Avital Ronell. About Idiocy. 2008 1/10

[robespierreyt]

"i wish you an unprecedented struggle wth genuine thought" haha!!! thanks Avital

[kenzaburo]

Power Point!!! Keep it simple!

[kchamps]

love this woman.

[ElishaTexas]

Excellent!

I've never understood why densely written thought causes people to give up. For me, every turn of phrase I don't understand is a jumping off point for new discoveries. If I wanted something handed to me on a plate, I'd go to Denny's.

[crassconversational]

I just want to know when she gave this lecture and why I couldn't attend

[garthhudson]

"I am prompted by Husserl to disturb the serenity of the historically-consistent overestimation of mathemes by means of suppressing necessary and constitutive cognitive power failures."

Is this woman an Andy Kaufman-like performance artist parodying the empty jargon and faux-profundity of post-modern academics?

[languagevirus]

She has commented in other lectures on her 'rhetorical politics', which she describes as one against any 'right-wing notions of clarity'. When the content of one's interrogation veers toward the unintelligible/unthinkable, it only seems fitting for the form to follow suit.

[garthhudson]

To call clarity "right-wing" is giving way too much credit to the "right-wing."

"When the content of one's interrogation veers toward the unintelligible/unthinkable, it only seems fitting for the form to follow suit."

Very well, but this was all done much better hundreds of years ago by people like Nicholas of Cusa and Valentinus. Now it's feedback loops in a University cocoon. Still, this intellectual fad will pass like all the others. They play right into "right-wing" hands. Navel-gazing.

[languagevirus]

To be honest, I don't see anything wrong with it. I mean, if she presented herself as a philosopher doing work with propositional calculus, or as some kind of working-class intellectual, I'd think it inappropriate to use such an obscure delivery.

But since her work mainly falls within the realm of literary criticism, why not have fun with the prose? (Btw, Cusa's Ignorantia is a great work!)

[robespierreyt]

have fun with the prose? I thought she was trying to give a lecture...any honest lecturer would make every effort to keep the wording understandable for the audience...otherwise, it becomes(is) obscure

[languagevirus]

Despite my earlier comment about the unintelligable, I really fail to see how this lecture in particular is obscure. If you understand the references she's making (that is, if you are to be considered part of her 'audience' -- if that word still retains any kind of meaning), then you'll understand. If not, then you won't.

[robespierreyt]

But then her audience is limited to the few academics who share that jargon...they can entertain each other with these lectures but they cannot expect to convince the world of anything they say. For a far-reaching non-obscure philosopher try Schopenhauer.

[Krelianx]

You are giving him too much credit. She is not 'having fun' with prose, as if the point was some purposeless pyrotechnical game with words and references. If you understand the jargon then it is quite straightforward; Ronell is not Brassier, her theory is rather standard post-Derridean deconstruction, and not particularly difficult once you know the basic operations and understand the references. Now, understanding her references: Hegel, Heidegger, Derrida; that's a challenge for thought!

[LewisMKster]

@garthhudson In a word, Yes. She got her start in performance art.

[ViraFilms]

cool