I just wrote these three sentences:

It is possible that the argument I am making here—that Velasco’s subtlety and purity make her stubbornly resistant to ideology-driven readings—might sound reactionary in the present academic climate. I do not mean to imply that that such readings are undesirable in principle, or that we should “just let poetry be poetry.” What is striking, though, is the muteness of criticism in the face of works that do not lend themselves to obvious USES.

But isn't what I'm doing a critical "use" also? How can I escape that aporia?