or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The SW&D Intellectual Masturbation Station
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The SW&D Intellectual Masturbation Station - Page 2

post #16 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teger View Post

see I dunno about this, i think construction of self is internalized, although, to some extent, your self/internalized construction is shaped by your environment (society, etc), so i see the 'stepping out' as second hand. also i think that, inherently, you can't other yourself, as (for me at least) the key to viewing something as an 'other' is in viewing it as something distinct from how you define yourself, and you can't view things in that way without a sense of self.

I think we're pretty much in agreement here, though I'd go beyond "shaped" by environment. I was trying to point out the problem of dichotomous thinking with regards to self/body, or mind/body, if you want to put it that way. As typically constructed imo the problem is analogous to self/other, which is why I phrased it the way I did above. But as you've said, something seems intuitively wrong about othering yourself, which is why I suggested the phenomenological (maybe we can think of it as 'first-person' or unreflexive) mode of engagement.
post #17 of 107
STFU and dance!
post #18 of 107
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Fellow Linguist View Post

I think we're pretty much in agreement here, though I'd go beyond "shaped" by environment. I was trying to point out the problem of dichotomous thinking with regards to self/body, or mind/body, if you want to put it that way. As typically constructed imo the problem is analogous to self/other, which is why I phrased it the way I did above. But as you've said, something seems intuitively wrong about othering yourself, which is why I suggested the phenomenological (maybe we can think of it as 'first-person' or unreflexive) mode of engagement.

I've never been a fan of the mind/body disconnect. maybe that's philosophy blasphemy.
post #19 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraphicNovelty View Post

Once I graduated and had no one to talk to about that sort of thing, reading dense literature/philosophy/social theory works became kind of boring.

I've always had trouble reading philosophy outside of class... I don't get much out of just reading without the engagement of discussing and writing about the article. frown.gif
post #20 of 107
where does SF fit?

gFCMC.png
post #21 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teger View Post

I've never been a fan of the mind/body disconnect. maybe that's philosophy blasphemy.
\

The philosophy of mind has progressed well beyond Cartesian ideas. Most modern philosophers are physicalists of some sort. I think that you are good to go. I have an Engineering Science PhD, but was just yay short of a minor in Philosophy of Science.

I propose that we settle all disagreements with a battle royale, The construction of a battle royale enfranchises the masses.
post #22 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teger View Post

which volume of proust's 'remembrance of things past' is the best.

Sodome et Gomorrhe, of course.

Malheureusement, à peine étions-nous assis dans une baie sans dégagements, que Mme de Saint–Euverte, but des quolibets du baron, vint à passer. Elle, peut-être pour dissimuler, ou dédaigner ouvertement les mauvais sentiments qu’elle inspirait à M. de Charlus, et surtout montrer qu’elle était intime avec une dame qui causait si familièrement avec lui, dit un bonjour dédaigneusement amical à la célèbre beauté, laquelle lui répondit, tout en regardant du coin de l’oeil M. de Charlus avec un sourire moqueur. Mais la baie était si étroite que Mme de Saint–Euverte, quand elle voulut, derrière nous, continuer de quêter ses invités du lendemain, se trouva prise et ne put facilement se dégager, moment précieux dont M. de Charlus, désireux de faire briller sa verve insolente aux yeux de la mère des deux jeunes gens, se garda bien de ne pas profiter. Une niaise question que je lui posai sans malice lui fournit l’occasion d’un triomphal couplet dont la pauvre de Saint–Euverte, quasi immobilisée derrière nous, ne pouvait guère perdre un mot.

— Croyez-vous que cet impertinent jeune homme, dit-il en me désignant à Mme de Surgis, vient de me demander, sans le moindre souci qu’on doit avoir de cacher ces sortes de besoins, si j’allais chez Mme de Saint–Euverte, c’est-à-dire, je pense, si j’avais la colique. Je tâcherais en tout cas de m’en soulager dans un endroit plus confortable que chez une personne qui, si j’ai bonne mémoire, célébrait son centenaire quand je commençai à aller dans le monde, c’est-à-dire pas chez elle. Et pourtant, qui plus qu’elle serait intéressante à entendre? Que de souvenirs historiques, vus et vécus du temps du Premier Empire et de la Restauration, que d’histoires intimes aussi qui n’avaient certainement rien de «Saint», mais devaient être très «Vertes», si l’on en croit la cuisse restée légère de la vénérable gambadeuse. Ce qui m’empêcherait de l’interroger sur ces époques passionnantes, c’est la sensibilité de mon appareil olfactif. La proximité de la dame suffit. Je me dis tout d’un coup: «Oh! mon Dieu, on a crevé ma fosse d’aisances», c’est simplement la marquise qui, dans quelque but d’invitation, vient d’ouvrir la bouche. Et vous comprenez que si j’avais le malheur d’aller chez elle, la fosse d’aisances se multiplierait en un formidable tonneau de vidange. Elle porte pourtant un nom mystique qui me fait toujours penser avec jubilation, quoiqu’elle ait passé depuis longtemps la date de son jubilé, à ce stupide vers dit «déliquescent»: «Ah! verte, combien verte était mon âme ce jour-là…» Mais il me faut une plus propre verdure. On me dit que l’infatigable marcheuse donne des «garden-parties», moi j’appellerais ça «des invites à se promener dans les égouts». Est-ce que vous allez vous crotter là? demanda-t-il à Mme de Surgis, qui cette fois se trouva ennuyée. Car voulant feindre de n’y pas aller, vis-à-vis du baron, et sachant qu’elle donnerait des jours de sa propre vie plutôt que de manquer la matinée Saint–Euverte, elle s’en tira par une moyenne, c’est-à-dire l’incertitude. Cette incertitude prit une forme si bêtement dilettante et si mesquinement couturière, que M. de Charlus, ne craignant pas d’offenser Mme de Surgis, à laquelle pourtant il désirait plaire, se mit à rire pour lui montrer que «ça ne prenait pas».
post #23 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by GG Allin View Post


I suggest you read up on the "Sokal Hoax" before bothering to read what is called post-structuralist theory.

 

I really wouldn't - or at least not in order simply to dismiss the people they attack a priori. Sokal and Bricmont made some good points about some aspects of social theory, or at least common US academic uses of certain French theorists, with their initial hoax article, but they also got some others woefully wrong once they came to setting out their stall further in book form (e.g. on Bruno Latour). You really need to have read quite a bit of contemporary social theory and philosophy to even get what they are critiquing and to be able to make some judgment about their assessment, and I get the feeling from the book that they didn't actually even make the effort to read a lot of what they are attacking properly, let along think about it in context.

post #24 of 107
I'm telling you guys, if you want a solid, unpretentious, oftentimes amusing account of 20th century Western literary theory, then check this out:


228


http://www.amazon.com/Literary-Theory-Introduction-Terry-Eagleton/dp/0816654476/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1337012732&sr=8-1
post #25 of 107

^ That's exactly what's needed. I slogged through all the Freud, Nietzsche, Marx, etc. and then some of those who built on their foundations and by the time I had to stare down Spivak I realized the only thing that really stuck with me was Death of the Author-era Barthes. That and Sedgwick. But Barthes was so refreshing, I looked at some of my friends and classmates and they were obsessed with looking at a text this or that way or through this or that lens and it just seemed that none of them had any real relationship with the writing at all. Not that it's a bad thing to be familiar with all these theorists, but it's kind of seductive in that you are introduced to this entirely new, very advanced vocabulary and a kind of pride that comes with name dropping etc etc etc I'm way too tired and burnt out BUT I think you just need perspective, you need to remember that in the end the only thing that is real is your relationship with what you are reading or writing.

 

So a solid, unpretentious, oftentimes amusing account of 20th century Western literary theory is what is needed, at least in my opinion. After that you need your own relationships, which too many people don't have, or are too concerned with their standing as "authors" or "readers" but holy shit what am I writing I'll stop here before I say something even more sweeping and stupid.

 

Been reading lots of Bashō though. Very refreshing from goddamn fucking Spivak.

 

Quote:

Stormy seas!

and stretching out to Sado Isle,

the Milky Way

 

aaaaaaah

post #26 of 107
not available on kindle wtf
post #27 of 107

I think hemmingway became more misogynous with time as farewell to arms is mostly about a hatred of war and a somewhat idolized love story.  If you read sun also rises there is a woman with whom all of the male characters are in love with, they end up fighting over her, but in the end she runs away with a bull fighter and everyone is friends again.  I would speculate that hemmingway was injured during  ww1 in a way that prevented him from having sex

post #28 of 107
Thread Starter 
i hate modern literary theory. its why im getting an MA in history not english. and because of that i think that most postmodernism is wankery and that hemimgway's misogyny is meaningless (product of his times and all that). it's easy to point fingers at people who lived 50 to 500 yaers ago and declare them deficient when measured against our current morality, but who cares? it doesn't mean anything. it's just a way to make yourself feel better at the expense of someone who isn't alive.

thewho I don't appreciate how you're using your white, masculine gaze to force us to read your 'texts,' as if your own ability to identify 'meaningful' work was anything other than the product of your privileged, racist upbringing.
post #29 of 107

Hey I would hate women too if I couldn't get it up...

post #30 of 107
Thread Starter 
i also hate the trend wherein you can only study your own culture, ie: white people can never do african american history because they're racist. what nonsense.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The SW&D Intellectual Masturbation Station