On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Steve Perry wrote:
>
> >Frankly, I've always thought the interesting postmodern ideas
> >have all appeared several times before -- at the turn of the
> >century, post World War I, post World War II -- when everything
> >seemed open to question.
>
> I think that's right, and hence part of the animus I feel regarding
> the arcane private language of the postmodernist/poststructuralist
> crowd--many valid insights, though I've yet to encounter one that
> couldn't be rendered much more forcefully in plain English.
Well, to be fair Steve, (a) several of these ideas, e.g., the idea that all value schemes are relative, are inherently paradoxical to express; and (b) the earlier writers appeared just as difficult to their contemporaries. I happen to agree that it would be more fruitful to reconstruct Freud than Lacan, and I think there's more of value in Merleau-Ponty than Derrida, but neither of those guys wrote like journalists.
> (I've even been so presumptuous as to
> think that this is part of the deep-psych of academe, which does
> not really want--in my opinion--to engage the world beyond its
> boundaries.)
I don't think you need a deep-psyche explanation of the origins of jargon. It's just a function of profesionalization. Have you read any memos written by businessmen lately? Or government employees? Or doctors or lawyers or economists or what have you? Professional jargon is mainly the result of being constrained by time as to what you can read; being forced to write; and needing this writing to be accepted by peers in order to advance your career. The whole process naturally leads to inbred-ness and shorthand. Amateurs can write differently because they are in a different economic position. By definition their writing doesn't have to serve career purposes.
In my experience, people that make fun of post-modern jargon are usually other professionals covertly asserting the superiority of their own, older-fashioned jargon, or non-academics asserting the superiority of their non-academic lifestyle. At least that's what I'm usually asserting when I make fun of it :o)
In sum, postmodernist jargon has its short-comings, but it's not a conspiracy to commit fraud or an expression of group neurosis. It's just people trying to make a living. You think you can do better, write your own book :o)
Michael
__________________________________________________________________________ Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com