I don't know enough about this, and I hardly know anyone else who cares enough about it who isn't a fan of Butler who would write such a criticism.
I think the section on Bodies that Matter ought to be expanded, especially in its relation to Gender Trouble, but again I don't feel comfortable right now doing that myself.
However, Judith Butler takes the precaution to explicitly deny being against all forms of limitation of discourse. Until you tell me exactly what instance of language use is troubling for you, I cannot try to help you.
I read Excitable Bad writing award butler a few years ago, so I am not crystal clear on the details, but I made the original much more concise over words shorter than your edit and reorganized it so that some of the general comments about the book which originally appeared at the end of the section are now a lead-in at the beginning.
Don't try to mislead about your edit history, btw; it's right there for everyone to look at. The MLA has an obligation to make clear the value of literary studies to the broader public and to counter the anti-intellectualism and sloganeering that threatens the critical thought within the academy.
Entries offer tendentious, petulant reactions to the hubbub. So the award is not just an interesting bit of info about her career, but also an example of a recurring critique made against Butler.
I have taken time to understand Butler's ideas and have rejected them unequivocally. If this is just about the "lesbian writers" category, leave the damn thing. The argument that 'well, such and such physics theorem is still on Wikipedia is patently ridiculous.
Somtimes you find criticism and responses of ideas of philospher X, sometimes you find a simple explication of their views.
The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.
Since you have insisted on leaving a response to the Bad Writing Contest 'criticism', if it constitutes that, I have changed the title of the newly created section to Criticism and Response, and also, as I said I would, put up the NPOV, because I do believe response to a widely publicized context, response which goes even DEEPER into specifics which no one would be able to understand just happening upon the encyclopedia, is inappropriate, and constitutes caving in to trying to, as Nussbaum points out, find meaning, when really, even according to Butler, meaning of the sort an average encyclopedia reader would hope to find, is impossible.
What Butler does, as Nussbaum points out, is try at great pains to obfuscate meaning, because she doesn't believe 'meaning' exists, in the sense that most think of that--she likes to think she eschews traditional "definitions".
Often, the bad writer will feel that they have a particular story they want to tell. Racism is assuming anything about anyone based on a perceived deviation from a racial norm known as white. You cannot have an article on Judith Butler that spouts off her original borrowed philosophy in her original language and then ALSO expect that there not be criticisms of it.
But people have to know that she is, even perhaps admittedly, a radical. But I'm not annoyed because Butler isn't a "Jewish lesbian" to a rough approximation of the meaning of those adjectives, neither of which she'd be entirely sanguine about. This action was not discussed or debated, and I'm reverting.
You keep talking as though someone has argued for inclusion of some of the criticisms from the press release. Speaking of shell games, see if you can figure out the subject of that sentence. I switch back and forth between five different tasks.
We can go line by line and I can try my best to simplify things. That's called POV warringAnd so the annual Bad Writing Contest was born. The rules were simple: Entries should be a sentence or two from an actual published scholarly book or journal article.
No translations into English allowed, and the entries had to be nonironic: We could hardly admit parodies in. the Bad Writing Award is unfair and high-handed, "a matter of bad faith to take a single sentence out of context and charge it with obfuscation" (Culler, p. 43); the clarity Dutton et al.
prize is, in fact, an unstable political concept, always begging the question, Michael Warner notes, "Clarity for whom?". And so the annual Bad Writing Contest was born. The rules were simple: Entries should be a sentence or two from an actual published scholarly book or journal article.
No translations into English allowed, and the entries had to be nonironic: We could hardly admit parodies in. Since the Bulwer Lytton Fiction Contest has challenged man, woman, and (precocious) child to write an atrocious opening sentence to a hypothetical bad novel. Judith Butler’s Difficulty There is no joy to be had in justifying Butler’s Bad Writing Award.
Each lapse in grammar and style reflects less upon Butler herself than it does upon the enterprise that has made her an influential celebrity. Here eminence isn’t a measure. Jul 21, · Judith Butler and the Bad Writing Award Hat tip Minding the Campus and See Thru EDU The English language reportedly has one million words, but the average English speaker only uses about ten thousand of them.Download