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.
No comments:
Post a Comment