No description available.

"Kinds of Spaces: Poststructural Concepts and Metafictional Appropriations" emerges from studies in structural linguistics, contemporary critical theory, and metafiction and thus moves into the realms of poststructuralism and deconstruction while developing a theory of space in writing. Its central sections attempt to conceptually and physically broaden the scope of the investigation and progress from linguistic space, via inscribed space and ontological inter-space, to erotic space. Thus, "Marking a Place of Differ( )nce" concerns the poststructural redefinition of the Saussurean model with its gap between signifier and signified in the debate between Lacan and Derrida on the "Purloined Letter"; "'a spatial displacement of words"' discusses the disruption of syntax and the ensuing dissemination of letters across the page in concrete prose, particularly as they relate to narratological displacement in Raymond Federman's Double or Nothing; "From Ear to Eye" reenacts the analogy created between sound and sight in Steve Katz's The Exagggerations of Peter Prince, which attempts an erosion of ontological and spatial boundaries in the text; "The Body, the Book, and the Supplement of Supplements" addresses the physical space between reader and book, the uniting of their bodies, and is based on Rousseau's concept of the supplement, Foucault's notion of the gaze, and Baudrillard's discussion of seduction.These central sections are framed by: "The Blank in Writing," which develops a theory of blank space in writing mostly drawing on Derridean concepts and applying them to a reading of the Mobv Dick chapter "The Whiteness of the Whale," and "The Topography of Writing," which, while focussing on the relationship between space and time, discusses Raymond Federman's The Voice in the Closet, a typographical tour de force which incorporates blank space. At the end, a "Postscript" attempts to assess the blank's sign quality as it emerges as integral constituent to each concept discussed. / Department of English

This analysis deconstructs and destabilizes the use of polarization in the sociological analysis of religion. The sociology of religion operates on the assumption that fundamental differences exist between religion and non-religion. Beginning with Feuerbach, this approach is elaborated by Durkheim, Berger, Barnes, and Caplan. These authors differentiate religion and non-religion along multiple axes. The religious is characterized by irrationality, mystification, and masochism, while the non-religious is depicted as rational, empirical, and empowering. The deconstruction of this polarization may proceed along two different lines. First, the characterizations of religious thought and activity may be discredited. Second, these characterizations of religious thought may be shown to apply equally to the non-religious through a reflexive or symmetrical examination. If these contrasts are destabilized, the religious and non-religious become qualitative equivalents, engaged in a similar project, using similar tactics, and driven by similar objectives.

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Murdoch University, 2005. / Thesis submitted to the Division of Arts. Filmography: leaves 284-287. Bibliography: leaves 271-283.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2008. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on July 8, 2009) Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 1999. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 368-397).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Edinburgh, 1997.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1996. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 45-47).