Friday, July 27, 2007

Postcultural Narrative and Dialectic Deconstruction

1. Dialectic deconstruction and posttextual discourse
“Art is part of the dialectic of consciousness,” says Marx; however, according to Hamburger[1] , it is not so much art that is part of the dialectic of consciousness, but rather the absurdity, and eventually the collapse, of art. If posttextual discourse holds, the works of Spelling are reminiscent of Smith.

“Society is intrinsically used in the service of sexist perceptions of class,” says Debord. However, dialectic deconstruction holds that the task of the poet is deconstruction, but only if sexuality is distinct from language; otherwise, we can assume that the State is dead. The subject is contextualised into a dialectic Marxism that includes consciousness as a paradox.

In the works of Spelling, a predominant concept is the concept of subcapitalist truth. In a sense, Lyotard suggests the use of dialectic deconstruction to read sexual identity. The characteristic theme of the works of Spelling is not materialism as such, but postmaterialism.

The primary theme of von Ludwig’s[2] essay on postcultural narrative is the role of the artist as poet. But Foucault uses the term ‘neoconstructive cultural theory’ to denote the difference between art and society. Long[3] states that we have to choose between dialectic deconstruction and Debordist situation.

If one examines the subpatriarchial paradigm of context, one is faced with a choice: either reject posttextual discourse or conclude that sexual identity has intrinsic meaning. Thus, the example of postcultural narrative depicted in Rushdie’s Satanic Verses is also evident in The Moor’s Last Sigh, although in a more capitalist sense. The premise of dialectic deconstruction suggests that consciousness is fundamentally impossible.

“Culture is meaningless,” says Lacan; however, according to Dietrich[4] , it is not so much culture that is meaningless, but rather the stasis, and thus the genre, of culture. But the subject is interpolated into a Sartreist absurdity that includes language as a reality. If dialectic deconstruction holds, the works of Rushdie are an example of mythopoetical nihilism.

Thus, d’Erlette[5] holds that we have to choose between posttextual discourse and the semioticist paradigm of expression. In Midnight’s Children, Rushdie examines postcapitalist nationalism; in The Moor’s Last Sigh, however, he affirms posttextual discourse.

Therefore, the main theme of the works of Rushdie is the role of the participant as poet. Baudrillard’s model of dialectic pretextual theory implies that context comes from communication, but only if the premise of postcultural narrative is valid; if that is not the case, sexual identity, somewhat paradoxically, has objective value.

But Bataille uses the term ‘capitalist theory’ to denote a posttextual paradox. The subject is contextualised into a posttextual discourse that includes consciousness as a reality.

In a sense, the primary theme of Drucker’s[6] critique of postcultural narrative is the common ground between reality and class. The subject is interpolated into a dialectic deconstruction that includes sexuality as a whole.

But Foucault’s analysis of postcultural narrative states that the collective is capable of significance. Several narratives concerning the role of the writer as artist exist.

Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a posttextual discourse that includes truth as a reality. An abundance of constructions concerning postcultural narrative may be found.

It could be said that Bataille uses the term ‘dialectic deconstruction’ to denote the bridge between sexuality and class. The main theme of the works of Rushdie is the role of the participant as writer.

In a sense, any number of discourses concerning a self-sufficient whole exist. If Debordist image holds, we have to choose between dialectic deconstruction and subtextual dialectic theory.

2. Rushdie and the pretextual paradigm of discourse
If one examines dialectic deconstruction, one is faced with a choice: either accept posttextual discourse or conclude that expression is a product of the collective unconscious. However, Foucault uses the term ‘dialectic deconstruction’ to denote the common ground between sexual identity and society. The characteristic theme of Cameron’s[7] essay on postcultural narrative is a dialectic totality.

It could be said that Sargeant[8] implies that we have to choose between deconstructivist rationalism and postcapitalist theory. The premise of posttextual discourse states that reality is capable of social comment, but only if language is interchangeable with sexuality; otherwise, Bataille’s model of postcultural narrative is one of “the dialectic paradigm of narrative”, and therefore intrinsically elitist.

However, the subject is interpolated into a posttextual discourse that includes culture as a whole. If dialectic deconstruction holds, we have to choose between postcultural narrative and subcapitalist cultural theory.

Forgot to put the damn disclamer. This ISNT ME. Its some stupid random text generator. Pretty Impressive eh!

3 comments:

daydreamingoracle said...

I totally agree....
postcultural narrative and subcapitalist cultural theory are two side of the coins but they are both parts of dialectic deconstruction... and true there is a paradigm shift that is occuring coz of the change in post culutural narrative and in this context subcapitalist culutural theory should also be recontructed!
this will lead to the much desired change needed in the field of narrative deconstruction.

interesting topic!

The Depressed Doormat said...

@oracle: rofl....

daydreamingoracle said...

jus saw da rofl... rofl? dat ws a cue to u.... 2 put up a similar comment on my blog :P
ur so dumb :P