Literary Attention: The Hairy Politics of Details 

International audienceWhat can literary studies bring to our experience? The fact that many scholars, on both sides of the Atlantic, have recently felt the need to address this question is usually interpreted as a symptom of a " crisis " in the literary profession. Less students, less jobs, less attractiveness, less impact, less prestige: the study of literature seems bound to follow the path taken by the study of theology during the 19 th century. Against this background feeling of gloom and doom, the steady flow of manifestoes in favor of literary studies often sounds overblown by wishful thinking. Literary interpretations, as performed in the classroom, are supposed to ground, shape and expand our moral consciousness, set the foundations for an alternative to the suicidal logics of global capitalism, and/or provide an affordable gymnastics training us to become successful among the young sharks of the creative class… Such contradictory and overambitious goals have provided an understandable backlash among more realistic, cautious or cynical colleagues.Phil Watts never indulged in theoretical or programmatic gesturing. As a teacher, as a scholar, as a member of faculty committees, as a departmental chair, he was well aware of the challenges faced by our profession. As a reader and as a thinker, he eagerly followed the debates about the constant reconfiguration of our discipline—and his interest in Jacques Rancière and Roland Barthes bears witness to his profound engagement with literary theory, in its connection with intellectual history and political philosophy. But, to my knowledge, he never attempted directly, openly and frontally to intervene in the theoretical discussions about the evolution and the future of our profession.This may be due to his profound humility: there is an inherent arrogance in the theoretical mode of discourse, which went against the grain of his self-effacing persona. But I believe it is also due to a deeper form of wisdom and intelligence. Phil understood that the best way to defend the study of literature was to actually perform it, rather than merely to preach it. As a teacher, as a scholar, as a family man and as a community member, he taught by example, rather than by admonition or reproach. The best thing we can do to defend, improve and expand our practice of literature is to follow his example