Reading dates: 5 September – 24 October 2014
When Gilman-Opalsky kept referring to a book by Julia Kristeva I never heard of, I made my mind up to chose this when my turn came in our Dialectical Materialism book group. This is a book of interviews and, I am going to be honest, it was not my most inspiring choice for our discussion. I cannot understand why it is Gilman-Opalsky’s main reference. The book is repetitive and depends very much on the interviewer and his questions. Kristeva is good, and she has some very interesting insights into psychoanalysis, art and May 68 but in a format like this it is difficult to make an argument consistently. I chose a question and answer form for the last chapter of my PhD and I think it worked to deepen the understanding of what I had been raising in previous chapters but, then again, I was writing both the questions and answers, creating characters that fit the argument itself. Of all the interviewers, I got the sense that the first – Philippe Petit – did not like her at all, so was out to get her (note this is MY sense), the second – Rainer Ganahl – was the best but his text was too short and the third –Rubén Gallo – was far too wordy; Kristeva lost heart with her answers. I felt for her, as our discussion also lost heart. But how do you chose a book for a book group? Do you chose something you have already read and you know is good, or do you risk and grab something you are curious about (which is what I did). This time, my risk did not pay off despite the fact that I had trusted Gilman-Opalsky (and liked his book), but that does not mean I did not enjoy the discussion.