21 March, 2007

You are currently browsing the daily archive for 21 March, 2007.

Margarete Kohlenbach and Raymond Geuss, eds. The Early Frankfurt School and Religion. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. x + 263 pp. Notes, bibliography, index. $85.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-1-4039-3557-1.

Reviewed for H-German by Emily J. Levine, History Department, Stanford University.

Dialectics of Enlightenment

This volume is the outcome of a growing academic interest in the relationship between religion and Enlightenment broadly conceived. Just as recent works have rewritten religion back into the Enlightenment narrative so, too, this volume reminds us that critical theory was not entirely hostile to religion as was once thought.[1] As Kohlenbach and Geuss explain in their introduction, critical theory was first introduced to the West in the postwar period by the neo-Marxist student movement of the 1960s. Attracted to critical theory because of its claim to link social theory and political practice, the student movement nonetheless simply ignored or suppressed any anti-liberal features of the philosophy that did not fit their own philosophy. This attitude extended to any affinities between critical theory and religious traditions. If the Left adopted a secularized form of critical theory for its political purposes, then the theological camp, for its part, exaggerated the existential concerns of critical theory as justification for its own arguments against the privatization of religion and failed to “realise that for Critical Theory religion represented first and foremost a _problem_, even on those rare occasions when it seemed to be presented as a solution” (emphasis in original, p. 2). Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , ,

I have completed the first part of Trinh Minh-ha’s text, Woman, Native Other. The first two sections contained the conceptual framework for woman/women, language, writing, nativism, and science. Largely an anthropological perspective, this text begins to broaden the interdisciplinary purview of women’s history and the history of displacement. While I found these two chapters quite dense, there is a lively pulse to Minh-ha’s text. The narrative that is being written is also writing both the author and reader. Displacement is inevitable; however, I get the sense that the displacement is both the displacement of the native, woman, women, oppressed and the displacement of the one who has been managed by rationality, the masculine symbolic, and Father Culture.

In Commitment from the Mirror-Writing Box, echoes of French Feminist Theory [namely Kristeva and Cixous] are very present and help to buttress Minh-ha’s writing/feminine writing/woman writing. This chapter reveals the undercurrents [yes, she points to several] that oppress women’s ability to write: rationality, male dominance, and Father Culture are some to name. The following chapter on the Language of Nativism continues to unmask the binds of oppressions by considering the act and function of language. No longer can language be something that is passive; for Minh-ha, language is a birthing process, free from male/masculine rationality.

Writing is an act of envelopment; it is an act of labor and birth.

Tags: ,

51204 pages viewed, 206 today
18842 visits, 103 today
FireStats icon Powered by FireStatsInspectorWordpress has prevented 0 attacks.
WP-Definitions