Saturday, February 15, 2014

Wendy Doniger's modus operandi

I would no more go to Wendy Doniger for knowledge about Hindus than I would go to John Yoo for knowledge about US Constitutional law.  This is because I was there at her unmasking more than twelve years ago.  This was the time of RISA Lila (RISA = Religion in South Asia, an arm of the American Academy of Religion (AAR)), when the power equation in US academia became very clear to Hindus in America.  (Yes, back then, when Hindus painfully learned it, they were apparently whining and biased and fundamentalists and fascists and all the smear words you can throw at.   But the nature of US academia in economics is made clearer, isn't it?  by Paul Krugman's blog and his account of freshwater vs saltwater economists, and what kind of papers are allowed to be published.  So perhaps the Hindu case may meet a little less skepticism. )

What I like about this linked essay is that it goes straight to the heart of the modus operandi of Wendy Doniger and her students.   It also goes to the problem manifest on the Hindu side - the lack of confident scholarship to counter Doniger and company on her playing field.  Too many of them also believe that the study of religion in the university would violate secularism - so India does not have the equivalent of the AAR.   The Indian anglicized elite continues to have a strong case of Macaulayitis as well.


Comments (8)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Oh please!

Modern Hindus may be straight laced and puritanical (or not), but you have lived in India. Can you pretend you've never seen any of the famously erotic temple art? Whatever scholarly sins Doniger or her pupils may (or may not) have committed, they certainly did not invent the erotic element in Hindu art and literature.
1 reply · active 580 weeks ago
CIP, how does famously erotic temple art have anything to do with an Oedipal complex? Do you know what you're talking about ? How does Ganesha's pot belly indicate a cultural fondness for oral sex? Ganesha's trunk symbolizes a limp phallus? Really? Grow up.
I know nothing about the specific examples you cite, but the generic complaint about Doniger I see most - including yours and the essays you cite - is that she sexualizes Hinduism and its traditions. I'm not a big fan of Freudian analysis of literature, European, Indian, or other, but the Indian temple art that so outraged MaCaulay includes a lot of explicit depictions of sex, oral and other. Modern India, so far as I can tell, seems to be very prudish culturally - more like MaCaulay than the temple sculptors.
5 replies · active 580 weeks ago
If you get your sound bite from the newspapers or from NPR, that is the understanding you will be limited to. And I guess you understood nothing from the essay I linked to.
I now understand the Republican mindset - that the only thing that happened in the 8 years of the Clinton Presidency was the Monica Lewinsky episode. Given your comment, I take it that a historian who reduced the Clinton Presidency, what with its failed health care reform, its efforts in ex-Yugoslavia, its reform of welfare, its removal of regulations on the financial industry, its cruise missile strikes on the Taliban/al Qaeda, his appoint of Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court, etc., etc., etc., down to Monica Lewinsky, would elicit no complaint from you; and anyone who protested that the Clinton Presidency was more than Monica Lewinsky would be a culturally prudish American.

PS: I think you will promptly misunderstand what I wrote. So let me try one more. Is the National Football League really only about concussions and cheerleaders? Or is there something more to it than that? What would you think of a writer who reduced the National Football League to just those two things, and nothing else?
Let me just ask a few questions: how much of Doniger's work have you personally read? The book in question? A few quotes taken out of context?

The author of one of the essays you sent me to admitted that the example given of Doniger's methodology was in fact the author's own invention.

I see little evidence in what you wrote that you have any direct familiarity with the book, much less what in it you object to. In any case, the book you caricature doesn't look much like the one I'm reading.
Enough of her stuff - some of the works from a decade or more ago. As I wrote, if I was a student of law, once John Yoo writes his torture memos, I wouldn't read him anymore for constitutional law. Life is way too short to spend it on idiots looking for occasional sense in their works. For me, once someone falls into my "do not trust" list, they usually remain there.
My apologies, I should have been clear, the example I had given of Doniger's methodology is a composite. What is exact is how the history or commentary is constructed, how criticism of it is received, and so on. That essay is in one page what it took the whole book "Invading the Sacred" to say, and nowhere does that book spell it out so clearly.

Post a new comment

Comments by