A quarter way through this incredibly obtuse wall of post-modernist philosophy masquerading as a walking conversation I realized I wasn’t getting much out of it.
This historical treatise has a lot of notoriety but I found it unnecessarily dense, and ultimately flawed, in that its focus on states and state power ignores a related discussion of capitalist power, such that altho there is a useful perspective to glean here about how a drive for social legibility can transform a society, I wouldn't recommend the book overall.
Comments
Post a Comment