Save Middlesex Philosophy

30 April 2010

To:
m.driscoll@mdx.ac.uk,
w.ahmad@mdx.ac.uk,
m.house@mdx.ac.uk,
e.esche@mdx.ac.uk

I am writing to express my deep dismay at the decision taken to close the Philosophy Department at Middlesex University.

The Department is nationally and internationally renowned and plays a unique role in the maintaining of creative, philosophical thinking in the humanties nationwide and in London in particular.

It is all the more alarming in the context of the shortsighted downgrading of the humanities which seems to be the policy of this governernment and, I think we can be sure, is most likely to be the policy of the incoming Government next week.

As well as the perceived attack on philosophical and critical thought, this closure will do damage to the University’s reputation worldwide.

I speak for myself, but I am also sure that my late sister, the distinguished philosopher Gillian Rose, who enjoyed close contacts with members of your distinguished philosophy faculty, would have been aghast at this decision.

Your sincerely,
Jacqueline Rose
Professor of English,
Queen Mary University of London.

29 April 2010

Dear colleagues:

I am writing you about your decision to close the philosophy programs at Middlesex University.  As a political philosopher at City University of New York, I can only express my dismay at what seems to be a precipitous and ill-advised decision.  My colleagues and I at CUNY have long read and profited from the work of Peter Hallward and Peter Osborne, to name the two scholars at Middlesex whose work I know best.   Though I am admittedly judging from afar, I remain confident that the quality of their work is directly related to the environment of excellence that has been fostered at Middlesex.  To think that you would destroy such an environment, as if it were so much expendable space, is inconceivable to me.  You may or may not derive some temporary financial advantage from such a decision; I’m in no position to know.  But what I am in a position to know is that should you proceed with this scheme, you will have earned for yourself a very black mark in the international academic community — and deservedly so.  I can’t imagine that that is how you wish to be known by your colleagues throughout the world.

Sincerely,

Corey Robin
Associate Professor of Political Science
City University of New York

29 April 2010

Dear Vice-Chancellor and colleagues,

I fear that I hardly need to say more to than that your already notorious announcement that you will terminate the teaching of philosophy at Middlesex will do no more than bring public shame and opprobrium upon you.  There is little point in dwelling on the distinguished history of the subject at Middlesex nor on the exceptionally brutal treatment of a group of staff, my some time colleagues and actual friends. For I cannot imagine any way to persuade you to reverse such a decision other than to insist that it is one which only underlines your bankruptcy as leaders of a once major institution.

Yours etc

Adrian Rifkin
Professor of Fine Art
Goldsmiths, University of London

Sent: Thu 29/04/2010 08:53
To: Michael Driscoll; Waqar Ahmad; Margaret House; e.esche@mdx.ac.u
Subject: Philosophy cuts

I write to register my sense of outrage and disgust that Middlesex has decided to set itself on a reckless course of action in attempting to throw away its world class programme in philosophy. This is probably the only programme that Middlesex has any reputation in internationally. As an employee of a university that is making similar bottom-line decisions, I am far too familiar with the business rationale for cuts like the ones your propose. To sacrifice what is essentially the jewel in the crown of your university for purely (and quite dubious) financial reasons is to make a mockery of Middlesex’s claim to be a ‘university’. Furthermore, the comment by Dean Esche that has been made public that the department does not contribute ‘in any measurable way’ to the university is not only, quite frankly, embarrassing, it also betrays an attitude that is as unprofessional as it is ignorant. I hope you will reconsider this course of action.

Yours sincerely,
John David Rhodes

—
John David Rhodes, Ph.D.
Senior Lecturer in Literature and Visual Culture
School of English
University of Sussex
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/english/profile198618.html

May 1, 2010

Dear Vice-Chancellor Driscoll,

I was distressed to hear about the pending closure of philosophy at Middlesex University, including the liquidation of The Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy.  As the Director of the Program in Experimental Critical Theory at UCLA, I have long been extremely impressed with the work being done at the Centre, which clearly is one of the most important places for the study of contemporary philosophy in the world.   This work is of vital interest not only to philosophers, but to scholars and students in a wide range of fields in the humanities and social sciences, including all the modern and classical language and literature programs, political science, sociology, anthropology, film, art, art history, digital media and design, and numerous other fields.  The UCLA Program in Experimental Critical Theory regards the Middlesex CRMEP as a most distinguished partner, one that we turn to frequently for guidance in new and emerging fields of critical thought.  I have sent students to the Centre in Middlesex to study with Peter Hallward, Peter Osborne, Eric Alliez, and the other internationally known staff of the CRMEP, and it is clear to me that they come back transformed by the experience, with a level of intellectual sophistication that puts them in the forefront of advanced thinking in these areas.

I understand that these are financially very difficult times for Middlesex, as they are for the University of California, including my campus, UCLA.  I have struggled to maintain our program despite dwindling resources, and I understand that drastic steps are often necessary for the sake of the survival of the university itself.  But my belief is that, in the triage that such times calls for, it is most important to preserve those parts of the university that have been most outstanding, what we call our “areas of excellence,” since the damage done to the entire university is severe and irreversible, both practically and in terms of our international reputation, when those areas are eliminated or even severely harmed by cuts.  I have seen the serious and irrecuperable harm done to other campuses of the University of California by the destruction of such “centerpiece” programs – as the CRMEP certainly is in Middlesex, from our point of view in the United States – and I urge you to do whatever you can to save philosophy and the CRMEP.  The loss of the Middlesex programs would be a terrible blow, with repercussions felt all over the world, including the US, South America, and Asia – not to mention Europe itself.  It would be a shame to see the vultures circling over the CRMEP, hoping to pick up what Middlesex has thrown away.

Indeed, if the programs in philosophy at Middlesex are saved, I would like to propose a new alliance between the Program in Experimental Critical Theory at UCLA and the CRMEP at Middlesex.  I have ideas for ways to connect our two programs in ways that I believe would be mutually beneficial, and without any added costs for either university.  My hope is that we can not only survive these difficult times, but find ways to prosper and grow.

I hope you will do everything you can to save philosophy and the CRMEP at Middlesex.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Reinhard
Associate Professor of English
and Comparative Literature,
UCLA
Director, Program in Experimental Critical Theory
Soundandsignifier.com

29 April 2010

Dear Michael Driscoll,

It was great shock and dismay that I learned of Middlesex’s decision to close its Philosophy program. This is not just one more unfortunate decision in a time of cutbacks and austerity measures, but a travesty for the future of philosophy.
I understand that the program is well ranked according to the standards of research and publication that serve as criteria within the UK, but I am really not well suited to address those issues.  Thus, I will leave those points to others who can address them better. However, as a philosophy professor who teaches and publishes on contemporary continental philosophy, I can say that the philosophy program at Middlesex practically serves as the gold standard for research, writing, and teaching in philosophy. This is true not only of the individual faculty, who stand out individually in terms of their publications, but of the program as whole, whose conferences and colloquia are often discussed and distributed internationally (through digital recordings and various websites).

As someone who advises students who are considering graduate work in philosophy, I can also attest to the fact that many students in the US consider Middlesex to be the preeminent place to pursue graduate work in philosophy.

I understand that these are tough times financially, that universities internationally are under a great deal of pressure, but universities are supposed to look at something beyond the bottom line, at the quality of scholarship and, quite simply, the future of knowledge production. By any such criteria the decision to close the philosophy department is a horrible decision and should be reversed immediately.

Sincerely,

Jason Read
Associate Professor of Philosophy
University of Southern Maine
Box 9300
Portland, Maine 04104-9300
207-228-8266
http://www.usm.maine.edu/phi/indexread.htm

29 April 2010

Vice-Chancellor of the University, Michael Driscoll
Middlesex University in London
The Burroughs
London NW4 4BT
England

Dear Sir,

I write in dismay upon hearing the news of the decision to close the philosophy program at Middlesex, and urge you to reverse course as soon as possible.

Many of the supporters of the program have already written to you pointing out the discrepancy between the University’s claim to support research excellence and this decision to terminate an internationally prominent unit. You know the numbers cited in this regard. I would in addition offer this personal testimony. I have reviewed two books by members of the philosophy department, Professor Hallward and Dr Alliez. The reviews were published in the leading philosophy book review forum, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. In addition, I presented a paper to the Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy in December 2006. So it is with first-hand knowledge that I testify to the excellence of both the staff and students at Middlesex, an excellence that fully justifies their reputation as a leading centre for the study of contemporary European philosophy as it grows out of the long history of philosophy.

Philosophy in Europe traces its heritage back 2500 years to the ancient Greeks. Along with its sibling rivals mathematics and literature, it has formed the basis of our European culture since that time. For the last 800 years, since the founding of the universities of Bologna, Montpellier, Paris, Oxford, and Cambridge, it has been the centre of the university as an institution of higher learning. In view of this history, we can rightfully claim that has been the work of many preceding generations of philosophers that has developed the prestige of the term “university,” and your decision to eliminate the philosophy program will lead all of us today who are the guardians of that tradition to fight to strip that name from the institution you lead, and to have it referred to simply as the Middlesex Training Institute.

To put it bluntly, sir, you have no right to call your institute a university if this decision is not rescinded. Your decision amounts to the unjust appropriation of a name whose worth was built up by those preceding me in the philosophy tradition, and I pledge to work tirelessly with all my colleagues in philosophy world-wide to take back the name. The title of “university” does not belong to you and your team; it belongs to the cultural tradition at the centre of which philosophy has stood for thousands of years, and we, who work to further that tradition, will reclaim that name, as it is no less than our duty to those who have gone before us and whose work we honor.

Yours sincerely,

John Protevi
PhD, Philosophy, Loyola University Chicago (1990)
Professor, Department of French Studies
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge LA 70803 USA

29 April 2010

Dear Michael Driscoll, Waqar Ahmad, Margaret House & Ed Esche,

The decision on the part of Middlesex University to close its Philosophy department is a travesty. As evidenced by the massive outcry which has already greeted this decision, it is absolutely clear that the university has made a terrible mistake. The ‘justifications’ for the closure of Philosophy at Middlesex – which, I’m sure you don’t need reminding, is the highest-scoring department at a post-92 and your most valuable research asset – are risible. If you want to talk about ‘impact’, there are few things that people associate with the name ‘Middlesex University’ more than its excellent Philosophy department and staff. Over the past decade or so, Middlesex has built up its reputation for being the best place in the country to study European philosophy, surpassing its Russell Group competitors. It makes absolutely no sense, either from an economic or a PR perspective to destroy in an instant what does you most proud.

It cannot have escaped your notice that in the past year or so threats to close or make cuts to Philosophy at Liverpool and KCL have been greeted with a storm of international protest. The same thing has already begun to happen over Middlesex. The precedent has been for management to reverse their decisions – I can only hope, as someone who had the privilege to be awarded their PhD by Middlesex – that this will happen in this case as well.

Sincerely,

Dr Nina Power
(PhD in Philosophy, Middlesex University, 2006)

29 April 2010

Dear Ed Esche,

I am a first year part-time PhD student in philosophy at Middlesex University. I also completed the part-time MA Philosophy and Contemporary Critical Theory at Middlesex University in 2008.

I am extremely disappointed that you recommended the closure of our philosophy department. I am disgusted that the University executive accepted this recommendation.

Our philosophy department is well-known internationally as a centre of research excellence and brilliant teaching. I myself am one of many students who have relocated to study at CRMEP. I moved back to the UK for the sole purpose of studying philosophy at CRMEP after having lived for many years in Austria and Hungary. You have decided to close a philosophy department that has a strong international pull-factor.

I came to CRMEP with a background in fine art. The MA philosophy courses at Middlesex welcome students from other disciplines to study philosophy. Not only are philosophy departments increasingly rare in the UK, many departments do not welcome students from different backgrounds so warmly as CRMEP do. At least two of my own colleagues in the arts intend to study at CRMEP in the future, and the increased intake of the MA courses in recent years is evidence of the growing popularity of CRMEP’s philosophy courses. How can you justify closing a department that is expanding?

Your decision to close philosophy at Middlesex so abruptly seems to have been made without any consideration of my circumstances (and others in similar scenarios). As a part-time PhD student, I am scheduled to study until 2015. I study part-time because I have to do paid work to pay for and support my PhD. CRMEP is one of the few places where this is actually affordable for me. Why have you disregarded my future study and the income Middlesex would receive from my fees?

Finally, you and the University executive are guilty of betraying the tradition of inclusive education in this country. Your preference for maximum profit over inclusive learning is deplorable.

I find your decision unjust, and I will – with many many others – fight against it.

Will Potter,
Research Student in Philosophy
Middlesex University

29 April 2010

Dear Michael Driscoll, Waqar Ahmad, Margaret House & Ed Esche,

This morning, as I sheltered from the rain under the cosy eves of the Politics Department at Rhodes University in Grahamstown in South Africa, there was only one topic of conversation amongst my colleagues and the group of graduate students taking their coffee and smoke break. That was, of course, your decision to close the Philosophy Department at Middlesex. My university sits in the poorest province of a country descending into an ever more brutal and malicious politics of power and plunder. But today it was your attack on the things that matter and not the militarisation of  our police, news of more activists driven from their shacks by a party militia or another corruption scandal that was at the centre of our collective attention.

The fact that you have so wholly abandoned any conception of the academic vocation and any attempt to value what is good, beautiful and true above the brute logic of money makes you the enemies of anyone, anywhere in the world, who values the academic vocation, the pursuit of philosophy as an end in itself or any aspiration to a life of the mind that extends beyond the purely instrumental calculus of profit or loss – a calculus that, more often than not, ascribes excellent to profit when in fact profit often flows from complicity with domination and the dogmas in which is disguises itself.

Last night I wrote to my colleagues and comrades around the world – professors, poets, writers and activists scattered from South Africa, to the Congo, Brazil, India, Greece, Turkey and the US and the UK – encouraging them to take swift and firm action against your decision. I have no doubt that there are many others around the world who have written similar letters. I have no doubt that action will be taken from around the world.

When the University of California in Santa Barbara tried to act against William Robinson last year they were defeated by a global campaign to defend an academic under attack from a management ruthless and cowardly in equal measure. You too may be defeated. I will certainly contribute what little I can, from far away, to your defeat.

Every day crimes are perpetrated against people and against society in the name of profit and loss. Most of these crimes are organised through modes of action that have long ago, and often with considerable violence, secured their public legitimacy. Many of these crimes are perpetrated against people whose lives and struggles do not easily transcend the local and which simply do not count in any elite public sphere. The academy has not been fully subordinated to the market and it is, at least in England, an international project. Neither you nor the World Bank nor the accountants to whom you have given control of your university may know how to value genuine scholarship but there are many in elite publics that do. You have made a fundamental miscalculation if you think that your attack will pass as easily as an eviction in Lagos or Delhi or Johannesburg aimed at ‘unlocking the value’ of a piece of land on which people have made their lives.

People are equal but our collective projects – political, artistic, philosophical, pedagogical – are not. Philosophy, like politics, like art, is a delicate thing. Making a career as an academic philosopher is easy and something that has no particular value outside of the value of it being a job like any other. But making an intervention in thought – an intervention that becomes part of the reservoir from which people draw to think about justice, beauty and truth is another thing altogether. There is individual brilliance scattered here and there. Sometimes it is strong enough to survive in isolation, sometimes it can create networks that transcend institutions and flourish that way. But it is at its strongest when it is a collaborative project rooted in daily exchange. Your attempt to destroy what has been built at Middlesex is an attempt to destroy an extraordinary department – certainly the best place to study continental philosophy in English – and a crucial node in a global network.

The resistance that you will encounter will be significant.

Richard Pithouse
Politics Department,
Rhodes University
South Africa