|
#1
| |||
| |||
| If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudoscientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities,and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to "normalize" formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality. |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| As far as I'm concerned it's just gobbledygook. It only seems to have sense but actually doesn't. |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| If, for a while, the ruse [is this the right word or is it "use"?]of desire is calculable for the uses of discipline, soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudoscientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to "normalize" formally the disturbance of [a discourse of splitting] that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality. I think the author has a poor grasp of some words and phrases he has used, and also has not really a good understanding of English grammar. Basically he seems to be suggesting that by manipulating people's desires and needs, all these negative reactions will occur as an attempt to make sense of a world that has become fractured. |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| Homi K. Bhabha is an Indian-American postcolonial theorist. He is the Anne F. Rothenberg Professor of English and American Literature and Language at Harvard University. So one cannot think that he is not well versed in English language and grammar. Obviously, he wants to say something but because of the convoluted nature and intricacy of the sentence one cannot make head or tail of it. Or is he trying to deliberately mystify his readers? |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| If he is that eminent, then no, he not trying to mystify his readers. He expects them to know and understand the terminologies he is using. I still find "the ruse of desire" an odd phrase, unless there is something in the preceding text to explain it. Extracting sentences from complex texts can sometime mean it is more difficult to explain content and intent. Could you look at your source and see if it can help to provide more context? |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| all, does, mean, what |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |