[jalisco555]

For the record here is Judith Butler's prize winning sentence:

"The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power."

I have no idea what it means.

[jalisco555]

Ping.

[heartwood]

at first I thought this was about the Bulwer Lytton contest, and that the woman had done it on purpose. Maybe she should.

[Gefreiter]

In my graduate program this kind of writing would have been heavily edited by the professor and quite probably tossed out entirely.

Not all historians are full of crap. Alot depends on where they trained, and under whom.

[r9etb]

I have no idea what it means.

Perhaps this helps to explain.....

[tsomer]

"The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power."

I'm not sure this is a sentence. Maybe a diagram?

[ClearCase_guy]

I have no idea what it means.

Let me translate: It's Bush's fault.

[dasboot]

Professor Irwin Cory BUMP!

[Mamzelle]

She knows you have no idea what it means. She has no idea what it means. She expects no one to have any idea what she means. But she can forever hide behind the feminine--"Well, if you don't know, I'm not going to tell you."

Words cannot plumb the depths of my contempt for these charlatans, these frauds, these carpetbaggers of the intellect.

[Old Professer]

Instead of society moving forward, it reverberates?

[dighton]

I have no idea what it means.

“Will babble for food.”

[Our man in washington]

Let me help:

"The move from a structuralist account ("Structuralist" means 'I hate more successful people, but I also hate myself for hating them, so I'm saying they can't help being jerks, because it's all part of the system.')

in which capital (References to "capital" mean "Waaahh! It's unfair that people make millions for making stuff people want when I only get a professor's salary and I'm so much smarter.")

is understood to structure social relations ("Waahhh! Rich people can get dates and I can't!)

in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation ("The masses don't even know their being brainwashed when they give pretty women more respect than me. It's just repetition that brainwashed them!")

brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory ("Althusserian Theory" means "Our intellectual fingerpainting really is helping those poor masses we claim to love but whose neighborhoods we'd never live in. As intellectuals, we truly are noble. Let us bow to the mirror.")

that takes structural totalities ("Totalities--am I standing up to the oppresive system or what?")

as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony ("Ha! It may just sound like I'm complaining about not getting dates, but I really have come up with something new!)

as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power. ("Ha! I'm on to the popular people! They have some strategy for making me hate myself. I know they do!")

So I think it all means "Waahhhh!"

[buzzsaw6]

This is the perfect example of the highly educated idiot.

[FreedomCalls]

Here's the second place finisher by Homi K. Bhabha, a professor of English at the University of Chicago:

If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudo-scientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities, and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to “normalize” formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality.

[FreedomCalls]

Here's another nominee; Steven Z. Levine from an anthology entitled Twelve Views of Manet’s “Bar” (Princeton University Press, 1996):

As my story is an august tale of fathers and sons, real and imagined, the biography here will fitfully attend to the putative traces in Manet’s work of “les noms du père,” a Lacanian romance of the errant paternal phallus (“Les Non-dupes errent”), a revised Freudian novella of the inferential dynamic of paternity which annihilates (and hence enculturates) through the deferred introduction of the third term of insemination the phenomenologically irreducible dyad of the mother and child.