I’m slogging through Anti-Oedipus again for Contemporary Rhetorical Theory. I don’t know why I assigned this book, other than it’s important. Maybe I’ll remember once I get over this sinus infection. Anyway, I found this good link to Lacan:
Related posts:This entry was posted on Thursday, April 28th, 2005 at 9:57 pm by ~LS~ and is filed under Theory. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Voxygen.net 5.0 ©1996-2009
Wordpress Theme: ©The Open Learning Centre
Laura Sells -- Laura@voxygen.net
Last updated: December 25, 2009 @ 12:44 pm
I agree that this book is important, yet I am curious to see how you use it to teach rhetorical theory. I can see teasing out rhetorical implications in terms of relationships to politics, power, and “a people.” Can you give a cursory comment about how you use this text as rhetorical theory?
I’m reading D y G’s book now also, and I find it extremely useful for dealing with the rhetoric I encounter when trying to dialog with different folks. In these wierd anti-radical times, I find, from talking to random people, at bars and on the train and such, that if one is a close-minded conservative, they tend to frame their arguements in a simplistic moral or god-believing rhetoric which is difficult to counter. Also if they are an open-minded liberal, they tend to frame their arguements in a pro-capitalist democratic faith-type context, which I find to be critically non-constructive. With Anti-Oedipus, D y G present a sort of “super-context” that frames both these different point of views. I admit D y G have rather sci-fi approach to describing the nature of the this “super-context” but it hits home on some really great points.