User:Pmaiden/sandbox

Realities of Collapse: Expressionism and capitalist presemantic theory
This text has been edited by the postmodernism generator

1. Contexts of meaninglessness
“Class is part of the rubicon of art,” says Bataille. In V, Pynchon analyses textual theory; in Vineland, however, he deconstructs expressionism.

In a sense, if the subcultural paradigm of discourse holds, we have to choose between expressionism and capitalist socialism. Any number of appropriations concerning not deconstruction, as predialectic discourse suggests, but subdeconstruction may be found.

However, the main theme of de Selby’s[1] model of capitalist presemantic theory is the role of the reader as artist. Debord suggests the use of predialectic discourse to attack hierarchy.

Thus, the characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is not narrative, but subnarrative. McElwaine[2] implies that we have to choose between the textual paradigm of discourse and postcultural theory.

2. Expressionism and patriarchialist discourse
The primary theme of Parry’s[3] essay on patriarchialist discourse is the role of the observer as artist. But if cultural postsemantic theory holds, the works of Rushdie are an example of mythopoetical nationalism. Many narratives concerning expressionism exist.

In the works of Rushdie, a predominant concept is the distinction between without and within. In a sense, Lyotard uses the term ‘patriarchialist discourse’ to denote the difference between society and class. An abundance of sublimations concerning a self-supporting reality may be discovered.

If one examines the conceptualist paradigm of consensus, one is faced with a choice: either accept capitalist presemantic theory or conclude that academe is capable of intentionality. However, the example of substructural cultural theory depicted in Rushdie’s Satanic Verses emerges again in The Ground Beneath Her Feet. Baudrillard promotes the use of patriarchialist discourse to analyse and deconstruct sexual identity.

It could be said that the characteristic theme of the works of Rushdie is not discourse per se, but postdiscourse. The subject is interpolated into a capitalist presemantic theory that includes sexuality as a totality.

Thus, Humphrey[4] states that we have to choose between patriarchialist discourse and prematerialist capitalism. Lyotard suggests the use of expressionism to attack outmoded perceptions of society.

Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a cultural narrative that includes language as a paradox. If patriarchialist discourse holds, we have to choose between capitalist presemantic theory and poststructuralist nationalism.

But the primary theme of la Fournier’s[5] model of patriarchialist discourse is the role of the participant as writer. Derrida uses the term ‘expressionism’ to denote the bridge between sexuality and society.

Therefore, Debord’s essay on capitalist presemantic theory holds that culture serves to reinforce capitalism. Scuglia[6] suggests that we have to choose between patriarchialist discourse and subtextual discourse.

3. Narratives of economy
“Society is fundamentally impossible,” says Sartre. In a sense, the characteristic theme of the works of Gibson is a mythopoetical reality. Lacan promotes the use of expressionism to analyse class.

But if patriarchialist discourse holds, we have to choose between capitalist presemantic theory and deconstructivist libertarianism. The main theme of la Tournier’s[7] critique of patriarchialist discourse is the dialectic, and hence the stasis, of dialectic sexual identity.

Thus, a number of theories concerning the precapitalist paradigm of discourse exist. The primary theme of the works of Gibson is a modern totality.