Witch Postmodernists? Reply to Graber

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Douglas B Hanson: "Re: communities--virtual and otherwise"
• Previous message: John O'Brien: "OPEN POST TO HUGH JARVIS"

On Mon, 13 Dec 1993, SS51000 wrote:

> How postmodern of B. Rodman to assume that postmodernism must be defined
> by professed postmodernists themselves!.... Sorry, Mr. Rodman. A
scientific nose can detect postmodernism a mile away, even if it call
itself "science"; and the smell is foul. --Bob Graber

Let me see if I have this straight:

In your view, a scholar can legitimately be labeled
"postmodernist" even if he or she:
1) Never identifies himself or herself as a postmodernist
2) Doesn't show any particular interest in postmodernism
3) Doesn't display any particular knowledge of postmodernism
4) Published the work that you call "postmodern" a decade before
the beginnings of discussion of postmodernism in architecture, literature,
philosophy, let alone anthropology!
You are telling me that such a scholar *still* can be considered a
postmodernist because of his or her smell (and at quite a distance, too!),
and also because you say so.
The way by which you identify postmodernists reminds me of nothing
so much as witchfinding in Early Modern Europe.

P.S. I'm not a postmodernist, Bob, but I doubt if I could prove it
to you. :-)


Bill Rodman
rodman@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca

• Next message: Douglas B Hanson: "Re: communities--virtual and otherwise"
• Previous message: John O'Brien: "OPEN POST TO HUGH JARVIS"