Date: Sun, 24 Sep 1995 19:20:03 +1000 (EST) From: Catherine Driscoll <s_cad1-AT-eduserv.its.unimelb.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: Braidotti's Irigaray Diane Certainly Butler "stands on the shoulders" of Irigaray as you say (although perhaps a less vertical metaphor would suit Irigaray more), and that is (one reason) why I attributed the dismissal of 'gender' -- of women's specificity and even subjectivity -- to Kristeva rather than Butler. I read _Bodies That Matter_ as very carefully constructing a space in which feminine specificity might be asserted without designating that specificity as prior or of the essence of woman. Your assertion that Braidotti is not careful in qualifying this priority is worth thinking about. However, I don't see how the argument for 'feminine specificity' can be sidelined in Irigaray to just a few lapses which can be forgiven as side-effects of her analyses. Unless, of course, those lapses are her texts. I'd be interested to hear if you have similar objections to Elizabeth Grosz'reading of Irigaray (?) -- certainly she also, though differently, engages Irigaray and Deleuze (and Deleuze and Guattari) together in positing something like a female feminist subject. All the best Catherine ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005