File spoon-archives/french-feminism.archive/french-feminism_2000/french-feminism.0008, message 3


Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:42:18 +0800
Subject: Re: talking about Irigaray


At 10:26 1/8/2000, Catherine Peebles wrote:
>"Don't you think that Nietzsche's physiological emphasis is a better vehicle
>than Irigaray's to carry the notion of the Natural Body into Western
>consciousness?"
>
>Perhaps you could clarify what you mean by the notion of the Natural Body?
>And would one have to choose between Irigaray and Nietzsche? I think that
>Irigaray's emphasis on mediation versus the immediate (which she calls
>"woman's traditional task") would be important here.
>
>Catherine
>
>

The natural body is my concept that the body should not have to be adorned
--read "improved" --by some aspect of Western culture in order to be made
publically acceptable.

Any viewpoint derived out of Christianity seems to demand that women should
be "improved".  ie. If they are not disciplined by some aspect of western
philosphy or religion, they are unacceptable.

This implies looking for what the natural body might possibly be.  It is
anything that is unselfconscious and free, vis a vis Western philosophy as
a traditional or authoritative disciplining agent.  It may choose to
identify with parts of this, as Western consciousness, or it may not.  It
may even choose to submit to a discipline.  The essential difference is
that either it does so, or it does not do so, from an essentially free
state of consciousness, which it has actually contrived by and for itself.

Please see the following text as an example:

--

http://www.iinet.net.au/~scratchy/skydive.html




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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005