Fall Book Preview (w/ Link Dump!)

I’ve made a list of some new books coming out this Fall that have sample chapters online, so interested parties that don’t already know can check them out.

The Centre of Theology and Philosophy is publishing five books this fall on SCM Press. Some of these books have their respective introductions and first chapter’s online. As I spent a month indexing the conference volumes I can say that they are well worth reading if you have interests in these areas and present a good variance of viewpoints and work. Our favorite Scientifico-Enlightenment-Lacanian-Rationalist has a blog post cited in Belief and Metaphysics in an essay by Marcus Pound, whose Theology, Psychoanalysis and Trauma is sure to be controversial amongst Lacanians. It should be noted that I don’t exactly quite line up with the purpose of the books series, so don’t expect a defense of the orientation, but I will say that they are looking to be quite good regardless. For those attending the AAR this year do come to the book launch and drink free alcohol with me.

Palgrave has really taken off as a publisher of interesting work in Continental philosophy. Three books in the Renewing Philosophy series look particularly interesting to me. Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought Beyond Representation by Simon O’Sullivan, On Futurity:Malabou, Nancy & Derrida by Jean-Paul Martinon, and of course Nihil Unbound: Enlightenment and Extinction by Ray Brassier. The last of which I believe will be the focus of a reading group here at Nottingham, but the price may prohibit that. Palgrave has also founded two new series that look very promising. Miguel de Beistegui will be editing the Palgrave Forum for French Philosophy and John Protevi will be editing New Directions in Philosophy and Cognitive Science. All of this with the recent Henri Bergson Centennial Series makes Palgrave my current favorite publisher. Now if only they’d publish these at an affordable price.

Lastly is Philip Goodchild’s Theology of Money. I’ve read about a 2/3 of this in draft form and think it is a very powerful piece of work. Sure to be controversial, I can only hope it will also be read.

21 thoughts on “Fall Book Preview (w/ Link Dump!)

  1. Dude, we are gonna read Brassier if we have to share one copy. It is the shizz nizzle, although probably seriously wrong, but like his other stuff inspirationally wrong. Totally inspirationally wrong.

    See also the book in the Centre affiliated series, Illuminations, The End of Work, a critique of capitalism criticizing its inherent utilitarianism drawing upon the resources of John Ruskin and William Morris. I have read a fair bit of it, and it is pretty damned interesting stuff, though not as good, of course, as my work on the subject (mah hahahahahahah etc).

    You forgot the upcoming release of Conor Cunningham’s book on Darwinism, Evolution: Darwin’s Pious Idea, which is likely to put the Centre on the map by critiquing both dogmatic Dawkinish neo-Darwinism and intelligent design, and giving a theological re-reading of Evolution. This, of course, being trailed by his excellent essay in the Belief and Metaphysics volume, which might be the best thing a theologian proper has written on the subject.

    The Goodchild book also looks very sexy.

  2. I seem to recall the “this idea is further explored in my book” citation in Belief and Metaphysics is vaguely 2007, I am assuming soonish, as it is finished.

    As the Illuminations thing is edited by John, I would assume that it is affiliated. One of the books has already arrived and is mentioned on the site. It just isn’t getting as much promotion.

    £40 for Proposing Theology – you are having a laugh!

  3. I suspect that it must be based upon his programatic address five or six months back. Thats what he said anyhow!

    Goodchild’s Introduction is so much cooler with the inclusion of “a parable”.

  4. Thanks Marc, I’ve fixed it. And I am presenting at the AAR. Sadly it is at the same time as Milbank, Keller, and Ward, so I’m not sure how many people will come. On the other hand they’re talking about process theology.

    Why Aitch,

    No. Brassier stuff is far more informed, it appears, or at least isn’t the same kind of thing. Still I get the impression the two know each other (Land was in the first issue of Collapse, the journal Brassier co-edits).

  5. Query in passing – the blurb for Goodchild’s interesting-looking book includes this:

    By contrast to the received wisdom of economics that money is a passive object of human invention and control – an instrument of exchange and a measure of value – this work explores the significance of money as a social contract and therefore as a dynamic social force within the global economy

    Sorry, but whose received wisdom is that? Modern economics is founded on the idea, which Marx takes from Smith, that exchange has emergent effects, and therefore isn’t ‘a passive object of human invention and control’. I realise I’m critiquing a blurb and may be missing the point, but it just jumped out as obviously wrong…

  6. I’m not sure what to tell you. The blurb is most obviously not written by Philip, but from what I can tell the ‘received wisdom’ does seem to play to some libertarian notions of economics. This isn’t my strong area and may be a mistake on Philip’s part or a mis-statement.

  7. If you want a trailer and a further explaination of things in Philip’s book read Capital and Kingdom in the Theology and The Political collection, which is a better “blurb” for his project that the blurb. From what I remember, the first bit talks about money in Marx and classical political economy and explains it much better than I can.

  8. ‘Modern economics is founded on the idea, which Marx takes from Smith, that exchange has emergent effects, and therefore isn’t ‘a passive object of human invention and control’.’

    Just looking over this again I’m not so sure you get the point. The foundation of a discourse does not determine its practice. It seems fairly obvious, from reading the paper and living in the world, that most people, including what could be called practical economists, do think of money as a passive object that can be controlled by virtue of being a human invention. There are obvious degrees and nuances to this, but the same basic assumption holds. Philip’s book also is firmly within the discourse of Smith and Marx so I don’t expect that his position is all that alien to them though surely differentiated from them.

  9. Fair enough; I was talking off the top of my head and could easily be wrong or at cross-purposes. I will look up Goodchild’s work, though – looks interesting.

  10. Yeah, Conor’s book on Evolution doesn’t come out till next year. He’s not quite done with it yet.

    Alex, you are right about his piece in Belief & Metaphysics though — although I heard him present on this same paper last year, this filled out version of it is brilliant.

Comments are closed.