Assignment for Thursday, Oct. 26

"But what would that world look like?"

I was asking this about Valerie Solanas' picture, too.  She describes all of the following as trivial:  Art, Science, Sex, Politics, Religion, Money, Parenthood, and many more.  Instead, SCUM women are groovy and thrill-seeking.  But look at how vague those latter terms terms are.  I think that she, with all her courage and energy and smarts, didn't have the words to fully paint that future for us.

(I think that we should note that those rejected terms are parts of _our_ culture.  Could there be something, in a world of undomesticated people, that we'd call "art" or "sex" or "religion", etc.?  I think so?  But they'd necessarily differ in important ways from what we do now.)

For Thursday:  95-109  (Yes, this means temporarily skipping the essay on anger.)

Don't wait until Wednesday night.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Assignment for Mon., Sept. 11 I mean Tuesday 9/12

So many thoughts.  I keep thinking about "exclusions," and the historical movement of some of them from "obviously necessary" to "obviously unjust." I am also thinking about false consciousness, which I did not explain well.  (But I think that there are accessible analogues.) We will talk more about these things. I'm thinking about a syllabus.  Would you believe that it has been done, all this time?  It has.  I'm just insecure about it. For Monday, 201-244 in Feminism in Our Time.   Good, close reading, so we could have a discussion as good as Thursday's. You will notice that one of the readings is by the very famous write Kate Millet.  She just died this week.  Here's a link about her that David sent me:  HERE . And here's a link I caught, as I soaked in the interwebs: HERE .  (Where are those links you were going to send me, about the variety of forms of relationships???)
Read more