Introducing Postmodernism, Third Edition (Introducing)

Reviews (See all 13) Write a reviewfor this

It's a hit!

i still don't understand postmodernism. i think it's a bunch of academic nonsense that will probably never make much sense. however, the book has s... (show more)

i still don't understand postmodernism. i think it's a bunch of academic nonsense that will probably never make much sense. however, the book has some notable observations about hyperreality. (show less)

 

 

by Facebook-gebruiker

No, it's a flop!

Given that this is written (poorly) by the series editor, I am less than enthusiastic about pursuing other titles in the series.

The first third... (show more)

Given that this is written (poorly) by the series editor, I am less than enthusiastic about pursuing other titles in the series.

The first third is engaging, covering art, philosophy, linguistics, etc. The series uses a "comic-book" presentation that, in this case particularly, makes ideas approachable.

The quality of the presentation slides, and the content goes off the cliff when the authors present "postmodern science". (This is not a postmodern philosophy of science, merely science done in a postmodern era.)

Here are a few examples of the factual errors in the science portion:

"[T]he atom not only consists of protons, neutrons, and electrons, but all the varieties of gluons, charms, quarks..."

For the unititiated, the charm quark is a flavor of quark. There is no "charm" particle.

""Relativism was introduced into science by Quantum mechanics."

Actually, that came in at least with, um, Relativity.

"Heisenberg introduced... uncertainty: the impossibility of predicting both the mass and velocity of a particle at any given moment"

The actual uncertainty relation is between position and momentum, or between time and energy. (1)

All three of these errors occurred on just one page of the pomo science section. I am familiar with modern physics, so I recognized the errors. I lack confidence that the book is not full of such misinformation on other topics.

What I can say for certain is that in the final section of the book, the authors engage in a social and cultural critique that makes Francis Schaeffer (3) look like Slavoj Zizek (4). The haste with which the book was completed is tranparent as every trite example of pomo culture is rehashed with almost no analysis.

I'm curious if anyone has found other titles in the series to be better prepared. I own a copy of Introducing Derrida, but am hesitant to crack it open.

(1) This is why physicists can't get laid. When they have time, they can't find the energy, and when they have momentum, they can't find the position. (2)

(2) Alternatively, it is because of jokes like this that they fail in their sexual pursuits.

(3) Radical evangelical "critic" who often used New Yorker and NYT Book Review articles as the basis of his comments on art, music, and philosophy. Predictably, his analysis suffers significantly from his lack of knowledge or comprehension of the ideas he criticized.

(4) In some repects, he is "the man". (show less)

 

 

by Joel Avery

More Reviews

• 
  

  Quick and broad overview… I give the folks that put this together credit for covering a whole lot in a few pages with lots of comic-book art... Am I now Introduced to Post Modernism? Let's just say I bumped into Post Modernism in the Lobby... Didn't think that much of him forgot what we talked about and moved on... Would I recommend you read this little book... Sure, if you don't know anything about Post Modernism before you read this, you really won't know that much more after, and I'm ... (show more)

  Quick and broad overview… I give the folks that put this together credit for covering a whole lot in a few pages with lots of comic-book art... Am I now Introduced to Post Modernism? Let's just say I bumped into Post Modernism in the Lobby... Didn't think that much of him forgot what we talked about and moved on... Would I recommend you read this little book... Sure, if you don't know anything about Post Modernism before you read this, you really won't know that much more after, and I'm not so sure that is such a bad thing... Seems to me that most of these guys have way too much time on there hands anyway and it would probably be a good Idea if we didn't pay much attention to them at all... Anyway... For the sake of the general economy, buy the book and read it... You obviously have the time if you can think about Post Modernism in the first place. (show less)

   

  by Ed Siemens on Jan 19, 2009 at 06:26AM

  Already read

  Is this review helpful? yes no
   
• 

  As you'd expect, it's a fantastic synopsis of philosophy, art and culture in the later twentieth-century as it proceeds from the early twentieth-century. It addresses memes throughout the times from the vantage of postmodernism after having explained the theoretical origins of postmodernism (Derrida, Lacan, Iriguay, Lyotard). As the front cover notes, the range of information is vast, but the actual content is far too laconic at times. I'm very interested to hear more about the reasons behin... (show more)

  As you'd expect, it's a fantastic synopsis of philosophy, art and culture in the later twentieth-century as it proceeds from the early twentieth-century. It addresses memes throughout the times from the vantage of postmodernism after having explained the theoretical origins of postmodernism (Derrida, Lacan, Iriguay, Lyotard). As the front cover notes, the range of information is vast, but the actual content is far too laconic at times. I'm very interested to hear more about the reasons behind suggesting romanticism as a possibility of overcoming postmodernism, since it is by no means clear how it is the major alternative. Perhaps when we question our deepest roots, we find either absolutes or fictions, and the postmodernists see absolutes as unacceptable "meta-narratives" and fictions as lies, whereas the romanticists may see fictions as intrisically valuable in some respect, like a beautiful and spiritual interpretation of nature. (show less)

   

  by David Pitcher on Jul 02, 2008 at 11:30PM

  Already read

  Is this review helpful? yes no
   
• See all reviews
  Write a review