Before puritanism and personality cults made it boring, affect theory brimmed with real intellectual potential. Laura Kipnis explains

Laura Kipnis discusses the evolution of affect theory in her review of Lisa Downing's book, "Against Affect." Kipnis argues that affect theory, which emerged in the mid-1990s, was initially rich with intellectual potential but has since become constrained by puritanism and personality cults. She emphasizes that the original focus of affect theory on emotions, the body, and experience provided a fertile ground for academic exploration, but this potential has been diminished over time. In "Against Affect," Downing aims to critique the current state of affect theory and to advocate for a return to reason within the academic humanities. Kipnis notes that Downing's work serves as a polemic that seeks to rescue and redistribute rational thought among those who have engaged with affect theory but have not reverted to more traditional forms of analysis. This critique highlights a perceived need for a balance between emotional engagement and rational discourse in the humanities. Kipnis's review reflects a broader concern regarding the trajectory of affect theory and its implications for academic inquiry. She suggests that the initial promise of affect theory has been overshadowed by a shift towards more restrictive interpretations, which may limit the scope of intellectual exploration in the field. The discussion raises questions about the future of affect theory and its relevance in contemporary academic discourse.