I can't compare the two, since only one is conceptual. Talking about desire inherently privileges the linguistic universe, because desire is object-having. So in a way, talking about which situation I'd rather have misses the point. I don't want or not-want the nonlinguistic option, because it can't hold being desired as a predicate. (I'm not quite sure that made sense.)
But in any case, it's an event-horizon. As we navigate the space leading up to that event-horizon, being aware of its presence is surely better than not being aware.
And don't ask me to defend it right now, but there is the Nietzschean notion that once we break free of language we can return to it as its master rather than servant. (And yes, I can see how that is gendered!) Thus Joyce, Beckett, et al.
The goal is to destabilize language, not to chuck it completely?
And, while it wouldn't concern me, in such a universe there'd be no slash, then, m/m, f/f, or whatever! There'd be no point in fixating on Summer Glau as opposed to your aunt Petunia, Larry King, Shamu the whale, or the mailbox on the corner.
I agree that there wouldn't be m/m or f/f'; I'm not convinced there wouldn't be Summer Glau or Aunt Petunia, though, because those are particulars rather than universals. Surely I can fixate on Summer Glau or Aunt Petunia without notions of gender?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-03-26 04:07 pm (UTC)I can't compare the two, since only one is conceptual. Talking about desire inherently privileges the linguistic universe, because desire is object-having. So in a way, talking about which situation I'd rather have misses the point. I don't want or not-want the nonlinguistic option, because it can't hold being desired as a predicate. (I'm not quite sure that made sense.)
But in any case, it's an event-horizon. As we navigate the space leading up to that event-horizon, being aware of its presence is surely better than not being aware.
And don't ask me to defend it right now, but there is the Nietzschean notion that once we break free of language we can return to it as its master rather than servant. (And yes, I can see how that is gendered!) Thus Joyce, Beckett, et al.
The goal is to destabilize language, not to chuck it completely?
And, while it wouldn't concern me, in such a universe there'd be no slash, then, m/m, f/f, or whatever! There'd be no point in fixating on Summer Glau as opposed to your aunt Petunia, Larry King, Shamu the whale, or the mailbox on the corner.
I agree that there wouldn't be m/m or f/f'; I'm not convinced there wouldn't be Summer Glau or Aunt Petunia, though, because those are particulars rather than universals. Surely I can fixate on Summer Glau or Aunt Petunia without notions of gender?