Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 14:58:58 -0500
From: Bob <suannschafer-AT-earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The


>>How do we interrupt and transform the narratives posited by
>>the institution while utilizing the same problematic methodologies?
>
>>April, isn't that the $64,000 question?
>
>Of course, but my concern just now has more to do with an "authentic"
>versus a "constructed" notion of history and of identity.

I'm not sure I understand what precisely you mean by an "authentic" notion
of history.  I'm a little better on an "authentic" notion of identity --
one's own notion of identity?

>Is it
>legitimate to hearken to the real (in terms of experience, *particularly
>that of marginalized people*) and History (in an 'absolute sense)

An "absolute sense" of history?

>to
>critique, well, History in its traditional absolute sense.

Of course it's legitimate to hearken to the real -- in terms of experience
-- which I also take from one's own perspective to be the "authentic" in
order to critique History -- but doesn't this critique have the additional
effect of "constructing" History?

>I know this
>seems like a rephrasing of the same question, and I know the list has
>touched on it before, but I was hoping someone would have some
>(more)thoughts.  Perhaps I should think about it a little more before I
>pursue the question, it's just that this book I was reading last night
>brought it to the fore --again.

I'm not sure it's a rephrasing and I don't particularly care if it is -- or
if the list has touched on it before.  I find it interesting -- and
consequently worth pursuing -- for understanding.

Bob


>April
>How DOES one critique within/out the system by using the critical
>methodologies of the system?  As such, isn't there the risk that one's
>motives are ALWAYS therefore already suspect -- and the critique itself
>susceptible to misinterpretation, misprision?
>
>Bob