|
A Tale of Two Cities is everywhere, wouldn't surprise me at all.
As for Derrida, I shan't give up in my quest to vindicate some of his ideas in spite of his discourse. His smaller, less haughty works like "Plato's Pharmacy" or "Structure, Sign, Play" are very useful and don't require too much swampstomping. As for stuff like "On Grammatology" and the theory behind stuff like trace, give me a few more years 
(Then again, it is precisely my impulse to smack Derrida's tongue out of his cheek that compels my reading/enjoyment of his ideas, so perhaps this is all in vain to begin with. Such is life.)
|
I mean it's fine, I don't have any beef with people studying derrida. I just don't think he's somebody that's so important and central that having more than a cursory understanding of him is mandatory. And derrideans have this attitude that derrida is the master of truth and that anybody who doesn't study him is inadequate. I wouldn't terrorize people with hegel in the same way that derrideans terrorize people with derrida, even though hegel is just as difficult (of course, I think hegel has actual substance behind the difficulty, but that is of course the question at issue). There's this attitude derrideans have that 'this is the most important thing, but it's impossible to explain to you, so if you haven't spent years studying it, you just aren't invited to play with us. Also, any criticism you have is just proof that you don't understand.' derrideans are the most sectarian of all, imo
|
Yeah I agree with you for the most part, and that's why I really don't consider myself a Derridean at all. I just find that my pencil labeled "Derrida" can oftentimes work well when used in concert with other implements if one can overlook the mess that others who work in similar media produce, including the work of Derrida himself. I can't help but steal "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." from Marx right here and suggest that it very much applies to more than just a higher phase of communist society. As I learn more about the specifics of exactly what went down in and around the philosophy/lit theory of the "postmodern" break, I can't help but feel that a lot of good ideas were almost entirely covered over by the constituent waste of a generation of old men who were (and are) entirely flabbergasted by television and constructed image media (the internet has made it even worse lol). Particularly when it comes to creative expression and art, many pomo thinkers waved the white flag far too early in the battle for the existence of things like "good" or "bad" or "art", and this defeatism not only informed the content of the works of thinkers like Derrida but also, perhaps more importantly, their shape and form as well. The ornamental stylings of Derrida read to me like a cry for help rather than a smug self-affirmation, and now you can begin to see why I, as you do, dislike and disagree with the bulk of Derrida scholarship.
There's a lotta salvage out here in this wasteland, knawimsayin.
|
?
I'm not a Derridean and Derrida isn't the centre of my thought and studies anyway. I don't care if you don't want to read Derrida, it's fine and I can completely understand that. But there is a problem if you say stupid shit like "I don't care if I'm misunderstanding him". If you're going to say anything about anything you better put in the effort to actually get shit correct. Or else just pass by in silence.
|
I would LOVE to pass over derrida in silence. Unfortunately the derrideans don't let you
|
Yeah, but you're the one that brought him up and dismissed him SO flippantly in that stupid Christianity thread. We really could do without dumb things like that.
|
|
|
Where did IronMan go? He abandoned his thread. The watchman is asleep. He was like a better version of Christian youtube videos.
|
Baa?21245 Posts
derrida is like everything on reddit/4chan/other random internet communities - there are more people complaining about his so-called rabid fans than there are actual rabid fans
this is just trace shit right here
Indeed, it is precisely because there are precious few true Derrideans (note how quickly people jumped into qualify themselves as "not totally Derridean," "I really don't consider myself a Derridean at all," etc.) that it's so easy to just bash Derrida.
Then again I should jump on the bandwagon but saying I'm not a Derridean at all either do hoho.
|
The more and more I read Derrida, the more and more I start to appreciate him. Yes, a lot of his stuff in my opinion is superfluous, but his methodology of deconstruction and binary opposition really did help shape my thought, especially in politics.
When it comes to French postmodernism and post-structuralism, yes, there are problems, but I do feel that 90 percent of the critics are just philistines and critics for the sake of being critics.
Also, there are some very amazing deonstructionists who should not be dismissed so flippantly such as Kojin Karatani.
http://www.kojinkaratani.com/en/talks/history-and-repetition-today.html
http://www.kojinkaratani.com/en/talks/thing-as-other.html
|
On November 01 2013 21:37 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
there are more people complaining about his so-called rabid fans than there are actual rabid fans.
not in my life
On November 01 2013 22:15 Shiragaku wrote:
When it comes to French postmodernism and post-structuralism, yes, there are problems, but I do feel that 90 percent of the critics are just philistines and critics for the sake of being critics.
many of the french intellectuals of the period also hated derrida. like foucault. derrida is much more marginal a figure in french intellectual life than in anglophone
edit: also his influence has extended to a lot more than even people who explicitly work with derrida. I blame him for the idea in our intellectual culture that the entire task of critical thought is to play "spot the binary" and then yell "gotcha!!"
|
Yeah, his fame is clearly due to the respect he gained in america. Not sure how that makes sense though.
|
I bought the third book of the Gentleman Bastard series, The Republic of Thieves last week and I'm now about midway through. It's realistic fantasy much like ASOIAF and it has the George R.R. Martin seal of approval.
![[image loading]](http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1348233235l/2890090.jpg)
If anyone knows this series I must say it has been much more enjoyable than the second book and the premise is far more thrilling. Great way to kill time before the Winds of Winter hits the shelves...
|
On November 02 2013 01:46 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 21:37 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
there are more people complaining about his so-called rabid fans than there are actual rabid fans. not in my life Show nested quote +On November 01 2013 22:15 Shiragaku wrote:
When it comes to French postmodernism and post-structuralism, yes, there are problems, but I do feel that 90 percent of the critics are just philistines and critics for the sake of being critics.
many of the french intellectuals of the period also hated derrida. like foucault. derrida is much more marginal a figure in french intellectual life than in anglophone.
French intellectuals seem to hate each other in general.
|
On November 02 2013 04:11 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2013 01:46 sam!zdat wrote:On November 01 2013 21:37 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
there are more people complaining about his so-called rabid fans than there are actual rabid fans. not in my life On November 01 2013 22:15 Shiragaku wrote:
When it comes to French postmodernism and post-structuralism, yes, there are problems, but I do feel that 90 percent of the critics are just philistines and critics for the sake of being critics.
many of the french intellectuals of the period also hated derrida. like foucault. derrida is much more marginal a figure in french intellectual life than in anglophone. French intellectuals people seem to hate each other in general.
But it's all appearances
Edit : to clarify a bit, all XXth century French intellectuals tend to come from the same little school, which explains quite a lot in the way they interracted with each other...).
|
|
|
![[image loading]](http://pervegalit.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/picture-31.png)
The Science of Logic.
Okay, the last three days I've been reading the prefaces and I'm not two pages into the introduction. So far there's a lot of promises that seem really hard to hold, but it makes sense and I don't think I've gone crazy yet ! Not sure how long it will last, but I think it's worth a try. I've picked up something easier in parallel :
![[image loading]](http://www.devoir-de-philosophie.com/images_fiches_de_lecture/7211.jpg)
Balzac, how I missed thee !
|
the biographical introduction to the cambridge companion for hegel is really fascinating stuff, he was a really interesting guy
|
|
|
On November 02 2013 07:09 sam!zdat wrote:
the biographical introduction to the cambridge companion for hegel is really fascinating stuff, he was a really interesting guy
He also seems funnier than I expected, quite not on the level of Marx though :/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.mescaline.com/doors-perception.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.johnallegro.org/images/SacredMushroom-Hodder-ds.jpg)
