Kristeva and revolt

Kristeva’s article “New Forms of Revolt” contrasts two different types of revolt, one old and political, the other new and internal. My understanding of Kristeva’s article is basic, as I found it to be disorganized. Kristeva states that the commonly known definition of revolt is “a challenge to pre-established norms, values, and powers,” but the act of revolution has been tainted by politics such as “trade-offs between parties”(3). The ‘old’ revolt is based on the action of rejecting old values for new values without question, or as Kristeva puts it, “the questioning of values turned into nihilism”(5).

Instead of the ‘old’ revolt, Kristeva advocates for the ‘new’ internal type of revolt. We should abandon the nihilist approach to life, where we see life in absolutes. The new form of “intimate” revolt would have us constantly question ourselves and our internal emotional development, instead of seeing ourselves as having to fit into designated stages or the nihilist revolt of moving from one set of values to another (11). This new revolt means that people can recognize that they are always emotionally and mentally evolving, and through psychoanalysis can separate themselves from the constraints of society.