Rose

Rose

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Politics and Love: Maybe not so compatiable

While Prof. Borck seems to be a genuinely funny and nice person, her lecture lacked in terms of relating to the class topic. Although a very good paper and lecture on friendship, politics, and democracy, she outlined in the beginning on how she would address familial love, but she never related her argument back to that original claim. I was actually very interested in learning a political take on familial love. Then when she began her presentation, I kept wondering when she was going to circle back to her original outline, but maybe she just forgot. She did a good job of analyzing new theories on Plato's philosophy on war and friendship from Plato's Republic; however, I was confused on the order in which she chose to present, saying that Plato was "responding" to Schmitt and Derrida's ideas of friendship and enemies and liberalism. I just don't see how someone who has been dead thousands of years can respond to work done in the 20th century. Again, her topic was very scholarly and interesting, and I could tell she put a lot of work into writing, but she failed to tie it into familial love, like she promised at the beginning of the lecture.

1 comment:

  1. Just to let you know - older writers can always "respond" to more contemporary writers (not literally of course) but figuratively we can put two writers in conversation with one another in order to get new perspectives - how might one writer comment on another writer, etc. How their ideas contrast, reflect each other, etc.

    ReplyDelete