> I'm not alone in calling her language obtuse - her fellow > post-modernists (I don't think it's very nice to take a commonly > understood term like "modern" and overlay it with a specific technical > meaning, I hate this about Agile programmers too, who I usually abhor, > but that's for another thread) claim she's nuts too. > > Oh cultural theorists, when will they learn that ad hominem attacks along the lines of 'I claim you are nuts Gayatari Chakravorty-Spivak! And I am a theorist, so I should know!' are not generally the best way of ensuring their ideas go down in history? I am not well-read on deconstructionism: while I have enjoyed Terry Eagleton's criticism of Spivak (via Derrida), I read it as part of an ongoing conversation on the nature of language itself, as Shruthi highlighted in one of her last emails. Perhaps if it were a debate, Eagleton, who is fantastically eloquent no matter how self-contradictory or lazily constructed his arguments are, will always emerge the winner, simply because there will be more people - in the short term - who find him believable.
Supriya -- roswitha.blogspot.com | roswitha.tumblr.com
