Acceso usuarios
Tommaso M. Milani, Susan Ehrlich *
In this article, we reflect upon Wolfgang Klein’s provocative suggestion, in Writing or reading, but not both or: a proposal to reintroduce cuneiform writing using the hammer and chisel, that “every scientist” at universities or other research institutions “may and must publish exactly thirty pages a year.” In our view, Klein’s proposal to limit the number of pages each author should be allotted in a given year is comparable to a pill that treats the symptom but not the disease. Instead, we draw upon the ideas of American political theorist Nancy Fraser to argue for the need for a more radical transformation of the structures upon which the academic enterprise rests. Such a transformation would require (1) overhauling the underlying political-economic structure of academic labour relations, and (2) reconsidering what counts as a legitimate form of knowledge production. In saying so, we are also inspired by current theoretical debates about radical humanism and southern/decolonial perspectives to the sociology of language. Ultimately, we advocate for the need to disinvest from (1) individualism as a key principle of the academic project, at least in the humanities and the social sciences; and (2) the written word as the only medium for the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge. Such a proposal is underpinned by an emphasis on orality, the usage of other forms of representation, and the need for recognizing alternative ways of producing and disseminating (Indigenous) ways of being, knowing, and feeling.
