--------------AC154A7A0DEE3771ED768E4D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear D&G'rs,
In my travels I have encountered a great deal of hostilitytowards D&G
(who they see as basically indistinguishable from Lacan, Kristeva, Freud
etc.) from practitioners of what could be described as a type of
Cultural Studies originating from the Birmingham Centre (often with
heavy dep on Foucault & sometimes Bourdieu).
There is a kind of orthodoxy which ops by demonstrating via Content
Analysis of the media a prejudice re: Ethnicity, Sexuality, Gender,
[some few are still interested in Class].
It aspires to something like Said's Orientalism. It utilizes the idea of
the Other cf. Ethnicity, Sexuality, Gender etc. But for such an
orthodoxy the very idea of an unconscious op is redundant, pointless,
non-demonstrable.
I heard of a man who wrote on postcoloniality with D&G. Might have done
a bad job. Anyway the project was met with much hostility.
Orthodoxy:
1. Identities are discursive constructs (also re: signifying practices)
2. These become the sights of contestation
3. And sites from which to contest
Pushed hard enough it is agreed that ethics is itself a discursive
contstruct/site of contestation/mode of contesting. There is nothing
except hegemony and subversion. BwO is irrelevant not because it is a
discursive construct (which it is not, by the way), but because nobody
is claiming it for their Identity (except maybe some embattled and
desperately recuperating educated white men).
I sometimes call this orthodoxy "Skeptical Activism". LOL!
:) Chris
--------------AC154A7A0DEE3771ED768E4D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
Dear D&G'rs,
<P>In my travels I have encountered a great deal of hostilitytowards D&G
(who they see as basically indistinguishable from Lacan, Kristeva, Freud
etc.) from practitioners of what could be described as a type of
Cultural Studies originating from the Birmingham Centre (often with heavy
dep on Foucault & sometimes Bourdieu).
<P>There is a kind of orthodoxy which ops by demonstrating via Content
Analysis of the media a prejudice re: Ethnicity, Sexuality, Gender, [some
few are still interested in Class].
<P>It aspires to something like Said's <I>Orientalism</I>. It utilizes
the idea of the Other cf. Ethnicity, Sexuality, Gender etc. But for such
an orthodoxy the very idea of an unconscious op is redundant, pointless,
non-demonstrable.
<P>I heard of a man who wrote on postcoloniality with D&G. Might have
done a bad job. Anyway the project was met with much hostility.
<P>Orthodoxy:
<BR>1. Identities are discursive constructs (also re: signifying practices)
<BR>2. These become the sights of contestation
<BR>3. And sites from which to contest
<P>Pushed hard enough it is agreed that ethics is itself a discursive contstruct/site
of contestation/mode of contesting. There is nothing except hegemony and
subversion. BwO is irrelevant not because it is a discursive construct
(which it is not, by the way), but because nobody is claiming it for their
Identity (except maybe some embattled and desperately recuperating educated
white men).
<P>I sometimes call this orthodoxy "Skeptical Activism". LOL!
<P>:) Chris</HTML>
--------------AC154A7A0DEE3771ED768E4D--