lisbet (aidenraine) wrote,
lisbet
aidenraine

  • Mood:

It's not what it's saying, it's how it's saying it

I tend to roll my eyes at (most kinds of) theory not because the ideas are uninteresting across the board, but because I rarely encounter a theorist who can write! Oy.

One sentence, which should be read out loud without taking more than one breath for full effect:

"At this point we encounter a certain surprising congruence between Benjamin and the Stalinist notion of history: as soon as we conceive history as a text, as 'its own history', its own narration - as something which receives its signification retroactively and where this delay, this effect of àpres coup is inscribed in the actual event itself which literally, 'is' not but always 'will have been'- we are obliged, implicitly at least, to view the historical process from the perspective of 'Last Judgement': of a final settling of accounts, of a point of accomplished symbolization/historicization, of the 'end of history', when every event will receive retroactively its definitive meaning, its final place in the total narration."

(Incidentally, it's Zizek... who writes in his train of thought and because he thinks super quickly his sentences get way out of hand. This was the first sentence at the top of my current page. I did not go looking for one.)

Complex ideas do not require complex sentence structure, I insist. Good writers can present complex thoughts clearly and concisely. You may find the above quotation clear, but my attention span won't tolerate it.
Tags: school
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 4 comments