![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I've moved from the post-structuralists to the structuralists now, especially Gérard Genette (does nobody write about this stuff outside of France? What is it about France and these extreme, often silly language theories?).
The structuralists are far from perfect. They have a tendency to try and stuff square pegs into round holes. They have a tendency to believe that "The living bird is ... its labelled bones." But at least they admit that words can have meaning, and what the author was trying to say is important.
Naturally the author of the book I'm reading seems to despise him.
I still can't get over the bizarre, quasi-sexual obsession some of these critics have with total meaninglessness in a book, and how they expect us to share their obsession. And I mean quasi-sexual. Julia Kristeva and Roland Barthes both described the excitement of "text liberated from meaning" as a jouissance -- roughly, an orgasm.
Apparently, meaninglessness, confusion, and emptiness got them hot. I wonder vaguely if Roland Barthes is still alive, and -- if so -- if he uses videotapes of George W. Bush's press conferences as a sexual aide.
Edit: I checked. He died in 1980, run over by a laundry van. Why does that seem appropriate?
The structuralists are far from perfect. They have a tendency to try and stuff square pegs into round holes. They have a tendency to believe that "The living bird is ... its labelled bones." But at least they admit that words can have meaning, and what the author was trying to say is important.
Naturally the author of the book I'm reading seems to despise him.
I still can't get over the bizarre, quasi-sexual obsession some of these critics have with total meaninglessness in a book, and how they expect us to share their obsession. And I mean quasi-sexual. Julia Kristeva and Roland Barthes both described the excitement of "text liberated from meaning" as a jouissance -- roughly, an orgasm.
Apparently, meaninglessness, confusion, and emptiness got them hot. I wonder vaguely if Roland Barthes is still alive, and -- if so -- if he uses videotapes of George W. Bush's press conferences as a sexual aide.
Edit: I checked. He died in 1980, run over by a laundry van. Why does that seem appropriate?
