Customer Reviews

Postmodernism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Postmodernism is a tricky thing to define. According to Christopher Butler, 'it is certain of its uncertainty', and he intentionally writes 'about postmodern artists, intellectual gurus, academic critics, philosophers, and social scientists...as if they were all members of a loosely constituted and quarrelsome political party.' Butler draws on the work of Derrida, Jameson, Barthes, Althusser and Foucault to provide an intellectual basis for the idea of postmodernism, but does not confine his study to critical and literary theory. The idea of postmodernism is one that has spread into politics and other social sciences, art and the humanities, and even the hard sciences in many ways.

Because postmodernism is more of a method or discourse than a set theory (at least so far as typical Anglo-American concepts of theory would have it), Butler worries that some of postmodernism is lost in translation - owing so much to the French intellectual foundation, and owing much to nuance and subtle readings, the translation of postmodern ideas has been slow to be exactly transferred. This is also in part due to the resistance of English and English-speaking intellectual constructs to permit some of the linguistic aspects of postmodernism in any easy way.

One of the key issues of postmodernism is the idea of grand narratives and metanarratives, and changing the way one uses text, language and symbolic items to interpret the world. This is where deconstruction and reconstruction come into play. Butler addresses these issues in terms of philosophy, history, art and expression, as well as ethical and political theory. He claims that the ideas of postmodernism tend to be more successful in the ethical and political realm, dealing with issues of identity, selfhood, difference and autonomy, all of which tend to be linguistically constructed and supported.

Butler quotes Jameson as seeing the postmodern as 'the disappearance of a sense of history', in culture and in philosophy. The question of Pontius Pilate, 'What is truth?' gets played out again and again in postmodern circles in ways the early Romans and Christians would never have thought. Butler worries for the postmodern condition, stating 'Postmodernists are by and large pessimists.' He says that postmodern thinkers are better at deconstruction than construction/reconstruction, and worries that much of what postmodernism inspires is bleak and dark.

Some reviewers of this text have noted a bias against postmodernism in Butler, which is probably a bit misplaced. Butler is biased against some of the outcomes of postmodernist thinking, and goes a bit further in this Very Short Introduction that perhaps is best in describing what might be the outcome of the logical extreme. Still, this is a very good introduction to the underlying principles of postmodernist thought, with some of the applications in various disciplines of the underlying framework.

I was pleased to find that Prof. Butler discusses "post-modernist" theory critically and with intellectual rigor. I was concerned that this short introduction would be either a hymn to post-modernist theory or an uncritical recitation of post-modernist ideas. Instead, Prof. Butler analyzes and criticizes the sources, substance and implications of various post-modernist methodologies -- deconstruction, Foucaultian analysis, post-colonialism -- as these have been embraced, partially-embraced, and adapted in literature, the visual arts, architecture and popular culture. The reader learns alot about post-modernist theory, but from a critic who is skeptical as well as informed. Would the "episteme" have "replicated" his example.

This book serves as a fairly straightforward introduction to postmodern thinking. Unfortunately, it is overly critical of postmodernism, which may discourage the curious beginner from pursuing the subject further. It might have been more appropriately titled, "Postmodernism: A Very Short Critique". While there is nothing inherently wrong with casting a critical eye on postmodernism, an introduction should be more balanced than this book is. I would recommend "Teach Yourself Postmodernism by Glenn Ward as a better introduction.

Butler touches on all aspects of PM thought/aesthetics in; literature, architecture, art theory etc. and nails it right on the head.

It is fair to say, as some reviewers pointed out below, that he is certainly not a cheerleader for PM theory. He shows no mercy and points out all of the glaring contradictions of PM dogma as he sees them. (And so much the better, considering that much writing on the subject frustratingly skims over the absurd aspects of PM in favor of joining in on the lovefest).

Nevertheless, this is a very clearly written and fair-minded little document.

Along with Culler's Literary Theory Butler's Postmodernism represents a commendable "Very Short Introduction" to controversial ideas in the humanities. Both volumes are even-handed and well-explained. This is in sharp contrast to Catherine Belsey's Poststructualism: A Very Short Introduction. In the latter volume, the reader doesn't get anything like an even-handed overview. Instead, the reader gets one-sided advocacy of poststructuralist thinking, complete with the movement's characteristically strained logic and unconcern for clear expression.

Despite some of the reviews that indicated Christopher Butler's tone was negative toward Postmodernism in this VERY SHORT INTRODUCTION, I found the book very helpful with my growing understanding of meta-narrative terminology and classifications. Also, as pointed out by other reviewers, is the fact that defining a meta-discourse that supposes universal definitions are not possible, poses special problems that I feel Butler handled very nicely.

Butler, simply and rightly, maintained his neutrality on the subject, which it seems, should be the first of Post-modern goals. In other words, Postmodernism is neither good nor bad.

This book is a great read, even for a total novice, if it is read quickly without fussing over names or knowedge of artists. You can still get the big picture about the concepts underlying Postmodernist thinking and work. It is filled with references to work done in the style which will require some research for the average reader to get a more precise understanding of the artistic developments made under the influence of these ideas.

This book is exactly what a very short introduction should be: clear, concise, observant and critical. It is also well written and easy to read. If you've been putting off finding out about postmodernism because of the dense fog of obscurantism surrounding it, put off no more. This is your book.

This book will probably be enjoyed for those that feel baffled or awed at the conceptual and verbal exuberance of postmodern theory (and their theorists' chutzpah), or looking for soothing, assuring, and easy answers to the difficult (sometimes unnecessarily difficult) questions and challenges posed by this cultural movement.

The author is off to a bad start when he locates the theoretical origins of postmodernity in the thought of Jacques Derrida. Postmodernity is a critical and cultural trend with a strong semiotic, quotational, de-centralizing component in relation to "master narratives" like Western liberalism, Marxism, Freudianism, Nazism, positivism, literary modernism, while Derrida's early work aimed to unsettle the canonical foundations of traditional Western metaphysics. Although Derrida's later work often dovetails with the concerns of many postmodern writers, artists, and critics, it is plain wrong to locate in this philosopher's discourse the conceptual foundations of postmodernity. Another "faux pas" by Butler is to state that Wittgenstein had already solved the philosophical questions posed by Derrida. Therefore, Butler implies that every concern posed by postmodernity had already found its philosophical resolution decades ago.

Butler's fallacious logic may be explained in that, like Fredric Jameson, he seems to believe that the pinnacle of Western culture is to be found in Modernism and its later following, and that postmodernity is merely a corrupt by-product of Modernism. While it is true that Butler offers a few valuable criticisms of postmodernity, I think that he chose rather easy (and forgettable) targets. In general, he has avoided the major postmodern writers, architects or photographers, choosing to focus on bells and whistles instead: fads, gimmicks, shock performances are the objects of the author's condescension. Maybe Oxford UP had a lapse of judgment when asking Butler to introduce readers to something that he obviously despises. Furthermore, Butler's lack of knowledge of anything postmodern beyond the restricted (and restrictive) boundaries of Anglo-Saxon culture make this choice all the more regrettable.

I would recommend a more worthwhile introduction to postmodernism, like Jencks's _What is postmodernism?_, Lyotard's _The postmodern explained to children_, Harvey's _The Condition of Postmodernity_, or Waugh's excellent reader on postmodernism. By all means avoid this book unless your position is already POSTMODERNISM = BAD.

I've read the Very Short Introduction series on Poststructuralism and Art Theory, and they were excellent (I use them in my classes, because they're so clear and concise, beautifully outlined, and so well written, and I've recommended them to my students). I already know quite a lot about these subjects, but I learned a lot.

So I was expecting a good solid work this time too, but it was pure negativity. He's hostile toward the subject, and the book reads like a harangue, or an editorial. It's just not a serious treatment of the subject.