volume 36, issue 7, P1033-1048 1999
DOI: 10.1111/1467-6486.00169
View full text

Abstract: It may appear absurd to attempt to manage a re-view of a`book' when not only its ontological status remains elusive and undecidable, positively villainous and aleatory, but where its author is neither authoritative nor`present' in any orthodox sense. How to re-view something which doesn't have a view, nor displays an orthodox view against which a re-view can establish itself? A book, moreover, which even incorporates its own reviews; a book that speaks out of an apocalyptic vertigo through which contemporary …

expand abstract