Kurt Borg
I am a Lecturer in the Department of Public Policy at the University of Malta. I completed a PhD at Staffordshire University, with a thesis that draws on the philosophical works of Michel Foucault and Judith Butler to analyse the ethics and politics of narrating trauma in institutional contexts. My research interests revolve around the interface between continental philosophy, social theory and politics. I am interested in theories of subjectivity, resistance and discourse analysis.
less
InterestsView All (49)
Uploads
Papers by Kurt Borg
What this chapter does not attempt is to consider the theme of confession in Maltese literature at large. Mifsud’s confessional approach is not being contrasted with anyone else’s, nor is his approach shown to be any more accurate or more problematic than anyone else’s. What this chapter does attempt is a conversation between two approaches to autobiographical confession: Butler’s philosophical ideas on gendered identity, subjectivity, and mourning, and Mifsud’s confessional approach in In the Name of the Father; a conversation that shows that the two approaches converge on various points but diverge on others.
In the Name of the Father is a work of confession – it narrates various stories on the author himself, his relation to his father and to his son. However, the book is also a reflection on autobiographical confession, its limits and its difficulties. The impulse of this chapter is the epigraph that opens In the Name of the Father, and how the various meanings of the epigraph unfold throughout the book. The epigraph is an utterance made by Hélène Cixous in an interview: “One can confess all one wants, the unconfessable remains unconfessed” (28). This chapter analyses how the notion of the unconfessable may trouble Mifsud’s aims in presenting a narrative account of his relation to his father in the intriguing way that he does. I accept Mifsud’s portrayal of confessing oneself as a difficult activity, and seek to trouble further Mifsud’s own portrayal of this activity.
This chapter proceeds to i) explore the portrayal of gender and masculinity in In the Name of the Father in relation to Butler’s ideas on gender performativity to suggest that the tension between the father and the son emerged from their implicit disagreement on what constituted proper gender performances of masculinity. The narrator confesses that, as a child, what contributed to feeling distanced from his father was the father’s injunction to behave ‘like a man’. This reflection on confessing gender is used as a prelude to a broader reflection on ii) autobiographical confession and its limits, by referring to Butler’s ideas on grief and relationality, and iii) Mifsud’s confessional approach in light of what he considers unconfessable. The chapter concludes by iv) suggesting that Mifsud’s rendition of confession ultimately rests on an ungrounded hope.
What this chapter does not attempt is to consider the theme of confession in Maltese literature at large. Mifsud’s confessional approach is not being contrasted with anyone else’s, nor is his approach shown to be any more accurate or more problematic than anyone else’s. What this chapter does attempt is a conversation between two approaches to autobiographical confession: Butler’s philosophical ideas on gendered identity, subjectivity, and mourning, and Mifsud’s confessional approach in In the Name of the Father; a conversation that shows that the two approaches converge on various points but diverge on others.
In the Name of the Father is a work of confession – it narrates various stories on the author himself, his relation to his father and to his son. However, the book is also a reflection on autobiographical confession, its limits and its difficulties. The impulse of this chapter is the epigraph that opens In the Name of the Father, and how the various meanings of the epigraph unfold throughout the book. The epigraph is an utterance made by Hélène Cixous in an interview: “One can confess all one wants, the unconfessable remains unconfessed” (28). This chapter analyses how the notion of the unconfessable may trouble Mifsud’s aims in presenting a narrative account of his relation to his father in the intriguing way that he does. I accept Mifsud’s portrayal of confessing oneself as a difficult activity, and seek to trouble further Mifsud’s own portrayal of this activity.
This chapter proceeds to i) explore the portrayal of gender and masculinity in In the Name of the Father in relation to Butler’s ideas on gender performativity to suggest that the tension between the father and the son emerged from their implicit disagreement on what constituted proper gender performances of masculinity. The narrator confesses that, as a child, what contributed to feeling distanced from his father was the father’s injunction to behave ‘like a man’. This reflection on confessing gender is used as a prelude to a broader reflection on ii) autobiographical confession and its limits, by referring to Butler’s ideas on grief and relationality, and iii) Mifsud’s confessional approach in light of what he considers unconfessable. The chapter concludes by iv) suggesting that Mifsud’s rendition of confession ultimately rests on an ungrounded hope.
What do we mean by “deconstruction”? The name itself may seem to imply something negative, something pessimistic, something that undoes something precious. When dealing with politics – an activity which is deemed serious and urgent – it seems that there is no room for hesitance, uncertainty and inconsistencies. Derrida’s work has often been criticised on these lines; his work, it is claimed, is there to play, to make fun of things, to transform and transgress traditional framework of thought and action for the sake of instability, making it unlikely that deconstruction or a deconstructive approach to politics can be of any use. Contrary to this characterisation, what I will argue is that Derrida’s philosophical approach entails a sensibility that can inform and enrich politics. This sensibility is inherited by Judith Butler, who relies upon but greatly extends Derrida’s approach in her work on gender and beyond. The approach employed in their works is a political one, which can be called a playful politics, or politics of parody. Although in this paper I will focus on the political, I wouldn’t hesitate in saying that the sensibility that governs this political approach is an ethical one. Both Derrida and Butler agree that the relation between ethics and politics is an intricate one. The focus on the relation between the self and others highlights how ethics cannot not overflow into a politics, and the political – insofar as its effects concern individuals or spaces where individuals come to be – cannot not have an ethical bearing, even if neglected. Butler articulates this point succinctly when she writes that ‘the ethical demand gives rise to the political account, and that ethics undermines its own credibility when it does not become critique.’ (GAO, 124)
This paper will explore two concepts from Foucault’s repertoire, entrepreneurship of the self and apparatus. This paper claims that entrepreneurship of the self is read as a form of apparatus that brings forth the process of neoliberal subjectification. The aim is to show that
in the context of the pandemic and the rise of new labour relations because of new forms of technology driven business models, the individual is transformed into an investor that must invest in themselves and taking full responsibility for the outcome.