Comments and Questions:
- Butler's language is puzzle-like, in my opinion, requiring the comprehensive piecing and close analysis of the various components that work together to paint the overall picture of her own beliefs about the subjects she is delving into. I am still trying to get a more firm grasp on being able to summarize and understand her outlooks fully... i am really enjoying her presentation of questions and exploration into subjects i have not been too exposed to.
- I enjoyed reading Butler's analysis of Kristeva's theory of the semiotic dimension of language and the "Symbolic". Her explaination of Kristeva's theory and her refutations of many of her ideas intrigued me...i was further exposed to the philosophical depths in which one can analyze Sex and sexuality.... i thought these philosophical ideas that were posed through language categorization (? right word?) by Kristeva act as an interesting and made for a graspable understanding of her overall points- she makes a solid apparatus of her own ideas... Butler refutes these ideas with a solid stance of her own... The dissection of the semiotic and the symbolic in reference to the paternal law and notions of motherhood and lesbianism and poetic language that Butler offers left me feeling confused while at the same time feeling i get the position that butler takes...
- I also liked reading about Butler's analysis of Foucault of Sexuality... and thought it was really interesting to be exposed to Foucault's "reverse-discourse which treats 'sex' as an effect rather than an origin" (119). My question's this- what are people's overall thoughts of Kristeva's theories. Foucault's as expressed in this particular chap 3, and comments on Butler's analysis of them.
- also i am curious how people understand Kristeva's theory overall... And if anyone has found an interesting and insightful way of explicating their idea of it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment