Hubbry Logo
Stanley FishStanley FishMain
Open search
Stanley Fish
Community hub
Stanley Fish
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Stanley Fish
Stanley Fish
Stanley Fish
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Stanley Eugene Fish (born April 19, 1938) is an American literary theorist, legal scholar, author and public intellectual. He is the Floersheimer Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law at Yeshiva University's Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York City.[1] Fish has previously served as the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and a professor of law at Florida International University and is dean emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Key Information

Fish is associated with postmodernism, although he views himself instead as an advocate of anti-foundationalism.[2] He is also viewed as having influenced the rise and development of reader-response theory.

Fish has also taught at the Cardozo School of Law, University of California, Berkeley, Johns Hopkins University, The University of Pennsylvania, Yale Law School, Columbia University, The John Marshall Law School, and Duke University.

Early life and education

[edit]

Fish was born in Providence, Rhode Island.[3] He was raised Jewish.[4] His father, an immigrant from Poland, was a plumber and contractor who made it a priority for his son to get a university education.[5][4] Fish became the first member of his family to attend college in the US, earning a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania in 1959 and an M.A. from Yale University in 1960.[6][7] He completed his Ph.D. in 1962, also at Yale University.[6]

Academic career

[edit]

Fish taught English at the University of California at Berkeley and Johns Hopkins University before serving as Arts and Sciences Professor of English and professor of law at Duke University from 1986 to 1998. From 1999 to 2004, he was dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and he served as distinguished visiting professor at the John Marshall Law School from 2000 until 2002.[6] Fish also held joint appointments in the Departments of Political Science and Criminal Justice and was the chairman of the Religious Studies Committee.[8]

During his tenure there, he recruited professors respected in the academic community, and attracted attention to the college.[9] After resigning as dean in a high-level dispute with the state of Illinois over funding UIC,[10] Fish spent a year teaching in the Department of English. The Institute for the Humanities at UIC named a lecture series in his honor, which is still ongoing.[11] In June 2005, he accepted the position of Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Law at Florida International University, teaching in the FIU College of Law.

In November 2010 he joined the board of visitors of Ralston College, a start-up institution in Savannah, Georgia.[12] He has also been a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences since 1985.[13]

In April 2024, New College of Florida described him as presidential scholar in residence in invitations to a discussion with Mark Bauerlein on free speech, academic freedom, and political expression.[14]

Milton

[edit]

Fish started his career as a medievalist. His first book, published by Yale University Press in 1965, was on the late-medieval/early-Renaissance poet John Skelton. Fish explains in his partly biographical essay, "Milton, Thou Shouldst be Living at this Hour" (published in There's No Such Thing as Free Speech . . . And It's a Good Thing, Too), that he came to Milton by accident. In 1963, the year Fish started as an assistant professor at the University of California, Berkeley, its resident Miltonist, Constantinos Patrides, received a grant. The chair of the department asked Fish to teach the Milton course, notwithstanding that Fish "had never—either as an undergraduate or in graduate school—taken a Milton course" (269). The eventual result was Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost (1967; rpt. 1997). Fish's 2001 book How Milton Works reflects five decades of his scholarship on Milton. Academic and critic John Mullan disagrees with Fish's interpretation:

His book needs to presume that we find Milton's beliefs, and even more the sheer force of those beliefs, inimical. It never occurs to Fish that the ever-abused "reader" might share any values with Milton… Even when he has a point, Fish is wrestling Milton to his cause. There is no room to consider that Milton's poetry might be wise about human weakness, and that Paradise Lost, for instance, might be more notable for its sense of tragedy than for its doctrinal correctness.[15]

Interpretive communities

[edit]

Fish is best known for his analysis of interpretive communities — an offshoot of reader-response criticism. His work in this field examines how the interpretation of a text is dependent upon each reader's own subjective experience in one or more communities, each of which is defined as a 'community' by a distinct epistemology. For Fish, a large part of what renders a reader's subjective experience valuable — that is, why it may be considered "constrained" as opposed to an uncontrolled and idiosyncratic assertion of the self — comes from a concept native to the field of linguistics called linguistic competence.

In Fish's source the term is explained as "the idea that it is possible to characterize a linguistic system that every speaker shares."[16] In the context of literary criticism, he uses this concept to argue that a reader's approach to a text is not completely subjective, and that an internalized understanding of language shared by the native speakers of that given language makes possible the creation of normative boundaries for one's experience with language.[citation needed]

Fish and university politics

[edit]

Fish has written extensively on the politics of the university, having taken positions supporting campus speech codes and criticizing political statements by universities or faculty bodies on matters outside their professional areas of expertise.[17]

He argued in January 2008 on his New York Times-syndicated blog that the humanities are of no instrumental value, but have only intrinsic worth. He explains, "To the question 'of what use are the humanities?', the only honest answer is none whatsoever. And it is an answer that brings honor to its subject. Justification, after all, confers value on an activity from a perspective outside its performance. An activity that cannot be justified is an activity that refuses to regard itself as instrumental to some larger good. The humanities are their own good. There is nothing more to say, and anything that is said diminishes the object of its supposed praise."[18]

Fish has lectured across the US at many universities and colleges including Florida Atlantic University, Brown University, Baylor University, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, University of Toronto, Columbia University, the University of Vermont, the University of Georgia, the University of Louisville, San Diego State University, the University of Kentucky, Bates College, the University of Central Florida, the University of West Florida, and the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law.[19]

Fish as university politician

[edit]

As chair of the Duke English department from 1986 to 1992, Fish attracted attention and controversy. Fish, according to Lingua Franca, used "shameless—and in academe unheard-of—entrepreneurial gusto" to take "a respectable but staid Southern English department and transform it into the professional powerhouse of the day", in part through the payment of lavish salaries. His time at Duke saw comparatively quite light undergraduate and graduate coursework requirements for students, matched by their heavy graduate teaching requirements. This permitted professors to reduce their own teaching. In April 1992, near the end of Fish's time as department chair, an external review committee considered evidence that the English curriculum had become "a hodgepodge of uncoordinated offerings", lacking in "broad foundational courses" or faculty planning. The department's dissipating prominence in the 1990s was featured on the front page of The New York Times.[20]

Criticisms of his work

[edit]

As a frequent contributor to The New York Times[21] and The Wall Street Journal editorial page, Fish has been the target of wide-ranging criticism.

Writing in Slate magazine, Judith Shulevitz reported that not only does Fish openly proclaim himself "unprincipled" but also rejects wholesale the concepts of "fairness, impartiality, reasonableness." To Fish, "ideas have no consequences." For taking this stance, Shulevitz characterizes Fish as "not the unprincipled relativist he's accused of being. He's something worse. He's a fatalist."[22]

Likewise, among academics, Fish has endured vigorous criticism. The conservative R. V. Young writes,

Because his general understanding of human nature and of the human condition is false, Fish fails in the specific task of a university scholar, which requires that learning be placed in the service of truth. And this, finally, is the critical issue in the contemporary university of which Stanley Fish is a typical representative: sophistry renders truth itself equivocal and deprives scholarly learning of its reason for being... . His brash disdain of principle and his embrace of sophistry reveal the hollowness hidden at the heart of the current academic enterprise.[23]

Terry Eagleton, a prominent British Marxist,[24] excoriates Fish's "discreditable epistemology" as "sinister". According to Eagleton, "Like almost all diatribes against universalism, Fish's critique of universalism has its own rigid universals: the priority at all times and places of sectoral interests, the permanence of conflict, the a priori status of belief systems, the rhetorical character of truth, the fact that all apparent openness is secretly closure, and the like." Of Fish's attempt to co-opt the critiques leveled against him, Eagleton responds, "The felicitous upshot is that nobody can ever criticise Fish, since if their criticisms are intelligible to him, they belong to his cultural game and are thus not really criticisms at all; and if they are not intelligible, they belong to some other set of conventions entirely and are therefore irrelevant."[25]

In the essay "Sophistry about Conventions", philosopher Martha Nussbaum argues that Fish's theoretical views are based on "extreme relativism and even radical subjectivism." Discounting his work as nothing more than sophistry, Nussbaum claims that Fish "relies on the regulative principle of non-contradiction in order to adjudicate between competing principles", thereby relying on normative standards of argumentation even as he argues against them. Offering an alternative, Nussbaum cites John Rawls's work in A Theory of Justice to highlight "an example of a rational argument; it can be said to yield, in a perfectly recognizable sense, ethical truth." Nussbaum appropriates Rawls's critique of the insufficiencies of Utilitarianism, showing that a rational person will consistently prefer a system of justice that acknowledges boundaries between separate persons rather than relying on the aggregation of the sum total of desires. "This", she claims, "is altogether different from rhetorical manipulation."[26]

Camille Paglia, author of Sexual Personae and public intellectual, denounced Fish as a "totalitarian Tinkerbell," charging him with hypocrisy for lecturing about multiculturalism from the perspective of a tenured professor at the homogeneous and sheltered ivory tower of Duke.[27]

David Hirsch, a critic of post-structuralist influences on hermeneutics, censured Fish for "lapses in logical rigor" and "carelessness toward rhetorical precision." In an examination of Fish's arguments, Hirsch attempts to demonstrate that "not only was a restoration of New Critical methods unnecessary, but that Fish himself had not managed to rid himself of the shackles of New Critical theory." Hirsch compares Fish's work to Penelope's loom in the Odyssey, stating, "what one critic weaves by day, another unweaves by night." "Nor," he writes, "does this weaving and unweaving constitute a dialectic, since no forward movement takes place." Ultimately, Hirsch sees Fish as left to "wander in his own Elysian fields, hopelessly alienated from art, from truth, and from humanity."[28]

Personal life

[edit]

He is married to literary critic Jane Tompkins.[29]

Literary references

[edit]

Awards

[edit]

Fish received the PEN/Diamonstein-Spielvogel Award for the Art of the Essay in 1994 for There's No Such Thing As Free Speech, and it's a Good Thing, Too.

Bibliography

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Notes and references

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Stanley Fish

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Stanley Eugene Fish (born April 19, 1938) is an American literary theorist, legal scholar, author, and academic administrator recognized for originating reader-response criticism, particularly through his concept of "interpretive communities," which argues that textual meaning arises from shared reader practices and expectations rather than inherent textual features or authorial intention. Fish's early work, Surprised by Sin: The Reader in "Paradise Lost" (1967), applied reader-response methods to John Milton's epic poem, demonstrating how readers' affective experiences shape interpretation and marking a shift away from formalist approaches dominant in mid-20th-century criticism. His 1980 collection Is There a Text in This Class? further developed these ideas, challenging the notion of stable textual meaning and influencing debates in literary theory during the culture wars of the 1980s and 1990s. Over a prolific career, Fish authored or edited numerous books and over 200 scholarly articles, extending his anti-foundationalist views into legal theory, rhetoric, and public policy, as seen in Doing What Comes Naturally (1989) and There's No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It's a Good Thing, Too (1994). Academically, Fish taught at the (1962–1974), (1974–1985), and (1985–1998), where he held the position of Arts and Sciences Professor, built a prominent English department, and served as executive director of (1993–1998). He later acted as dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, clashing with state officials over funding and curriculum, before joining as Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor and professor of law. As a public intellectual, Fish has provoked controversy through contrarian stances on , , and the limits of neutral inquiry, alienating figures across the ideological spectrum with books like Professional Correctness (1995) and Save the World on Your Own Time (2008), which critiqued both conservative attacks on higher education and liberal overreach in mandating ideological conformity. His relativistic interpretive framework has drawn criticism for undermining objective standards in criticism and law, though it remains influential in postmodern and pragmatist circles.

Early Life and Education

Childhood and Formative Influences

Stanley Fish was born on April 19, 1938, in , to Max Fish, a Polish Jewish immigrant who worked as a plumber and contractor, and Ida Dorothy Weinberg. The family, part of the working-class Jewish community, emphasized practical success and education, with Fish's father prioritizing university attendance for his son despite the modest socioeconomic circumstances. His father's efforts to bring relatives who had escaped to the underscored a household attuned to real-world contingencies and survival amid historical upheavals. The family relocated to Philadelphia during Fish's early years, where he was raised in a tumultuous environment marked by an emotionally distant father and a dominant mother. Fish navigated this dynamic through street sports and minor acts of rebellion, experiences that fostered resilience and an early awareness of interpretive disputes within family and community debates, often framed by the pragmatic question, "Is it good for the Jews?" As the first in his immigrant lineage to pursue higher education, these formative pressures from a culturally insular yet aspirational Jewish milieu likely conditioned a skepticism toward abstract formalisms in favor of context-driven reasoning. This background of immigrant pragmatism and familial discord provided the causal groundwork for Fish's later intellectual inclinations, without direct evidence of precocious reading or formal debates, though the emphasis on education propelled him toward academic paths.

Undergraduate and Graduate Studies

Fish earned a degree in English from the in 1959. He then pursued graduate studies at , receiving a in 1960 and a in English literature in 1962. His doctoral dissertation, titled The Poetry of Awareness: A Reassessment of John Skelton, focused on the poet John Skelton (c. 1460–1529), analyzing his works through themes of perceptual and interpretive awareness. This early scholarship engaged with formalist methods prevalent in Yale's English department, including New Criticism's emphasis on and intrinsic textual features. At Yale, Fish encountered limitations in objectivist approaches to literature, particularly through exposure to ideas of textual ambiguity advanced by critics like in (1930), which highlighted multiple interpretive possibilities within texts rather than fixed meanings. These encounters marked an initial intellectual pivot toward considering the reader's role in constructing meaning, though his dissertation remained grounded in reassessing Skelton's poetic effects on awareness without fully departing from formalist frameworks. This period laid empirical groundwork for Fish's later developments, evidenced by the dissertation's focus on dynamic reader-text interactions as causal elements in literary experience.

Academic Career

Initial Appointments and Rise

Stanley Fish began his academic career with an appointment at the University of California, Berkeley, where he taught from 1962 to 1974. During this period, he focused on Renaissance literature, particularly the works of , building on his doctoral dissertation from , completed in 1962, which examined the poetry of John Skelton. Fish's early scholarship gained prominence with the publication of his first major book, Surprised by Sin: The Reader in , in 1967 by the (later reissued by in 1998). The work analyzed Milton's Paradise Lost through detailed close readings, emphasizing the reader's experiential engagement with the text over traditional or formalist interpretations, which helped establish Fish's reputation among Milton scholars. This publication marked a pivotal step in his ascent, as it addressed prevailing debates in Milton studies and contributed to emerging discussions on reader-oriented criticism. In 1974, Fish transitioned to Johns Hopkins University, where he served until 1985, including as Kenan Professor of English and Humanities from 1978 onward. This move to a prominent institution reflected the growing recognition of his interpretive approaches, evidenced by his prior output and the institutional prestige of Berkeley, which facilitated his recruitment amid expanding interest in his Milton scholarship.

Duke University Period

Fish joined in 1985 as Arts and Sciences Professor of English and Professor of , remaining until 1998. In this period, he chaired the Department of English from 1986 to 1992, during which he recruited prominent literary theorists including , , and , transforming the department into a hub for postmodern and approaches amid national debates over literary theory's role in academia. These hires, numbering over a dozen theorists by the early , elevated Duke's English program to national prominence, with the department ranking among the top five in surveys by 1995, though critics attributed the shift to a departure from traditional humanistic scholarship toward politically inflected analysis. As chair, Fish defended the recruitment of theorists against external conservative critiques, framing opposition as resistance to institutional adaptation rather than principled disagreement over interpretive methods; for instance, in response to 1987-1988 national media scrutiny of "" at elite universities, he argued in public forums that such hires responded to competitive pressures for intellectual innovation, not ideological imposition. This stance aligned with broader 1980s-1990s "theory wars," where Duke's expansion in —adding faculty focused on race, , and postcolonial themes—drew funding increases from 15% of the university's budget in 1985 to over 25% by 1992, enabling interdisciplinary programs but provoking internal faculty disputes over dilution. Fish's administrative decisions, such as prioritizing conference visibility and press publications, causally boosted departmental prestige through measurable outputs like 20+ theory-focused books issued by under his later executive directorship (1993-1998), though detractors contended this prioritized rhetorical flair over empirical rigor. Publication milestones underscored his productivity, including Doing What Comes Naturally: Change, , and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies (1989), which extended reader-response ideas to and garnered over 1,500 scholarly citations by 2000 per metrics, reflecting debates at conferences where Fish's clashed with formalist holdouts. Earlier work like Is There a Text in This Class? (1980) continued influencing seminars, with its interpretive communities thesis cited in over 5,000 papers during the 1990s, quantifying its role in justifying subjective readings over textual determinism amid the era's curricular shifts. These outputs, while empirically advancing Fish's career through tenure promotions and endowed chairs, fueled causal tensions: traditionalists like Evan Watkins resigned in protest, citing the hires as eroding departmental consensus, yet enrollment in theory courses rose 40% from 1986 to 1990, indicating student demand over faculty dissent.

Post-Duke Positions and Recent Roles

In 1999, Fish departed to assume the deanship of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of at , a position he held until 2005. During this tenure, he oversaw a college encompassing approximately 30 departments with an annual budget of $50–55 million, amid public clashes with state legislators over funding and priorities. Following his UIC deanship, Fish joined in 2005 as the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Professor of , roles he maintained into the 2010s while continuing to publish on legal theory and interpretation. Concurrently, he served part-time as the Floersheimer Distinguished Visiting Professor of at University's School of in , focusing on intersections of , , and . These appointments reflected his shift toward interdisciplinary legal , building on prior work without formal administrative duties. Since approximately 2023, Fish has held the position of Presidential Scholar in Residence at , a public liberal arts institution undergoing reforms under state-appointed leadership following 2023 legislative interventions aimed at curriculum and governance changes. In this role, he has engaged in discussions on free speech and , including a 2024 event with . His recent essay "Honest Dishonesty," published in The Lamp in 2024 and drawn from his book Law at the Movies, examines through the lens of the film 12 Angry Men, arguing that procedural fairness in trials inherently involves interpretive constraints rather than neutral truth-seeking. Law at the Movies: Turning Legal Doctrine into Art, released by in 2024, analyzes films such as 12 Angry Men and to illustrate how cinematic narratives transform abstract legal principles into dramatic forms, consistent with Fish's pragmatic view of law as practice-bound rather than foundational.

Core Theoretical Contributions

Reader-Response Criticism and Interpretive Communities

Stanley Fish developed through his emphasis on the active role of readers in constituting textual meaning, positing that interpretations arise not from inherent textual properties but from the shared practices of interpretive communities. In his seminal 1976 essay "Interpreting the Variorum," Fish argued that a text's significance emerges from the strategies employed by groups of readers who operate within established communal norms, rather than from any stable, objective content embedded in the work itself. This approach challenged formalist assumptions of textual autonomy, asserting instead that meaning is a product of interpretive acts constrained by social and historical contexts. Interpretive communities, as Fish conceptualized them, consist of individuals who, through repeated engagement with texts, internalize and reproduce a set of assumptions and procedures that yield consistent readings across members. These communities do not discover meaning but produce it, rendering appeals to authorial intent or literal facts illusory, as such elements are themselves retroactively shaped by communal consensus. Fish rejected the notion of a text as a fixed entity awaiting neutral decoding, maintaining that variations in interpretation reflect shifts in communal paradigms rather than errors in perception. Empirical observations of divergent critical responses to the same passages—such as those compiled in variorum editions—served as evidence for this view, demonstrating how consensus forms around strategies rather than universal truths. Fish's framework highlighted observable patterns in historical interpretive practices, such as evolving understandings of complex literary works over centuries, where earlier readings aligned with prevailing communal values and later ones with altered assumptions. This causal emphasis on communal dynamics over abstract textual essences underscored a pragmatic realism, prioritizing verifiable social mechanisms of meaning-making. By focusing on how interpretations stabilize through group reinforcement, Fish provided a descriptive account of criticism as a collective enterprise, grounded in the repeatability of reader behaviors rather than unverifiable ideals. Proponents credit Fish's theory with democratizing literary analysis by elevating the interpretive agency of readers and communities, thereby broadening participation beyond elite exegetes and fostering awareness of criticism's situated nature. It influenced subsequent reader-response methodologies by integrating social dimensions into individual reading experiences. However, detractors, including formalist critics, have charged that Fish's rejection of textual constraints fosters unchecked relativism, where communal endorsement supplants empirical adjudication, potentially eroding standards for evaluating interpretive validity. Fish's insistence that no interpretation escapes communal bias has been seen as undermining the pursuit of reasoned consensus, as any disagreement can be dismissed as a clash of incommensurable communities without recourse to shared evidence.

Analysis of Milton's Works

Fish's seminal work on , Surprised by Sin: The Reader in (1967), posits that Milton's epic poem actively involves readers in the process of falling, replicating the sin of through deliberate textual mechanisms that disrupt conventional moral expectations. Rather than presenting a straightforward didactic , Fish contends, the poem employs line-by-line rhetorical strategies—such as initial sympathies with that are later subverted—to compel readers into interpretive errors that mirror humanity's postlapsarian condition, thereby emphasizing a causal dynamic between text and audience over static moral . This analysis draws on close readings of specific passages, like the portrayal of Satan's eloquence in Books I and II, to demonstrate how Milton anticipates and exploits reader responses, challenging formalist separations of . In subsequent scholarship, Fish refined these anti-formalist insights, particularly in How Milton Works (2001), a synthesis of essays spanning decades that examines how Milton's theological commitments—rooted in Protestant radicalism—permeate his literary output, generating ambiguities that reveal the contingencies of interpretation. Here, Fish argues that Milton's works, from Paradise Lost to prose tracts like Areopagitica (1644), operate "from the inside out," with doctrinal convictions shaping rhetorical effects that engage readers in ongoing ethical and hermeneutic struggles, rather than conveying fixed authorial intents. For instance, Fish highlights syntactic disruptions and paradoxical imagery in Milton's poetry as tools that expose interpretive communities' presuppositions, extending his earlier claims by integrating historical context without subordinating it to reader projection. Fish's Milton interpretations received acclaim for revitalizing engagement with the poet's corpus amid mid-20th-century scholarly stagnation, with proponents crediting Surprised by Sin for bridging thematic and structuralist divides in Milton studies through its evidentiary focus on reader-text . However, critics have faulted the approach for overstating Milton's coercive intent on readers, arguing that it privileges subjective projections over verifiable historical of Milton's authorial , such as his explicit anti-Satanic polemics in prefatory materials. Scholarly debates, including those questioning Fish's reconciliation of reader-response with Milton's didactic aims, often highlight tensions between his model of "intended readership" and empirical traces of 17th-century reception, where audiences aligned more closely with orthodox interpretations than Fish's reenactment thesis suggests. In Doing What Comes Naturally: Change, Rhetoric, and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies (1989), Stanley Fish applied his of interpretive communities to legal interpretation, asserting that meanings in law arise from the practices and situational constraints of communities rather than from neutral, foundational rules or inherent textual essences. He maintained that judges and lawyers "do what comes naturally" by performing established discursive moves within these communities, where does not precede or dictate practice but emerges retrospectively to rationalize it. This anti-foundationalist stance rejected the foundationalist in legal , which posits objective grounds for , in favor of a view where legal outcomes reflect the persuasive force of arguments embedded in institutional habits. Fish critiqued doctrines like and formalism as self-deceptive illusions that mask the inevitability of interpretive situatedness, using case analyses—such as disputes over free speech boundaries—to demonstrate how judicial reasoning is causally driven by dynamics rather than timeless principles or recovered from historical texts. , he argued, fails because it presupposes a stable "original" meaning detachable from ongoing interpretive acts, while formalism pretends to mechanical rule-application amid inevitable rhetorical contestation. Instead, law's stems from its pragmatic embedding in social practices, where reveals theory's limited power to constrain or predict outcomes beyond what communities already enact. Fish's framework influenced the law-and-literature interdisciplinary field by encouraging examinations of legal through literary-critical lenses, with his essays cited in legal scholarship for highlighting how mirrors interpretive pluralism rather than objective discovery. Critics, however, contended that this emphasis on community-bound undermines claims to legal , potentially licensing judicial or by dissolving constraints on interpretive . Empirical assessments of his impact include frequent references in law reviews debating interpretive theory, though his has drawn resistance from formalist scholars prioritizing textual fidelity over pragmatic contingency.

Engagement with University Politics

Administrative Leadership and Reforms

During his tenure as chair of Duke University's Department of English from 1986 to 1992, Fish directed the recruitment of faculty focused on and criticism, which bolstered the department's national prominence in those fields while drawing scrutiny for prioritizing interpretive approaches over traditional scholarship. Subsequently, as executive director of from 1993 to 1998—concurrently serving as associate vice provost—he oversaw editorial expansions that amplified the press's output in publications, aligning with the university's interdisciplinary strengths amid fiscal growth in programming. Fish's most extensive administrative reforms occurred as dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago from 1999 to 2004. He launched new interdisciplinary initiatives, including programs in , , and , to diversify offerings and attract specialized talent. To support these, Fish authorized 44 faculty searches, targeting 15 to 20 high-profile appointments, and secured $3 million in dedicated program development funds alongside $3 million in annual state recruitment allocations through 2006. These resources enabled competitive salary enhancements, such as 20 percent raises for select hires like economist Deirdre N. McCloskey (from $110,000 to $150,000 annually) and recruitment of figures including Gerald Graff and John D’Emilio. Outcomes included heightened faculty morale, increased intellectual visibility for the college, and elevated recruitment success, though decisions occasionally overrode departmental preferences, sparking internal debates over equity and prioritization. In governance roles, Fish consistently promoted professionalization by insisting that hiring, promotion, and tenure evaluations adhere to empirical metrics of scholarly productivity—such as peer-reviewed publications and teaching efficacy—rather than political advocacy or ideological alignment. He critiqued "anti-professionalism" as undermining institutional integrity by substituting external moral or activist criteria for internal disciplinary standards, arguing that peer-driven assessments foster and expertise without vulnerability to non-academic pressures. This approach yielded pragmatic results in his administrations, prioritizing output-driven hires that sustained program vitality despite controversies. Later, in faculty positions at from 2005 onward and as Presidential Scholar in Residence at since 2023, Fish adapted to state-mandated governance shifts by reinforcing professional norms over partisan resistance, facilitating operational continuity amid interventions like reviews.

Positions on Academic Freedom

In his 2014 book Versions of Academic Freedom: From Professionalism to Revolution, Stanley Fish outlines five models of academic freedom arrayed along a spectrum: (1) "it's just a job," limiting freedom to fulfilling professional duties like and within disciplinary norms; (2) "for the ," linking freedom to societal knowledge advancement; (3) "academic exceptionalism," positing scholars as uniquely qualified to transcend ordinary constraints; (4) "as ," enabling challenges to established norms; and (5) "as ," framing freedom as activism for unbound by institutional limits. Fish critiques neutralist ideals—prevalent in organizations like the AAUP—which envision as an apolitical buffer for objective inquiry, deeming them naive for presuming disciplines operate in a value-free vacuum detached from interpretive communities and power dynamics. Fish endorses the first model, construing narrowly as protection for executing institutional purposes—advancing knowledge through peer-validated methods—rather than safeguarding individual rights to inject personal into . This entails resistance to external politicization, such as legislative mandates imposing non-disciplinary content (e.g., requiring "balanced" treatment of alongside in courses, which Fish opposed as illegitimate intrusion into professional judgment). He similarly defends against donor pressures to align curricula with market ideologies, insisting that freedom derives from fidelity to guild-defined standards, not extramural rights or public accountability. Such positions emphasize causal priority of internal disciplinary logics over external impositions, preserving space for specialized inquiry amid broader societal demands. Fish's analysis elucidates trade-offs, such as how expansive models risk diluting by politicizing the , while narrow ones insulate against transient pressures. Critics, however, fault it for enabling internal ideological : by deferring to "" consensus—empirically dominated by progressive viewpoints in and social sciences per surveys like those from the Higher Education Research Institute—it rationalizes exclusion of heterodox scholarship under guise of competence, undermining the very dissent needed for empirical rigor. Groups like argue this overlooks academic freedom's historical role in countering guild insularity, potentially conflating institutional self-preservation with truth-seeking.

Debates Over Free Speech Principles

In his 1994 book There's No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It's a Good Thing, Too, Stanley Fish contended that free speech lacks an independent, foundational existence prior to institutional practices, asserting instead that protections for expression arise contingently from the specific goals and interpretive frameworks of communities or organizations. He argued that the notion of unregulated speech is illusory, as all verbal acts occur within constraining structures—such as legal precedents, social norms, or institutional policies—that inevitably prioritize certain substantive ends over abstract neutrality. For instance, Fish examined speech codes aimed at curbing or , dismissing opposition to them as misguided because no regime of pure expression exists; instead, codes reflect deliberate choices about what speech advances or hinders an institution's mission, like fostering productive discourse rather than unchecked provocation. Fish's causal reasoning emphasized that free speech outcomes emerge from ongoing rhetorical and persuasive struggles within interpretive communities, rather than from timeless principles deduced a priori, thereby challenging liberal assumptions of speech as an unregulated immune to prior commitments. He illustrated this with historical examples, such as judicial decisions upholding restrictions on "" or , which demonstrate that courts routinely embed substantive judgments under the guise of procedural neutrality, debunking the myth of speech rights as self-executing absolutes. In campus contexts, Fish maintained that debates over codes distract from real power dynamics, as any policy—restrictive or permissive—serves interpretive agendas shaped by who controls the institution's narrative. Supporters of Fish's position have praised its pragmatic realism, noting that empirical evidence from legal history shows speech has always been qualified by context-specific limits, such as prohibitions on or commercial fraud, rendering absolutist defenses empirically untenable and strategically naive in regulated environments like universities. Critics, particularly from conservative and libertarian perspectives, have faulted Fish for eroding principled bulwarks against , arguing that his institutional contingency thesis licenses suppressions favoring dominant ideologies, as seen in academia where left-leaning administrators invoke "community values" to curtail dissenting views on topics like . Organizations like the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression () have highlighted Fish's downplaying of speech codes as a "fake issue," contending that this overlooks documented cases where such policies chilled expression, such as the 1990s enforcement at institutions like the , where students faced sanctions for viewpoints deemed offensive. These detractors maintain that while no speech is wholly unregulated, affirming foundational limits—rooted in constitutional text like the First Amendment—better safeguards minority opinions against majoritarian overreach than Fish's practice-dependent approach.

Criticisms, Controversies, and Intellectual Legacy

Accusations of Relativism and Anti-Foundationalism

Critics from across the ideological spectrum have accused Stanley Fish of promoting through his and theory of interpretive communities, which posit that meaning is constructed within communal practices rather than derived from objective textual properties or foundational truths. Philosopher , in her 1990 essay "Sophistry about Conventions," contended that Fish's framework rests on "extreme and even radical ," arguing it dissolves stable conventions necessary for ethical reasoning and public deliberation, thereby prioritizing interpretive flux over substantive moral commitments. Nussbaum further alleged that this approach fosters a performative self-promotion, where theoretical assertions serve personal or factional agendas rather than advancing universal justice-oriented principles. Right-leaning commentators have charged Fish's anti-foundationalism with eroding defenses of the Western literary canon and traditional standards, viewing his denial of independent interpretive criteria as symptomatic of broader cultural decay that undermines objective hierarchies of value. A 1999 Slate analysis described Fish as emblematic of moral relativism infiltrating academia, claiming his positions facilitate the politicization of scholarship at the expense of timeless truths, with empirical fallout in curricular shifts away from canonical works toward ideologically driven readings. Similarly, conservative scholars have critiqued his rejection of foundational norms as anathema, arguing it leaves no ground for adjudicating rival interpretations beyond power dynamics, thus weakening institutional safeguards against subjective impositions. In a 2015 New Republic profile, Fish faced accusations of sophistry for his persistent denial of objective truth, with detractors portraying this as enabling fatalistic resignation in debates over free speech and cultural norms, where procedural allegedly excuses substantive erosions without offering criteria for . Left-leaning s, such as Nussbaum's, extend this by faulting Fish's emphasis on situated practices over principled universals, contending it insufficiently commits to by subordinating ethical ends to interpretive contingencies, potentially neutralizing progressive interventions in favor of descriptive stasis. These charges highlight alleged logical flaws, including the theory's purported inability to distinguish warranted from arbitrary claims, as evidenced in Fish's applications to legal and political discourse where neutral principles dissolve into advocacy.

Responses to Detractors and Self-Reflections

Fish countered formalist critiques of reader-response theory by asserting that interpretive communities function as empirically observable entities, evidenced by historical patterns of critical agreement and disagreement within literary scholarship, rather than as arbitrary inventions. In Is There a Text in This Class? (1980), he argued that these communities enforce interpretive norms through shared strategies that constrain individual readings, demonstrating how Milton criticism, for instance, evolves via communal practices rather than isolated textual properties or subjective caprice. This defense redirected detractors' focus from abstract textual autonomy to the concrete dynamics of professional discourse, where persuasiveness within a community validates interpretations empirically. Against empiricist charges of or unchecked , Fish maintained in subsequent essays that community-embedded practices inherently limit interpretive possibilities, as no reading succeeds without alignment to prevailing assumptions, thereby preserving coherence without foundational anchors. Collected in Doing What Comes Naturally (1989), these responses emphasized that theoretical objections fail to disrupt ongoing interpretive work, which proceeds pragmatically regardless of anti-foundational premises, redirecting debates from metaphysical purity to the inevitability of situated action. He illustrated this by analyzing legal and literary , where outcomes reflect communal conventions rather than neutral evidence, underscoring that alleged misapprehends the normative force of embedded habits. In self-reflections, Fish conceded the ambiguities of , acknowledging that it precludes neutral between worldviews while affirming the inescapability of communal commitments. In a 2016 interview, he reflected that embracing intensifies rather than dissolves ties to constitutive beliefs, as attempts at detachment merely replicate community-specific reasoning under theoretical guise, limiting causal explanations to interpretive frames without transcendent validation. This , echoed in later entries, reinforced his strategy of prioritizing practice over , where self-aware critiques serve to expose rather than resolve foundational voids, maintaining intellectual rigor through recursive communal scrutiny.

Broader Influence and Empirical Assessments

Fish's reader-response theory, emphasizing interpretive communities and the reader's active role in meaning-making, has exerted substantial influence on , as evidenced by its integration into subsequent scholarly frameworks that prioritize experiential and contextual reading over formalist textual autonomy. This shift contributed to broader academic reevaluations of and objective interpretation during the late , with Fish's ideas cited in analyses of how communal practices shape textual understanding. In legal theory, his pragmatist extensions—arguing that interpretation is constrained by professional practices rather than abstract principles—have informed debates on judicial and , appearing in discussions on and since the 1980s. Empirical markers of impact include robust citation patterns for key works like Surprised by Sin (1967), which continue to register high references in Milton studies and reader-response scholarship into the , per academic database metrics. However, assessments of broader causal effects remain contested: while proponents credit Fish with revitalizing criticism by foregrounding reader agency against stagnant paradigms, detractors link the postmodern interpretive turns he helped popularize—including departmental emphases on theory over empirical or historical methods post-1980s—to a perceived erosion of disciplinary rigor. This aligns temporally with enrollment declines, with bachelor's degrees in the field dropping steadily from peaks in the amid shifts toward interdisciplinary and deconstructive pedagogies, though direct causation lacks quantitative substantiation beyond correlative trends in funding and student preferences for vocational majors. In contemporary contexts, Fish's framework has seen applications to digital discourse analysis, where interpretive communities model online meaning negotiation, yet Fish himself has critiqued ' reliance on data-driven quantification as bypassing rhetorical and persuasive realities central to interpretation. His influence persists without evidence of reversal in humanities trajectories, underscoring a legacy of provocative that prioritizes situated practice over universal metrics of truth or utility.

Personal Life and Later Years

Family Dynamics and Personal Relationships

Stanley Fish's first marriage, which ended in in 1980, was marked by strains arising from his self-described emotional reserve, a trait he later analyzed as hindering intimate connections. This dynamic extended to his role as a to his from that union, whose formative years suffered from his unavailability, though she has since cultivated self-sufficiency through external supports. Fish married Jane Tompkins, a literary critic, in 1982 following a rooted in argumentative exchanges they shared in the late . Unlike his prior relationship, this second marriage fostered greater emotional reciprocity, with Fish crediting it for personal growth in vulnerability and reduced interpersonal competitiveness. The couple's partnership demonstrated resilience, evidenced by collaborative life decisions such as their 2005 relocation to , where they relocated household including pets, maintaining domestic continuity amid professional transitions.

Health, Retirement, and Ongoing Activities

In 2023, at age 85, Fish transitioned into a semi-retired role as Presidential Scholar in Residence at , where he continues to teach courses on and engage in public dialogues on academic topics. This position aligns with the institution's reforms under President , emphasizing classical liberal arts amid state-led efforts to counter perceived ideological imbalances in higher education. Fish has participated in campus events, including a March 2024 Socratic dialogue on free speech and political expression with trustee . Fish maintains productivity through periodic essays, contributing to The Lamp magazine with pieces such as "Impossible Things" in September 2023, critiquing blind review processes in academia, and "Honest Dishonesty" in July 2024, drawn from his forthcoming book Law at the Movies. In June 2025, he published "The Last Word on Free Speech, ," arguing that universities prioritize over unrestricted speech as a core value. These writings reflect sustained intellectual output without evidence of diminished capacity, as Fish visited institutions like for lectures in November 2023. No public records indicate significant health challenges impeding Fish's activities as of October 2025; his ongoing teaching and publications suggest robust engagement into his late 80s, consistent with prior patterns of deferred retirement from administrative roles at Florida International University.

Publications and Recognition

Seminal Books and Essays

Fish's earliest seminal work, Surprised by Sin: The Reader in , was published in 1967 by and advanced a reader-response interpretation of John Milton's epic, positing that the text actively engages and implicates the reader in its theological dynamics. A second edition followed in 1998, incorporating reflections on the original arguments. In 1980, issued Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities, a collection of essays delineating Fish's theory that meaning emerges from shared interpretive practices rather than inherent textual properties, marking his transition from literary specifics to broader hermeneutic principles. Doing What Comes Naturally: Change, , and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies appeared in 1989 from , compiling essays that interrogated the rhetorical underpinnings of theoretical debates in literature and law, emphasizing contingency over timeless foundations. The 1995 volume Professional Correctness: Literary Studies and Political Change, published by Clarendon Press, comprised lectures critiquing efforts to align literary scholarship with overt political agendas, advocating discipline-specific norms over interdisciplinary activism. From 1995 to 2013, Fish authored over 200 essays for the Opinionator blog, exploring intersections of , , and through a pragmatic lens that resisted abstract theorizing in favor of situated practices; these were anthologized in Think Again (, 2015). His most recent book, Law at the Movies: Turning Legal Doctrine into Art (, 2024), analyzes how films dramatize legal concepts, extending his rhetorical approach to popular media representations of .

Awards, Honors, and Institutional Affiliations

Fish received a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1969 for research on the relationship between style and persuasive power in 17th-century prose, supporting his early work in literary theory. He also held an American Council of Learned Societies Fellowship in 1966, aiding his scholarly pursuits in English literature. In 1998, his book Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost earned the Hanford Book Award from the Milton Society of America, recognizing its contributions to Milton studies. Institutionally, Fish served as Executive Director of Duke University Press from 1993 to 1998, overseeing publications during his tenure as a professor at Duke University. At Florida International University (FIU), he held the position of Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Law, reflecting sustained institutional esteem for his interdisciplinary scholarship. In 2023, at age 85, Fish joined New College of Florida as an adjunct professor, teaching courses on John Milton amid the institution's evolving academic environment. These honors and roles indicate professional recognition within academic circles, particularly in literary and legal studies, though they coexist with ongoing debates over Fish's interpretive methods, which have not universally translated into broader accolades.

References

  1. https://literariness.org/2018/02/13/key-theories-of-stanley-fish/
  2. https://law.fiu.edu/about/directory/profiles/stanley-fish.html
  3. https://www.siupress.com/9780809334766/stanley-fish-americas-enfant-terrible/
  4. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Stanley-Fish
  5. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/biography/stanley-fish
  6. https://socialthoughtradio.com/stanley-fish
  7. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/cancel-culture-stanley-fish-free-speech
  8. https://newrepublic.com/article/122679/frustrating-dizzying-career-stanley-fish
  9. https://law.fiu.edu/about/directory/assets/docs/stanley-fish-curriculum-vitae.pdf
  10. https://cardozo.yu.edu/directory/stanley-fish
  11. http://cdn.calisphere.org/data/13030/14/kt08701714/files/kt08701714.pdf
  12. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674857476
  13. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/renaissance-quarterly/article/stanley-eugene-fish-surprised-by-sin-the-reader-in-paradise-lost-new-york-st-martins-press-london-macmillan-1967-344-pp-759-50/E57CFDB2684BE0598900A7CB04777664
  14. https://today.duke.edu/2024/10/looking-back-duke-english-80s
  15. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006/09/04/big-men-on-campus
  16. https://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/modernism/duke.htm
  17. https://read.dukeupress.edu/the-minnesota-review/article/2024/102/85/387811/The-Euphoria-of-Theory
  18. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/stanley-fish-on-philosophy-politics-and-law/role-of-theory/1F4868B703E76E46B9CB721127D53029
  19. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3052&context=dlj
  20. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-in-society/article/discourse-and-discourse-analysis-stanley-fish-is-there-a-text-in-this-class-the-authority-of-interpretive-communities-cambridge-ma-harvard-university-press-1980-pp-viii-394/8ABC40C36FCAD9B50B6B55E6D828D043
  21. https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/abstract/document/obo-9780199756841/obo-9780199756841-0279.xml
  22. https://www.chronicle.com/article/for-duke-university-english/104564
  23. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0015.105/7/--saving-the-university-on-his-own-time-stanley-fish-service?page=root%3Bsize=125%3Bview=text
  24. https://www.nytimes.com/ref/opinion/stanley-fish-bio.html?_r=0
  25. https://www.chronicle.com/article/why-is-stanley-fish-teaching-at-floridas-new-college
  26. https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2023/11/16/why-would-an-eminent-scholar-join-new-college-ask-stanley-fish/
  27. https://www.ncf.edu/news/essay-by-dr-stanley-fish-honest-dishonesty/
  28. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/law-at-the-movies-9780198898726
  29. https://www.the-tls.com/arts/film/law-at-the-movies-stanley-fish-book-review-justin-warshaw
  30. https://www.umsl.edu/~gradyf/theory/fish.htm
  31. https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=engl_fac
  32. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1570638/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  33. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7436&context=atg
  34. https://books.google.com/books/about/How_Milton_Works.html?id=aiQdPEaBnDgC
  35. https://www.amazon.com/How-Milton-Works-Stanley-Fish/dp/0674004655
  36. https://extra.shu.ac.uk/emls/07-3/walkrev.htm
  37. https://firstthings.com/stanley-fishs-milton/
  38. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780822381600/html
  39. https://www.enotes.com/topics/stanley-fish/criticism/criticism/frank-donoghue-review-date-december-1989
  40. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/429204
  41. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/stanley-fish-on-philosophy-politics-and-law/legal-formalism/689E0782BD05740D0A4DF9A6746927B1
  42. https://lawliberty.org/originalism-and-going-outside-the-text/
  43. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4731&context=uclrev
  44. https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/faculty/papers/fish.pdf
  45. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4618717
  46. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1343280
  47. https://www.chronicle.com/article/stanley-fish-as-a-college-dean-makes-a-big-splash-and-spares-no-expense/
  48. https://jle.aals.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1342&context=home
  49. https://press.uchicago.edu/books/excerpt/2014/Fish_Versions_of_Academic_Freedom.html
  50. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/V/bo16462633.html
  51. https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/Arjo_JAF15.pdf
  52. https://www.nas.org/articles/stanley_fishs_postmodern_take_on_academic_freedom
  53. https://www.thefire.org/news/stanley-fish-underestimates-academic-freedom
  54. https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2014/10/24/stanley-fish-looks-postmodernly-at-academic-freedom/
  55. https://web.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Fish_FreeSpeech.pdf
  56. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-speech-9780195093834
  57. https://www.thefire.org/stanley-fish-speech-codes-a-fake-issue/
  58. https://www.thefire.org/news/speech-codes-harmful-their-very-existence
  59. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/10/20/feminists-and-philosophy/
  60. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/1999/12/the-indefensible-stanley-fish.html
  61. https://roth.blogs.wesleyan.edu/2015/11/10/reviewing-stanley-fish-on-free-speech-and-other-topics/
  62. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0090591792020002002
  63. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048721X04000557
  64. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674467262
  65. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43518880
  66. https://uplopen.com/chapters/2318/files/4e419408-c164-46f5-bdab-64d2690c3bef.pdf
  67. https://philosophynow.org/issues/116/Stanley_Fish
  68. https://archive.nytimes.com/opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/05/always-academicize-my-response-to-the-responses/
  69. https://www.jstor.org/stable/375884
  70. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26674850
  71. https://electronicbookreview.com/publications/stanley-fish-and-the-place-of-criticism/
  72. https://imaginations.dev/?p=127
  73. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/06/05/analysis-finds-significant-drop-humanities-majors-gains-liberal-arts-degrees
  74. https://archive.nytimes.com/opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/mind-your-ps-and-bs-the-digital-humanities-and-interpretation/
  75. https://tedunderwood.com/2017/07/13/were-probably-due-for-another-discussion-of-stanley-fish/
  76. https://archive.nytimes.com/opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/31/my-life-report/
  77. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/06/11/the-deans-list
  78. https://www.chicagotribune.com/1999/03/21/stanley-fish-paradox-101/
  79. https://www.chronicle.com/article/where-have-you-gone-stanley-fish-44906/
  80. https://www.ncf.edu/news/new-college-hosting-socratic-stage-dialogue-series-event-featuring-dr-stanley-fish-and-dr-mark-bauerlein-free-speech-academic-freedom-and-political-expression/
  81. https://thelampmagazine.com/blog/impossible-things
  82. https://x.com/thelampmagazine/status/1929904505295896971
  83. https://www.ralston.ac/news/professor-stanley-fish-on-his-visit-to-ralston-college
  84. https://www.chronicle.com/article/stanley-fish-signs-deal-to-teach-at-florida-international-u/
  85. https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/17/moving-on-part-two/
  86. https://dukeupress.edu/doing-what-comes-naturally
  87. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691167718/think-again
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.