Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 15:51:13 -0700 (MST)
From: deaun moulton <deaun-AT-unm.edu>
Subject: Re: PLC: silenced protest


On Sun, 9 Nov 1997, James Ralph Westfall wrote:

> Well, I don't think I made that very clear. Let me try to phrase what is
> at issue here, using Hegel's terms. I wanted the <recognition> I thought
> the paper warranted me. I thought that my "message" had been alienated,
> and that I just needed to convince her that something great was right
> there before her eyes in my paper. I wanted the negation of the
> exteriority that divided me from the Other (my professor). I wanted us to
> be "all on the same page." I wanted to undo the "death of the author,"
> which demands that my text reject me in the moment that I give it to the
> Other. I wanted from her the phallus: the recognition opposed to my texts'
> rejection of me. 

In short, you figured you knew more than she did and that if you talked
hard enough (in your parlance this 'talking' is kind of seduction, I
suppose) she'd see it your way and give in.  She said "no."  Would this be
the same explanation if the gender question were not invoked?  Would she
have made the same response to a woman, or it is unfeasible in Lacanian
psychology for women to ask the question (make the seduction)? 


deaun

deaun-AT-unm.edu




     --- from list phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---