[ilds] baboonism

Richard Pine richardpin at eircom.net
Sat Jul 7 02:10:31 PDT 2007


The labels serve the purpose of allowing the critics and their gullible 
students to talk about the -isms. Otherwise they would have to talk about 
the literature. RP
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pamela Francis" <albigensian at hotmail.com>
To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: [ilds] baboonism


> The wikipedia list of postmodern authors demonstrates that the border
> between modernism and postmodernism is leaky at best and sometimes
> completely disolved; William Faulkner, Saul Bellow, Flannery 
> o'Connor--John
> Updike?  as postmodernists?  i can see the case for each (if I look
> hard)--and I certainly read the Quintet as postmodern.  So what does 
> really
> distinguish the mod from the postmod?  And do we really have to have the
> distinction? What purpose can such labels--esp.since they are only
> nominal---serve?
> Just wondering--Pamela
>
>
>>From: "Vittorio Celentano" <vcel at ix.netcom.com>
>>Reply-To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
>>To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
>>Subject: Re: [ilds] baboonism
>>Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 00:32:19 -0400
>>
>>Pamela and others:
>>
>>Lawrence Durrell is listed as a postmodern author in
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_literature
>>
>>Vittorio
>>----- 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
>>with
>> > those who believe in the man in the moon, he and Surrey have 
>> > illustrated
>>the
>> > common misconception of postmodern thought--and not without some 
>> > reason,
>>as
>> > that is how it is quite often presented to the Great Unread Public. 
>> > But
>>the
>> > 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
>>question
>> > metanarratives--we also must question the questioning.  In this case, 
>> > it
>>is
>> > 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
>>to
>> > absolutely NO ONE.
>> >
>> > On the surface, this tends to support the politically liberal point of
>>view,
>> > which many of the Great Unread Public equate with
>> > nambypambyloveandpeaceforeveryoneness.  But I find considerable logic 
>> > in
>>the
>> > 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
>>s
>> > 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
>>absolutely
>> > >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
>>green
>> > >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
>> >
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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