[ilds] baboonism

Vittorio Celentano vcel at ix.netcom.com
Fri Jul 6 21:32:19 PDT 2007

Pamela and others:

Lawrence Durrell is listed as a postmodern author in

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pamela Francis" <albigensian at hotmail.com>
To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ilds] baboonism

> Though I can't completely disagree with Lincolnshire's equating of Xnty
> those who believe in the man in the moon, he and Surrey have illustrated
> common misconception of postmodern thought--and not without some reason,
> that is how it is quite often presented to the Great Unread Public.  But
> case of David Irving (Holocaust Denier par excellence) demonstrated--to
> those that were paying attention--that postmodernist thought must be based
> on REASONABLE debate.  Even though, as postmodernists, we may question who
> has written history and from what location--in other words, we must
> metanarratives--we also must question the questioning.  In this case, it
> clear that questioning the metanarrative--with all its repercussions for
> current prejudices and acts of ethnic cleansing--cannot be questioned for
> any other reason than hatred, that is, the continued perpetuation of
> violence against certain ethnic and/or cultural identities.  If the
> questioning of Holocaust metanarratives cannot bring about anything other
> than more hatred, it is an unreasonable debate, one which brings justice
> absolutely NO ONE.
> On the surface, this tends to support the politically liberal point of
> which many of the Great Unread Public equate with
> nambypambyloveandpeaceforeveryoneness.  But I find considerable logic in
> argument that the "questioning", i.e., the denial of the Holocaust cannot
> bring about any hidden injustices to those who (I, and I think most of you
> as well) believe perpetuated the mass murder of Jews, Poles, homosexuals,
> and gypsies (to name only a few of Hitler's victims).  In other words, thi
> denial redeems no one.  In that sense, then, it is not reasonable, and
> therefore is not an example of postmodern theory in praxis.
> Having said all that, it is sometimes very tempting to tell confused
> undergraduates that postmodernism is the idea that all ideas are valid.
> It's just so much easier than being, well, reasonable...
> >From: Michael Haag <michaelhaag at btinternet.com>
> >Reply-To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> >Subject: [ilds] baboonism
> >Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 03:05:53 +0100
> >
> >From the Questions Answered column in The Times, 6 July 2007:
> >
> >
> >Can anyone define what postmodern thought is?
> >
> >Postmodernists believe there is no knowledge or truth, only "discourse".
> >However, they also tend to hold that modish left-wing views are
> >true and that anyone who opposes these should be persecuted.
> >
> >Andrew M. Chisholm, Thames Ditton, Surrey
> >
> >I was recently told that Modernism was the age of reason, in which any
> >religious beliefs were decried as being irrational. Postmodern thought,
> >however, takes things to the opposite extreme, in that it regards all
> >values as being equally valid. In other words Christianity is placed on a
> >par with those who think there is a man in the moon, which is made of
> >cheese.
> >
> >Tim Mickleburgh, Grimsby, Lincolnshire
> >_______________________________________________
> >ILDS mailing list
> >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds


> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds

More information about the ILDS mailing list