Charting a meta-narrative of tragic inheritance through Greek tragedy, Renaissance tragic drama, and the modern drama, I establish an alternative view of western theatre's past-one that embodies its own consciously adopted tragic form. Specific constructions of fate, agency and justice provide sites for understanding the evolution of a tragic consciousness. Readings of Aeschylus' Oresteia, Sophocles' Oedipus Tyrannos, and Euripides' Bacchae ground this argument in the Greek original. It also tells a story of their ahistorical continuity based on tragic repetition. This dissertation examines the ways in which tragedy produces, and challenges, human subjectivity in three distinct periods of western theatrical production. My critique is rooted in the lack of engagement with questions of worldview (of the nexus of cosmology and ontology) and the subsequent, unproblematic acceptance of the Colonial Modernist incarnation of the dominant, domineering Artificial Worldview (Four Arrows and Narvaez 2016 Barnesmoore 2018b) implied therein. I have been asked by a reviewer to " set up the critique of urban theory and develop it using examples ", and have done my best to fulfill this request, but, moving from Foucault's insightful and oft repeated observation that the power of what is said is often most clearly expressed in what is therefore not said, my critique of Urban and Geographical theory and the ontological-epistemological debates waged therein is rooted less in what has been said than in what has not been said. order as subsequently dependent upon hierarchical domination (Barnesmoore 2018b)-and the elite class, the state 1, the legal system, the police, 'bigger scales' and other such edifices of the Artificial Worldview and its conception of order through hierarchical dominion are thus (oft unproblematically) accepted as the natural authority from which the order of things (in the city and beyond) is derived. systems-who or what has the authority to assert the order of things (in the city and beyond)? This question of authority, as noted by Springer (2014), is all too often understood in the banally hierarchical terms of the Artificial Worldview-which accepts the order of (human) nature as evil and views the production of social, political, economic, religious, etc. This question leads us back to the age old question of authority in social, political, economic, religious, etc. Catterall's (2018) editorial note for issue 22.2 of CITY, like the final footnote in Barnesmoore's (2018a) editorial for the same issue, raises the question of 'what/whose order is to be asserted in the city'.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |