Citational techniques can simultaneously be serious argument and deliberate play

Evidence

After abc, d occupies itself with the critique of the legal copyright to one’s own words and mimes citationality by testing the seriousness of “Copyright © by John D. Searle” as it is plausibly placed between more and more quotation marks. Derrida also tests the status of the signature as a man’s mark by examining its every implication and reproducing “his own” in various ways. Now these are, of course, “serious” demonstrations of Derrida’s argument. But they are also, and unmistakably, high-class tomfoolery. — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader, 783

Categorization

• QUESTION: Does the Derrida citation-tomfoolery operative here parallel Spivak’s own strategic-essentialism performance?
• XREF: connects to: A scholarly book can sustain argument through allusion without inline citations; Mixing serious intent with undisciplined language is deliberate disciplinary critique — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader: Selected Works of…, 787; Problems can emerge from their own momentum when an argument is followed wholeheartedly (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Polemical intent can coexist with rigorous textual scholarship #corroborates (0.80) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1700
• A scholarly book can sustain argument through allusion without inline citations #corroborates (0.78)
• Mixing serious intent with undisciplined language is deliberate disciplinary critique #expands (0.72) — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader, 787
• Problems can emerge from their own momentum when an argument is followed wholeheartedly #exemplifies (0.72)