Antigone's Nature

Hypatia ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 412-436
Author(s):  
William Robert
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Difference ◽  
Luce Irigaray ◽  
Complex Relation

Antigone fascinates G. W. F. Hegel and Luce Irigaray, both of whom turn to her in their explorations and articulations of ethics. Hegel and Irigaray make these re-turns to Antigone through the double and related lenses of nature and sexual difference. This essay investigates these figures of Antigone and the accompanying ethical accounts of nature and sexual difference as a way of examining Irigaray's complex relation to and creative uses of Hegel's thought.

scholarly journals Patriarchal Regime of the Spectacle: Racial and Gendered Gaze in Jhumpa Lahiri’s Fiction

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moussa Pourya Asl ◽  
Nurul Farhana Low bt Abdullah
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Difference ◽  
Social Regulation ◽  
Complex Relation ◽  
Self Image ◽  
The Social ◽  
Late Twentieth ◽  
Gendered Gaze ◽  
Affective Consequences ◽  
And Control ◽  
Late Twentieth Century

This article attempts to evince the political, cultural and affective consequences of Jhumpa Lahiri’s diasporic writings and their particular enunciations of the literary gaze. To do so, it details the manner in which the stories’ exercise of visual operations rigidly corresponds with those of the Panopticon. The essay argues that Lahiri’s narrative produces a kind of panoptic machine that underpins the ‘modes of social regulation and control’ that Foucault has explained as disciplinary technologies. By situating Lahiri’s stories, “A Real Durwan” and “Only Goodness,” within a historical-political context, this essay aims at identifying the way in which panopticism defines her fiction as both a record of and a participant in the social, sexual and political ‘paranoia’ behind the propaganda of America’s self-image as the land of freedom. We maintain that Lahiri’s fiction situates itself in complex relation to the postcolonial concerns of the late twentieth century, suggesting that through their fascination with a visual literalization of the panoptic machine, and by privileging the masculine gaze, the stories legitimate the perpetuation of socially prescribed notion of sexual difference.  Keywords: Gaze, Sexual difference, Panopticon, A Real Durwan, Only Goodness

Tracing Sexual Difference

1998 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Pamela Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Personal Identity ◽  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Sexual Difference ◽  
Western Culture ◽  
The Self ◽  
The Other ◽  
Luce Irigaray ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Self Identity ◽  
The Difference

A reading of Luce Irigaray suggests the possibility of tracing sexual difference in philosophical accounts of personal identity. In particular, I argue that Irigaray raises the possibility of moving beyond the aporia of the other which lies at the heart of Paul Ricoeur's account of self-identity. My contention is that the self conceived in Ricoeur's Oneself as Another is male insofar as it is dependent upon the patriarchal monotheism which has shaped Western culture both socially and economically. Nevertheless there remains the possibility of developing Ricoeur's reference to 'the trace of the Other' in order to give a non-essential meaning to sexual difference. Such meaning will emerge when (i) both men and women have identities as subjects, and (ii) the difference between them can be expressed. I aim to elucidate both conditions by appropriating Irigaray's 'Questions to Emmanuel Levinas: On the Divinity of Love.'

The Diabolical Strategy of Mimesis: Luce Irigaray's Reading of Maurice Merleau-Ponty

Hypatia ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 114-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Kozel
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Difference ◽  
The Other ◽  
Luce Irigaray ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
The Voice

In this essay I explore the dynamic between Luce Irigaray and Maurice Merleau-Ponty as it unfolds in An Ethics of Sexual Difference (1993). Irigaray's strategy of mimesis is a powerful feminist tool, both philosophically and politically. Regarding textual engagement as analogous for relations between self and other beyond the text, I deliver a cautionary message: mimetic strategy is powerful but runs the risk of silencing the voice of the other.

Questions to Luce Irigaray

Hypatia ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Ince
Keyword(s):  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Sexual Difference ◽  
Luce Irigaray ◽  
The Feminine

This article traces the “dialogue” between the work of the philosophers Luce Irigaray and Emmanuel Levinas. It attempts to construct a more nuanced discussion than has been given to date of Irigaray's critique of Levinas, particularly as formulated in “Questions to Emmanuel Levinas” (Irigaray 1991)-It suggests that the concepts of the feminine and of voluptuosity articulated by Levinas have more to contribute to Irigaray's project of an ethics of sexual difference than she herself sometimes appears to think.

Irigaray, Luce (1930–)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina Chanter
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Difference ◽  
The Other ◽  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Luce Irigaray ◽  
International Recognition ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Other Woman ◽  
Partial View

Luce Irigaray holds doctorates in both linguistics and philosophy, and has practised as a psychoanalyst for many years. Author of over twenty books, she has established a reputation as a pre-eminent theorist of sexual difference – a term she would prefer to ‘feminist’. The latter carries with it the history of feminism as a struggle for equality, whereas Irigaray sees herself more as a feminist of difference, emphasizing the need to differentiate women from men over and above the need to establish parity between the sexes. Speculum de l’autre femme (1974) (Speculum of the Other Woman) (1985), the book that earned her international recognition, fuses philosophy with psychoanalysis, and employs a lyrical ‘mimesis’, or mimicry, that parodies and undercuts philosophical pretensions to universality. While adopting the standpoint of universality, objectivity and uniformity, the philosophical tradition in fact reflects a partial view of the world, one which is informed by those largely responsible for writing it: men. Without the material, maternal and nurturing succour provided by women as mothers and homemakers, men would not have had the freedom to reflect, the peace to think, or the time to write the philosophy that has shaped our culture. As such, women are suppressed and unacknowledged; femininity is the unthought ground of philosophy – philosophy’s other.

Sôma, technê and the Somatechnics of Sexual Difference

Somatechnics ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Sampson
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Difference ◽  
Luce Irigaray ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
The Third ◽  
Point Of Departure ◽  
Shed Light

This article investigates what may be called a somatechnics of sexual difference by way of making a detour through the classical Greek notions of sôma and technê. An emphasis is put upon a tension between different figurations of these notions within an ancient Greek context, exemplified through a contrast, or counterpoint, between a later Platonic and earlier pre-Platonic significance of these words. Taking some of the various denotations that sôma and technê carry within early Greek thinking both as a point of departure and as a means of providing an outside to more contemporary ways of conceptualizing and understanding corporeality and technology, the article attempts to use this as a background in order to shed light upon sexual difference. That is to say, I am addressing three different contexts in this article: The first is a pre-Platonic context. The second is a later, classical context: the context of Plato, if you will. These two constitute a background in order to shed light upon the third contemporary one, where the concept of somatechnics as well as the notion of sexual difference as conceived by Luce Irigaray belong.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document