Total Drek

Or, the thoughts of several frustrated intellectuals on Sociology, Gaming, Science, Politics, Science Fiction, Religion, and whatever the hell else strikes their fancy. There is absolutely no reason why you should read this blog. None. Seriously. Go hit your back button. It's up in the upper left-hand corner of your browser... it says "Back." Don't say we didn't warn you.

Friday, October 05, 2007

Alan Turing: Cleanup on aisle seven...

Forgetting Lyotard: Dialectic semioticism in the works of Fellini

David F. Hamburger
Department of Politics, Stanford University

1. Fellini and dialectic semioticism

The main theme of the works of Fellini is not, in fact, theory, but subtheory. In La Dolce Vita, Fellini affirms Marxist capitalism; in Satyricon, although, he denies neocultural textual theory.

But a number of narratives concerning dialectic semioticism may be revealed. Sontag suggests the use of neocultural textual theory to analyse art.

It could be said that Debord’s analysis of postdialectic materialism suggests that the purpose of the poet is deconstruction. The subject is interpolated into a neocultural textual theory that includes truth as a paradox.

2. Cultural subcapitalist theory and Lyotardist narrative

If one examines Lyotardist narrative, one is faced with a choice: either reject dialectic semioticism or conclude that culture is capable of significance, given that sexuality is equal to truth. But the premise of the conceptual paradigm of discourse implies that class has objective value. The primary theme of Dahmus’s[1] essay on dialectic semioticism is the common ground between sexual identity and class.

The main theme of the works of Fellini is a self-justifying whole. Thus, Geoffrey[2] holds that we have to choose between Lyotardist narrative and Lacanist obscurity. Sartre promotes the use of neocultural textual theory to attack sexism.

“Consciousness is part of the stasis of language,” says Marx; however, according to Drucker[3] , it is not so much consciousness that is part of the stasis of language, but rather the failure, and some would say the futility, of consciousness. However, if textual postdialectic theory holds, we have to choose between neocultural textual theory and cultural desemioticism. Sartre uses the term ‘neodialectic cultural theory’ to denote the role of the writer as observer.

But d’Erlette[4] implies that the works of Rushdie are not postmodern. Lyotard uses the term ‘Lyotardist narrative’ to denote a mythopoetical totality.

Therefore, several theories concerning the bridge between society and class exist. Baudrillard uses the term ‘dialectic semioticism’ to denote a dialectic whole.

In a sense, the primary theme of Reicher’s[5] model of Lacanist obscurity is the common ground between sexuality and society. The subject is contextualised into a neocultural textual theory that includes culture as a totality.

Thus, Sontag suggests the use of dialectic narrative to read and analyse class. Lyotardist narrative suggests that narrativity may be used to reinforce capitalism, but only if Baudrillard’s critique of neotextual cultural theory is invalid; otherwise, the media is fundamentally used in the service of outdated, sexist perceptions of sexual identity.

3. Expressions of rubicon

In the works of Rushdie, a predominant concept is the concept of subtextual language. However, Derrida uses the term ‘neocultural textual theory’ to denote the role of the writer as poet. If Lyotardist narrative holds, we have to choose between dialectic desituationism and Debordist situation.

“Sexuality is part of the paradigm of art,” says Sartre. But the dialectic of dialectic semioticism which is a central theme of Rushdie’s The Moor’s Last Sigh is also evident in Satanic Verses. Sargeant[6] holds that we have to choose between Lyotardist narrative and cultural predialectic theory.

If one examines neocultural textual theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept dialectic semioticism or conclude that narrativity is capable of significant form, given that sexuality is distinct from consciousness. However, any number of theories concerning neocultural textual theory may be found. Marx uses the term ‘textual narrative’ to denote the dialectic, and some would say the futility, of postconstructivist sexual identity.

Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a neocultural textual theory that includes art as a paradox. The main theme of the works of Rushdie is not discourse, as Lyotardist narrative suggests, but prediscourse.

However, Debord promotes the use of neocultural textual theory to deconstruct the status quo. If dialectic semioticism holds, we have to choose between neocultural textual theory and Baudrillardist simulacra.

Thus, Debord uses the term ‘dialectic semioticism’ to denote the collapse of dialectic society. Abian[7] states that we have to choose between neocultural textual theory and precapitalist libertarianism.

Therefore, dialectic construction holds that sexual identity, surprisingly, has intrinsic meaning. Sartre suggests the use of neocultural textual theory to modify society.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Dahmus, T. V. O. (1972) Neocultural textual theory and dialectic semioticism. And/Or Press

2. Geoffrey, B. ed. (1981) The Rubicon of Context: Dialectic semioticism in the works of Rushdie. University of Michigan Press

3. Drucker, C. W. (1978) Dialectic semioticism in the works of Cage. O’Reilly & Associates

4. d’Erlette, J. ed. (1989) The Fatal flaw of Class: Dialectic semioticism and neocultural textual theory. Panic Button Books

5. Reicher, L. V. B. (1971) Neocultural textual theory and dialectic semioticism. And/Or Press

6. Sargeant, A. ed. (1992) The Discourse of Absurdity: Dialectic semioticism, nationalism and neomaterial feminism. University of California Press

7. Abian, I. B. (1987) Dialectic semioticism and neocultural textual theory. Cambridge University Press


Have I lost my mind? No, I've just been playing with the postmodernism generator, a simple computer program that can generate short bits of pomo drivel more or less randomly. I say more or less because, honestly, I can barely tell the difference between the randomly generated paper and authentic postmodern "scholarship." Clearly I need the innovative approach to peer review that has been discussed previously.

Do I have any wider point? Nah. Not really. Mostly, it's just that I've been ragging on the Conservapeons a little, and it might be fair to remind us all that some illogical idiocy comes from our side of the world as well.

I mean, really, it does take something like randomly generated pomo to equal Conservapedia so I've done my best!

Labels: , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger Mister Troll said...

A randomly-generated "wiki" would be pretty funny, actually. (Of course, if it sounds like a good idea, someone's bound to have done it already. Sigh.)

And of course you're familiar with Sokal's 'famous' article? I must admit the point of it still escapes me (even after reading his explanation), but then I never learned about post-modern theory. The same is true of your example random post-modern post. I understand the words, but not the context and so miss the point. Sometime I should get introduced to the field (any suggestions for a gentle introduction?).

On a different note, are post-modernists those people who think dialogue is a verb? (But what really gets me is whenever I see "problematize". Argh! That's not a word!) :-)

Drek - I'd like to invite you to come be our friend!

Friday, October 05, 2007 8:01:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter