This is one of the winners of the 1998 (and sadly last) Bad Writing Contest:
Certainly, the writer should be punished severely for such absurdly pretentious rubbish. It may even be meaningless rubbish, but who'd know?
As the person who submitted this for the contest wrote, the entire book it is taken from is “absolutely, unequivocally incomprehensible.”
But the question I suppose is, why would an ostensibly intelligent person write like this in the first place?
I realise the usual excuse is that "theory (as in critical theory) is hard" and therefore writing about it will be hard to read.
Of course this is complete bullshit. Your modern literary or critical theorist is nothing more than a puffed up version of someone we've all had the misfortune to run into at a party - the crashing bore who tries to show how clever he is by using a lot of big words, when actual communication would have been easier and clearer with simpler and more precise language.
These people are to a man and a woman a bunch of tossers.
It's even worse that in many cases these are the very same people who are now responsible for writing school curricula.
And associated article originally published in The Wall Street Journal: