Against Novelty

I am aware of the urgency to create a novel standpoint and unique nuance in my writing beyond the fidelity to a certain theory (or logic, instead). Yet, for now, I am not ready for committing fully to that style due to my insufficient expertise. Furthermore, I think that despite the attempts to create a unique tone in our writing by various maneuvers in providing certain empirical data or narration, argumentative insight, and some notes of theories we owe, it always ends up using and operating certain ontological and theoretical ‘faith’ that resides in the backbone of our writing. Hence, I think it is ok to sincerely defend certain figures and ontological orientation (in my case, as a way to deepen my onto-epistemological basis by trying to avoid a serious misreading of my ‘canon’) and try to make my voice visible in my writing by narrating my reading, doubts, and several questions to the thinkers I promote and at the same time challenge other thinkers who are problematic and failed us to understand certain problem and condition (we may agree that attacking certain figures is necessary and constitutive in our writing, not merely for demonstrating the sense of urgency and relevance). It may be my naive view against the current instant production of academia.