FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2021006510> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2021006510 endingPage "39" @default.
• W2021006510 startingPage "1" @default.
• W2021006510 abstract "Communal Narcosis and Sublime Withdrawal:The Problem of Community in Kant's Critique of Judgment Vivasvan Soni (bio) That is sublime in comparison with which everything else is small. —Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment Introduction The moment of high theory may be long behind us, but the categories and distinctive habits of thought that go by the name of poststructuralism are still very much with us. They will be for a long time to come. If there are those today who believe naively that a critique of poststructuralism is possible and even overdue, it is only because poststructuralist ways of thinking have become so naturalized that the criticisms themselves are articulated in the languages poststructuralism has bequeathed us. The course of intellectual history is glacial, punctuated now and then by cataclysms of geological proportion. In the aftermath of an intellectual revolution such as the one we have just witnessed, we would do well to leave criticizing aside for the moment and take stock of the legacy that is now ours for better or worse. One of the animating impulses of the diverse poststructuralisms is a sustained and uncompromising attack on the concept of totality and on the political totalitarianism that is supposed to follow from it. As a result, we are today deeply suspicious of concepts that are predicated on a notion of totality: community, happiness, utopia, history, globality. Yet these are some of our most crucial political concepts. Instead of simply abandoning them, the task that confronts us in the wake of the poststructuralist revolution is how to think these concepts [End Page 1] anew. Surprisingly, poststructuralism itself provides us with the intellectual resources for this project. Properly thought, totalities are heterogeneous, complex, differentiated, irreducible. For this reason, it is the peculiarity of those ideas, which depend on a concept of totality, that they cannot be intuited or experienced: they are only accessible as totalities through writing, representation, language, narrative, and fiction. Paradoxically, poststructuralism has been in the vanguard of revalorizing the latter categories, and yet the concepts that could most benefit from this revalorization have largely fallen into disuse.1 Can we think totality in a nontotalitarian way? This task has barely begun: it is one of the most urgent intellectual and political projects that confronts us today.2 My paper is a modest contribution to this larger project.3 Jean-Luc Nancy has already begun the work of theorizing community in nonsubstantivist and nonidentitarian ways. But how does his reconceptualization of community transform our understanding of the aesthetic, which traditionally has been predicated on notions of harmonious and organic communities? In this paper, I will show that Nancy's notion of the inoperative community opens the way to a radical rereading of Kant's Critique of Judgment,4 which will allow us to reappraise both the significance of this text for aesthetic and political theory and the importance of aesthetic judgment for any thinking of community.5 There is of course nothing new in the claim that the aesthetic is irreducibly political, though it will always be important to reaffirm the insight when new formalisms threaten. But Kant's text, read after Nancy, teaches us to think the relation between the aesthetic and the political in an unfamiliar and surprising way. When we speak of the aesthetic as political, it is usually in the mode of ideology critique: there is an ideology of the aesthetic that must be exposed, and perhaps a utopian dimension of the text that must be salvaged (Eagleton; Marcuse; Bloch). All aesthetic artifacts are deemed political in this double way. We have become adepts of a hermeneutics of suspicion, and this mode of criticism is the very conscience of democracy today. However, such a strategy of reading concedes in advance the priority of politics over aesthetics: while every work of art conceals reflections on a social, historical, and political conjuncture, affirming its belatedness in relation to the political, politics can get along just fine without the aesthetic. Paradoxically, through its [End Page 2] unreflective privileging of politics, ideology critique remains at the level of aesthetic theory rather than political thought. What ideology critique cannot comprehend is that there may be a more fundamental..." @default.
• W2021006510 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2021006510 creator A5056546666 @default.
• W2021006510 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W2021006510 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2021006510 title "Communal Narcosis and Sublime Withdrawal: The Problem of Community in Kant's Critique of Judgment" @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1485184078 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1496312651 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1502096594 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1513104673 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1528784858 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1532486868 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1533200881 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1542712947 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1561534459 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1565465892 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1576632330 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1588414895 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1595165895 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1595353434 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1963162085 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1971062810 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1983262717 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1984645963 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1994575828 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1995586516 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W1998442982 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2000505772 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2008064632 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2014673109 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2021365244 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2021438111 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2025494137 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2032302470 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2062223358 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2066738331 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2066790571 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2073303091 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2084035140 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2324296539 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2483681359 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2529585633 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2795944822 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2802003336 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2994795030 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W3123989397 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W3147612231 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W3158820556 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W3190062161 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W428492103 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W572181227 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W581788488 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W588392779 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W613290060 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W623739888 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W633733379 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W637530142 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W647580863 @default.
• W2021006510 cites W2092582002 @default.
• W2021006510 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/cul.2006.0030" @default.
• W2021006510 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2021006510 type Work @default.
• W2021006510 sameAs 2021006510 @default.
• W2021006510 citedByCount "8" @default.
• W2021006510 countsByYear W20210065102012 @default.
• W2021006510 countsByYear W20210065102015 @default.
• W2021006510 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2021006510 hasAuthorship W2021006510A5056546666 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C2119116 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C2775944640 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C2776717531 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C2778120072 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C2778749631 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C2778999518 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C107038049 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C111472728 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C138885662 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C144024400 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C17744445 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C199539241 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C2119116 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C2775944640 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C2776717531 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C2778120072 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C2778749631 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C2778999518 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C41895202 @default.
• W2021006510 hasConceptScore W2021006510C94625758 @default.
• W2021006510 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2021006510 hasLocation W20210065101 @default.

• next