I no longer attempt to rationalise inexplicable phenomena; there are explanations, Horatio, but they are likely to be beyond our ken.
Every original poet has a new insight, or rather introduces a new power.
Authors we are in danger of accepting as gospel, whereas founders of discursivity provide permeable ideas that we can elaborate upon in a tradition of constructive dialogue.
Satire about any and all professionals with a special vocabulary has been a staple of fiction and popular ridicule since the 18th century.
I'm a fan or naysayer like everyone else, not an authority of any kind.
The rhetoric of theory is always in a bind. It pronounces ideas and denounces failures to accept or grasp them while insisting that there are no grounds either for accepting or grasping ideas.
I do identify the escape hatch through which Foucault eludes the charge that he himself is an authorauthority, hence a tyrant. He establishes the category of "founder of discursivity" for the authors he likes. Slippery, perhaps, but you can see what he means.
The State acquires power. . . and because of its insatiable lust for power it is incapable of giving up any of it. The State never abdicates.
Only you're right in saying she's too good an opinion of herself to think of you. The saucy jade! I should like to know where she'd find a better!
I think garlic is absolutely critical. Lemon is absolutely critical to boost the immune system. Olive oil is absolutely critical. . . just one teaspoon, it will last the whole month.
What we will be seeking. . . for the rest of our lives will be large, stable communities of like-minded people, which is to say relatives. They no longer exist. The lack of them is not only the main cause, but probably the only cause of our shapeless discontent in the midst of such prosperity.