Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 09:17:42 +0100 From: "steve.devos" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk> Subject: Re: Differend... Glen Two things I forgot to add which I meant to, hence these late additions; related to positions that on the one hand deny that the ground on which Lyotard's stands has validity - for a humanist critique try some of Tzvetan Todorov - esp Chapter 6 of Imperfect Garden... or the work of John Gray - especially Straw Dogs which correctly in my viuew would argue that Lyotard is in reality a humanist... steve steve.devos wrote: > Glen > > Regarding the 'dispute' the most interesting are rather obviously > Badiou's work as noted below..: > > * Badiou's work which conmtgains a consistent critique and refusal > of this aspect of Lyotard's work, actually it's a critique of > the linguistic turn in philosophy. > * Jacques Ranciere's work especially 'Disagreement' which begins > with a rejection of the idea of 'differend' as associated with > philosophy of politics. > * Daniel Bensaid's work Marx in out times contains an implicit > critique but it's buried deep in the text and has no surface > markers. > * Lecourt's book Mediocracy is worth reading for the way he > conflates Lyotard with the nouvelle philosophers... > * Negri's book 'Revolution in our time' is also an implicit > critique of Lyotard's position.... > > There are also some good feminist critiques but to my shame I can't > remember the texts today... They are more marginal to my current > interests... Dinae might have them to hand. > > If you only read one or two of these I'd recommend the Ranciere text > and of course the Badiou. > > regards > steve > > > > Glen Fuller wrote: > >>Hi Everyone, >> >>Three things: >> >>Has anyone followed through with the Differend in their work and has >>published stuff I can read? >> >>What was the big dispute between lyotard and others (I can't remember >>who) (hmm this question makes a lot of sense!) in the french >>intellectual (post)marxist community, I think in the late 1990's? >> >>And lastly, sorry for my outburst in defence of my thesis work. I have >>so much invested (in every sense) in this venture, I couldn't help >>myself but react rather badly. >> >>Ciao, >>Glen. >> >> >> >
HTML VERSION:
Glen
Regarding the 'dispute' the most interesting are rather obviously Badiou's work as noted below..:
There are also some good feminist critiques but to my shame I can't remember the texts today... They are more marginal to my current interests... Dinae might have them to hand.
- Badiou's work which conmtgains a consistent critique and refusal of this aspect of Lyotard's work, actually it's a critique of the linguistic turn in philosophy.
- Jacques Ranciere's work especially 'Disagreement' which begins with a rejection of the idea of 'differend' as associated with philosophy of politics.
- Daniel Bensaid's work Marx in out times contains an implicit critique but it's buried deep in the text and has no surface markers.
- Lecourt's book Mediocracy is worth reading for the way he conflates Lyotard with the nouvelle philosophers...
- Negri's book 'Revolution in our time' is also an implicit critique of Lyotard's position....
If you only read one or two of these I'd recommend the Ranciere text and of course the Badiou.
regards
steve
Glen Fuller wrote:
Hi Everyone, Three things: Has anyone followed through with the Differend in their work and has published stuff I can read? What was the big dispute between lyotard and others (I can't remember who) (hmm this question makes a lot of sense!) in the french intellectual (post)marxist community, I think in the late 1990's? And lastly, sorry for my outburst in defence of my thesis work. I have so much invested (in every sense) in this venture, I couldn't help myself but react rather badly. Ciao, Glen.