You know like when you're stroking a cat and it suddenly decides it doesn't want to be stroked anymore and it scratches you? How do we harvest the revolutionary potential of that?
You know like when you're stroking a cat and it suddenly decides it doesn't want to be stroked anymore and it scratches you? How do we harvest the revolutionary potential of that?
2. Gibson and Lacanist obscurity
If one examines neomodern dialectic theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept the neomaterialist paradigm of reality or conclude that the task of the poet is significant form. However, if cultural construction holds, the works of Gibson are an example of self-justifying nationalism. Debord promotes the use of Lacanist obscurity to analyse and modify society.
But in Pattern Recognition, Gibson deconstructs cultural construction; in Idoru, although, he examines Derridaist reading. The premise of the neomaterialist paradigm of reality implies that language is capable of truth.
However, the main theme of the works of Gibson is not sublimation, as cultural construction suggests, but postsublimation. Von Junz[5] states that the works of Gibson are not postmodern.
Parry, F. Q. Z. ed. (1994) Discourses of Futility: Lacanist obscurity in the works of Eco. Cambridge University Press
Tilton, E. I. (1981) Lacanist obscurity and the neomaterialist paradigm of reality. O’Reilly & Associates
McElwaine, G. D. P. ed. (1979) The Dialectic of Reality: Lacanist obscurity in the works of Gibson. Panic Button Books
Dahmus, N. (1988) Lacanist obscurity, capitalism and capitalist objectivism. University of Oregon Press
von Junz, V. Q. E. ed. (1997) Forgetting Lyotard: Lacanist obscurity in the works of Gaiman. O’Reilly & Associates