>Dennis paraphrased my understanding of Yoshie's comment: Butler imagines
>signification as the crack in totality that will unleash transformation. In
>itself, this thought is banal, like restating, for the zillionth time, that
>dreams are the royal road to the unconscious.
From the same premise, Surrealists, etc. at least created fascinating art. :) What works in art, however, doesn't work in politics.
Psychoanalysis should be thought of as art, I believe.
>But, like Derrida, she
>represents (and probably hopes for) such changes in purely formal terms.
That's a problem common to all philosophy. The Poverty of Philosophy, as the Old Man put it. Philosophy is poor because history is missing from it, even when it wants to be political & even materialist.
Yoshie