<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>de Man - French Philosophy - tribe.net</title>
  <link rel="alternate" href="http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/42673730-413e-481b-8039-f0ea02a28352?format=atom" />
  <subtitle>Tribe.net. Local Connections</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <title>Re: de Man</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/42673730-413e-481b-8039-f0ea02a28352#378d31fa-e451-48e4-bca2-91d557f1d861" />
    <author>
      <name>Edward</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/42673730-413e-481b-8039-f0ea02a28352#378d31fa-e451-48e4-bca2-91d557f1d861</id>
    <updated>2004-09-05T21:57:56Z</updated>
    <published>2004-09-05T21:57:56Z</published>
    <summary type="html">Actually, the title essay argues explicitly &amp;amp;lt;i&gt;against&amp;amp;lt;/i&gt; the idea of a method of reading.  &#xD;
&#xD;
--Ed</summary>
    <dc:creator>Edward</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2004-09-05T21:57:56Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>de Man</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/42673730-413e-481b-8039-f0ea02a28352#9a75b558-e36b-4af8-93a1-1c2b70ee7dcb" />
    <author>
      <name>charles</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/42673730-413e-481b-8039-f0ea02a28352#9a75b558-e36b-4af8-93a1-1c2b70ee7dcb</id>
    <updated>2004-08-20T21:42:19Z</updated>
    <published>2004-08-20T21:42:19Z</published>
    <summary type="html">Just finished reading The Resistance to Theory (the essay collection) by Paul de Man.  I felt I understood it better than the last time I dipped into theory.  And recently reading Derrida the same.  Although I still don't "comprehend" it completely.  I think I am getting a sense for the method and the way the terms and the references interact or react to each other.  Also I think de Man is usually easier for me.  &#xD;
&#xD;
Also, I tried reading Kristeva's first novel recently, not sure why people liked it.  Pretty dry.</summary>
    <dc:creator>charles</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2004-08-20T21:42:19Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>



