July 20, 2025 - English Studies

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon: A Critical Analysis

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon first appeared in 1914 in The Times newspaper on September 21, and was later included in his collection The Winnowing Fan: Poems of the Great War (1914).

Introduction: “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon first appeared in 1914 in The Times newspaper on September 21, and was later included in his collection The Winnowing Fan: Poems of the Great War (1914). The poem gained lasting popularity for its solemn and reverent tone, which captured the grief and pride of a nation mourning its dead during World War I. Written in the early months of the war, it served both as a eulogy and a form of national remembrance, particularly resonant with the British public. One stanza, in particular, became iconic: “They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old… At the going down of the sun and in the morning / We will remember them.” These lines are now recited annually on Remembrance Day and inscribed on war memorials throughout the Commonwealth. Through its vivid imagery—“They fell with their faces to the foe”—and spiritual resonance—“There is music in the midst of desolation / And a glory that shines upon our tears”—Binyon’s poem elevates the sacrifice of the soldiers into something eternal and sacred, contributing profoundly to the cultural memory of the war.

Text: “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children,

England mourns for her dead across the sea.

Flesh of her flesh they were, spirit of her spirit,

Fallen in the cause of the free.

Solemn the drums thrill; Death august and royal

Sings sorrow up into immortal spheres,

There is music in the midst of desolation

And a glory that shines upon our tears.

They went with songs to the battle, they were young,

Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow.

They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted;

They fell with their faces to the foe.

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:

Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning

We will remember them.

They mingle not with their laughing comrades again;

They sit no more at familiar tables of home;

They have no lot in our labour of the day-time;

They sleep beyond England’s foam.

But where our desires are and our hopes profound,

Felt as a well-spring that is hidden from sight,

To the innermost heart of their own land they are known

As the stars are known to the Night;

As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust,

Moving in marches upon the heavenly plain;

As the stars that are starry in the time of our darkness,

To the end, to the end, they remain.

Annotations: “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

Stanza	Simple Annotation (Meaning)	Literary Devices
1	England, personified as a mother, proudly and sorrowfully grieves for her sons who died overseas. They were deeply connected to her, dying for the freedom of others.	🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Personification – England as a mother🔁 Repetition – “flesh of her flesh”🕊 Alliteration – “Flesh of her flesh”🎖 Theme – Patriotism, sacrifice
2	The war dead are honored with solemn ceremonies. Despite the sadness, their deaths are seen as noble, with beauty even in grief.	🥁 Alliteration – “Solemn the drums thrill”👑 Metaphor – Death as “august and royal”🎵 Imagery – “music in desolation”🌟 Juxtaposition – Sorrow vs glory
3	The soldiers were youthful, strong, and brave. They fought loyally and died facing the enemy with courage.	👶 Irony – Youth and death🧍 Visual Imagery – “Straight of limb, true of eye”🔁 Repetition – “they were…”✊ Heroism – “faces to the foe”
4	The fallen will stay forever young, while the living age. We will always remember them at sunset and sunrise.	🕯 Epiphora – “grow old” repeated⏳ Metaphor – Timeless remembrance🕊 Alliteration – “sun…sunrise”📜 Anaphora – “At the…”
5	The dead no longer share life’s joys or work. They now sleep far away, across the sea, removed from everyday life.	🌊 Euphemism – “sleep beyond England’s foam”🏠 Imagery – “tables of home”⚖️ Contrast – Living vs dead💭 Tone – Solemn, reflective
6	Though unseen, the dead are deeply connected to the nation’s spirit, like unseen hopes or stars known to the night.	💧 Metaphor – “wellspring…hidden”🌌 Symbolism – Stars as memory/souls🌒 Simile – “As the stars are known to the Night”
7	The fallen are eternal, like stars shining even after we die. In our darkest times, they remain to guide us.	🌟 Simile & Metaphor – “Stars…heavenly plain”♾️ Repetition – “To the end, to the end”🕯 Imagery – “dust…darkness”🔁 Motif – Eternity, remembrance

Literary And Poetic Devices: “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

🔣 Device	📝 Example from the Poem	📖 Explanation and Device Nature
📜 Anaphora	“At the going down of the sun and in the morning / We will remember them”	The phrase “At the…” is repeated at the beginning of lines. This is anaphora, a rhetorical device used to create rhythm and solemn emphasis, particularly in remembrance. It draws attention to the act of remembering as a daily, ritualistic pledge.
🕊 Alliteration	“Flesh of her flesh, spirit of her spirit”	The repetition of the initial “f” and “s” sounds gives the line musicality and emphasizes emotional unity. Alliteration enhances the lyrical quality and emotional resonance by reinforcing key ideas (identity, sacrifice).
⚖️ Contrast	“They went with songs to the battle, they were young… They fell with their faces to the foe”	This presents a stark contrast between youth and death, hope and loss. The contrast highlights the tragic irony of young lives lost in war, a technique used to heighten emotional impact.
🕯 Epiphora	“They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old”	The word “old” ends both parts of the sentence. This is epiphora, used to reinforce the central idea that the dead remain timeless, while the living age. It adds rhythmic closure and thematic contrast.
🌊 Euphemism	“They sleep beyond England’s foam”	The word “sleep” softens the harshness of death. Euphemism is used to express loss with dignity, especially in elegiac poetry. It evokes peace rather than violence.
👶 Irony	“They went with songs to the battle, they were young”	There is tragic irony here: young, hopeful men go cheerfully to war but meet death. The contrast between cheerful going and violent end underscores war’s cruelty.
🎵 Imagery	“There is music in the midst of desolation”	This appeals to hearing and emotion, blending sorrow with beauty. Imagery is used to evoke complex feelings—grief elevated by the honor and glory of sacrifice.
🧍 Visual Imagery	“Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow”	The vivid physical description helps readers picture the youth and vitality of the soldiers. This is visual imagery, enriching emotional connection and idealizing their character.
✊ Heroism	“They fell with their faces to the foe”	This line praises bravery in combat. It captures heroism by emphasizing dignity in death and facing danger without retreat. It glorifies sacrifice.
💧 Metaphysical Conceit	“Felt as a well-spring that is hidden from sight”	Deep emotion is compared to an unseen spring. This conceit combines abstract spirituality with a physical metaphor, typical in metaphysical poetry to express inner emotional truths.
👑 Metaphor	“Death august and royal”	Death is directly described as noble and kingly. This metaphor elevates the concept of dying in war, turning it into something honorable and dignified.
🌌 Motif	“As the stars… the stars… the stars…”	The recurring image of stars across multiple stanzas forms a motif of remembrance, eternity, and guidance. Motifs reinforce central themes through repetition.
🎖 Theme	Whole poem (sacrifice, remembrance, eternity)	The poem’s core themes are remembrance, patriotic mourning, and eternal honor. Themes give the poem its emotional and moral backbone, guiding reader interpretation.
🔁 Repetition	“They were… They were… They fell…”	The recurring structure emphasizes continuity and collective sacrifice. Repetition creates rhythm and solemnity, allowing the message to resonate emotionally.
🌒 Simile	“As the stars are known to the Night”	This simile compares the remembrance of the dead to stars known by the night. It conveys permanence and familiarity, helping visualize abstract memory.
🌟 Star Symbolism	“As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust”	Stars symbolize eternal life and memory. They’re distant yet constant—ideal for representing the undying presence of the fallen in collective consciousness.
🌌 Symbolism	“England mourns for her dead across the sea”	England symbolizes a motherland mourning her children. Symbolism allows emotional ideas (grief, nationhood) to be conveyed through familiar images.
✨ Juxtaposition	“There is music in the midst of desolation”	Two opposing concepts—music and destruction—are placed together. This juxtaposition reveals the paradox of war: sorrow infused with honor or beauty.

🕊 Themes in “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

1. Remembrance and Commemoration: In “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon, the most powerful theme is remembrance. Binyon creates a ritual of national memory through the iconic lines: “At the going down of the sun and in the morning / We will remember them.” These words, drawn from stanza four, are still recited on Remembrance Day and engraved on war memorials throughout the Commonwealth. The act of remembering becomes sacred, as those left behind vow to honor the fallen daily. The line “They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old” reinforces the permanence of memory; the dead remain eternally young in the nation’s heart. The poem’s very title, “For the Fallen,” signals its commemorative purpose, and the closing affirmation “To the end, to the end, they remain” seals the idea of continuous remembrance.

🏅 2. Heroism and Sacrifice: In “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon, heroism is depicted as both physical and spiritual courage. The poet honors those who died defending freedom with phrases like “Fallen in the cause of the free,” connecting their deaths to a noble purpose. The line “They fell with their faces to the foe” exemplifies bravery, suggesting that the soldiers met death courageously in battle. Furthermore, death itself is personified with dignity: “Death august and royal,” elevating the fallen to the status of timeless heroes. Their youth and steadfast spirit are highlighted in descriptions like “Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow.” By presenting them as idealized figures, Binyon not only mourns their loss but venerates their sacrifice as part of national honor and military valor.

🌌 3. Eternity and Immortality: In “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon, the theme of eternity transforms the soldiers from mortal men into lasting symbols. Through celestial imagery, especially the metaphor of stars, Binyon creates a sense of timelessness: “As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust.” This line, from the final stanza, suggests that even when the living pass away, the memory of the fallen will continue to shine. The repeated reference to stars “in the time of our darkness” portrays the dead as guiding lights, present even when hope seems lost. The phrase “They shall grow not old…” further cements this theme, separating the fallen from the aging of the living and granting them an immortal place in collective memory. Their spirit becomes universal and eternal, “moving in marches upon the heavenly plain.”

🇬🇧 4. National Identity and Collective Mourning

In “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon, the mourning of fallen soldiers is framed as a national and cultural experience. The poem opens with the lines “With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children, / England mourns for her dead across the sea,” personifying England as a grieving yet proud mother. This metaphor ties the personal grief of families to a broader national identity. The line “Flesh of her flesh they were, spirit of her spirit” deepens this connection, portraying the soldiers not as separate individuals but as extensions of the nation itself. The poem affirms that the dead remain embedded in the national psyche: “To the innermost heart of their own land they are known.” Through this language, Binyon crafts a solemn yet unifying portrayal of patriotic loss, where mourning is a shared, almost sacred, civic duty.

Literary Theories and “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

🔣 Theory	📖 Application of the Theory	📝 Textual Reference / Example
🏛 1. Historical/Biographical Theory	This theory focuses on understanding the poem through its historical and authorial context. “For the Fallen” was written in 1914, shortly after the outbreak of World War I. Laurence Binyon, too old to enlist, wrote it in tribute to British soldiers. The poem reflects the national mood of solemn patriotism and grief. It is deeply rooted in the early WWI context, prior to the disillusionment that came later in war poetry.	“England mourns for her dead across the sea” (Stanza 1) shows the national grief during WWI. “Fallen in the cause of the free” (Stanza 1) expresses contemporary patriotic justification for war.
🎭 2. Formalist Theory (New Criticism)	Formalism focuses on the poem’s structure, form, and literary devices, independent of context or authorial intent. The poem is rich in structure, balanced stanzas, regular meter, and use of repetition and imagery that contribute to its solemn tone. Devices like alliteration, metaphor, and motif unify the text and reinforce its themes.	“They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old” (Stanza 4) – use of repetition and contrast. “As the stars… they remain” (Stanza 7) – recurring motif of stars reinforcing immortality theme.
🇬🇧 3. Nationalist/Post-Colonial Theory	This theory explores how literature reinforces or challenges national identity. Binyon’s poem glorifies British identity and frames death in war as a noble act of serving the nation. England is personified as a mourning mother, reinforcing unity, sacrifice, and national pride. It presents war as honorable rather than exploitative, reflecting early 20th-century imperial ideals.	“With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children / England mourns…” (Stanza 1) – England as a nurturing yet grieving nation. “To the innermost heart of their own land they are known” (Stanza 6) – the dead are preserved in the nation’s cultural memory.
🧠 4. Psychological Theory (Psychoanalytic)	This theory examines underlying psychological drives, grief, and collective memory. The poem externalizes both personal and national grief. It may be seen as a mechanism for processing trauma through ritualized language and symbolism. The repetition and imagery function as a coping method for national mourning.	“There is music in the midst of desolation / And a glory that shines upon our tears” (Stanza 2) – shows how sorrow is elevated into something beautiful. “We will remember them” – collective reaffirmation helps resolve grief through ritual memory (Stanza 4).

Critical Questions about “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

🕯 1. How does “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon shape our understanding of national mourning?

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon transforms national mourning into a collective, reverent act of remembrance. The poem opens with the image of “a mother for her children,” identifying England as the symbolic mourner. This metaphor makes grief not only familial but patriotic. The line “England mourns for her dead across the sea” reflects a whole nation’s sorrow, not just individual loss. Mourning becomes a civic duty, especially with the recurring vow: “We will remember them.” By combining ritualistic repetition with solemn tone, Binyon offers a poetic space where grief is dignified and unified across generations, reinforcing how societies honor those lost to war.

🏅 2. In what ways does “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon idealize the soldier and his death?

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon portrays the soldier not as a tragic figure, but as a timeless symbol of valor and purity. In stanza three, the poet describes the young men as “Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow,” highlighting their physical and moral perfection. Death is presented as noble: “They fell with their faces to the foe.” Even death itself is portrayed with grandeur: “Death august and royal.” These portrayals align the fallen soldiers with classical heroism, transforming their deaths from suffering into meaningful, almost sacred sacrifice. The poem thus constructs a heroic mythology around wartime loss, fitting for early World War I sentiment.

🌌 3. What role does the concept of eternity play in “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon?

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon deeply embeds the theme of eternity to affirm that the memory of the dead will never fade. The well-known line “They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old” detaches the fallen from time. Eternity is symbolized through the image of stars: “As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust.” These lines suggest that the dead transcend physical life and become part of a universal, lasting order. Their memory moves into the celestial realm—“marches upon the heavenly plain”—thus portraying remembrance not as temporary emotion, but as permanent, guiding presence.

🇬🇧 4. How does “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon use poetic structure and language to create a tone of solemn reverence?

“For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon creates its reverent tone through a careful blend of form, rhythm, and elevated diction. The poem is written in regular quatrains with controlled meter, evoking a hymn-like quality. Literary devices like alliteration—“Flesh of her flesh, spirit of her spirit”—and repetition—“They were… they fell…”—build a meditative pace, reinforcing the sacredness of the message. The use of phrases like “Death august and royal” and “glory that shines upon our tears” elevates the language, moving beyond ordinary grief to poetic glorification. This formal, dignified structure turns the poem into a ritual of national remembrance, ensuring that the tone remains respectful and solemn throughout.

Literary Works Similar to “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

📜 1. “In Flanders Fields” by John McCrae

📌 Both poems honor fallen soldiers with reverent tone and use nature imagery like poppies and stars to symbolize sacrifice.
🕊 Theme: Remembrance & Memorial Tone

🎖 2. “Dulce et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen

📌 While Binyon glorifies sacrifice, Owen exposes its brutality—but both examine the emotional impact of war on society.
⚔️ Theme: War & Death (Idealized vs Real)

🌌 3. “The Soldier” by Rupert Brooke

📌 Like Binyon’s poem, it portrays death for one’s country as noble, eternal, and spiritually redemptive.
🇬🇧 Theme: Patriotism & Spiritual Immortality

🕯 4. “Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night” by Dylan Thomas

📌 Although not a war poem, it shares Binyon’s tone of dignified resistance in the face of death.
🔥 Theme: Death & Noble Defiance

🌠 5. “Requiem” by Robert Louis Stevenson

📌 Both poems present death as peaceful and deserved rest, celebrating a life completed with honor.
🛌 Theme: Peaceful Death & Legacy

Representative Quotations of “For the Fallen” by Laurence Binyon

📜 Quotation	📖 Explanation	🧠 Theoretical Perspective
🕊 “They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old.”	Immortalizes the fallen by contrasting them with the aging living, elevating their memory above time.	Psychoanalytic Theory – eternal youth comforts the national psyche by freezing memory in heroism.
🎖 “They fell with their faces to the foe.”	Highlights the heroism of soldiers who met death head-on, not in retreat.	Heroic/Nationalist Theory – frames soldiers as ideal patriots and moral examples.
🌌 “As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust.”	Uses stars as a metaphor for eternal remembrance; their legacy outlives the living.	Symbolism & Formalist Theory – eternal imagery preserves cultural memory.
🕯 “We will remember them.”	A ritualistic, communal vow repeated to ensure the fallen are never forgotten.	Reader-Response Theory – the reader is drawn into a participatory act of remembrance.
🇬🇧 “England mourns for her dead across the sea.”	Presents mourning as a national act and ties emotional loss to national identity.	Post-Colonial/Nationalist Theory – explores the state as a grieving subject and unifier.
📜 “With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children.”	Personifies England as a dignified, grieving mother, sanctifying loss.	Feminist/Post-Structural Theory – analyzes the metaphor of the nation as female caregiver.
✨ “There is music in the midst of desolation.”	Juxtaposes beauty and sorrow, expressing that grief can contain nobility.	Formalist Theory – emotional duality through poetic contrast.
🔁 “They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted.”	Celebrates courage, endurance, and unwavering loyalty in the face of overwhelming danger.	Heroic Theory – reinforces the myth of the selfless soldier.
⏳ “To the end, to the end, they remain.”	Repetition reinforces the idea of permanence and ongoing presence in national memory.	Psychoanalytic/Formalist Theory – poetic structure mirrors eternal remembrance.
🔔 “Death august and royal sings sorrow up into immortal spheres.”	Elevates death into something sacred and majestic, transforming it into transcendence.	Mythic/Archetypal Theory – death becomes a rite of spiritual passage.

“Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković: Summary and Critique

“Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković first appeared in Philosophia in 2016, published by Springer Science+Business Media.

Introduction: “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković

“Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković first appeared in Philosophia in 2016, published by Springer Science+Business Media. The article critically advances the philosophical conversation on “bullshit” by identifying a conceptual gap in the influential accounts by Harry Frankfurt and G.A. Cohen. Ivanković argues that a significant form of bullshit—obscurantism, or the intentional use of opaque, ambiguous language to deceive or overawe—escapes Frankfurt’s producer-focused analysis and is inadequately captured by Cohen’s product-centered framework. By distinguishing between obscurantist bullshit and mere obscurity, Ivanković situates bullshit within a normative landscape that includes not just the text and its author, but the audience (or bullshittee) as well. Drawing on Boudry and Buekens, he elucidates the rhetorical mechanisms and cognitive biases that facilitate the spread of philosophical obscurantism, including immunizing strategies, aesthetic seduction, and the exploitation of charitable interpretation. Importantly, he resists essentialist definitions of bullshit, instead advocating for a morally nuanced account that foregrounds authorial intent and the audience’s susceptibility. In the realm of literary theory and philosophy of language, Ivanković’s intervention deepens our understanding of clarity as a philosophical virtue and refines the epistemic and ethical distinctions between bad writing and intentional obfuscation. His work is thus vital for contemporary debates on academic style, truth-telling, and the ethics of intellectual discourse.

Summary of “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković

🧠 Overview: Addressing Gaps in Bullshit Theory

Ivanković critiques existing definitions of “bullshit” by Harry Frankfurt and G.A. Cohen.
He introduces obscurantism as a distinct and under-theorized form of bullshit.

The central claim: “Obscurantist bullshit pushes the envelope of the current conceptual frameworks” (Ivanković, 2016, p. 2).

👤 Frankfurt’s Producer-Oriented Account

Frankfurt defines bullshit by the intent of the speaker: the bullshitter “is indifferent to how things really are” (Frankfurt, 1988).
Bullshit is worse than lying because it disregards truth entirely.

Ivanković critiques this view as too narrow: “Frankfurt’s essentialism… is insufficiently inclusive” (Ivanković, 2016, p. 3).

📦 Cohen’s Product-Oriented Account

Cohen focuses on the product of bullshit, particularly unclarifiable unclarity.
He targets philosophical texts (e.g., Althusser, Hegel) that appear deliberately incomprehensible.

Ivanković aligns with Cohen but notes a lack of emphasis on the bullshitter’s intent:

“What Cohen wants to look at is bullshit taken independently from the producer” (p. 6).

🧩 Introducing Obscurantism

Defined as the deliberate use of opacity to deceive or elevate trivial claims.

Not all obscure writing is obscurantist; intent matters.
Quote: “There is an important normative difference between being an obscurantist and someone who merely writes obscurely” (p. 4).

🎭 Bullshit as a Three-Part Relation

Ivanković introduces a triadic framework:
1. Bullshit (the product),
2. Bullshitter (the producer),
3. Bullshittee (the audience).
This model expands on both Frankfurt’s and Cohen’s accounts by emphasizing the audience’s interpretive role.

🧪 Mechanisms of Obscurantism (via Boudry & Buekens)

Ambiguity as virtue: vagueness perceived as profundity.

Example: Lacan’s “the Other” — a term so multivalent it becomes meaningless (p. 14).

Immunizing strategies: use of relativism or constructivism to deflect critique.

“Truth is always relative to a discourse” (p. 15).

Authority and seduction: leveraging academic status or obscure jargon to “insulate arguments from criticism” (p. 16).

🧰 The Practical Challenge of Intent

Ivanković argues for the importance of identifying intentional deception.
But intent is hard to detect: “A more narrow conception that I offer… brings up the practical difficulty of identifying authors as bullshitters” (p. 17).
Nevertheless, intention remains central to moral fault.

🧾 The “Obscuria” Thought Experiment

Hypothetical society where obscure writing is the norm.
He presents 4 types of philosophers in Obscuria:
1. Deliberate obscurantists (clear bullshitters).
2. Unaware mimics (merely obscure).
3. Culturally conditioned defenders (borderline cases).
4. Regretful conformists (morally permissible obscurantism).
Concludes: intent and context both matter, but not all obscurants are equally blameworthy.

📏 Clarity as a Normative Principle

Obscurantism must be scrutinized, but mere avoidance of bullshit is not enough.
Clarity demands “self-criticism, effort, and pedantry” (p. 20).
Quoting Williamson:

“The fear of boring oneself or one’s readers is a great enemy of truth” (Williamson, 2006, p. 185).

✅ Conclusion

Obscurantist bullshit is a normative and epistemic problem.
Both the producer’s intent and the audience’s receptiveness must be considered.

The proposed framework offers a more comprehensive lens to identify and challenge academic bullshit.

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković

🧩 Term	📖 Explanation	📝 Quotation & In-text Citation
🎭 Bullshit	A speech act where the speaker shows indifference to the truth. Unlike lying, the bullshitter doesn’t care whether what they say is true or false, only how it sounds or appears.	“To a bullshitter, claims Frankfurt, the truth of his utterances are of no importance” (Ivanković, 2016, p. 5).
👤 Bullshitter	The agent who produces bullshit. Frankfurt focuses on their internal state—primarily indifference to truth rather than intent to deceive.	“Frankfurt follows suit in terms of focusing on the performer of bullshit, rather than the product itself…” (p. 5).
👂 Bullshittee	The receiver of bullshit—someone manipulated by stylistic, aesthetic, or authoritative appeal to accept nonsense.	“…an exhaustive account of the social phenomenon of bullshit will observe three aspects – the product, the producer, and the audience” (p. 4).
🌫️ Obscurantism	The deliberate use of opaque, jargon-heavy, or ambiguous language intended to mislead, elevate triviality, or conceal weakness. It’s Ivanković’s key addition to bullshit theory.	“Obscurantism… escapes Frankfurt’s radar… and is not given distinct status in Cohen’s framework” (p. 1).
🧱 Unclarifiable Unclarity	Cohen’s term for philosophical texts so obscure that clarification distorts them beyond recognition. A hallmark of academic bullshit.	“Not only obscure but… if we are able to break the obscurity down, the resulting product is trivial or unrecognizable” (p. 3).
🔒 Immunizing Strategies	Rhetorical defenses like radical relativism or postmodern constructivism that protect obscurities from rational critique.	“Immunizing strategies consist of general and theory-independent arguments… such as radical relativism about truth” (p. 15).
🔄 Hermeneutic Effort & Principle of Charity	Readers are often biased to assume obscure texts are meaningful, which sustains obscurantism. This effort feeds into loss aversion and adaptive preference.	“…he is willing to invest a huge hermeneutic effort… persuaded that the hidden treasure… is valuable” (p. 16).
🧠 Intentional vs. Unintentional Bullshit	Differentiates deliberate deception (obscurantist) from accidental obscurity (incompetence or cultural mimicry). Central to Ivanković’s ethical distinction.	“…the deliberate producer commits a very different and barely comparable kind of moral fault” (p. 13).
🏛️ Obscuria (Thought Experiment)	A fictional philosophical culture where obscurity is normalized. Used to illustrate the moral and epistemic complexity of bullshit in academic environments.	“Let us call this context Obscuria… where philosophers subscribe to a particular writing style” (p. 18).
🧭 Principle of Clarity	A philosophical standard favoring precise, comprehensible, and accessible communication. Not equivalent to avoiding bullshit but conceptually linked.	“…while exposing and avoiding philosophical bullshit is important… the mere avoidance… is not conducive to an exhaustive principle of clarity” (p. 4).

Contribution of “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković to Literary Theory/Theories

🧠 1. Critical Theory / Frankfurt School

Connection: Engages with Harry Frankfurt’s foundational work On Bullshit, expanding it to challenge ideological and epistemic manipulation in intellectual discourse.
Contribution:
- Ivanković criticizes Frankfurt’s essentialism for excluding obscurantist forms of academic manipulation.
- He re-frames bullshit as part of a broader ideological structure, where language is used not just to mislead but to establish power.
- “Frankfurt’s essentialism… is insufficiently inclusive” (Ivanković, 2016, p. 3).
Relevance: Adds nuance to ideological critique by addressing how intellectual obfuscation reinforces epistemic authority without substance.

📜 2. Post-Structuralism

Connection: Challenges the celebration of ambiguity found in postmodern and post-structuralist texts (e.g., Lacan, Derrida, Žižek).
Contribution:
- Argues that not all ambiguity is emancipatory or profound—some is strategically obscure to resist falsifiability and critique.
- Discusses “ambiguity as value”: the view that interpretive multiplicity = profundity.
- “Obscurantists rely on loose and undefined concepts in equally loosely configured systems…” (p. 14).
Relevance: Critiques deconstructionist aesthetics when they cross into intentional mystification; calls for a normative check on opacity in theoretical language.

✍️ 3. Rhetorical and Discourse Theory

Connection: Explores how rhetoric and style function as tools of deception in philosophical and theoretical texts.
Contribution:
- Identifies rhetorical strategies like “hermeneutic overinvestment” and “immunizing strategies” (e.g., appeals to relativism).
- Reveals how obscurantist writing manipulates the audience’s cognitive and interpretive biases.
- “Immunizing strategies consist of general and theory-independent arguments… such as radical relativism about truth” (p. 15).
Relevance: Deepens rhetorical theory by introducing moral dimensions to discourse analysis—when obscurity is used for manipulation.

🔎 4. Reader-Response Theory

Connection: Positions the bullshittee (audience) as an active participant whose interpretive charity and bias are exploited.
Contribution:
- Emphasizes how readers’ own assumptions and “principle of charity” are co-opted into validating nonsense.
- Highlights the role of hermeneutic effort in the production of meaning—often in vain.
- “…the reader’s charitableness remains effective until other cognitive biases become operative” (p. 16).
Relevance: Challenges the assumption that meaning is always co-constructed; alerts to asymmetries of intent and interpretation.

🧰 5. Structuralism / Semiotics

Connection: Considers how language structures and signifiers are sometimes intentionally emptied of meaning.
Contribution:
- Analyzes terms like Lacan’s “the Other” as floating signifiers with excessive ambiguity.
- Critiques when signs are used not for sense-making but for impression and mystique.
- “This testifies only to the ‘rich’ and ‘profound’ character of the insights we have been offered” (p. 14).
Relevance: Reinforces structuralist critique of semantic instability and connects it to moral and epistemic responsibility in theory-making.

🧾 6. Marxist Literary Theory

Connection: Reflects the concerns of analytical Marxists like G.A. Cohen in exposing vacuous ideological jargon in academic Marxism.
Contribution:
- Targets “Althusserian Marxism” and similar trends for cloaking trivial insights in pompous, obscure prose.
- Defends a Marxism free from obfuscation—“Marxism without bullshit.”
- “Cohen specifically targets Althusserian Marxists… as bullshit” (p. 6).

Relevance: Reorients Marxist criticism toward conceptual clarity, rational accountability, and anti-elitism in theory.

💬 7. Philosophy of Language & Literary Style

Connection: Questions what makes writing obscure vs. obscurantist, and how style becomes a tool of deception.
Contribution:
- Proposes a normative distinction: “writing obscurely” ≠ “writing to obscure.”
- Introduces “Obscuria” as a fictional academic setting to explore the ethics of stylistic conformity.
- “There is an important normative difference between being an obscurantist and someone who merely writes obscurely” (p. 4).

Relevance: Offers tools for evaluating style, precision, and authorial responsibility in literary and academic prose.

🧭 8. Ethics of Interpretation / Clarity as a Virtue

Connection: Engages with literary ethics—how clarity itself is a moral stance in writing.

Contribution:
- Advocates for the principle of clarity as a normative goal in scholarly discourse.
- Rejects the idea that aesthetic complexity should override truth-seeking or intelligibility.
- “Avoiding bullshit is not conducive to an exhaustive principle of clarity” (p. 4).
Relevance: Pushes literary theory to recognize clarity and sincerity as critical virtues, not just stylistic preferences.

Examples of Critiques Through “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković

🧩 Work	🎯 Critique through Ivanković’s Framework	🔍 Key Obscurantist Indicators
📘 Jacques Lacan – Écrits	Ivanković (drawing from Boudry & Buekens) cites Lacan as a textbook case of deliberate obscurantism, using overloaded signifiers (like “the Other”) to create mystique rather than clarity.	– Ambiguity as rhetorical virtue- Loosely defined central terms- Reader forced into hermeneutic over-effort (Ivanković, 2016, pp. 14–15)
📙 Martin Heidegger – Being and Time	Though not explicitly named, Ivanković echoes Cohen’s critique of philosophers like Heidegger, whose language is often impenetrably obscure and resists clarification.	– “Unclarifiable unclarity” (Cohen)- Ambiguity mistaken for depth- Immunizing jargon from critique (p. 6)
📕 Louis Althusser – Reading Capital	Cohen’s original target, supported by Ivanković, Althusser is framed as a producer of academic bullshit—presenting banal or confused claims in intentionally complex prose.	– Intentional obfuscation- Marxist jargon divorced from substance- Audience dependency on authorial authority (p. 6)
📗 Slavoj Žižek – The Sublime Object of Ideology	Žižek is mentioned indirectly (e.g. in the Lacan section) as someone who uses theoretical pastiche and ambiguous constructs that often serve an aesthetic or performative function more than a clarifying one.	– Cross-referencing cinematic/theoretical language without synthesis- Seductive ambiguity- Resistance to paraphrase (pp. 14–15)

Criticism Against “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković

⚖️ 1. Over-Reliance on Authorial Intent

Ivanković insists that intentionality distinguishes obscurantism from mere obscurity, but:
- Intent is notoriously difficult to verify in academic writing.
- Risk of subjectivity: readers might project intent without sufficient evidence.
- Undermines the practicality of the theory: “To identify obscurantists, we must infer intention—an unstable criterion.”

📉 2. Undermines Value of Complexity

The article risks conflating complexity with deception, implying that opaque language is suspicious by default.
- Philosophical or literary works may be complex due to the subject, not due to bad faith.
- For example, works by Heidegger or Derrida often require dense terminology for ontological nuance.

🔄 3. Circularity in Defining Bullshit

Ivanković criticizes Frankfurt’s essentialism but does not clearly escape it himself:
- His expanded model still hinges on mental states and normative assumptions.
- The term “bullshit” remains slippery despite the three-part structure (bullshit–bullshitter–bullshittee).

🔍 4. Under-theorized Audience Role

While Ivanković introduces the “bullshittee”, the analysis of audience psychology is limited and simplified.
- More engagement with reader-response theory or cognitive linguistics could enhance this part.
- The model underestimates cultural literacy and interpretive competence among readers.

🧪 5. Selective Targeting of Theoretical Traditions

The critique is implicitly biased against continental/postmodern thinkers, e.g. Lacan, Žižek, Althusser.
- Neglects to critique obscurity in analytic philosophy, despite acknowledging it.
- Risks appearing as an ideological defense of analytic clarity rather than a balanced philosophical inquiry.

🚫 6. Incomplete Conceptual Boundaries

The distinction between “merely obscure” and “obscurantist” remains unstable:
- Some hypothetical cases (e.g., the “Obscuria” philosopher) show that moral fault is gradient, not binary.
- No clear criteria to consistently classify authors into categories.

🧭 7. Pessimism Toward Clarity

Despite endorsing the principle of clarity, Ivanković ends with a pessimistic conclusion:
- Suggests that even avoiding bullshit does not lead to clarity.
- This may weaken the normative thrust of the entire argument.

Representative Quotations from “Steering Clear of Bullshit? The Problem of Obscurantism” by Viktor Ivanković with Explanation

🔖 Quotation	🧠 Explanation
1. “Obscurantism… escapes Frankfurt’s radar in tracking those judgments unconcerned with truth.” (p. 1)	Sets up the central claim: Frankfurt’s theory fails to capture deliberate obfuscation, which Ivanković terms obscurantist bullshit.
2. “There is an important normative difference between being an obscurantist and someone who merely writes obscurely.” (p. 4)	Introduces Ivanković’s key ethical distinction—not all obscure writing is immoral, but deliberate obfuscation is.
3. “Cohen wants to look at bullshit taken independently from the producer, focusing on the product.” (p. 6)	Critiques Cohen’s approach as ignoring authorial intent, which is crucial for judging moral blame.
4. “Immunizing strategies consist of general and theory-independent arguments… such as radical relativism.” (p. 15)	Highlights rhetorical devices used by obscurantist authors to deflect criticism and resist falsification.
5. “He is willing to invest a huge hermeneutic effort… persuaded that the hidden treasure… is valuable.” (p. 16)	Describes how readers may over-interpret nonsense, mistaking obscurity for depth due to cognitive bias.
6. “The deliberate producer commits a very different and barely comparable kind of moral fault.” (p. 13)	Clarifies that intentional bullshit is ethically worse than mere incompetence or obscurity.
7. “Obscurantists rely on loose and undefined concepts in equally loosely configured systems.” (p. 14)	Criticizes philosophical jargon used without clarity, often to impress or obscure lack of substance.
8. “Let us call this context Obscuria… where philosophers subscribe to a particular writing style.” (p. 18)	Introduces a thought experiment to explore how academic norms might normalize or excuse bullshit.
9. “While exposing and avoiding philosophical bullshit is important… the mere avoidance… is not conducive to an exhaustive principle of clarity.” (p. 4)	Argues that avoiding bullshit isn’t enough—we need positive clarity standards for writing.
10. “The fear of boring oneself or one’s readers is a great enemy of truth.” (quoting Williamson, p. 20)	Ends by reinforcing that truth-seeking requires precision and discipline, not stylistic seduction.

Day: July 20, 2025