The Impending Rise of Intellectualism in All Fields
It's becoming readily apparent that the need to lend a certain sense of intellectual legitimacy to one's field is above all a major concern for those involved. Areas of study such as library science, that previously had no means of expressing any sort of academic necessity, are being flooded with tracts on the psychological ramifications of the reference interview and the need to think of one's self as an "information architect," an absurd term that, in some vulgar sense, reeks of desperation. Is it inherent for fields that previously seemed little more than "trades" in the sense that they trained a student on how to actually perform in the field with a modicum of success without the worries of sending away the customers in some sort of psychological fugue to adopt a sort of intellectual dissection of the field in order to provide the masses with a means to understand the inner workings as being complex, in-depth, and above all necessary? To me, this reflects on the desperation of the field that isn't, in the public view, a necessary cog in the workings of society at large. It's impressive to see academia churn out materials that strive to provide those interested in the subject an arena to expand upon the theories and dilemmas that are, more often than not, commonplace in nature and relatively meaningless to anyone other than those involved in the process itself.
It also presents another dilemma for those proponents of theory in general. What constitutes the necessary means for entry into academia? Is there some sort of criteria that must be involved before any particular field can become open to interpretation and analysis? Literary theory proponents, of whom I include myself, seem to believe that it's possible to deconstruct any material in any number of ways. On the one hand, this offers those in the field an opportunity to look at works in ways that aren't, traditionally, associated with the standard interpretation. On the other hand, this also opens up a plethora of questions relating to the legitimacy of certain fields adopting the same sort of interpretive paradigm. Ultimately, the absurdity involved in such an effort far outweighs its legitimate right to be proclaimed as necessary and useful. In the end, though, what has to happen is that the entropic forces will eventually shift, forcing out the dominant way of thinking into a different sphere. Until then, it's rather hopeless when looking at the state of academic discourse.