|
|
US Mall 1 - Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex
|
List Price: $35.95
Our Price: $19.00
Your Save: $ 16.95 ( 47% )
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Manufacturer: Routledge
|
Average Customer Rating:  
|
|
Binding: Paperback
Dewey Decimal Number: 305.3
EAN: 9780415903660
ISBN: 0415903661
Label: Routledge
Manufacturer: Routledge
Number Of Items: 1
Number Of Pages: 288
Publication Date: 1993-10
Publisher: Routledge
Studio: Routledge
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spotlight customer reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: A poststrcuturalist deconstruction of Freud
Comment: My initial reaction to reading Bodies that Matter by Judith Butler is that she writes from a very unique perspective and theoretical standpoint: post-structuralism. While she maybe considered one of the foremost theorists on gender and feminism, I find her writings extremely difficult to follow. She presents key concepts readily but in a langue that is indicative of the post-structuralist perspective, convoluted and overly wordy. More often than not I found myself loosing focus and having to reread numerous passages just to maintain basic understanding.
If language, as Butler suggests, is confined by the language used (Butler 91: 1993) then Butler is caged. Her critical deconstruction of Freud, which is the main focus of the text, is enlightening but far too complex within the language used for the critique. The concepts of Freudian psychology are not that difficult to understand when presented in a fashion that lends itself to understanding. Many of his theories are paramount to understanding basic anthropological concepts, not to mention human psychology.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Lacanian response
Comment: When I first read this book, I was pleased to see that Butler was returning to the problem of "gender performativity" she raised in *Gender Trouble.* I do believe that she was misunderstood as having claimed in *Gender Trouble* that the performativity constitutive of gender implies an infinite "plasticity" or freedom from the constraints of gender. Yet after reading *Bodies,* I felt that she evaded the question with which she opened the book: in what way can the "materiality" of anatomical sex be construed as a "discursive limit" to ideological constructions of gender without being understood as existing outside of discourse? I believe that Butler is ultimately indecisive about the status of the materiality of sex as either a pre- or extra-discursive "hard kernel of the Real" or (just like gender) another aspect of discourse. This is what leads to her very wrong-headed "critique" of the concept of "objet petit a" in the work of Slavoj Zizek and Jacques Lacan, very complex work which she oversimplifies and accuses of "reifying" or "essentializing" sex. Any serious student of Lacan knows that the a-object of fantasy is anything but "essential." It phantasmatically "dresses up" (to use Lacan's words in Seminar 14) a primordial psychic "hole," an *absence* or pure negativity where a "grounding" for discourse ought to be but is *lacking.* It's a shame that a book such as this which begins with a rigorous intellectual question degenerates into a sort of psychoanalytic dilettantism.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Major work from a major thinker that doesn't quite convince
Comment: The best thing about Judith Butler is that she is always willing to think through the consequences of her earlier writings. This book was a response to the criticism that emerged out of the groundbreaking conclusion to GENDER TROUBLE that argued for an understanding of gender as performative. Critics took Butler to task for arguing that gender is something that is simply an act of performative volition - one can "be" whatever one wants to be - irrespective of the materiality of the body. Here, Butler turns the tables (in a neat deconstructive move) by showing how this criticism presupposes the a priori existence of "bodies" and "matter" separate from discourse. Yet, after a brilliant introduction, the book becomes weighted down by its own psychoanalytic presuppositions and its tediously dense prose style. There is often no reason for Butler's writing to be as incomprehensible as it is, especially given the giant claims she's making about the nature of gender (other than to "perform" her writing's own indebtedness to Lacanian psychoanalysis and Althusserian critique). Moreover, her work has been rightly faulted (partiucularly by Martha Nussbaum) by holding out an ideal of "subversion" that is something (in the terms of how she frames it) that ultimately DOES have very little to do with the ways sexual inequality is experienced outside of a somewhat narrow bourgeois American academic purview. But, finally, given the indisputable pervasiveness of Butler's ideas within the academy and without it (particularly in the ways in which sexuality is viewed today), the work is clearly a seminal text nonetheless.
Customer Rating:
Summary: colossal hybris
Comment: This book drove me almost entirely insane. The essay if you can call it that on the film Paris is Burning is simply incendiary to any person with a trace element of logic in their scalp. This essay argues that Venus Extravaganza was murdered for having been a transvestite. In the film itself it says she/he is killed -- but what the NYPD cannot solve Butler solves in the twinkling of a phrase -- she claims he/she is erased for playing with the sexual line. Not for burning a customer, or for simply being in a dangerous business. Whores are wiped out all day and night for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ever hear of the Green River Killer? Still Butler knows the motive. She just invents anything she wants, and calls it truth. She actually infers that anybody has the right to invent their own reality, and everybody else has to honor this reality. Only an extremely stupid person who has never had to work for a living could keep such a dumb idea down without puking. Do you mean if I think I'm a millionaire and walk into a bank, they will give me a million dollars? Do you mean if I have cellulite all over my legs and breasts that I can be a top model, I just have to really believe it? Do you mean that if I think I'm a genius, then others will agree? Feminist academics who've never worked, but who love to dramatize their own victimization, will love this book. Everybody else will simply puke from laughing so hard.
Customer Rating:
Summary: what?
Comment: I would have to agree with the reader that said this book was completely incomprehensible!
|
|
|
Editorial Reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: A poststrcuturalist deconstruction of Freud
Comment: My initial reaction to reading Bodies that Matter by Judith Butler is that she writes from a very unique perspective and theoretical standpoint: post-structuralism. While she maybe considered one of the foremost theorists on gender and feminism, I find her writings extremely difficult to follow. She presents key concepts readily but in a langue that is indicative of the post-structuralist perspective, convoluted and overly wordy. More often than not I found myself loosing focus and having to reread numerous passages just to maintain basic understanding.
If language, as Butler suggests, is confined by the language used (Butler 91: 1993) then Butler is caged. Her critical deconstruction of Freud, which is the main focus of the text, is enlightening but far too complex within the language used for the critique. The concepts of Freudian psychology are not that difficult to understand when presented in a fashion that lends itself to understanding. Many of his theories are paramount to understanding basic anthropological concepts, not to mention human psychology.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Lacanian response
Comment: When I first read this book, I was pleased to see that Butler was returning to the problem of "gender performativity" she raised in *Gender Trouble.* I do believe that she was misunderstood as having claimed in *Gender Trouble* that the performativity constitutive of gender implies an infinite "plasticity" or freedom from the constraints of gender. Yet after reading *Bodies,* I felt that she evaded the question with which she opened the book: in what way can the "materiality" of anatomical sex be construed as a "discursive limit" to ideological constructions of gender without being understood as existing outside of discourse? I believe that Butler is ultimately indecisive about the status of the materiality of sex as either a pre- or extra-discursive "hard kernel of the Real" or (just like gender) another aspect of discourse. This is what leads to her very wrong-headed "critique" of the concept of "objet petit a" in the work of Slavoj Zizek and Jacques Lacan, very complex work which she oversimplifies and accuses of "reifying" or "essentializing" sex. Any serious student of Lacan knows that the a-object of fantasy is anything but "essential." It phantasmatically "dresses up" (to use Lacan's words in Seminar 14) a primordial psychic "hole," an *absence* or pure negativity where a "grounding" for discourse ought to be but is *lacking.* It's a shame that a book such as this which begins with a rigorous intellectual question degenerates into a sort of psychoanalytic dilettantism.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Major work from a major thinker that doesn't quite convince
Comment: The best thing about Judith Butler is that she is always willing to think through the consequences of her earlier writings. This book was a response to the criticism that emerged out of the groundbreaking conclusion to GENDER TROUBLE that argued for an understanding of gender as performative. Critics took Butler to task for arguing that gender is something that is simply an act of performative volition - one can "be" whatever one wants to be - irrespective of the materiality of the body. Here, Butler turns the tables (in a neat deconstructive move) by showing how this criticism presupposes the a priori existence of "bodies" and "matter" separate from discourse. Yet, after a brilliant introduction, the book becomes weighted down by its own psychoanalytic presuppositions and its tediously dense prose style. There is often no reason for Butler's writing to be as incomprehensible as it is, especially given the giant claims she's making about the nature of gender (other than to "perform" her writing's own indebtedness to Lacanian psychoanalysis and Althusserian critique). Moreover, her work has been rightly faulted (partiucularly by Martha Nussbaum) by holding out an ideal of "subversion" that is something (in the terms of how she frames it) that ultimately DOES have very little to do with the ways sexual inequality is experienced outside of a somewhat narrow bourgeois American academic purview. But, finally, given the indisputable pervasiveness of Butler's ideas within the academy and without it (particularly in the ways in which sexuality is viewed today), the work is clearly a seminal text nonetheless.
Customer Rating:
Summary: colossal hybris
Comment: This book drove me almost entirely insane. The essay if you can call it that on the film Paris is Burning is simply incendiary to any person with a trace element of logic in their scalp. This essay argues that Venus Extravaganza was murdered for having been a transvestite. In the film itself it says she/he is killed -- but what the NYPD cannot solve Butler solves in the twinkling of a phrase -- she claims he/she is erased for playing with the sexual line. Not for burning a customer, or for simply being in a dangerous business. Whores are wiped out all day and night for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ever hear of the Green River Killer? Still Butler knows the motive. She just invents anything she wants, and calls it truth. She actually infers that anybody has the right to invent their own reality, and everybody else has to honor this reality. Only an extremely stupid person who has never had to work for a living could keep such a dumb idea down without puking. Do you mean if I think I'm a millionaire and walk into a bank, they will give me a million dollars? Do you mean if I have cellulite all over my legs and breasts that I can be a top model, I just have to really believe it? Do you mean that if I think I'm a genius, then others will agree? Feminist academics who've never worked, but who love to dramatize their own victimization, will love this book. Everybody else will simply puke from laughing so hard.
Customer Rating:
Summary: what?
Comment: I would have to agree with the reader that said this book was completely incomprehensible!
Array
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
