About The Poetics of Consent breaks new ground in Homeric studies by interpreting the Iliad‘s depictions of political action in terms of the poeticforces that shaped the Iliad itself. Arguing that consensus is a central theme of the epic, David Elmer analyzes in detail scenes in which the poem’s three political communities-Achaeans, Trojans, and Olympian gods-engage in the process of collective decision making.
These scenes reflect an awareness of the negotiation involved in reconciling rival versions of the Iliad over centuries. They also point beyond the Iliad‘s world of gods and heroes to the here-and-now of the poem’s performance and reception, in which the consensus over the shape and meaning of the Iliadic tradition is continuously evolving. Elmer synthesizes ideas and methods from literary and political theory, classical philology, anthropology, and folklore studies to construct an alternative to conventional understandings of the Iliad‘s politics.
The marketisation of Western healthcare systems has now proceeded well into its fourth decade. In continental Europe health services have been marketised by way of administrative reform; in England the 2012 Health and Social Care Act was widely perceived as another watershed moment in this process; and in the US the Affordable Care Act is again under critical scrutiny.
The Poetics of Consent reveals the ways in which consensus and collective decision making determined the authoritative account of the Trojan War that we know as the Iliad. Elmer is an associate professor of the classics at Harvard University. Review Richard Martin, Stanford University This fine project far exceeds the bounds of a monograph on Homeric epic, as it opens up the Iliad to a broad range of questions concerning politics and persuasion, showing with admirable precision how consensus is constructed in one of our earliest documents of western culture. Elmer achieves what is harder and harder to do—he makes totally new points about our oldest Greek compositions, as he convincingly tracks the theme of consent throughout the Iliad and demonstrates how it structures the entire poem. This is one of the most important books on Homer in decades.
Focused on clarity and logical argument, analytic philosophy has dominated the discipline in the United States, Australia, and Britain over the past one hundred years, and it is often seen as a unified, coherent, and inevitable advancement. Laugier questions this assumption, rethinking the very grounds that drove analytic philosophy to develop and uncovering its inherent tensions and confusions. Drawing on J.
Austin and the later works of Ludwig Wittgenstein, she argues for the solution provided by ordinary language philosophy—a philosophy that trusts and utilizes the everyday use of language and the clarity of meaning it provides—and in doing so offers a major contribution to the philosophy of language and twentieth- and twenty-first-century philosophy as a whole. This slim volume is essentially a detailed and nuanced philosophical examination of three classics of American film noir, all from the very fateful 1940’s: Jacques Tourneur’s Out of the Past, Orson Welles’s The Lady from Shanghai, and Fritz Lang’s Scarlet Street. Though Pippin pays some attention to specific techniques of meaning-making in film, such as montage, framing, camera angle, and mise-en-scene, his primary focus is on eliciting clear accounts of what on the human level is actually going on in the films he examines, in terms of action, thought, and feeling, and then articulating philosophical perspectives on the human condition — or at least that in post-war America — that the films can be seen as exploring, or even advancing.
Pippin skillfully demonstrates that complex relations among ideas such as those of action, character, intention, self-control, and self-knowledge are undeniably part of the content of these strangely gripping cinematic tours de force, as is more overtly, the idea that the main characters in these claustrophobic scenarios are in some sense fated to do what they do. He convinces us that these films raise, if without definitively answering, questions about how these various notions are related, in what circumstances, and to what degree. Just out from As Peter Fenves writes in review, “Almost every dimension of contemporary critical discourse has been affected by the debates between Anglo-American and continental thinkers concerning the structure and function of the performative.
This volume not only addresses the problem of the performative from a variety of perspectives, it also provides insight into its genesis: how it is that the “performativity of the performative” has become a decisive question for contemporary culture.” This from the: About Performatives After Deconstruction What has happened since de Man and Derrida first read Austin? How has the encounter between deconstruction and the performative affected each of these terms? In addressing these questions, this book brings together scholars whose works have been provoked in different ways by the encounter of deconstruction and the performative.Following Derrida’s appeal to any rigorous deconstruction to reckon with Austin’s theorems and his ever growing commitment to rethink and rewrite the performative and its multiple articulations, it is now urgent that we reflect upon the effects of a theoretical event that has profoundly marked the contemporary scene.
The contributors to this book suggest various ways of re-reading the heritage and future of both deconstruction and the performative after their encounter, bringing into focus both the constitutive aporia of the performative and the role it plays within the deconstruction of the metaphysical tradition. Table Of Contents.
Thanks to for alerting me to by Richard Moran, published in the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume ( pages 115–135, June 2013) and available through Wiley Online. The abstract reads: The notion of ‘bipolar’ or ‘ second-personal’ normativity is often illustrated by such situations as that of one person addressing a complaint to another, or asserting some right, or claiming some authority.
This paper argues that the presence of speech acts of various kinds in the development of the idea of the ‘ second-personal’ is not accidental. Through development of a notion of ‘ illocutionary authority’ I seek to show a role for the ‘ second-personal’ in ordinary testimony, despite Darwall’s argument that the notion of the ‘ second-personal’ marks a divide between practical and theoretical reason.
The complete article can be accessed. Shalom Lappin (King’s College London) writes: In (I believe) 1974 Peter Geach came to the Philosophy Department at Tel Aviv University, where I was a young lecturer at the time.
After his talk, there was a reception at the home of the Chair of the Department. During the reception Geach expressed the desire to sing a song that he had composed in German about Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, the debate over definite descriptions, and other matters philosophical. I recorded the song on a cassette tape, which became part of my collection, and it accompanied me on my wanderings.
It disappeared in our house here for many years until my wife came upon it unexpectedly in a drawer, this past weekend. Some additional rummaging turned up an old tape deck with stereo speakers, long unused. Unfortunately the tape had split, but several days of analogue engineering and a transplant to a blank cassette (amazingly, still available at Mapplin, right here on the Strand) managed to restore it.
I have produced an available till June 5 from this link. The sound quality is not great, but Geach’s lyrics are clear, and he is in fine voice. UPDATE: Professor Lappin writes with more information: “Mark Textor points out that Geach’s song is apparently based on a poem by Heine. He has translated the song, sustaining the analogy with the poem. I include his translation of Geach, a published translation of the Heine poem, and the German original of the poem (all generously provided by Mark), below. Many thanks to him for his insights and his translation.
“This would seem to open up new lines of research in Geach scholarship. Anyone interested in pursuing them (or changing their thesis topic accordingly) should contact Mark. I am merely the sound engineer here.”. Coetzee’s handwritten drafts of Life & Times of Michael K are constructed of stacks of exam books bound together with cardboard and wire.
The book, published in 1983, went on to win the Booker Prize. Photo by Pete Smith. The of Nobel Prize–winning writer and University of Texas at Austin alumnus J.M. Coetzee is available for research at the Harry Ransom Center, a humanities research library and museum at The University of Texas at Austin. The bulk of the archive traces the author’s life and career from 1960 through 2012. Coetzee was born in Cape Town, South Africa, in 1940 and graduated from the University of Cape Town. After working three years as a computer programmer in England, he enrolled in The University of Texas at Austin in 1965 to pursue his Ph.D.
In English, linguistics and Germanic languages, which he earned in 1969. While at the university, he conducted research in the Ransom Center’s collections for his dissertation on the early fiction of Samuel Beckett. “It is a privilege to have graduated from being a teaching assistant at The University of Texas to being one of the authors whose papers are conserved here,” said Coetzee.