>And again, this isn't meant as criticism of Butler; rather,
>what disturbs me is the artificial barrier between disciplines
>that allows some academics to see her work as ground breaking
>and original.
i don't cut her any slack for that. as i wrote a while ago, she cites victor turner's work, very briefly, and *he* knows about this perspective. what pisses me off is that she doesn't even bother to explore these arguments, the research--just briefly nods to turner. i mean, hell, sam's going to write a friggin article and already he's got a list of texts to read that'll take him years if he really wants to be that thorough [don't do it sam, you'd be nuts!]. sam appears to have taken this project a lot more seriously than butler did hers. i was prepared to let her off the hook, despite the fact that i think scholars should be held to higher standards, because it's clear that there *is* something distinctly different about an anti-humanism, post-structuralist approach to identity than is found in mead, goffman, etc. [don't ask me to articulate it because i have a hard time doing so myself and don't friggin care most of the time]
so i always wonder what it was that she so afraid of that she couldn't be bothered to read the work in this field and confront it head on and actually demonstrate how they are different.
and, if she couldn't do that, then to be famliar enough to the literature to forestall this critique with some discussion as to why she chose not to deal with an already established body of scholarship.
i don't think there is *any* excuse given that she writes in the preface:
"the texts are assembled to facilitate a political convergence of feminism, gay and lesbian perspectives on gender, and post-structuralist theory. philosophy is the predominant disciplinary mechanism that currently mobilizes this author-subject, although it rarely if ever appears separated from other discourses (????what would they be???). this inquiry seeks to affirm those positions on the critical boundaries of disciplinary life. The point is not to stay marginal, but to participate in whatever network of marginal zones is spawned from other disciplinary centers and which, together, constitute a multiple displacement of those authorities. the complexity of gender requires an interdisciplinary and post disciplinary set of discourses in order to resist the domestication of gender studies or women studies within the academy and to radicalize the notion of feminist critique"
i guess miles that butler was unaware how marginalized the social constructionist perspective is, eh?
i hate butler today. grrrr, kelley