Michael Warner points out that clarity sometimes exists for the future. Intelligibility is relative and relational. Normative? I'm very sketchy here. Leaving out lots of possible connections to keep them fluid and open.
What responsibilities do readers, audiences, markets, reception communities, political folks, feminists have to those writing for/to/about audiences of the future?
Is it possible to claim one's writing in that place? Is that something only to be done retrospectively by others? a kind of merit?
When would such a claim be unaccountable to intelligibility? Is intelligibility something to be accountable for? Are intelligibility and "accessibility" the same, similar, or in different registers of response?
Is being intelligible pragmatic and instrumental?
I believe that readers and audiences with progressive and feminist political intentions have to contemplate the possibility of writing for the future, have to be willing to engage the unintelligible, be willing to do the work of creating intelligibility in their very roles of readers and audiences when supporting speculations and experiments and even, yes, lack of skill, among writers who work among futures.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment