Defining deviance is turning out even harder than we expected and we are collectively prolix in our delighted confusion. This semester we will further explore the thorny complexities of metadeviance. By our own sound practice of maximum effort at knowing things and specially privileging things that can’t be counted as Normal, we must include in our study all that Normality rejects. But it turns out that’s a hella lot of really disparate stuff! It also leads to some rather mind-bending inversions: Calling Confucianism “deviant” cracked us all up so much we wasted a whole seminar session making lame jokes about it. But we are resolved to return to as much seriousness as our next topic - Zen deviance - will allow and redouble our efforts at an intelligible taxonomy of deviance. We’ll surely fail but at least we’re being honest about it. And besides, if we stay at it long enough, we’re looking forward to the rare treat of Bodhidharma tearing off his eyelids to stay awake.