, 2013
Last updated
May 22, 2015

Having been away of late, I am only now able to respond to Simon Blackburn鈥檚 review of my book Imagining the University (鈥Creative steps to po-po-mo heaven鈥, 31 January).

First, the role of any reviewer is surely to provide a summary of the book鈥檚 contents, but Blackburn doesn鈥檛 really offer that. (A non-technical summary is set out in the book鈥檚 introduction in the form of 15 theses.)

Second, Blackburn rather misconstrues the argument. The 鈥渙rgy of adjectives鈥 is not my own but is my identification of different terms depicting the university that are to be found in the literature and which I critique in the book.

Third, Blackburn informs readers that dislocations of grammatical categories are common in the book, 鈥渒nowledge鈥 being mainly used as an adjective while 鈥渋maginary鈥 becomes a noun. The first example is mistaken; the second is curious, to say the least. Blackburn seems either not to know or to care that both Jean-Paul Sartre and Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor have used 鈥渋maginary鈥 as a noun (and done so in the titles of books of theirs). In Imagining the University, I draw on their meanings of 鈥渋maginary鈥, as well as making a distinction between it and 鈥渋magination鈥. Being charitable, Blackburn is at best misguided here.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Fourth, Blackburn suggests that 鈥渦niversities are about educating a new generation鈥. Some might think that they are about rather more than that, including research and contributions to wider society. However, a matter that Imagining the University seeks to address is the future development of such institutions: that this is not picked up in the review could be said to be indicative of a certain complacency on the reviewer鈥檚 part.

Finally, there is no intimation in Blackburn鈥檚 review that he is aware of the literature on the university or on higher education. I do not apologise for the use of some technical terms in the book, but to suggest that it is marked by abstraction is unfair. I believe that a reader opening it at random would be met by an accessible prose (described as 鈥渆legant鈥 in a recent THE column).

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Ronald Barnett
Emeritus professor of higher education
Institute of Education, University of London

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT