Chris Rudge Chris Rudge i(10648462 works by)
Gender: Male
The material on this page is available to AustLit subscribers. If you are a subscriber or are from a subscribing organisation, please log in to gain full access. To explore options for subscribing to this unique teaching, research, and publishing resource for Australian culture and storytelling, please contact us or find out more.

Works By

Preview all
1 1 y separately published work icon Philament New Waves : Twenty-First-Century Feminisms no. 23 Blythe Worthy (editor), Chris Rudge (editor), 2017 12930313 2017 periodical issue

WITH this special volume of Philament, edited by Blythe Worthy and myself, the journal moves into a new stage of its life. For our last published volume, number 22, “Precarity,” we decided to print a small number of physical copies, largely to satisfy our own curiosities about the cost of the printing process, but also to see whether the aesthetic value of these digital pages, lovingly typeset as they are, would carry over to the parchment. Happy with the results of our experiment, we have decided that we shall this time print a few more copies than the last time, an opportunity made possible thanks to Blythe Worthy’s strong advocacy of the journal and the resultant support we have received from the Sydney Social Sciences and Humanities Advanced Research Centre (SSSHARC).' (Chris Rudge : Editorial Note)
1 Facing Precarity Chris Rudge , 2016 single work criticism
— Appears in: Philament , December no. 22 2016; (p. 1-26) 'Also sprach Judith Butler in an interview with David Runciman on Talking Politics, a podcast recorded at the University of Cambridge in the immediate wake of Donald J. Trump’s election to President-elect.1 Among her myriad incisive remarks, the final line in the passage above is illuminating—although not because it is incisive. It offers no cool-headed explanation for Trump’s ascension (that is something Butler does elsewhere in the interview). Instead, it conveys Butler’s desire to avoid facing Trump, an admission as candid as it is non-intellectualised (in the Freudian sense of “intellectualisation”). And it is illuminating precisely because it so straightforward, and acknowledges so openly perhaps what is power’s most frightening and abject dimension: its visual dimension, and particularly the visual image of its “face.”' (Publication abstract)
X