On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 11:52 +0000, Dominic Fox wrote:
> If you want male parthenogenesis fantasies, look no further than the
> novel The Wild Boys by William S. Burroughs, a writer noted for his
> misogyny (although not so much for homophobia...)
Ha yes, Burroughs is interesting thought in terms of the unity of
content and form (if I can be a little loose with terms) with collage as
the infinite suture with the transference projection of the phallic
economy and the phallic mother and the finite desires Lacan's schema
puts forward in the petit objet (a). Juliet Mitchell and Judith Butler
discuss this phallic Mother.... (memory? I would need to check. Misogyny
as the face of the phallic mother?) Also interesting with Burroughs is
the female jungle which eats males and a reading of Kant's sublime in CJ
is suggested again in terms of immanent critique of a finite romantic
line (perhaps after Kant's immanent critique of reason in CPR.) I have
read little on this critical entanglement with the Romantic sublime and
Burroughs modernism. As Badiou suggests, infinite immanent critique to
critique finite romanticism, placing Burroughs within modernism. Which
makes me wonder how useful this idea of placing Burroughs in the
Postmodern cannon really is?
Of course, to simply follow Burroughs formal method would be an
ineffective formalism. I would probably find myself agreeing with
Badiou's suggestion that the truth of Burroughs cutups remains with
Burroughs and an interruption and beginning again is needed for an
effective immanent critique.
|