Professor Paul Crosthwaite Inaugural Lecture

I  want  to  begin,  as  you  might  expect, with  a  few  other  Thank  you. Thank  you.  First  of  all,  to  all  of  you  for  coming. I  really,  really  appreciate  it. I  don't  take  it  lightly, it's  wonderful  to  see  you.  Thank  you. There  are  many,  many friends  and  colleagues  at  this  university and  other  institutions  who  have  helped me  and  supported  me  over  the  years. Far  too  numerous  to  mention, I  think,  and  I  hope  they  know  who  they  are. Some  of  them,  a  good  number  of  them, many  of  them  are  in  this  room. And  it's  wonderful  to  have  them  here. I  must  say,  special  thanks  to my  colleagues  in  the  Department  of  English  Literature, the  widest  school  of  Literatures,  Languages  and  cultures. I'm  grateful  every  day  for  the  way  that  they  provide  a genuinely  friendly,  supportive,  collegial  environment. And  that  has  been  so  crucial  to my  career  in  the  nearly  decade  and  a  half I've  been  at  Edinburgh, I  must  just  mention  a  couple  of  people  specifically, they've  already  been  mentioned  by  Alex, but  I  think  it's  important  to  flag  them  again. I'm  so  pleased  and  grateful that  my  longtime  collaborators, Peter  Night  and  Nikki  Marsh, have  been  able  to  make  it  all the  way  from  Manchester  and  the  South  Coast  respectively. So  they've  really  put  in  the  miles  to  be  here. You're  going  to  see  their  names  come  up  more than  once  more  in  this  talk, which  perhaps  explains  why  they  deserve a  special  mention  and  their  friendship, their  collegiality, their  collaboration  has  just been  such  a  blessing  in  my  career. It  really  has  just  been  such  a  special  part  of  the  past, again,  as  I  say,  decade,  decade  and  a  half. So  thank  you  both  very  much  for  being  here. It  really  means  the  world  to  me. Finally,  I  think  most  crucially  of  all, I'm  so  happy  that  my  parents,  Bernie  and  Dave, my  parents  in  law,  Les  and  Judith,  my  wife  Mel, and  our  daughters,  Poppy  and  Violet, are  here  this  evening. Words  can't  really  express  their  love, their  kindness,  their  support  has  meant  to  me. All  I  can  really  say  is  thank  you  all  so  much. I  know  Poppy  and  Violet  are  also  happy  to  be  here because  they've  managed  to  wangle an  afternoon  off  school. So  well  done,  girl.  You're  going to  enjoy  the  talk  regardless.  I  think  for  that  reason. Let  me  turn  then  to  the  subject  of  this  lecture. The  basic  aims  of  the  lecture  are, I  think,  quite  straightforward, and  they  reflect  the  work  that  I've  been doing  for  the  past  decade  and  a  half  or  so. But  most  simply,  what  I  want  to discuss  in  the  next  40  minutes  or  so  is  how approaches  in  the  humanities  can  make valuable  contributions  to  an  understanding of  economics  and  the  economy. I'm  going  to  be  talking  about  the  interdisciplinary  field that's  increasingly  referred  to as  the  Economic  Humanities. A  field  that  brings the  methodological  approaches  of  literary  studies  and the  wider  humanities  to  bear  on topics  such  as  money  finance, markets,  investment,  speculation,  and  economic  modelling. You  can,  I  think,  hopefully, begin  to  get  a  sense  of  the  nature  and  the  scale, the  scope  of  this  field  just by  glancing  at  the  titles  in  the  series that  I  co  edit  with  Peter  Knight  and Nikki  Marsh  for  Palgrave  Macmillan, which  is  entitled  Studies  in Literature,  Culture,  and  Economics. You  can  also  see  here  the  volume  Alex  kindly  mentioned, the  Cambridge  Companion  to  Literature  and  Economics that  the  three  of  us  co  edited. As  you  can  hopefully  see, the  books  in  this  series cover  film  and  the  arts  more  widely, as  well  as  literature. They  range  historically  from the  early  modern  period  to  the  present. Although  this  might  be  slightly  less obvious  from  their  titles. What  they  all  have  in  common,  I  think, is  an  aim  not  just  of  analysing literary  and  cultural  artefacts  through  an  economic  lens, although  they  all  do  that  in  fascinating  ways, but  also  of  using  the  techniques  of literary  and  cultural  analysis  to explore  economic  theories  and  practises  themselves. It's  very  much  worth  emphasising  that  our  series represents  just  a  small  portion of  this  much  larger  field. Here  you  can  see  some  important defining  works  in  the  wider  field, some  of  which  are  written  by  people  in  this  room. I'm  pleased  to  say  even  this  gallery itself  is  very  far  from  being a  comprehensive  image  of the  important  work  that's  been produced  in  this  field just  over  the  past  ten  or  15  years. This  is  leaving  out  foundational  work from  decades  gone  by. What  I  want  to  do  in this  talk  is  highlight  several  strands of  theoretical  thinking  and research  that  run  through  this  field. Offering  as  a  illustration some  examples  from  my  own  work, both  individual  and  collaborative, as  instances  of  these  kinds  of  approaches  in  practise. Again,  I  don't  want  to  imply  that  these  trends represent  an  exhaustive  mapping  of  the  field. But  I  hope  in  tracing  them  briefly  in  this  talk, that  I'll  be  able  to  convey  a  sense,  at  least, of  the  kind  of  work  that  is  being  done  under the  broad  banner  of  the  Economic  Humanities. Let  me  give  you  a  quick  sense  of  what  I  want  to  cover. There  are  basically  going  to  be  four parts  of  the  lecture. Firstly,  I  want  to  consider  how  the  Economic  Humanities draws  attention  to  the  crucial  roles  of  mediation, representation,  visualisation  metaphor  in  shaping how  economic  phenomena  are understood,  theorised,  and  practised. Secondly,  I'll  consider  how the  economic  world  is  pervaded  by  linguistic, textual  and  symbolic  forms  that invite  attention  to  the  questions  of  genre, rhetoric,  narrative  that  are  of  course, central  to  literary  and  cultural  study. I  also  want  to  think  about  how  a  humanities based  analytical  framework  might  help  us  to understand  the  animating  roles  of such  seemingly  irrational  unscientific  states  as  fantasy, desire,  faith, or  imagination  in  economic  thought  and  behaviour. Finally,  I'll  discuss how  economic  sociology's  understanding of  financial  and  economic  theories and  models  as  performative. That  is,  as  producing  or  generating the  very  phenomena  that  they notionally  merely  identify  or  describe. How  this  idea  of economics  having  a  performative  dimension. How  placing  this  performativity  paradigm  into contact  with  an  analysis  of theatrical  or  dramatic  performance  Performance, as  we  would  tend  to  think  of  in  an  English  department, how  this  juxtaposition  might offer  additional  insights  into  the  role  of  language, speech  and  embodiment  in  economic  life. So  to  begin  then  with  those  questions  of mediation  representation  visualisation  metaphor 2014-2016  I  was  involved  along  with  Nikki  Peter, and  others  in  curating  an  exhibition  which Alex  kindly  mentioned  entitled  Show  Me  the  Money, The  Image  of  Finance  1,700  to  the  present. The  exhibition  was  staged  in various  museums  and  galleries  around  the  UK, and  it  consisted  of  myriad  examples of  the  way  in  which  financial  markets, monetary  instruments, and  other  aspects  of  the  financial  system  have  been represented  in  visual  culture  from the  18th  century  to  the  early  21st  century. It  encompassed  a  very  diverse  range of  forms  of  visual  culture. Everything  from  ledger  books  and satirical  prints  of  villainous  speculators in  18th  century  London. Right  through  two  works  of  contemporary  photography, video  and  digital  art. One  work  that  we  commissioned, especially  with  the  support  of  the  Arts  Council  for the  exhibition  was  a  digital  piece by  the  British  artists  Conford  and Cross  a  piece  called  Black  Narcissus. A  moving  video  piece  is  still  from  it. This  work  is  based  on the  stock  prices  from  the  Foot  A  index  on the  London  Stock  Exchange  for  the  period  2003  to  2013. Using  computer  generated  imagery, it  represents  those  prices  as a  mountain  landscape  with  the  undulations, the  peaks  and  troughs  of  the  mountain  range corresponding  to  the  ups  and  downs  of  the  market. Right  in  the  middle  of  the  slide. Here  in  this  vertiginous  drop, we  have  the  global  financial  crisis  of  2008. The  market  quite  literally  falls  off  a  cliff  at  this. 0.1  Of  the  really  interesting  aspects of  this  work  I  think  is  the  way  in  which it  highlights  how  financial  markets  are habitually  normalised  and  naturalised. Representations  or  visualisations, like  the  stock  chart  with  its  undulating  profile, tend  to  give  the  markets the  appearance  of  natural,  necessary, inevitable  things  That's  accentuated  here,  by  the  way, in  which  the  stock  market  itself becomes  a  literal  natural  landscape. It  gives  the  impression  of  something  given  enduring, eternal,  ontologically  real  in  the  fullest  sense. But  at  the  same  time,  I  think  we're aware  in  viewing  a  work  like  this, that  this  ultra  realistic  representation is  an  artificial  simulation. This,  I  think,  hints  at  how  the  markets  are  themselves, in  fact,  far  from  natural, but  rather  highly  constructed  contingent  phenomena constructed  moreover  to  particular  ends and  with  particular  assumptions  built  into  them, and  which  could  be  constructed  very  differently. So  a  piece  like  this  helps  us  to  appreciate that  far  from  being  neutral  or  transparent, economic  media  and  representational  technologies, like  the  stock  chart  for  example, play  an  integral  role  in  constructing the  ideological  coordinates  of economic  knowledge  and  practise. Representation  matters. Representation  isn't  just  a  kind of  screen  that  we  look  through. It  shapes  our  understanding  of  the  very  thing that  it's  notionally  merely  neutrally  representing. Black  narcissus  both  deploys the  common  metaphorical  conception  of the  financial  markets  as  a  mountain  landscape, and  at  the  same  time, precisely  by  foregrounding  that  metaphor  as metaphor  suggests  how  it might  be  denaturalized  and  rethought. And  by  extension,  how  finance itself  might  be  denaturalized, That  is  no  longer  seen  as  a  natural, immutable  fact  of  life, but  rather  as  a  site  of ideological  and  political  struggle  and  contestation. And  Peter  and  Nikki  needs  was  coming. I'm  sure  it  was  very  gratifying  to my  curators  and  I that  when  the  editors  of  a  major  textbook, the  Oxford  Handbook  of  Financial  Regulation, were  looking  for  an  image  for  their  cover, they  decided  on  a  still  from  this  work. It's  really  pleasing  to  me,  to  us, I  think  that  the  complex  and  critical  meanings and  implications  of  this  work, however  visible  or  not, they  immediately  are,  But  nevertheless  the  kind of  thinking  that  lies  behind  this  work, that  those  are  attached  to  this  key  reference  work  for scholars  and  professional  practitioners  in  this  field. That  seems  like  a  valuable  thing  to  me. I  want  to  shift  emphasis  now  to  focus  on questions  of  genre,  rhetoric,  and  narrative. Here  I  want  to  highlight  the  example of  a  project  on  which  I collaborated  both  with  Nikki  and  Peter, whom  I've  already  mentioned  several  times, and  with  two  economic  historians, Helen  Paul  and  James  Taylor. Helen,  a  colleague  of  Nikki's  at  Southampton, and  James  at  University  of  Lancaster. This  project  resulted  in  a  book  that, again  a  kindly  mentioned  invested  how  three  centuries  of stock  market  advice  reshaped  our  money  markets  and  minds. What  this  project  sought  to  do, as  the  title  suggests, is  to  chart  the  history  of a  particular  form  of  economic  writing. The  Guide  to  Stock  Market Investment  for  the  Nonprofessional  investor. The  kinds  of  books  that  are  in  fact ubiquitous  today  in,  say, the  airport  bookshops,  where  we  might  while away  an  absent  minded  half  hour whilst  waiting  for  our  flight. Books  that  promise  to  reveal  to  you  a  method, technique,  or  set  of strategies  for  beating  the  stock  market. And  the  book  traces  the  history  of  this  genre. And  again,  it's  a  history  that  we  trace  back  to the  18th  century  now, when  on  the  rare  occasions  economists  have  looked  at the  kinds  of  systems  for stock  market  prediction  propounded  in  books  like  this, they've  quite  reasonably  and understandably  been  interested  in  one  basic  question, do  they  work  actually, if  you  apply  their  methods, will  they  actually  make  your  money? What  they  found  is  that  there's  very  little  evidence that  any  of  the  distinctive  systems of  investment  analysis that  are  elaborated  in these  kinds  of  works  would  actually enable  an  investor  to  earn consistent  returns  in  the  stock  market. At  the  root  of  our  research then  was  an  intriguing  puzzle. If  these  kinds  of  books  are  highly  unlikely  to  turn  you into  a  star  or  even  a  moderately  successful  trader, then  why  are  they such  reliably  prominent  fixtures  in  bookstores? Airport  news  stands  in  many  cases, such  consistent  sellers  that titles  first  published  the  better  part  of a  century  ago  continue to  appear  in  updated  editions  today. One  of  the  really  interesting  phenomena  that  we discovered  was  that  the  investment  classic, the  book  that  was  published so  long  ago  that  it  would  seem not  possibly  to  have  any  relevance  to an  age  of  high  frequency  trading. But  is  nevertheless  held  up  as  this  kind  of almost  Bible  like  source  of  wisdom. In  order  to  answer  this  question, we  did  the  work  of  literary  critics, which  is  to  say  we  indeed close  read  by  the  end  of  the  project, literally  hundreds  of  these  books. The  conclusion  we  came  to  is  that  they  do in  fact  give  readers  something  valuable, even  if  it's  not  what  they  ostensibly  promise. While  they  notionally  offer  routes  to  market  success, what  they  actually  deliver  are  means  of conjuring  alternative  and  expanded  forms  of  selfhood. Narrative  scenarios  that  provide  opportunities for  readers  to  conceive  of  themselves  as  resourceful, decisive  risk  takers,  or  possessors  of privileged  insights  into  the  true  nature of  the  forces  shaping  the  markets. These  are  texts  then  that  work  towards  the  staging  of fantasy  and  vicarious  experience  that  permit  readers  to conceive  of  themselves  as  equipped  to play  a  desirable  glamorous  role, even  in  the  absence  of  any  actual  means, ability,  or  even  perhaps  in  truth  intention  to  do  so. That  the  avid  consumption  of such  books  stems  from  their  capacity  to  make  readers feel  that  they  could achieve  a  desirable  outcome  though  the  balance  of probability  belies  that  hope  places them  in  proximity  to  other  popular  lifestyle  genres, like  for  example,  the  Diet  book. By  interpolating  the  reader toward  a  profound  transformation whose  nature  is  subjective  before  it  is  economic. Such  texts,  closest  kinship  might  be  to  self  help literature  rather  than  to  economic  theory  on  our  account. Then  the  economists  conclusion that  investment  advice  writing  does not  work  would  only  be  the  beginning  of  the  story. While  such  text  may  not  work  in  a  narrow  economic  sense, we  aim  to  identify  and  understand the  work  that  they  nonetheless  do  the  cultural, symbolic,  affective, and  ideological  work  of  refashioning  the  self and  naturalising  the  financialization of  both  subjectivity  and  society. Similarly,  we  argue  that  approaching investment  advice  literature  as simply  consisting  of  a  set of  extractable  and  testable  methods and  precepts  overlooks the  particular  rhetorical  and  narrative  terms via  which  that  financial  content  is  articulated. Along  with  the  work  that  such  rhetoric does  in  framing  understandings of  market  norms  and  policing  market  boundaries. So  by  the  time  we  finished  the  book, arising  from  the  project, we  felt  that  we've  been  able to  demonstrate  that  the  kind  of attention  to  genre  rhetoric  and  narrative, that  is  the  stock  in  trade  of  literary  criticism, could  offer  a  way  of  understanding  the  appeal  and the  success  of  a  particular  kind  of  economic  writing. That  is  strictly  economic  analysis concerned  simply  with  the  effectiveness or  otherwise  of  this  form  of  writing. Could  we  would  like  to think  that  we  were  generating  knowledge regarding  an  economic  question  that  could  only  come  from methodological  coordinates  that  are precisely  not  those  of  economics. Some  of  the  thinking  behind  this  project carries  over  into  the  next  area  that  I  want  to  discuss, which  relates  to  questions  of  fantasy, desire,  faith,  and  imagination. Here  I  want  to  highlight  an  aspect of  a  book  I  published  in 2019  entitled  The  Market  Logics  of  Contemporary  Fiction. Now,  as  the  title  suggests, very  differently  to  the  Invested  book, this  is  primarily  a  work  of  literary  criticism  and literary  history  examining  the  contemporary  novel. But  here  too,  I  tried  at  certain  points  to  reverse this  polarity  and  not  simply analyse  contemporary  fiction  from the  point  of  view  of  the  market. But  also  think  about  how  contemporary  fiction and  an  analytical  approach to  it  might  provide insights  into  financial  markets  themselves. One  of  the  things  that  I  became especially  interested  in  was  a  theory that  is  absolutely  crucial  and central  to  the  discipline  of  financial  economics. It  emerged  in  the  1960s  and  1970s, and  it  remains  extremely  influential, controversial  and  much  contested, it  should  be  said,  but nevertheless  extremely  influential  today. This  is  the  idea  of  the  efficient  market  hypothesis, the  idea  of  market  efficiency. My  analysis  of  this  theory,  how  it's  conceptualised, the  devotion  that  it  commands among  many  economists  and  others, led  me  to  see  how  it  goes  beyond  the strictly  theoretical,  the  strictly  intellectual, and  enters  into  something  closer  to  the  realm  of  faith, belief,  devotion,  the  sacred, or  even  I  would  suggest  the  utopian. In  fact,  I'd  contend  that  finance  more broadly  has  a  profoundly  Utopian  dimension. For  many  of  those  who  work  with  or theorise  about  financial  markets  in  instruments, such  phenomena  possess  a  beauty  and perfectibility  lacking  from  the  world  at  large, but  with  the  potential  to  make over  that  world  in  their  own  image. To  this  way  of  thinking, finance  is,  or  at  least  tends  towards, being  an  idealised  domain  in  which  absolute  equilibrium, precision  and  synchronisation  preside. And  all  that  is  required  for social  and  economic  life  in  general, to  assume  these  same  qualities  is the  thoroughgoing  expansion  of  financial  logics. Like  all  utopias,  financial  utopias are  simultaneously  technical. A  matter  of  optimally  constructed  policies,  practises, procedures,  and  deeply  aesthetic  visionary  projections. Whose  sublimity  is  to  be contemplated  with  reverence,  awe,  and  wonder. As  I've  just  suggested,  finances, utopian  aesthetic  finds  its  purest  expression, I  think,  in  claims  for financial  markets  maximal  efficiency. Now,  the  efficient  market  hypothesis,  the  E,  M  H, is  a  central  plank  of  the  now  canonical  body  of finance  theory  that  began to  transform  American  universities, economics  and  business  departments  in  the  1960s  and  70s. And  became  integral  to  financial  professionals  models, practises  and  assumptions  over  succeeding  decades. It's  most  closely  associated  with the  leading  financial  economists Eugene  Farmer  and  Paul  Samuelson. The  EMH  refines  a  vision  of  the  market  as a  perfect  aggregator  of  dispersed  knowledge  and  action. That  stretches  back  through  pioneering neo  liberal  thinkers  such  as  Friedrich  Hayek. All  the  way  to  the  foundations  of modern  political  economy  in  Adam  Smith  and  the  notion  of the  invisible  hand  in Eugene  Farmers  canonical  formulation. Mature  securities  markets,  financial  markets  and advanced  capitalist  economies  can  be  defined  as efficient  in  that  their  prices always  fully  reflect  all  available  information. Because  so  the  theory  runs. Numerous  investors  and  traders devote  their  attention  to  identifying divergences  between  the  prices  of  stocks  and other  financial  assets  and  their  true  values. Such  divergences  will  vanish  almost  before  they  appear, as  market  participants  immediately  act  en  masse  to exploit  the  arbitrage  opportunity. So  you  get  wind  of  the  fact  that there's  important  new  information about  the  value  of  a  stock. You  see  that  relative  to  that  information, it's  missed  price  you  trade in  the  market  and  in  doing  so, you  bring  price  and  value  into  alignment. Instantaneously  is  kind  of  the  theory  on  this  account. The  market's  collective  wisdom  has, as  we  like  to  say  in  English  departments, always  already  priced  in everything  that  can  be  known  about  the  past  and  present, as  well  as  everything  that  can  be anticipated  about  the  future. Since  the  efficient  market  consistently  incorporates an  aggregated  best  guess  about  what  the  future  holds, impending  price  movements  are,  in  effect,  random, no  more  predictable  than  the  successive  coin tosses  that  recorded  on  a  chart  form. The  meandering  random  walk  path  invoked  by Burton  Malkiel  in his  celebrated  popularisation  of  the  EMH, A  Random  Walk  Down  Wall  Street,  from  1973. This  is  a  book  that  my  co  authors  and  I  discussed  it sensively  in  our  stock  market  advice  book,  Invested. Now,  underlying  efficient  market  theorists, technical  disquisitions  is  thus  a  conception of  financial  markets  as,  in  effect, omniscient  phenomena  in  whose  price  records  every  event, even  every  merely  prospective  possible  event is  weighed,  registered,  and  preserved. And  what  makes  this  conception  properly. Utopian,  in  several  senses  of  the  word,  I  think, is  the  way  in  which  it  answers  to a  profoundly  human  and ultimately  theological  yearning  for a  transcendent  realm  in  which  the  ephemera  of the  every  day  would  be  redeemed  and  immortalised. Slavoggeq  refers  to  such  a  space  as the  other  scene  in  which  the  accounts  are  properly  kept. The  fictional  other  place  in  which, from  the  perspective  of  the  last  judgement, our  acts  will  be  properly  located  and  accounted  for. Thomas  Moore's  original  Utopia, we  might  recall  is  literally no  Place  ige  is  here echoing  the  carbalstic  and  messianic  utopianism  of  Volta. Bena  means  thesis  on  the  philosophy  of  history, which  imagines  a  divine  chronicler  for  whom  nothing  that has  ever  happened  should  be  regarded  as  lost  for  history. And  whose  recital  of  events, both  major  and  minor, permits  a  redeemed  mankind to  receive  the  fullness  of  its  past. Now  citable  in  all  its  moment, the  EMH  vision  of financial  markets  would  thus  lend  weight  to Benjamin's  intuition  in  the  Fragment  Capitalism as  Religion,  written  in  1921, that  a  religion  may  be  discerned  in  capitalism since  capitalism  serves  essentially to  allay  the  same  anxieties, torments  and  disturbances  to which  the  so  called  religions  offered  answers. The  EMH  suggests  the  possibility  of  something  like the  ascension  of  temporal  life into  the  realm  of  the  eternal. That  religious  faith  once  uniquely extended  the  utopian  vision  that  glimmers  within efficient  market  theory  of  the  market  as a  radiant  redemptive  space  With  the  power  to elevate  even  the  most  quotidian  occurrences  of our  fallen  world  onto  a  transcendent  plane. Helps  to  explain  why  the  EMates  retain  such  a  hold  across the  discipline  of  economics  and the  financial  profession  even  in  the  face  of  events. Most  obviously  the  global  financial  crisis  of  2078, that  would  seem  conclusively  to  have  disproved  it  at stake  is  not  simply a  theoretical  explanation  of the  functioning  of  the  securities  markets, but  the  very  possibility  of some  secular  proxy  for  the  kind  of  omniscient  state, traditionally  attributed  only  to the  divine  that  might  bestow,  meaning, significance  and  permanence  on  events  and  experiences otherwise  destined  to  lapse  into  historical  oblivion. This  vision,  likewise  helps  to explain  why  the  EMH  has  provided the  underlying  rationale  for  the  neo  liberal  extension  of market  logics  to  virtually  every  domain of  contemporary  life, from  health  and  education  to  criminal  justice, and  even  the  environment. If  markets  know  best  the  argument  runs, then  all  social  and  economic  fields will  function  efficiently, precisely  to  the  extent  to  which  they are  organised  on  a  market  basis. Via  this  process  of  expansion, the  utopia,  that  is  the  market, need  not  merely  be  an  idealised  reflection of  the  ordinary  everyday  world. With  financial  markets  on  the  one  hand, reflecting  wider  socio  economic  reality  on  the  other, But  imminent  to  that  world, a  fully  achieved  Utopia  at  the  level  of  daily  life, whose  every  interaction  would  be miraculously  coordinated  and  optimised. If  in  the  efficient  market  imagination, the  social  world  is  perfectly mirrored  by  the  stock  market, then  the  ultimate  expansion  and fulfilment  of  this  vision  would  see  the  world, in  effect,  become  coterminous  with, and  indistinguishable  from  the  market. What  I  tried  to  do  in  this  analysis  of efficient  market  thought  is  to examine  what  might  appear  to  be  quite  a  technical, even  dry  economic  theory. And  to  try  to  understand  the  deeper  philosophical, and  as  I've  suggested, even  theological  vision  that underlies  it  and  helps  to account  for  its  enduring  appeal. In  order  to  do  so,  I  was  again drawing  on  literary  and  cultural  studies, interpretive  methodologies  in  ways  that  I  hope illuminate  an  aspect  of the  economics  discipline  in  a  new  and  revealing  way. The  final  area  that  I  want  to consider  concerns  two  closely  related  terms that  are  increasingly  important  in social  scientific  approaches  to the  economy,  performativity,  and  performance. Here  I'm  drawing  on  a  recently  published  book, Speculative  Time,  American  Literature in  an  Age  of  Crisis, which  came  out  earlier  this  year. Now,  performativity, as  many  people  in  this  room  will  know, is  an  important  concept across  the  philosophy  of  language, cultural  theory,  especially  gender  theory. In  recent  years,  it's  become  very significant  in  economic  sociology  as  well. Key  scholars  in  economic  sociology  and allied  fields  like  the  social  studies  of  finance, most  notably  Donald  Mackenzie  of this  Parish  Professor  of Sociology  here  at  the  University  of  Edinburgh. Figures  like  Mackenzie  have  argued  that economic  and  financial  models  are  not  merely descriptive  or  merely  predictive, but  rather  performative. That  is,  they  produce  or  generate the  very  phenomena  that  they supposedly  merely  neutrally  account  for. Their  a  version  of  what  the  pioneering American  sociologist  Robert  K  Merton termed  the  self  fulfilling  prophecy. The  claim  about  the  future  that  by  virtue  of being  made  helps  to  bring  that  future  about. Recently,  scholars  in  the  field  have increasingly  argued  that  economic  theories and  other  forms  of  economic  discourse take  on  performative,  that  is, self  fulfilling  effects,  in  part, at  least  by  deploying  performative, that  is  theatrical,  dramatic, staged,  spectacular  techniques  of  delivery. For  Ekaterina  Sptlova,  for  example, economic  performativity  is  rooted in  the  specific  theatricality  of  language. It  makes  things  happen  by  means  of theatrical  persuasion,  convincing  staging, and  thus  making  believe the  trust  taker  stages  trustworthiness  using various  devices  and  strategies such  as  personal  appearance  and  voice. By  doing  so,  she  does  not  provide the  audience  with  any  rational  reasons  for  belief, but  makes  them  believe. Despite  the  importance  of  such  language for  the  economic  performativity  approach. However,  there  have  been no  previous  attempts  to  put this  approach  into  dialogue  with the  actual  study  of  stage  performance  of the  kind  carried  out  in literary  studies  and  performance  studies. I  should  say  I'm  not  a  performance  studies  scholar, however,  a  number  of  my  colleagues  in  this  room  are. And  I  await  their  questions  and comments  both  with  enthusiasm  and  apprehension. As  an  account  such  as  Stlovz  suggests what  social  scientists  habitually  term  economic  actors. This  is  the  terminology  in the  social  scientific  literature if  economic  actors  are  to be  understood  in  the  performativity  paradigm precisely  as  actors  in  the  theatrical  sense. If  moreover,  such  actors  typically  affect  change not  simply  by  dutifully  delivering  codified  formulas, but  by  conveying  force  and  conviction via  rhetorical  and  embodied  methods. Then  the  linguistic  and  performance  techniques of  a  theatrical  production  in  which the  phenomenon  of  economic  performativity is  recognisably  and  centrally  at  stake, present  opportunities  to  isolate and  examine  in  magnified  form the  performative  theatrical  dimensions  of performative  self  verifying  self  generating  discourse. In  my  book,  I  argued  that an  American  play  first  staged  in  1935, Archibald  Mclesh's  verse  drama  Panic, provides  exactly  such  opportunities. It's  a  play  set  during  the  early  1930s  banking  crisis, in  which  there  was  a  wave  of  banking  failures  across the  United  States  in  the  wake  of  the  great  crash  of  1929, which  very  much  had  a  kind  of self  fulfilling  prophecy  aspect  to  it. Fear  fed  on  fear,  fed  on  fear. And  when  FDR  in his  inauguration  speech  referred to  having  nothing  to  fear  but  fear  itself, it  was  precisely  this  self generating  self  perpetuating  fear that  was  driving  the  banking  crisis to  which  he  was  referring. And  in  this  discussion  of  Mclesh's  play, I  tried  to  show  in  detail  how  the  notion  of economic  performativity deepens  our  understanding  of  panic. A  play  in  which  the  horizons  of economic  life  are  defined  by  a  financial  crisis that  perpetuates  itself  because characters  proclaim  and  act  in  the  belief  that  it  must, making  it  almost  impossible  to glimpse  an  alternate  future. More  broadly,  I  aim  to  offer  indications, not  only  of  how  scientific  theories  of performativity  might  provide  resources for  the  study  of  dramatic  performances, whose  themes,  particularly  in  the  American  tradition, are  so  often  financial  or  economic. But  also  of  how  direct  attention  to the  theatre  might  enrich  social  scientists, accounts  of  the  theatricality of  financial  and  economic  theory  and  practise. Mclesh's  playtext,  and  the  documentation  of the  1935  production  that can  be  found  in  a  range  of  sources, makes  it  possible  to  establish  a  clear  understanding of  how  Panic  was  originally  staged  and  performed. The  play  that  emerges  from  this  process of  reconstruction  presents  itself as  a  strikingly  pertinent  dramatisation  of the  enactment  and  effects  of  economic  performativity. Here  I  just  want  to  focus  on  one  particular  key  scene. Now  this  is  a  scene  in  which a  group  of  what  are  described  in  the  play  as  radicals left  wing  agitators  confront a  towering  Wall  Street  financier named  Mcgaffertys  very  deliberately  JP  Morgan  figure. Interestingly,  he  was  played  in  the  original  production, in  the  30s,  by  a  19  year  old  Orson  Wells. The  script  has  him  as  being  in  his  50s. Now,  by  all  accounts, and  this  perhaps  shouldn't  surprise  us, Wells  was  electrifying  in this  role  and  almost miraculous  in  his  ability  to  inhabit  a  man  of  this  age. I  say  it  shouldn't  surprise  us  because  of  course, about  five  or  six  years  later, he  demonstrated  those  age  transcending  abilities  in his  portrayal  of  Charles  Foster  Kane  in  Citizen  Kane. But  he  was  already  demonstrating  this  earlier, still  in  this  scene, a  profit  figure  who, it's  an  expressionist  style  play in  this  expressionist  manner, he's  sense  of  him  as  a  archetypal  figure. He's  simply  named  the  blind  man. The  blind  man  seeks  to  inculcate  despondency in  a  group  of  bankers  so  that  in  performative  fashion, their  demoralisation  will  make the  left  wing  radicals  predictions  of capitalism's  decline  into  reality. Now  this  photograph  shows  a  1980s  revival  of  the  play, and  I'm  pretty  sure  this is  a  shot  of  this  particular  scene  taking  place. I'll  just  read  a  few  lines  from this  speech  delivered  by  the  character  of  the  blind  man, which  will  hopefully  give  you  a  flavour. It's  a  verse  drama,  of  course, hence  the  very  noticeable poetic  quality  to  the  lines  here. The  bursting  seed  of  death  is  rotting right  beneath  your  tongues,  you  doubt. Not  in  your  heart. Doom  is  your  destiny, not  by  the  year's  earth  or the  Earth's  yield  is  man's  fortune  deciphered  or  fate told  only  and  furrows  of  men's  minds  are sowing  the  seeds  that  ripening  are  destiny. This  is  prophecy  precisely  as a  performative  form  of  speech  act. Something  that  becomes  true  to the  extent  to  which  it  is  believed  in. Something  that  works  on  the  minds  and the  bodies  of  those  who  receive  it. It's  a  speech  that  I  think  points to  the  conclusion  that  all  prophecy, or  rather,  aspires  to  be  self  fulfilling  prophecy. The  scene  staging  moreover  suggests  how  the  generation  of such  a  performative  response  may derive  not  only  from  vivid  and  forceful  rhetoric. But  also  from  an  address  that  for all  that  its  concerns  might  be  of  the  broadest  scope. It's  about  the  collapse  of  capitalism. For  all  that,  it's  very  broad. It  has  the  effect  of  a  personalised,  intimate, passionate  appeal  for  the  delivery of  the  lines  above  Mclesh's  directions. Had  the  blind  man  extend his  groping  fingers  to  touch  Mccafferty's  sleeve  rise, move  on  his  shoulder, touch  his  face  and  required  him  to modulate  his  tone  so  as  eventually  to  speak  gently, almost  with  tenderness,  his  voice low  in  its  accentuation of  the  encounters,  intimacy  and  tactility. The  scene  is  an  exhibition  performance  of  the  roles  of factors  such  as  vocal  dynamics  and  tonality, and  bodily  stance  and  gesture  in  performative  utterance. Understood  as  an  attempt  to  elicit  responses that  are  strongly  affective  and  embodied  in  nature. What  I  tried  to  argue  in  my  discussion of  panic  is  that  the  playtext  and  the practises  and  techniques  of its  original  staging  display a  dynamic  theatrical  form  that  exhibits, enacts,  and  interrogates  economic  processes. Now  widely  theorised  under the  rubric  of  the  performativity  thesis, the  plays  deliberately  and  instructively  exaggerated. Again,  it's  an  expressionist  play. It  has  that  stylized  quality, deliberately  exaggerated,  verbal,  visual,  bodily, and  auditory  elements  combined  to  present a  spectacular  showcase  of  performativity  in  action. So  this  discussion  is  another  attempt  to  show how  literature  and  the  literary  critical, or  I  guess  broadly  performance  studies  mode  of  analysis, might  offer  resources  for  deepening our  understanding  of  economic  theories  and  practises. To  conclude  very  briefly, as  I  mentioned  at  the  outset, I  haven't  sought  here  to  provide  anything like  a  comprehensive  account of  what  this  kind  of  approach, what  I've  outlined  in  terms  of the  economic  humanities  does  or  might  do. But  I  hope  at  least  to  have  given  you a  sense  of  the  variety  and value  of  this  diverse  emerging  field and  of  the  ways  it  draws  on. And  at  the  same  time  reaches beyond  the  arts  and  humanities, into  economics  and  other  branches  of  the  social  sciences. Thanks  so  much  everyone  for  listening.  Thank  you.