tures -- by turning to 'culture' as the 'other' of metadiscourses -- they would be able to overturn existing boundaries of knowledge production that, in fact, continue to define and dictate their own discourses. Questions of authority, and with them hegemony, representation, and right, can be dealt with adequately only if we insist on the careful analyses of texts, on responsibly engaged rather than facilely dismissive judgements, and on deconstructing the ideological assumptions in discourses of 'opposition' and 'resistance' as well as in discourses of mainstream power. Most of all, as a form of exercise in 'cultural literacy', we need to continue to train our students to read -- to read arguments on their own terms rather than discarding them perfunctorily and prematurely -- not in order to find out about authors' original intent but in order to ask, Under what circumstances would such an argument -- no matter how preposterous -- make sense? With what assumptions does it produce meanings? In what ways and to what extent does it legitimize certain kinds of cultures while subordinating or outlawing others? Such are the questions of power and domination as they relate to the dissemination of knowledge. Old-fashioned questions of pedagogy as they are, they nonetheless demand frequent reiteration in the climate of Cultural Studies.