Seriously. We could not give a flying fuck:

In one of the most publicly contested tenure cases of the year, Barnard College announced Friday that it would promote Nadia Abu El-Haj, an anthropologist whose work on archaeology in Israel led to a major campaign against her. A statement released by the college did not directly speak to the controversy that has raged around Abu El-Haj. “Like all tenured members of the Barnard faculty, Professor Abu El-Haj has successfully passed a highly rigorous review that involves both Barnard’s own independent process and a university-wide review [at Columbia University] that reflects Barnard’s partnership with Columbia and the participation of Barnard faculty in Columbia’s graduate programs,” the statement said.

Blah blah blah. Yes, you're right - her book sucks. Forget the right-wing criticisms about her tenuous relationship to facts. She isn't even getting in through the door theoretically. On page 2 she promises to "scrutinize" archaeological historiography. The first mention of scholars as basic as Foucault comes on page 125 (or, according to the incorrect index, on 278 - and the fact that we know that is something we're never going to forgive you for). This is roughly equivalent to pontificating about the NFL without mentioning the Patriots or explaining the election without bringing up Hillary Clinton. Approve or disapprove or a scholar, you have to navigate academic work alongside certain theoretical landmarks. Otherwise you end up pathetically emoting about Israel's "colonial-national-cultural imagination" instead of producing real scholarship. "Colonial-national-cultural imagination," by the by, is also a phrase that appears on page 2.

But to return to our main point: who gives a fuck? Barnard College is a liberal arts summer camp for girls with trust funds. It's the kind of place where students are coerced into floor meetings where they're forced to discuss their bodies, the sisterhood, and poetry. These girls don't have to be brainwashed: the ability to recite liberal catechisms is a prerequisite for admission, with essay questions about maternal role models and "what you've done for your community" serving as filters.

As of 2007 Barnard has an undergraduate student body of 2,350 women. To put that in perspective: Juan Cole sees more students every day in the lunch line at Michigan. Ward Churchill will see more students in his first fake seminar than El-Haj will get in the next half-decade. Barnard doesn't even have a PhD program (although they do "participate" in Columbia's - that's almost like having a real one!). We're really supposed to care about this place? If we had our way El-Haj, Cole, Churchill, Mark LeVine, and the entire population of Berkeley, CA would all be banished to places like Barnard.

There are a lot of smart men and women at Barnard. None will be affected by El-Haj. There are also a lot of humorless pedants who spend their days wallowing in what passes for contemporary identity politics. They're a lost cause. Let them waste their energy hysterically screaming from sidewalks next to academic buildings.

Which is to say: please stop emailing us about this nonentity of a woman and the tiny echo chamber where she's going to be spending the next few decades of her life.

References:
* Barnard Tenures Scholar Opposed by Massive Campaign [IHE]

Previously:
* Brown University Outrage: Anti-Israel Academics Organize Conference To Attack Pro-Israel Critics, Shut Out Pro-Israel Speakers and Students
* Israel And AIPAC: We'll Respond To Walt And Mearsheimer When Their Vicious Anti-Semitism Gets Sophisticated Or Relevant (Plus: MR Is Suspicious About Leftist Pro-Mearsheimer Enthusiasm)
* People Who Live In Glass Context Houses Shouldn't Throw Stones