File spoon-archives/french-feminism.archive/french-feminism_1997/97-02-05.141, message 178


From: meaghan-AT-utdallas.edu
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 12:20:17 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Help...


Florence, interesting question.  One example of a style being coopted by 
the mainstream would be Rap music.  It has a twenty year history of 
development (don't ask for a citation, I'm telling you what I remember 
hearing) and in the 80s and 90s got so "big" (that is mainstream) that 
white kids in rich suburbs bought most of the cds and began to dress in 
the fashions of hiphop and rap artists.  Of course, those white kids in 
the rich suburbs do not live the lives and social experiences that rap 
describes, criticises, or valorizes.  I giggle when I see 19 year olds 
>from my home town (one of those well off little towns) whose daddys are 
comfortable white lawyers, etc, singing the lyrics of gansta rap -- 
there's a strange and scary moment when the one sings the song and 
dresses in the style of an artist who is deeply critical of power 
structure you represent.

That's one, the new hippie fads are another...

AS to Irigaray and "ecriture feminine" the same double edge applies.  
Almost anything can coopted -- especially when you talk about a style of 
writing or thinking.  When I read James Joyce I see elements of his style 
I associate with "e.f."  No, he's not writing JUST like Irigaray, but I 
see some similarities.  Kristeva was in fact, I heard, criticized for 
writing about poetic language which seems to resemble "e.f." in many 
ways, but all of her examples are works by men: Joyce, Beckett, Trakl and 
a few others.  I wonder, then, if men can write this way, does their 
doing so lessen the potential impact of this style of writing-thinking on 
the conventions of patriarchal writing-thinking (as in the style of 
analytical philosophy or non-experimental poetry)?  What's the boundary 
between a man writing and the attitude of patriarchy?  What's the 
boundary between a man writing speculatively, or experimentally (in 
philos and lit respectively) and patriarchy coopting a style which 
resists in both form and content its values and agenda's?  A question 
which has been bothering me is: if Irigaray's style is irreducible, or 
not iterable, if it cannot be picked up and used by others (women or men) 
in disciplines or on problems other than only hers, then how useful or 
effective is it as an intervention in patriarchy and its values?  

I think it all depends on how the new style or new mode is picked up.  
When the white suburban teens who drive mazdas to school sing about 
getting shot or about shooting up in the gheto -- this is empty mimicry 
and the cooptive power of the center at work.  When Rap evolves in gansta 
rap (I think in part in response to this cooptation) it moves out to find 
new territory from which to resist.  An it will likey be coopted again.  
That seems to be how this works (See um, Althusser "Ideology and the 
State Apparatus" for a short but DENSE description of this movement in 
history).  But, let's say that a style like Irigaray's (which has the 
rare combination of insight, eloquence, and rigor) is piked up in away 
that does not empty it of its force, by men and women who are looking for 
new and more (soemthing) way of doing philos or psychoanalysis or 
historical critique, then what you have a movement.  

Finally, given my reading around (which is not as extensive as it might 
be) I don't the current academic or philosophical world chomping at the 
bit to coopt Irig's methods.  They seem much more interested in ignoring 
them to death if possible.  

I hope that response was of some use to you.  Great question.

Happy New Year,
m

Meaghan Roberts-Jones			| ... for never will [we] be able
Ph.D. Candidate - Humanities		| to quench a longing which is
Lit.&Fem.Philos.			| eternally regenerated out of
University of Texas-Dallas		| the abundance of gratifications.
MS JO 31							
Box 830688				|	Friedrich Schlegel
Richardson, TX 7503-0688		|
meaghan-AT-utdallas.edu			|

On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Florence Pastoor wrote:

> 
> I know this is a crazy time of year to be asking for help - but for those
> of you who happen to be around over the holidays, I have a quick
> question...
> 
> I am writing a paper in which I am talking about how Irigaray's writing
> style -- which is, as Irigaray claims, "irreducible."  Actually here is an
> exact passage:
> 
> "Even if fashion does try to take it over, even if imitation does
> caricature it or use part of
> its content, [this] 'style' remains irreducible."  (taken from her article
> "The Three Genres.")
> 
> In an attempt to expand upon this citation, and clarify it, I thought I
> would use an example of how subversive works of art are often co-opted by
> precisely the mainstream art community they had hoped to rattle.  Their
> work is actually turned into (reduced to) cute 'fetishes' - or fashion.
> This, of course, rather undermines intent behind this work.  In fact, it
> can be rendered impotent through its appropriation by the powers that be...
> 
> My question is:  can anyone help with an example of a 'style' of art that
> actually sucuumbed to this fate.  or any other example.  I want to
> juxtaposition that example against Irigaray's claim that this new feminine
> style of writing will not and cannot actually be co-opted by the
> patriarchy.  ...
> 
> Does this make sense?  hope so.
> 
> thanks for any suggestions.
> 
> Have a merry christmas!
> 
> Florence Pastoor
> MA Candidate, Trinity College, Ireland
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list french-feminism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> 


     --- from list french-feminism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005