Joan Retallack, in her HOW TO DO THINGS WITH WORDS (after Austin), 1998
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Chris Jones <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 08:26 +1000, Alison Croggon wrote:
>> I guess performance lends itself to this, because it is already
>> literally a playing of a role in relation to an audience, which
>> permits the explosion of expectations. Poetry per se is more
>> problematic in its relation to an audience/reader
>
> I am curious if this idea helps or is useful... Eve Sedwick takes up
> Austin's how to do things with words and the traditional marriage
> ceremony where the groom says; I do. This I do actually performs or acts
> the words. This exchange of women is actually done with the two words
> (it seals the bargain)
>
> >From this Sedwick was able to get to an analysis of homophobia as being
> structured in the universalising way by this exchange. Hence, homosocial
> friendships between men are cemented also by this exchange.
>
> It is also interesting that queer still attacheds itself to a militant
> lesbian and gay liberation agenda. (The idea that we are all just n
> sexes categories as queer returns to Aristotle, and this was the problem
> Butler found herself in and had to get out of asap.)
>
> --
> I have chronic fatigue syndrome so I may be delayed in my reply. Just to
> let you know, that's all. Chris Jones.
>
> Blog: http://abdevpoetics.blogspot.com/
>
--
All best,
Catherine Daly
[log in to unmask]
|