Buy El Desacuerdo by Jacques Ranciere (ISBN: ) from Amazon’s Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders. El Desacuerdo: Jacques Ranciere: Books – El Desacuerdo by Jacques Ranciere at – ISBN – ISBN – Nueva Vision – – Softcover.
|Country:||Bosnia & Herzegovina|
|Published (Last):||22 May 2005|
|PDF File Size:||20.4 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.47 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read.
ranciere, jacques – el – Google Drive
Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page.
This important collection includes several essays that have never previously been published in English, as well as a brand new afterword. Together these essays serve as a superb introduction to the work of one of the world’s most influential contemporary thinkers.
El Desacuerdo (Spanish Edition): Jacques Ranciere: : Books
Hardcoverpages. Published February 8th by Continuum first published To see what your friends thought of this book, please cesacuerdo up. To ask other readers questions about Dissensusplease sign up. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. It is, however, very repetitive racniere such a way that the experience of reading the book sometimes felt intellectually stultifying to me. Jul 30, Phillip rated it really liked it Shelves: Ranciere’s political thought is really rwnciere, like nothing I’ve read before.
He introduces a distinction raciere politics a space of dissensus and the police dwsacuerdo space of consensus. His argument is premissed on the turn from political concerns to ethical concerns in the way power is exercised in today’s raciere. For example, during the Cold War, the fundamental dissensus was the ideological conflict between capitalism and communism, but with the beginning of the War on Terror period, we have an Ranciere’s political thought is really unique, like nothing I’ve read before.
For example, during the Cold War, the fundamental dissensus was the ideological conflict between capitalism and communism, but with the beginning of the War on Terror period, we have an ethical division between “good” and “evil,” and Ranciere makes much of Bush’s “Infinite Justice” as representative of this.
And he argues that as a result of the shift to ethics we have created police consensus where one cannot deviate from the side of “good. Ranciere also has a big section on Aesthetics, but I don’t feel I got as much out of that portion because I’m not very familiar with aesthetic theory.
It is the conflict between one who says white and another who also says white but does not understand the same thing by it or does not understand that the other is saying the same rranciere in the name of whiteness. This is one of the best books on politics that i can imagine, thought definitely not a novel! Ranciere dissects the origins and practices of politics and its intersection with philosophy poetically. It is also fascinating. Recommended for those who follow politics and philosophy.
This book shook me from my philosophical slumber for a while. Remains one of ranicere contemporary favorites. Dec 15, Chris rated it liked it. What to make of Ranciere?
He falls in a long line of extremely abstract French thought.
On a very general level, he provides some interesting insights in conceptualizing the concept of the police as a sort of regimented array of the sensible that extends the concept into a very broad term. His critique of political art, which doesn’t necessarily lead to action and can often descend into a parody of critiqueis in part insightful. Perhaps his most relevant observation is the way in which the ae What to make of Ranciere? Perhaps his most relevant observation is the way in which the aesthetic plays into his notion of the political, which creates a dissensus between different symbolic orders.
He also makes a good point of how political resistance and aesthetic resistance must remain on different registers altogether. On a another level, much of what he writes strikes one as using grandiose verbiage in making some fairly obvious points.
Ultimately, Ranciere is indebted to the modernist tradition, which his own wordy writing ascends to but never reaches. He prioritizes non-mimetic art desacuefdo problematic ways, has rather formalistic notions of how art desacuerd from context, holds a penchant for the counter-intuitive over the obvious. In other words, his concepts loftily escape the orbit of reality often– not that this makes them irrelevant.
But if you want any use from Ranciere, it requires re-tethering his concepts with the actual practices how how art and politics actually functions. Mar 02, Bill Gusky rated it really liked it. Whenever I read a book on literary theory or art criticism that was written in another language and translated into English, my first, usually regrettable, task is to discern where the author is really coming from. What’s his purpose in writing this, what factors is he responding to, and what is it he’s trying to get across?
A strong grasp of the writing usually evades me until I have these questions settled at least somewhat. You can say that that’s the first problem for everybody with every su Whenever I read a book on literary theory or art criticism that was written in another language and translated into English, my first, usually regrettable, task is to discern where the author is really coming from. You can say that that’s the first problem for everybody with every such book written in English as well, but then you’d be downplaying the importance of the vernacular in communicating clearly about these subjects.
An English-language author, and particularly one raised in America some time between the late ‘s and the early ‘s, shares a wealth of understoods with me.
The communication is half-completed upon merely shaking hands. Dssacuerdo such an English-language author takes on dense literary and art-critical subjects, the distance I must traverse in grasping the higher-level concepts being communicated, and in understanding the often esoteric terminology deployed, is not so great as to make the reading terribly laborious.
This distance is further lessened by their ability, should they have it, to weave esoteric terminology and concepts, and academic literary constructs, within vernacular language. The distance greatly expands when the author and translator were both born and raised in some distant country — France, for example. In books such as Dissensus, once Desqcuerdo succeeded in answering at some level the initial questions regarding the author’s purpose, and usually on second read, my next task with such books is to suss out the translator.
1. Ranciere El Desacuerdo
His choice of an English word in a certain situation is usually quite different from my choice in desacuedro identical situation. This also requires frequent re-reading, often at the sentence-by-sentence level. After jumping through all these hoops I’m finally in a place, drsacuerdo by the third read, to solidly benefit from the book. That’s where I am with Dissensus right now. Estos poderes constitutivos, virtuales, entran en interminable conflicto con los poderes constituidos del Imperio.
Estamos situados precisamente en esa bisagra de la finitud infinita que enlaza lo virtual con lo posible, comprometida con el pasaje desde el deseo a dexacuerdo futuro venidero.
Mar 04, Kyle marked it as to-read Shelves: Having only read the article on human rights contra Arendt contained in this collection, Ranciere is doing something intriguing with politics.
Retaining Arendt’s eanciere of politics as a process or action while dismissing the notion that there are barriers to being able to act is really intriguing. I’m curious to see if the rest of his thought on politics could be described as Arendtian to a degree.
Having read this alongside Arendt’s material, colleagues wanted to conflate his critique of Arendt Having only read the article on human rights danciere Arendt contained in this collection, Desacuerrdo is doing something intriguing with politics. Having read this alongside Arendt’s material, colleagues wanted to conflate his critique of Arendt with her ideas of politics in order to claim that he e, what he intends to critique.
However, to say that is a mistake insofar as Ranciere recognizes being marginalized in a way which Arendt would simply brush off, describe as unpolitical or say that it can be overcome through performativity. The latter option makes Ranciere’s work comparable to the Labor Movement chapter in The Human Condition yet as a whole her politics can’t account for this or is directly opposed to, in some cases, what Ranciere is describing.
May 13, Ian rated it liked it. It deeacuerdo so not for the sole pleasure of deconstructing the master’s discourse, but in order to think the lines according to which boundaries and passages are constructed, according to which they are conceivable and modifiable.
This critical practice of philosophy is an inseparably egalitarian, or anarchistic, practice, since “In this way, it is possible to define a certain dissensual practice of philosophy as an activity of de-classification that undermines all policing of domains and formulas.
El Desacuerdo (English, Spanish, Paperback)
This critical practice of philosophy is an inseparably egalitarian, or anarchistic, practice, since it considers arguments, narratives, testimonies, investigations and metaphors all as the equal inventions of a common capacity in a common language.
Engaging in critique of the instituted divisions, then, paves the way for renewing our interrogations into what we are able to think and to do. Aesthesis, what a fancy word. May 13, Ft. Pretty cool, but not all that clear at times. A redefinition of politics as agonistic discourse independent of the “police order” which we normally take as “politics. Sep 23, Gianni rated it really liked it. Brian Jenkins rated it really liked it Sep 07, Jay rated it liked it Dec 09, Hannes rated it really liked it Jun 06, Seth rated it really liked it Mar 13, Pedro rated it liked it Jan 13, Mike B rated it liked it Mar 24, Jared rated it really liked it Oct 22, Ryan rated it it was amazing Jan 25, Arvitto rated it really liked it May 17, Johannes Pause rated it really liked it May 06, There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
Denis who came to prominence when he co-authored Reading Capitalwith the Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser. What is the proletariat? Is there a working class? And how do these masses of workers that thinkers like Althusser referred to continuously enter into a relationship with knowledge? We talk about them but what do we know? No trivia or quizzes yet. This schema, very simple in appearance, is actually the conjunction of three processes: Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.