is philology philoblogy?

March 29, 2008

on March 29, 2008 at 1:43 am, Jared wrote:

I now understand what philoblogy is, but what is philology?


phi·lol·o·gy [n.]
1. the love of words (archaic)
2. a primitive form of pre-modern scholarly study fetishizing phonetic language and logocentrism, now replaced by Jacques Derrida’s anti-metaphysical grammatology.

Jacques Derrida

Philology must never be confused with Philoblogy.  While some philologists have claimed to carry the (figurative) weight of the world on their shoulders by saving ‘meaning’ as inherent in human language through Pilates-style theoretical maneuvering, philobloggers have never claimed anything more significant than their right to wage Warcraft.  The philologist is to the philoblogger as the fine-dining gourmand is to the all-you-can-eat buffet frequenter.  Whereas the philologist savours words, the philoblogger spews clichés.

But in today’s cyber-age, quantity is the name of the game, and philology is a distant relic of the past.  There are now very few philologists still in existence after the grammatologists nearly wiped them out in the frenetic Philosophical Genocide of the 1960s.  The result of this mighty struggle revealed the grammatologists as having utterly obliterated the Sisyphean weight that the philologists unwaveringly endured upon their shoulders, proving without a doubt that it never actually existed in the first place.  Since then, one occasionally stumbles across a philologist in the back room of the library’s reference section or doing stenography for C-SPAN, but their numbers are ever dwindling.