> On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Ken Hanly wrote:
>
>>Well perhaps what you say makes a bit more sense than the original but I
>>really dont appreciate the cleverness in deliberately writing in such a way
>>that only an elite sub-group of academics could possibly understand it.
>>
>
> Elite scholars, my ass, all the people in litcrit and culture studies have
> been downsized to hell and back for decades. The world-system is
> *complicated*: 6 billion people, hundreds of countries, thousands of
> languages, a vast and complex tapestry of class struggle, etc. One needs
> concepts capable of taking on the complexity of the total system, is all,
> and Jameson is delivering them. If you have questions about concepts, then
> ask them, but blanket condemnations of intellectuals for being
> intellectuals won't wash.
>
a simple question, if i may, from someone who recently joined this list and is a bit unaware of the history: is "DJ Freddy J" critiquing pomo or is he one of them? neither the original post (which i believe was a review of a recent performance (?) by him) nor the ensuing debates have added clarity (perhaps fittingly, given the subject? ;-)). i find this debate interesting, particularly since the person who started this posted a quote (from "DJ Freddy J"?) on postmodernism (logic of modern consumer capitalism or some such) that was exactly the same as the one that
i had reproduced from "the baffler"'s web site, in my question
regarding "the baffler", and i am intrigued by the factional attacks on postmodernism, literary criticism, [relativist] philosophy of science etc., within the left.
the original (perhaps mistaken) impression was that "DJ Freddy J" was critical of postmodern [and related] thinkers and brad delong and ken hanley's posts seemed to point out the presence in the post (quoting "DJ Freddy J") of the very denseness that it was trying to criticize. but the response above suggests the opposite!
--ravi