Subject
Re: VN and debunking the postmodern myth (fwd)
From
Date
Body
From: Jason Stuart <jts0803odon@yahoo.com>
>Can it possibly be time to debunk the foolish myth of the
"postmodern" novel? And how, precisely, do we go about its destruction?
These things usually take care of themselves, though I don't think anything really needs to be destroyed. The people I've talked to and worked with recently (I'm an undergrad senior too--just got Boyd's book as a Christmas present! Whatta coinkeedink) are a little tired of jargony, obscure writing. And the French. But that's just a perspective; it doesn't entail the death of theory. Characterizing postmodernism as a "lie" is likely to get you into the same ideological slum where Will and Greenblatt had their little turf war a decade ago, so be careful--that's my advice.
Still, I don't think appraising VN with an eye to the postmodern is necessarily without value; reading anything with your theory glasses on probably would've provoked--well, any author. Sure, maybe not Sontag or Dworkin, but you get my drift.
>These are just a few ideas that came to me. I'd be
interested in hearing other opiniosn on this idea,
from some of you established academics. I am, after
all, little more than a plucky undergraduate senior
with too much time and a passion for Nabokov.
Hope you don't mind the unestablished view. For my part--and I say this as someone on the brink of an academic career, so bear in mind it might change if I get desperate--I refuse to use phrases like "[verb]ing the body," "...after Auschwitz," and anything that involves excessive, arbitrary use of sl/ashes and (paren(t)heses) to (de)note sub/text. But it's one man's lonely battle. Or something. Have a look at Crews' "Postmodern Pooh" for a laugh.
Enjoy,
JS
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
>Can it possibly be time to debunk the foolish myth of the
"postmodern" novel? And how, precisely, do we go about its destruction?
These things usually take care of themselves, though I don't think anything really needs to be destroyed. The people I've talked to and worked with recently (I'm an undergrad senior too--just got Boyd's book as a Christmas present! Whatta coinkeedink) are a little tired of jargony, obscure writing. And the French. But that's just a perspective; it doesn't entail the death of theory. Characterizing postmodernism as a "lie" is likely to get you into the same ideological slum where Will and Greenblatt had their little turf war a decade ago, so be careful--that's my advice.
Still, I don't think appraising VN with an eye to the postmodern is necessarily without value; reading anything with your theory glasses on probably would've provoked--well, any author. Sure, maybe not Sontag or Dworkin, but you get my drift.
>These are just a few ideas that came to me. I'd be
interested in hearing other opiniosn on this idea,
from some of you established academics. I am, after
all, little more than a plucky undergraduate senior
with too much time and a passion for Nabokov.
Hope you don't mind the unestablished view. For my part--and I say this as someone on the brink of an academic career, so bear in mind it might change if I get desperate--I refuse to use phrases like "[verb]ing the body," "...after Auschwitz," and anything that involves excessive, arbitrary use of sl/ashes and (paren(t)heses) to (de)note sub/text. But it's one man's lonely battle. Or something. Have a look at Crews' "Postmodern Pooh" for a laugh.
Enjoy,
JS
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now