| Page: 1 | Rating: Unrated [0] |
Reflections
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sun Mar 9, 2003 @ 6:38pm |
 Coolness: 91930 | 1. Neodialectic feminism and capitalist narrative
In the works of Rushdie, a predominant concept is the distinction between ground and figure. If pretextual nihilism holds, we have to choose between subcultural capitalist theory and cultural discourse. In a sense, Sartre uses the term 'capitalist narrative' to denote not theory, but neotheory. A number of discourses concerning the absurdity, and some would say the stasis, of pretextual sexual identity may be discovered. But Baudrillard uses the term 'social realism' to denote the role of the reader as writer. The subject is interpolated into a deconstructivist postcapitalist theory that includes language as a paradox. Thus, Bataille uses the term 'capitalist narrative' to denote the common ground between class and sexual identity. 2. Rushdie and subcultural capitalist theory If one examines social realism, one is faced with a choice: either accept textual dematerialism or conclude that class, perhaps paradoxically, has objective value, given that sexuality is equal to language. The primary theme of the works of Rushdie is the collapse, and eventually the rubicon, of subcultural society. But Debord uses the term 'subcultural capitalist theory' to denote not, in fact, discourse, but postdiscourse. In The Ground Beneath Her Feet, Rushdie examines the dialectic paradigm of consensus; in Midnight's Children he affirms subcultural capitalist theory. It could be said that any number of narratives concerning capitalist narrative exist. The subject is contextualised into a social realism that includes narrativity as a totality. However, Sontag uses the term 'capitalist narrative' to denote a precapitalist reality. The economy, and thus the futility, of dialectic deappropriation intrinsic to Rushdie's The Ground Beneath Her Feet is also evident in The Moor's Last Sigh. Thus, subcultural capitalist theory implies that truth is intrinsically impossible. 3. Discourses of paradigm The characteristic theme of Prinn's[1] model of social realism is the difference between sexual identity and sexuality. The main theme of the works of Rushdie is a self-justifying totality. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a constructive discourse that includes consciousness as a paradox. "Sexual identity is unattainable," says Debord. The premise of social realism suggests that the significance of the artist is deconstruction. However, the subject is contextualised into a postdialectic structural theory that includes truth as a whole. Foucault's essay on subcultural capitalist theory holds that discourse must come from the masses. In a sense, Marx uses the term 'social realism' to denote not theory, as Lyotard would have it, but pretheory. An abundance of dematerialisms concerning the role of the participant as artist may be found. Therefore, Bataille promotes the use of subcultural capitalist theory to modify and read consciousness. Many discourses concerning social realism exist. But the subject is interpolated into a subcapitalist deappropriation that includes sexuality as a totality. 4. Capitalist narrative and dialectic discourse "Class is fundamentally elitist," says Foucault; however, according to de Selby[2] , it is not so much class that is fundamentally elitist, but rather the fatal flaw of class. Any number of desituationisms concerning not narrative, but neonarrative may be revealed. Thus, Baudrillard uses the term 'subcultural capitalist theory' to denote the common ground between society and truth. The characteristic theme of Sargeant's[3] model of social realism is not dematerialism, as subcultural capitalist theory suggests, but predematerialism. Dialectic discourse implies that the establishment is part of the economy of culture, given that the premise of capitalist posttextual theory is invalid. But Debord suggests the use of dialectic discourse to deconstruct class divisions. Many theories concerning Baudrillardist simulation exist. Therefore, the main theme of the works of Rushdie is the role of the reader as writer. Von Junz[4] suggests that we have to choose between social realism and the patriarchialist paradigm of consensus. It could be said that the subject is contextualised into a dialectic discourse that includes sexuality as a whole. If social realism holds, we have to choose between subcultural capitalist theory and precultural narrative. In a sense, McElwaine[5] holds that the works of Pynchon are postmodern. Bataille's analysis of dialectic discourse states that discourse is created by the collective unconscious. But in V, Pynchon denies subcultural capitalist theory; in Mason & Dixon, however, he affirms dialectic discourse. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sun Mar 9, 2003 @ 8:14pm |
| Coolness: 91930 | if anyone's wondering, the above is actually computer generated nonesense :) |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Unknown User replied on Sun Mar 9, 2003 @ 8:15pm |
 Coolness: 15440 | meaning? |
Reflections
| Page: 1 |
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
