236
PARTISAN REVIEW
specifically, an outpouring of research publications, conference talks,
and classroom presentations by subscribers. For many who have entered
the humanities as teachers and researchers, social constructionism has
been a liberating and serviceable implement of work, a standpoint that
has enhanced the productivity of professors. It has provided academics
with axioms and assurances necessary to their labors. Herein lies the
secret of constructionism's success: the critical method that follows from
constructionist premises has proven eminently conducive to the exigen–
cies of teaching, lecturing, and publishing. In a word, it is the school of
thought most congenial to current professional workplace conditions of
scholars in the humanities.
The most obvious advantage constructionism provides lies in its ter–
ritorial nature, for by undermining truth and objectivity, construction–
ism bolsters the humanities as an academic whole, carving out a space
in the university for practices of interpretation and subjectivity. One can
witness this turf function in critiques by literary and cultural theorists of
their institutional competitors-the scientists. This cultural critique of
science often goes by the name of "science studies," a project directed
at the political subtleties of scientific practices-for example, the pres–
ence of ideologically charged metaphors in scientific discourse. Its goal
is to reveal science itself as a construct, one especially dangerous in that
it casts scientificity as neutral and non-constructed . The institutional
goal of science studies is to delimit the sciences to one knowledge
domain, to show that they speak not for reality, but for certain con–
structions of reality.
If
the university is to reflect the different knowl–
edges of the universe, then containing the purview of scientific
knowledge to empirical practice preserves the humanities as a distinct
way of knowing.
But while the defensive position of the humanities in the university
promotes the use of social constructionism as a stock in trade, in fact,
the pressures favoring constructionism are often more quotidian and
prosaic than that of arts versus science competition. They affect pro–
fessors individually, not as representatives of a department or an out–
look; I mean the circumstances of graduate student aid, grant-giving,
job-hiring, tenure, leave time, teaching load, and salary increases . Pro–
fessors and graduate students have papers to grade, lectures to prepare,
applications to eva luate, books to read, undergraduates to meet, and
most importantly, essays and chapters to write. Their success rests in
how well they handle students, maintain collegiality, and meet research
expectations, with wellness frequently being measured by the number
of students they attract, the number of committees on which they serve,
