: This essay examines the connections between ignorance and abjection. Chanter relates Julia Kristeva's notion of abjection to the mechanisms of division found in feminist theory, race theory, film theory, and cultural theory. The neglect of the co-constitutive relationships among such categories as gender, race, and class produces abjection. If those categories are treated as separate parts of a person's identity that merely interlock or intermesh, they are rendered invisible and unknowable even in the very discourses about them. Race thus (...) becomes gender's unthought other, just as gender becomes the excluded other of race. Via an exploration of Margaret's Museum and Casablanca, the author shows why the various sexual, racial, and nationalist dynamics of the two films cannot be reduced to class or commodity fetishism, following Karl Marx, or psychoanalytic fetishism, following Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan. Whether they are crystallized in Marxist or Lacanian terms, fetishistic currencies of exchange are haunted by an imaginary populated by unthought, abject figures. Ejected from the systems of exchange consecrated as symbolic, fragmented, dislocated, diseased body parts inform and constitute meaning. (shrink)
Examining Levinas's critique of the Heideggerian conception of temporality, this book shows how the notion of the feminine both enables and prohibits the most fertile territory of Levinas's thought. The author suggests that though Levinas's conception of subjectivity corrects some of the problems Heidegger's philosophy introduces, such as his failure to deal adequately with ethics, Levinas creates new stumbling blocks, notably the confining role he accords to the feminine. For Levinas, the feminine functions as that which facilitates but is excluded (...) from the ethical relation that he sees as the pinnacle of philosophy. Showing that the feminine is a strategic part of Levinas's philosophy, but one that was not thought through by him, the author suggests that his failure to solidly place the feminine in his thinking is structurally consonant with his conceptual separation of politics from ethics. (shrink)
Ethics of Eros sheds light on contemporary feminist discourse by bringing into question some of the basic distinctions and categories that orchestrate it. The work of Luce Irigaray serves as a focus for interrogating the opposition between "French" and "Anglo-American" feminism as articulated in the debate over essentialism. Tina Chanter defends Irigaray against charges of essentialism by showing that such criticisms fail to consider the theoretical background of her work. Chanter demonstrates that Irigaray inherited and attempted to move beyond the (...) philosophical framework of Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Derrida, and Levinas. In tackling the debate over essentialism, Chanter also reconsiders the sex/gender distinction that has been fundamental to feminist theory. Ethics of Eros seeks to recast the differences between "French" and "Anglo-American" feminism so that they no longer represent opposing views but become capable of productive exchanges. It explains the circumstances in which the debate over essentialism arose and reveals how essentialist misreadings of Irigaray gained currency in feminist theory. The book illuminates Irigaray's writings and demonstrates the insights they hold for current feminist theory and philosophy. (shrink)
