Just an aside really, but when I hear comments like this I am always so grateful ending up with the professors I did, at the programs I was at, where effort was made to ignore or constructively address "the divide" of contemporary philosophy. I was probably a year into my MA before I learned how some might think it wrong, or silly to appreciate people like Cavell and Derrida, or Frege and Deleuze, etc. at the same time.

To me, the experience of talking with the true partisans of either the analytic/continental tradition is exhausting and at times absurd. Where else in academia do you have otherwise wonderful scholars being proud of never having read someone?

In my mind continental people are the worst offenders in this, but I guess your helping balance the scales here.

Thankfully, not everyone in the field is like this. Off the top of my head: Graham Priest and Paul Livingston are two guys doing good work to complicate the party lines here.