Calling one's partner 'fatso' might be a term of
> endearment in one relationship, and a wounding remark in another. And a
> particular act could be about mutual and consensual love in one
> relationship and about power relations in another. It's easy to move
> from what you're saying to "I wouldn't like to do that, so it must be
> depraved" - which makes me slightly wary of it.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Peter
>
Calling one's partner 'fatso' might be a term of
> endearment in one relationship, and a wounding remark in another. And a
> particular act could be about mutual and consensual love in one
> relationship and about power relations in another. It's easy to move
> from what you're saying to "I wouldn't like to do that, so it must be
> depraved" - which makes me slightly wary of it.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Peter
>
The late Wittgenstein's concept of contextuality of meaning is most
applicable here,
as in the De Sade's thread of discussion. The same thing (an act which may
be verbal or factual)
assumes a different meaning according to the various situations and
contexts: to
attribute to one word or act an identical significance in different
situations is misleading.
Consensus or divergence is the key word when absorbing a meaning or message:
so, it is true that if you call a woman "little harlot" in the course of a
violent discussion
containing resentment and anger is something, another if you use the same
phrase
in a totally different context, like in a deeply intimate loving and intense
sexual encounter.
Mid way between the insult and the prize is Serge Gainsbourg 's use of this
phrase in his
(beautiful) song "Sex shop" (for those who do not speak French, the song has
wonderfully been translated into English and sung by Mick Harvey ).
If you can get hold of the Mick Harvey's CD give a listening to this use of
"abusive"
language.
Erminia
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|