A Different Path: Why Stanley Cavell Won't Get to the Point

Journal of Speculative Philosophy 29 (4):503-521 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

ABSTRACT Stanley Cavell rarely gets to the point, and his winding sentences and frequent asides are a favorite target for detractors. This essay follows a different path, however, proposing that we listen carefully to Cavell's voice as an author and consider the philosophical significance of these twists and turns in his writings. After exploring the intellectual basis for Cavellian indirectness, the essay examines an exemplary passage from Must We Mean What We Say? linking it to the political unrest of the 1960s. It shows how Cavell used the indirectness of his writing to mount a necessarily subtle social critique of American society on the issue of race.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,296

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Aesthetics and Autobiography in Cavell.Jochen Schuff - 2020 - Estetika: The European Journal of Aesthetics 57 (2):150-162.
Using Stanley Cavell.Michael Fischer - 2008 - Philosophy and Literature 32 (1):pp. 198-204.
Stanley Cavell’s Argument of the Ordinary.Avner Baz - 2018 - Nordic Wittgenstein Review 7 (2):9-48.
Movies with Stanley Cavell in mind.David LaRocca (ed.) - 2021 - New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-12-02

Downloads
2 (#1,819,493)

6 months
24 (#121,857)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references