Paul de man criticism and crisis pdf
File Name: paul de man criticism and crisis .zip
- The De Man Case
- A technical snag at India’s largest stock exchange has the government worried
- Leadership Lessons Of Jesus Pdf
The De Man Case
Hou Hsiao-hsien: A new video lecture! How Motion Pictures Became the Movies. Constructive editing in Pickpocket : A video essay. Rex Stout: Logomachizing. Lessons with Bazin: Six Paths to a Poetics. Murder Culture: Adventures in s Suspense. Mad Detective : Doubling Down. Nordisk and the Tableau Aesthetic. Re Discovering Charles Dekeukeleire. Doing Film History. Anatomy of the Action Picture.
Film and the Historical Return. Studying Cinema. On the History of Film Style. Second edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Christopher Nolan: A Labyrinth of Linkages. First edition, Planet Hong Kong. Berkeley: University of California Press, Film Art: An Introduction. Textbook written with Kristin Thompson and Jeff Smith. Film History: An Introduction. Textbook written with Kristin Thompson first-named author.
Donald Trump did not lose the U. He was inaugurated on 4 March. Joseph Biden was arrested and executed. Or, if you like: Trump will be sworn in on 20 March, the anniversary of the founding of the Republican Party in Ripon, Wisconsin. Or Trump is President already and working with the military to prepare the mass executions of Democrats. But these are also narratives. Narrative in many manifestations, from jokes to comic books, is one of my keen interests.
I used that buzzword as a path into analyzing the yarn-spinning around presidential campaigns here and here and, inevitably, stages in the fascist coup attempted by the fumbling but indefatigable Trump regime here and here and here and here. The coup effort continues, now at the level of Republican state legislatures. The 6 January assault on the US Capitol, an atrocity many of us followed in real time, has been recast as different stories.
The trial began on 9 February with consideration of whether the Senate could impeach a President no longer holding office. That issue was settled by a vote that impeachment could proceed. The trial proper began on 1o February. The charge was that Trump incited the riot that led to the invasion of the Capitol on 6 January On 10 and 11 February, the House Impeachment managers presented their case.
On 12 February, the Trump attorneys presented their defense, after which both sides entertained questions from senators. The final day, 13 February, was taken up with debates about whether witnesses and further testimony would be invited.
After that was resolved, the proceedings ended with a vote on conviction. Sixty-seven votes would have been enough to convict Trump, but only 57 votes for that outcome were cast. Trump was acquitted. Official transcripts of the Senate sessions are available on the Congressional Record site.
A video record of the proceedings, with good quality on the video clips, is on the C-Span site. This also includes a rolling transcript. Both sides used film to make their arguments. What resources of cinema did they use? And how do the uses differ? We suggest that a film or a literary text or a TV show, etc. Take whales. Using categorical form, you might provide a taxonomy of whales. Using rhetorical form, you could make an argument about whale conservation.
With associational form, you might provide a poetic meditation on whales as metaphors for strength and grace. With abstract form, you might film whales in ways that turn them into pure patterns of imagery and sound. And using narrative form, you might tell a story about how a stubborn young girl helped get a stranded whale back into the sea.
Any given film could combine these principles. An argument for conserving whales could include sequences that give us information about genus and species, while other sequences could poeticize the great behemoths in the Whitman manner, or let us appreciate their abstract beauty.
Even a film that tries to make an argument is likely to include some passages involving agents and actions, goals and obstacles. But inserted in that structure we find stories about how the Dust Bowl came to be a disaster area and how the government has taken steps to improve things. A court case is a prototype of rhetoric. Aristotle accorded little importance to storytelling in forensic rhetoric, but later thinkers recognized the powerful role that it plays.
Theorists came to call narratio the portion of the argument that tells the story, or rather competing stories, of the matter in dispute. But what stories were told? How did the advocates tell them?
Do the presentations push beyond narrative to other types of form? And what implications do these strategies have for how political actors use moving-image media?
There people accused of lynching a man must watch a courtroom screening of their actions during the crime. Needless to say, there was much less self-examination shown by Republican senators when confronted with powerful sounds and images showing the fury they unleashed and did nothing to forestall.
Analyzing a piece of rhetoric demands that the audience be considered. I think not. The House advocates, it seems to me, were addressing two audiences: the general public and, to put it grandiosely, history. Representative Jaime Raskin and his colleagues treated the matter as a criminal case, offering a detailed reconstruction of motive, method, and opportunity. Assuming that future analyses would be skeptical and rigorous, looking for holes in the Prosecution account, they tried to make it tight, evidence-based, and the most plausible explanation of the events of 6 January.
Their account can be revised in the light of new information such as recent findings of who funded the rally and how it was coordinated with the White House. Still, it aspired to be a reliable first draft of the most accurate and comprehensive story of the event. Taking advantage of the primacy effect, they laid out their story in a dense fifteen-minute video at the start of the first day, during the argument about constitutionality. Over the next two days, the House managers spiraled out from the attack footage by means of a plot structure that starts with a crisis.
Interestingly, the Protagonists initially cast the Capitol police, particularly the black officers who were stunned by the racism they confronted. The sections are mostly chronological, showing events leading up to the crisis, though further flashbacks are embedded. Thanks to cellphones, we can get a godlike view of the whole event—a crucial choice of viewpoint for the prosecution.
I reconstruct the plot as follows. Election : On the big night, he tried to stop the counting and declared that he won. Post-election: He refused to concede, fought in the courts, and tried to round up phantom ballots. After failing to win over reluctant senators and he Department of Justice, he saw Pence as his last chance to overturn the electoral results.
When Pence demurred, Trump sought another avenue for action. Trump has a history of support of militias and white supremacists e. Just after the rally: A timeline from , when the march to the Capitol began, to , when marchers overwhelmed the police and broke in.
The attack: The timeline continues to the end of the day. The assault is crosscut with the responses of police, legislators, and staff. Pence and others were rushed to safety. The mob filled the Crypt, burst into the House, and ransacked the Senate chamber. Outside, rioters boasted of the destruction. At Trump acknowledged the attack in a tweet. Meanwhile, his staff and members of Congress pleaded with him to call the marauders back.
They asserted that he summoned them. Trump did not upbraid the men who plotted to kidnap the Michigan governor; he joked about it at a rally. His video of 13 January regretting the violence refused to admit that Biden won the election, thus maintaining the Big Lie.
A technical snag at India’s largest stock exchange has the government worried
This article sets out to stimulate discussion on the sociological value of fiction in the wider study of men and masculinities in society. Identifying masculinity as a major theme of the American literary tradition, this article engages in a case study analysis of canonical writers of contemporary American fiction, namely Paul Auster, Don DeLillo, and Bret Easton Ellis. Gendering our reading of fiction in this manner succeeds in illustrating that these authors are intent on not simply depicting masculinity as a social and historical construction but that they seek to challenge the established ideological image of hegemonic masculinity by writing counter-hegemonic narratives. London: Continuum. Begley, A. The Art of Fiction No.
At the time of his death, de Man was one of the most prominent literary critics in the United States—known particularly for his importation of German and French philosophical approaches into Anglo-American literary studies and critical theory. At the time of his death from cancer, he was Sterling Professor of the Humanities and chairman of the Department of Comparative Literature at Yale. These, in combination with revelations about his domestic life and financial history, caused a scandal and provoked a reconsideration of his life and work. Paul de Man was born to a family of artisans of nineteenth-century Belgium and by the time of his birth, his family was prominent among the new bourgeoisie in Antwerp. He played an important part in the decisions made by De Man during the Nazi occupation of Belgium. De Man's father and his mother, Madeleine, who were first cousins, married over the family's opposition. The marriage proved unhappy.
Paul de Man, “Criticism and Crisis,” in Blindness and Insight: Essays in the. Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism, 2nd rev. ed., intro. by Wlad Godzich.
Leadership Lessons Of Jesus Pdf
These are the core obsessions that drive our newsroom—defining topics of seismic importance to the global economy. Our emails are made to shine in your inbox, with something fresh every morning, afternoon, and weekend. On Feb.
I had not been planning to return to the topic of hydroxychloroquine so soon, but here we are. This will not be a calm, measured blog post — fair warning. Yesterday, Dr.
Hou Hsiao-hsien: A new video lecture! How Motion Pictures Became the Movies. Constructive editing in Pickpocket : A video essay. Rex Stout: Logomachizing. Lessons with Bazin: Six Paths to a Poetics.
Он был уже совсем. Правой рукой, точно железной клешней, он обхватил ее за талию так сильно, что она вскрикнула от боли, а левой сдавил ей грудную клетку. Сьюзан едва дышала. Отчаянно вырываясь из его рук, Сьюзан локтем с силой ударила Хейла. Он отпустил ее и прижал ладони к лицу. Из носа у него пошла кровь. Хейл упал на колени, не опуская рук.
Стрелка топливного индикатора указывала на ноль. И, как бы повинуясь неведомому сигналу, между стенами слева от него мелькнула тень. Нет сомнений, что человеческий мозг все же совершеннее самого быстродействующего компьютера в мире. В какую-то долю секунды сознание Беккера засекло очки в металлической оправе, обратилось к памяти в поисках аналога, нашло его и, подав сигнал тревоги, потребовало принять решение. Он отбросил бесполезный мотоцикл и пустился бежать со всех ног. К несчастью для Беккера, вместо неуклюжего такси Халохот обрел под ногами твердую почву.
Она перевела взгляд на пустую шифровалку. Скорее бы просигналил ее терминал. Но тот молчал.