Dear all,
Two things that I find interesting :
- every now and then, the issue of gender comes up on the list. I had
started a long reply a few months ago, didn't post it, do that's how
I remember;
- and very soon, the issue of writing, language and truth come up,
with post-modern vs. ? arguments
- and then, someone brings in Foucault or Derrida, and it goes on for
a while.
I am (very slightly) at odds with the way the discussion regresses
rather than progresses. I think that (american) post-modernism makes
an interesting misuses of its French sources. Or, more strictly
speaking, it has been reduced to a "general relativism", which would
take its root in the mismatch of language(s) and reality (to make it
simple... the issue has always been a central concern of all
philosophies).
I do not see that Foucault (I think I know his work rather well in
their original language) or Derrida (I red him less) implied (or even
supported) the idea that there is no truth. What they have analysed
and what they propose is to track the connection between language and
power, and the construction of "truths" not in an ontological sense,
but as something that justifies a structure (of interpretation= a
frame; of power= a society...).
And this was also one of the key issues of rethorics since... since
its inception : how can you (use language to) convince people of
something that can be experienced in a different way.
The general relativism that come out in the discussion makes me think
that there is little interest in changing things, and possibly, that
it even prevents change. My worry would even be that the "general
relativism" rather than being a radical challenge (in the
"revolutionary" connotation) could well end up in the most
conservative and fascist inertia (in the sense that "power" remains -
not becomes, remains- the backbone of the social structure).
And this is even a stronger paradox for design(ers) ?
When Fiona describes the fact that there are more female in the
textile dept of her university, and more male in the games dept., as
well as the perception she gets, what counts to me is not really the
exact reasons why... there are many that simply fall under common
sense. To me, the essential question is : 1/ is this desirable, from
my/faculty/society perspective(s) ? 2/ If not, how do I/the faculty/
the society change this. We can also have a discussion about why it
is desirable or not to have more male in textile and vice-versa, or
whether the females that are in games are feminine or not, or whether
the question(s) simply make sense. But, at the end of the day, true
or false, right or wrong, real or fiction, each of us has some power
to change or maintain the existing situation ;-)
My 2 (euro)cts,
Jean
|