‘Fanciful associations’

IF 0.3 3区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
{"title":"‘Fanciful associations’","authors":"","doi":"10.3167/cs.2021.340107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article concerns the expression ‘logical phallusies’, imputed to Jacques Derrida by Barry Smith in 1992 in a letter arguing against the proposed award to Derrida of an honorary doctorate at Cambridge. Derrida insisted that this expression appeared nowhere in his oeuvre – it has never been found – and yet it has endured, in discussions of Derrida’s work and general legacy, more than any other aspect of Derrida’s ‘Cambridge Affair’. I address two cases of the expression’s weird stubbornness, arguing that its misattribution to Derrida is a gesture which Derrida’s work guards against and undermines – even deconstructs – in advance. The article sounds a note of caution about the ‘post-theoretical’ practice of assimilating philosophers and theorists to the humanities via the decontextualised appropriation of putatively synecdochic buzzwords.","PeriodicalId":56154,"journal":{"name":"Critical Survey","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Survey","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/cs.2021.340107","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article concerns the expression ‘logical phallusies’, imputed to Jacques Derrida by Barry Smith in 1992 in a letter arguing against the proposed award to Derrida of an honorary doctorate at Cambridge. Derrida insisted that this expression appeared nowhere in his oeuvre – it has never been found – and yet it has endured, in discussions of Derrida’s work and general legacy, more than any other aspect of Derrida’s ‘Cambridge Affair’. I address two cases of the expression’s weird stubbornness, arguing that its misattribution to Derrida is a gesture which Derrida’s work guards against and undermines – even deconstructs – in advance. The article sounds a note of caution about the ‘post-theoretical’ practice of assimilating philosophers and theorists to the humanities via the decontextualised appropriation of putatively synecdochic buzzwords.
“奇妙的联想”
这篇文章涉及“逻辑阳具”一词,巴里·史密斯在1992年的一封信中指责雅克·德里达反对授予德里达剑桥大学荣誉博士学位的提议。德里达坚称,这句话在他的作品中从未出现过——从未被发现过——但在讨论德里达的作品和一般遗产时,它比德里达“剑桥事件”的任何其他方面都更为持久。我谈到了两个表达方式怪异固执的例子,认为它对德里达的错误归因是德里达的作品预先防范和破坏——甚至解构的一种姿态。这篇文章听起来是对“后理论”实践的警告,即通过对假定的通灵流行语的去文本化挪用,将哲学家和理论家同化到人文学科中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Critical Survey
Critical Survey LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信