Critiques
Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.
What else would I change? First, I'd make it more like a Norton Anthology. There are no notes but the notes provided by the authors themselves--all of whom, barring, say, the plainspeaking Habermas or Rorty--assume we'll get all their jokes. So: more notes, *especially* for our impossible writers. Who can complain about the impenetrability of modern theory after the failure of reading Hegel (Lacan, at least, pretends to have a personality)? And how can we get the BwO of Anti-Oedipus unless the notes contextualize it with the other BwO of Thousand Plateaus? Second, I might arrange it by topic instead of by school. After all, it's not the -isms that destroy traditional metaphysics: it's the new ways of asking questions, all of which open holes in multiple places beneath all previous sites of confidence, above all, the site of the Singular Rule.
I've noticed the demand for anteriority in so many of these thinkers: so many want to find the thing before. Thankfully, a few of our thinkers--Derrida, chiefly--do the anterior thing less to get before than to come at us *from behind.* I'm sure someone else has done the sexual reading of this tendency.