ANU painting postgraduate blog

Just another weblog


I thought this comment was worth making into a post. More comments?

Further to the comments on the Krasner and Pollock essay, I was talking to Sarah Rice who gave a clearer view of the deconstructive method and its use in the essay by Marcia Brennan.
Deconstruction works with binary opposites in a way that both brings them together, problematises and seeks out relationships between them to produce other ways of considering the field of issues.

Brennan does this with a number of binaries such as public/private (eg public practice and career/domestic and private), male/female, rational/intuitive and material/metaphysical (as with Pollocks material object untouched by the hand claimed to also have other ethereal emotional and metaphysical properties)

I think her method is what separates these essays in Modernisms Masculine Subjects from many earlier feminist writings to give them the sense of freshness that people commented on.


April 25, 2009 - Posted by | Reading 1., reading group | ,

1 Comment »

  1. Multiple perspectives, realities, perceptions that maintain difference yet are equally acknowledged. A difficult but enlightening way to write without an author’s particular preferences being apparent. Contributing to the rhizome rather than the taproot. In battling Western hegemony, the marginalized binary opposite asserts its own taproot. But maybe they were already rhizomatic, ie: following nature’s diversified lead rather than a singular mental fixation.

    Comment by vanessa | April 26, 2009 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: