‘The Kite Runner’ Critiqued: New Orientalism Goes to the Big Screen
While The Kite Runner movie is now captivating audiences throughout the country-much as the book did four years ago-with its enthralling tale of “family, forgiveness, and friendship” and the promise that indeed “there is a way to be good again,” very little has been written critiquing this work and its prominent role in the New Orientalist narrative of the Islamic Middle East.
Iranian literature specialist Dr. Fatemeh Keshavarz (Washington University in St. Louis) has classified this book as one of the recent works that she argues constitute a “New Orientalist” narrative in her book Jasmine and Stars: Reading More than Lolita in Tehran. (Dr. Hamid Dabashi of Columbia University also has written about New Orientalism and expatriates who serve as “native informers” or “comprador intellectuals” in respect to the Middle East).
Keshavarz broadly characterizes the New Orientalist works thusly:
Thematically, they stay focused on the public phobia [of Islam and the Islamic world]: blind faith and cruelty, political underdevelopment, and women’s social and sexual repression. They provide a mix of fear and intrigue-the basis for a blank check for the use of force in the region and Western self-affirmation. Perhaps not all the authors intend to sound the trumpet of war. But the divided, black-and-white world they hold before the reader leaves little room for anything other than surrender to the inevitability of conflict between the West and the Middle East.
While The Kite Runner is perhaps less obvious in its demonization of the Muslim world and glorification of the Western world-what Keshavarz terms the “Islamization of Evil” and the “Westernization of Goodness”-than books like Reading Lolita in Tehran, these themes nevertheless clearly permeate the entire novel. While seemingly just a captivating story of Amir and his redemption through the heroic rescue of his childhood friend Hassan’s son, Sohrab, the entire plot is imbued with noxious stereotypes about Islam and the Islamic world. This story, read in isolation, may indeed just be inspiring and heart-warming, but the significance of its underlying message in the current geopolitical context cannot be ignored.
At the most superficial level, the characters and their accompanying traits serve to advance a very specific agenda: everything from the conspicuous secularity of the great hero, Amir’s father, Baba, to the pedophilic Taliban (i.e. Muslim) executioner and nemesis of Amir, Assef, clearly perpetuates the basic underlying theme: the West (and Western values) = ‘good,’ while Islam = ‘bad,’ or even, ‘evil.’ The inherent goodness of Baba and evil of Assef is repeatedly reified for the reader in some of the most dramatic and graphic scenes of the entire book. Baba valiantly lays his life on the line to protect the woman who is about to be raped, while Assef brutally rapes children and performs gruesome public executions in the local soccer stadium. Yet, perhaps the most telling attribute of these two characters is the particular national ideologies that they express affinity for: Baba loves America, while Assef is an admirer of Hitler.
The most pernicious element of this novel, however, is also the same aspect that American readers consistently have identified as the most heart-warming and inspiring: the story of the redemption of Amir thorough his harrowing and heroic rescue of Sohrab. In short, Amir, the successful western expatriate writer must leave his safe, idyllic existence in the U.S.; return to an Afghanistan that has been ravaged by the Russians (our Cold War enemy) and the Taliban (the representation of our new Islamic enemy); and rescue the innocent orphaned son of his childhood friend from the incarnation of evil itself, Assef. Amir’s descent into this Other World, a veritable ‘heart of darkness,’ appears to be the only hope for its victims’ salvation.
This adventurous and engrossing story neatly functions as an allegorized version of the colonial/neo-colonial/imperial imperative of “intervening” in “dark” countries in order to save the sub-human Others who would be otherwise simply lost in their own ignorance and brutality. These magnanimous interventions, of course, have nothing to do with economic or geopolitical concerns; they are purely self-sacrificial expressions of the superiority of the imperial peoples’ humanity and ideology. When considered in this frame, the profound guilt that Amir suffers from his inaction during the violation of his innocent friend Hassan seems to represent the collective guilt of all “good” western or western-oriented people who watched idly while the Islamic bullies-epitomized by Assef-violated Afghanistan and the innocent western-oriented people like Baba and Amir. Of course, the implication then is that we also must redeem ourselves by returning and “rescuing” the people there from the Assefs of Afghanistan-this is our “way to be good again,” in the words Khaled Hosseini’s character Rahim Khan. This new recapitulation of the old “white man’s [now, western] burden” narrative, when combined with the “Westernization of Goodness” and “Islamization of Evil” clearly present throughout the novel, provides a superb ideological framework upon which to justify our present occupation and future military interventions in Afghanistan.
It certainly does not take much imagination to expand this story and its message to the entire Islamic Middle East-especially when we combine this work’s portrayal of Afghanistan with the other New Orientalist works on the Islamic Middle East, such as Azar Nafisi’s popular Reading Lolita in Tehran, Asne Seierstad’s The Bookseller of Kabul, Geraldine Brooks’ Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women, and even scholarly works like Bernard Lewis’ What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response. If what these works say about Islam and Islamic countries is the whole truth, then surely the continued and expanding U.S. military presence in that region is a good thing, right?
For anyone who has been to, or studies the Middle East, it is obvious that these accounts are gross distortions of the full reality on the ground there. It is not wrong to identify and write about the flaws of a particular country, religion, or ideology, but it is wrong and dishonest when an author’s writings systematically dehumanizes and reduces an entire culture and religion to the actions of its extremists. Especially, when these are the same people and countries that our leaders tell us need to be attacked and occupied by our military.
Matthew Thomas Miller is a graduate student in Islamic and Near Eastern Studies at Washington University in St. Louis.
Please see the following resources for a more detailed discussion of New Orientalism:
Keshavarz, Fatemeh. Banishing the Ghosts of Iran. Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 53, Issue 45.
Keshavarz, Fatemeh. Jasmine and Stars: Reading More than Lolita in Tehran. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 2007.
Keshavarz, Fatemeh. Interview. Jasmine and Stars: New Orientalist Narratives. ZNet. 2007 <http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=13448>.
Dabashi, Hamid. “Native Informers and the Making of the New American Empire.” Al-Ahram Weekly 1 June 2007. <http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/797/special.htm>.
Dabashi, Hamid. Interview. Lolita and Beyond . ZNet. 2007. <http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=10707>
I had assumed for years that the 1001 Arabian Nights were popular Arab stories that came to the West. I recently discovered they were not popular in Middle Eastern society at the time and considered rather crude. It was Western critics that propped them up.
Similarly, the most innocuous Middle Eastern arab stories we have seen on film have been those taken from these stories-such as the Sinbad movies. And yet, the most recent Hollywood depiction–a children’s cartoon, have sought to completely de-arabize and de-Islamisize the story.
Making a muslim villain an admirer of Hitler sounds heavy handed to me.
This is ridiculous at least in the case of the Kite Runner. I’m married to an Afghan and he loved the book as do alot of Afghans we know. Khaled Hossaini is considered a hero in the Afghan-American community and this story puts a human face on Afghan suffering along with A Thousand Splendid Suns. For once Afghans are potrayed as humanbeings and not terrorists like the MSM always portrays them. People learned about the Afghan culture through these books and the way Afghanistan once was before all the wars. People love these books WTF does some arrogant white grad student from St. Louis know about Afghans and Islam? Did he talk to any before setting his poisonous pen to paper?
See the Afghan Coalition here in Freemont CA (largest Afghan expat community supporting Khaled Hosseini in their blog)
http://afghancoalition.org/blog/?cat=11
As far as the Taliban they were always Pakistan’s Frankenstein monster. Majority of Afghans resent Pakistan’s interference in thier county’s affairs. Not to mention all the human rights violations the Taliban did when they were in power.
This article is so deeply insulting and offensive.
Afghans are not Arabs or Iranians by the way and Afghans do not consider themselves “Middle Eastern” so lumping them in with these groups simply because they are Muslim is also orientalism.
I really have a hard time with these esoteric theories. Art (in this case fiction) owes nothing to anyone’s pet political views. Nothing.
It was an average at best book (from a storytelling/novelistic/artistic viewpoint), I barely made myself finish it, and I won’t go see the movie.
twoblueday
“Art (in this case fiction) owes nothing to anyone’s pet political views. Nothing.”
Are you kidding?
Lennie Riefenstahl was likely satisfied with the work she did for the Third Reich. Powerful stuff. On its own stood the test of time. There certainly, though, wasn’t much work for her after the war. Lucky she didn’t end up in jail.
Brilliant piece…an island of sanity in an Orwellian world of “Brazil” insanity!
Edward Said did a marvelous job in describing “Oreintalism” in his book of the same name.
“Orientalism” defines the “Orient” (Greater Middle East) in the way the Western authors want it defined. Then, the solutions are imposed to the problems “identified” by their authors and their WOG (Westernized Oriental gentlemen/women) apparatchiks appointed by the conquerors.
The post 911 “liberated” hungry Afghan woman, circa 2006, in a blue burqa begging on the streets of Kabul pictured in the recent CNN documentary looked more oppressed today then she did under the “evil guys” in 2001.
The “pre-liberation” modern First-world Baghdad looks much better than the “liberated” dilapidated Baghdad war zone to me. So much for liberation!
moinansri.wordpress.com
JS says: “Afghans, like everyone, have bad taste in literature — surprise surprise”. All I can say is how racist of you to disregard the Afghan viewpoint and this is exactly what makes the argument of Thomas Miller weak as he does the very same thing!
The author of the Kite Runner, Khaled Hosseini is Afghan and he used part of his life experiences in writing his book. The author of reading Lolita in Tehran was a Westerner and not an Iranian. Comparing the two makes no sense. It would have made more sense to select an Iranian or Iranian Americna author.
Its an Iranian scholar bringing up this entire orientalist critique and not an Afghan. Iranians are none to happy right now that the US is in both Iraq and Afghanistan on Iran’s boarders hence the need to call any peice of literature written on Afghanistan or Iraq as imperialistic. This from the same Iranians that expelled Afghan refugees from their borders after 911! I for one do not for a moment endorse attacking Iran I am simply putting the scholar’s views into context.
The Kite Runner is entirely set before 911! The book does not endorse what happened to Afghanistan either pro or con after 911. Its a work of literature not a scholarly paper on US Foriegn Policy post 911!
My mother-in-law lives in Kabul and she told my husband she is happier now that the Taliban are gone moinansari. She is a widow and if she was still under the Taliban she could not leave the house without an escort. Fortunally, she can now move about freely under Karzai. More should and can be done in reconstruction but there are significant changes and things are improving there. Afghans remain hopeful: http://www.afghanconflictmonitor.org/2007/12/afhans-remain-o.html
This book is significant as it resulted in many Americans coming to care for the fate of the Afghan people and many people gave to NGO’s and Afghan schools after reading this novel. The effect is similar to the impact Steve McCurry’s National Geographic photo had in raising awarness about Afghan refugees in the 1980’s. This is a good thing. Afghanistan needs support from the international community.
Tamin Ansary another Afghan American author compares the Taliban to the Nazis see here:
http://tcotrel.tripod.com/afghanletter.html
Taliban are not part of the traditional Afghan culture and have always been supported by Pakistan see here. Do not make the mistake of confusing the Taliban with Afghan culture its not accurate:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB227/index.htm
Most Afghans view RAWA as a radical Marxist communist group. RAWA has criticized and attacked Afghan female activists who disagreed with their views. RAWA has criticized Dr. Sima Samar, Sima Wali, Zieba Shorish-Shamley and the Feminist Majority in the pass all groups that were working a long time for Afghan women. RAWA is anti-American and anti-Karzai government. RAWA would like to potray the current circumstances in Afghanistan as worse then the Taliban. This is complete nonsense as things are improving.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=what_do_afghan_women_want
JS you truly are clueless and its sick of you to call Khaled Hosseini a self-hating Afghan! Do you call Jewish people who criticize the Israeli occupation of Palestine self-hating Jews also?
I finished the book last night. Good book. I see many of your points. Assef represents the evil Taliban. Baba and Amir represent the good, non-fundamentalists of the region who believe in flying kites and joy. This represents that and that represents this? Jesus, I thought I was reading a fucking novel.
Fargo you were that’s all it is. The novel is about good vs evil which is an idea in human history as old as time.
Some people stretch this idea in order to finish their grad school term papers.
JS It was the Marxist Soviet occuptation of Afghanistan that killed and displaced millions of Afghans. Afghans have the highest number of refugees in the world after the Palestinians. So yes Marxism is very bad indeed in the eyes of many Afghans. My husband and our family became part of that diaspora escaping communism in Afghanistan. Marxism crushed Afghan culture and the free will of Afghans to live thier own lives in peace.
Marxism/Communism has proven to be a failure everywhere in the world from Romania to Vietnam to Afghanistan. It has oppressed people, impoverished and imprisoned people.
Jan or JS said: “The Soviet’s puppet government in Afghanistan was being besieged by radical Islamists, and requested half a dozen times that the USSR enter the country to defend it.”
Lady you are a troll no need to even respond anymore as you have completly discredited yourself. You think radical marxism is the best thing for the Afghan Muslim people. God help you if you ever set foot in Kabul with these ideas.
Both JS and DC Beltway have good points to make. Clearly, JS is more versed in the political philosophy of Marxism vs. Soviet Communism, while DC seems to have a more grounded opinion of the hyper-analysis of the book/movie. After all, the story makes a case for god and Islam, and does not damn Islam altogether, as the grad student implies. As a casual reader who knows little to nothing about about Afghanistan, the Taliban or Islam, I did not blur it all, as the grad student seems to.
Better off? Better off without their religion Islam and their cultural traditions? Wow if that was ever a westernized orientalism view there you have it JS congratulations you are an Orientalist! Rumi was an Afghan and one of the most famous Sufi poets of all time you are telling me they are better off without the Islam of Rumi their traditional Islam? Islam is central to Afghan culture and Communism Marxism is anti-religion.
If you saw the Kite Runner movie there is a beautiful scene where the adult Amir prays in Pakistan. The Kite Runner is not anti-Islam it is anti-radicalism of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and that is a good thing.
My husband could not return to his country under the Soviets and the same held true for millions of Afghans. Then the civil war came and then the Taliban backed by Pakistan. Imagine 15 years of never seeing your parents and then your father dying on you before you could return home. Grief that is unimaginable for most my husband lived it. He still lives with the memories of it all. There is not an Afghan that I know who hasn’t lost something their family, their friends, their property and wealth due to the Soviet Occupation, Civil War, and Taliban. Reconstruction is not perfect and I am highly critical of this administration and how things are going but I will say its a hope a hope for a better future for the 5th poorest nation in the world. My husband and other Afghans have finally returned home after years of exile. They are finally free to do so. You cannot imagine how my husband felt after being back in Kabul and seeing his mother again. He would never have been able to do so if the Taliban were still in power.
If Afghanistan is abandoned tomorrow it would be overrun by the Pakistan backed radical Taliban movement. Again under the yoke of oppression of radicalism. I for one will not allow for that to happen. How quickly people like you have forgotten human rights violations of the Taliban.
You however are a shill for Marxism not Progressive ideals. Marxism is not Progressive it is a Regressive political theory ask the millions of Chinese political prisoners who are little more than slave laborers. Ask the Romanians who were imprisoned during the Communist era ask the survivors of Pol Pot in Cambodia. Its a failed horrendous idea. Its anti-religion and its anti-personal freedoms such as the right to choose one’s own career or criticize the gov’t.
Lumping the situations of Iraq and Afghanistan in together is erroneous and wrong. I was against the Iraq war from the start. I had mixed feelings on the war with Afghanistan back in 01. However, I believe in the case of Afghanistan we must stay the course, not abandon people, and commit to stabilizing and reconstruction my husband’s homeland.
By the way in addition to your other factual errors the Afghani is the nation’s currency not the people!
Afghans will tell you the Golden Age of their country was under King Zahir Shah who established greater freedom for all such as the choice for women to attend schools, whether or not to wear the chador or veil, and other progressive reforms. Economic Growth also was at its height. So Afghans were progressing and modernizing just fine on their own and the Soviets sent them backwards and oppressed them.
http://www.afghan-network.net/Rulers/zahir_shah.html
Hi there. So much heat in this exchange, and somehow a central point has been missed or avoided - particularly by ‘js’ who seems overly eager to show her/his progressive credentials. DC is right to say the Taliban is Pakistan’s monster - but that is half the equation. It is also America’s Frankenstein. Pakistan’s ISI was largely the conduit of US money. The US security establishment knew fully to whom the money was being funneled to and what it was being used for.
If there was any big thing that Khalid Hosseini missed, it was this, and not for political ‘correctness’ but for artistic purposes. It may have even made the novel aesthetically richer, because it would have introduced the fundamental dilemma of the shelter being the source as well of an enormous, persistent dose of the poison. It’s a question the answer to which I would have wanted to read. For instance, wow is this being answered by Afghan communities? And apart from supporting Gen. Zia’s ISI - and now the ISI’s lord is Musharraf, however tenuous his hold is - how did Afghan communities abroad wrestle with the utter brutality of the US-led bombing of Afghanistan? The impetus that led the US into Iraq is the same that caused it to lead the bombing of Afghanistan, and to intervene in Guatemala, Chile, Vietnam, Panama, Cuba and the Philippines, which was its first imperial experiment. From each of these countries, a rich tapestry of anger, love and despair has been woven, and many have within them American threads, that served as slaver, salve and shelter. Though very different, one can draw different but similar aspects which involve Europe as well.
There are no easy answers here, and I tend to sympathize with DC and to be wary of JS’s certainties. Actually, the exchanges above have missed out on the fundamental, monumental role of form — here, the novel. Fiction which discusses frailties in ways that staid theorizing can never dream of, and this is why the response to Hosseini’s work seem to have drifted so far away from giving everyone a richer understanding of the stories at play and the conflicts that they engender.
I really liked the Hosseini book, for all its flaws and I even think DC actually diminishes Hosseini’s novel by making a caricature of the narrative - good vs. evil. Even in acutely ‘good vs. evil’ situations, there are sub-conflicts, great dilemmas, frailties and reckless courage. The theme of fallibility, cowardice and redemption are things that would intimidate even the most courageous of writers — and Hosseini’s very sparse use of literary devices and yet still remain faithful to the theme of redemption is something to be admired.
Yes, the setting is vital, but like I said above, there were other narratives that could have made the Kite Runner even more painful and moving at the same time, but which Hosseini, unfortunately, whether intentionally or not, did not delve into.
I think Miller’s paper is boring and predictable. I think it is a shallow, embarrassing critique that, after speaking about art - “heart-warming” - proceeded to read into political things that leave the reader outside of the conversation that Hosseini attempted with himself. Miller seems to project knowledge of literature with his display of ‘new orientalism’ readings, but I kind of feel that Miller actually has very little to say - or contribute to our understanding - of ‘orientalist’ literature or Islamic studies.
If I had the time and academic space enjoyed by Miller, I would have focused on the book’s shortcomings, based on the conversations that it missed: America’s role in funding the anti-Soviet jihadi engine, Central Asian politics and Pakistan. Perhaps a chapter or two about Central Asia’s Islamic traditions and then conversations involving or which Amir overhears about the frighteningly extreme version of Deobandi Islam that got grafted onto Afghanistan. These could have taken place in his childhood, or upon his return - in his transit, for instance.
Political analysis should not displace the focus on the aesthetic, if art is the thing being reviewed, in this case a sampling of literature from someone who attempted to grapple with the pain of an entire people, who are till now being betrayed (for “DC” to think Afghans are now are better off is understandable, but in a way the expression of this sentiment can be a bit irrelevant. It certainly misses discussing Hosseini’s craft and misses more central questions - who suffers when an already bludgeoned, bloodied populace is bombed by a power that had funded the very gang of thugs lording it over the enslaved people? Should the world have bombed East Timor as well to drive out the Indonesians? What about bombing Iraq again and again today to get the extremists out? And Nicaragua - it was right to fund the Contras?
By the way, Edward Said - among others, his work Orientalism - is still among the best lens, if not the best lens, to use in understanding our world today. I say this in order to comment that Miller’s reading of Said is just so cardboard-like and lazy. His paper is such a denigration of Said’s dedication to grappling with the political, aesthetic and historical dissonances of his time, which is still ours.
dcbeltway,
>The author of the Kite Runner, Khaled Hosseini is Afghan and he used
> part of his life experiences in writing his book. The author of
>reading Lolita in Tehran was a Westerner and not an Iranian. Comparing
> the two makes no sense. It would have made more sense to select an
>Iranian or Iranian Americna author.
for gods sake, before lecturing others about their mistakes, do a small search for the book “Reading Lolita in Tehran” Written byy Azar Nafisi, an Iranina American
> Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books is a book by
> Iranian author and professor, Azar Nafisi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_Lolita_in_Tehran
PS. I don’t know if Nafisi is a professor or not, but sending this to give you some correction.
JS I have read Rashid’s Taliban and also Steven Coll’s Ghost Wars along with a plethora of other works on Afghanistan and the Islamic world. As a Muslim I have also read the holy Qu’ran. Of course I have read Edward Said’s work on orientalism. Said’s work is excellent and applies to alot of works out there but I disagree with Miller that it applies to the Kite Runner.
Having traveled frequently throughout the Islamic world I am familiar with the lens many Americans falsely apply to this part of the world.
I know about America’s role in supporting the Taliban in Bhutto’s role in doing the same. I’m not naive. 43 million given to the Taliban under Bush prior to 2001. I know how the University of Nebraska hosted the Taliban and UNOCAL also in Texas and who Khalilizad and Karzai worked for in the past. Come on I’m married to an Afghan of course I know these things! I know about the pipelines etc.
I never said that the current gov’t in Afghanistan is perfect. However, I do believe it is the best hope right now for peace and stabilization of that country. My husband for one is very unhappy that the war lord war criminals are in parliament and have not been brought to justice.
My husband and I went through the severe anguish to 2001 not only of seeing the horror of 911 in the US but having to watch in horror as his country was bombed. For four months we didn’t know whether his parents were alive or dead as we could not call and our letters would not get through. We nearly contacted the Red Cross seeking info on them. In January of 2002 we finally recieved a letter stating that they were alive and safe.
JS you insult me by calling me names you’ll get the same in turn. You accuse me of being a shill and ignorant I see the same about you. You expect to be treated with respect in this discourse well treat the one your arguing with with respect. You think Afghans are better off under Marxism why are you not living in a Marxist state yourself?
Thanks Farhad I have not read reading Lolita in Tehran someone had told me it was written by a westerner.
July. 8 - Human remains are excavated from an underground Soviet-era prison on the outskirts of Kabul.
The site was used by Russian soldiers as a barracks and Afghan police say they think hundreds of people were killed buried there.
The discovery threatens to provoke further disquiet over an amnesty for war crimes agreed by Afghanistan’s parliament.
Tom Metcalfe reports.
http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=59659
Featured speaker: Nadir Nadiry, spokesman for Afghan independent human rights commission (English).
JS lots of people support Karzai lots don’t this is the gov’t Afghans have at the moment and I believe at this point we have to work with what we’ve got and work to improve it from within and from outside. Being negative and criticizing it is not helping to improve Afghanistan and I find that sort of negative attitude unproductive and detrimental.
RAWA is anti-everyone if you haven’t noticed that pattern yet. Many western feminists adore RAWA projecting their own orientalist feminist standards on Muslim women. Plenty of Afghan women if given the choice tomorrow would remain Muslim. Almost all would be against the Jihadis and for a moderate to progressive Islam. Groups like RAWA are against Islam entirely as are a lot of Western feminists. Many Western feminist feel Islam is the problem. I have a problem with that type of cultural lens as its hateful.
Alright, I got so tired of reading js and dc’s alternating hate rants that I just had to skip to the bottom. I can’t even remember who’s for or against the book. Both those guys need to get off their pedestals. Maybe it’s time to actually write your own articles, instead of just tagging rants to the bottom of other people’s.
But in regards to the original article and it’s thesis, I think it’s crap. Assef might have worked his way to a position of power with the Taliban, but he in no way represents them or anything else Muslim. He’s half white, and basically just a sick twisted bastard who’s feared by everyone around him. If anything a fascist, but not Muslim. And Amir, who according to the author represents everything secular and American, makes his biggest breakthrough when he begins praying for Allah to save Sohrab’s life. And he continues to pray every day thereafter. He has found faith. Isn’t that quite contrary to Miller’s thesis?
So again, crap. In my opinion
Really bad article. Pompous, pomo academia at its ignorant pontificating worst. …. IMHO.
You said it! Thanks.
“Really bad article. Pompous, pomo academia at its ignorant pontificating worst. …. IMHO.”