INVISIBLE WORMS IN ROSES
There's a bit of relief to be had from the intense heat
of Trumpism by coldly reading The Death
of White Sociology (New York:
Vintage, 1973), edited by Joyce A. Ladner.
It is a matter of common sense.
Conflicting premises, murky motives for doing one kind of research
rather than another, blind spots sprawling in humanistic and social science
projects in 2017, the rainbow colors of methodologies ----these all highlight
the rightness of Ladner's claim in 1973 that "sociology, like history,
economics and psychology, exists in a domain where color, ethnicity, and social
class are of primary importance. And as
long as this holds true, it is impossible for sociology to claim that it
maintains value neutrality in its approaches" (xix). It is equally impossible for humanities to
possess value neutrality. As Trumpism ups the ante for indigenous knowing as
well as convoluted theoretical interrogations and interventions, being cold
matters greatly. We are not detached
from our thinking. And after four
decades, I suspect that white sociology in the USA is not sufficiently dead. As I work on Reading Race Reading America: Literary
and Social Essays and another project on ideological shuttling between
democracy and fascism, I find the cautions in The Death of White Sociology to be at once helpful and
troubling. I ask myself if intellectual
projects are somewhat quixotic, permanently incapable of detecting invisible
worms in roses (see William Blake's magnificent poem "The Sick Rose,"
1794). I will not be denied the
"true fact" of the worm, the "magic" of Trumpism
notwithstanding.
A fellow writer notified me
yesterday about a survey
of nomenclature in Black Studies (https://milwaukee.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_39N3sncRkRoI5Lf
)) )proposed by Nolan Kopkin and Erin N. Winkler, members of the
Department of Africology at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. A butterfly
zoomed through my mind. Is there a
Department of Europology at any institution in the USA? Would such a department undertake a survey of
nomenclature in White Studies or Jewish Studies as subsets of American Studies? The butterfly asked and would not stay for an
answer. Why do I smell a worm I can't
see?
Why at just this
moment does Kopkin, who uses econometric techniques to pursue his work in
political economy and public policy, racial prejudice and entrepreneurship, and
substantive black political representation, express interest in nomenclature or
identity-naming? And why has his
colleague Winkler, who uses the qualitative methods of Africology to study
(among other things) childhood and learning about race, partner with him in the
undertaking? In the name of digital
humanities, I am deeply interested in where to locate the value investment of
their motives and their enterprise. Why
do I smell the familiar aroma of the rose that once studied the Black Subject
into near oblivion and bloomed without giving a nanosecond of notice to its own
compromised subjectivity? Perhaps a cold
rereading of The Death of White Sociology
can help me discover an answer.
Jerry W. Ward, Jr. July 10, 2017