>it is so frustrating that it seems impossible to discuss
post-structuralism or even recent cultural theory in any form with
Americans without having to talk about some all too vague and loose
version of 'postmodernism' meaning.<
the looseness of definition comes from three particular things i'd suggest:
a) the extent to which the reception of any french (or 'continental' philosophy for that matter) was received in the US as either an assault of the local traditions of analytical, positivist and humanist philosophy or as a continuation of another local tradition (pragmatism). in this instance, we either have people regarding 'postmodernism' as an import or as something to be incorporated by virtue of an american 'translation', which renders it palatable and indeed the kind of formalism that chuck g referred to;
b) the extent to which 'postmodernism' was positioned _locally_ as a counter to marxism (and here, perhaps, is where and how certain 'versions' of 'postmodernism' became both palatable (lyotard, baudrillard) and why 'postmodernism' increasingly became seen as the terrain of an important (though i would say rather odd from our perspective over here) battle royale, who's stakes exceeded any concrete discussion of 'postmodernism' and did so for reasons that were more polemical and of local significance than anything to do with 'posmodernism', which is where the most excessive and diremptive 'lumping' takes place; and
c) very much to do with the more tiresome issue of blaming 'postmodernism' for the decline of marxism in the US academy, or a resentment, precisely from those who like to think in terms of 'the public realm', over the extent to which (eg) derrida's very presence beyond academic debates signals perhaps that whilst derrida might be 'obscure' _to some_ (and certainly not any more difficult to read than talcott parsons or saul, unless you already have the background to do so, whether from an unexamined and historically-constituted intuition, or whether from a reading of similar traditions) he certainly does appear, much to the dismay of those who accuse him of wanting to halt thought (read here as a particular kind of thought which is thereby exhausted by it), he does seem to have prompted quite a bit of thought, but not the particular kind they would prefer -- as if derrida should instead be advancing their positions and not his.
> i don't think derrida is postmodern in any sense that is at all useful
or clear.<
no, and rather astonishing that anyone who's read his work would continue to say so. but me thinks the onus is on the accusers to show where and how these accusations are the true. but that would entail doing some work on their part, in the absence of which, nothing interesting can be said or is being said.
> if any analysis or philosphy can reach a large number of 'students and
teachers' then it has done something important and should be approached
carefully in discussing how productive it is i don't think
'obscurantist' (defined as what is not clear to me or other people i
know) constitutes such care <
and the first part is precisely why little care is shown perhaps?
>i agree with much of christian gregory's post on this thread and i
don't think either he or angela or i could be read as awe-struck or
adulatory with regard to derrida even though we are (in perhaps
different ways) taking issue with some of the dismissals expressed here
derrida has been and continues to be influential in significant ways and
warrants, therefore, thoughtful consideration of his work and how it and
he are deployed<
well, i wouldn't have prioritised dinner with the loved one on the night of derrida's speech if i had been so enamoured of derrida. and, i distinctly recall posting a criticism of derrida's _spectres of marx_, for reasons which have much less to do with thinking that derrida is anti-marxist (which he clearly is not) than with my penchant for a particular theory of surplus value. and, part of the reason i gave for that was derrida's rather too ambivalent relationship with the reception of his work in the US.
but again, catherine, i think any of these subtleties are lost on people who want to make a point that has more to do with their position that with derrida's...
Angela _________