Scott Yates wrote:
>This isn't to say that I don't think there can be accusations levelled at
>certain theorists for being unnecessarily obtruse (Mary Gergen springs to
>mind),
>but it seems as though there exists in many places an overt prejudice against
>post-structuralism/postmodernism as a whole. I think that Chomsky, whose
>work I
>studied a few years ago, highlights something on this. Unfailingly, his
>response
>to any question involving postmodernism is 'Sorry, I don't understand that.
>Maybe I'm missig a gene or something.' I think that this is actually quite
>dishonest. When such a renowned intellectual makes a comment like this, it's
>quite a resounding dismissal. The dishonesty comes in when you discover
>that he
>never has never made any effort to engage seriously with a body of work he is
>dismissing out of hand.
Well, maybe Chomsky's giving a Foucauldian non-answer to
post-structuralism, evading the ruse of discursive power, you know. Or
maybe he is busy and/or has better things to do.
Yoshie
>This isn't to say that I don't think there can be accusations levelled at
>certain theorists for being unnecessarily obtruse (Mary Gergen springs to
>mind),
>but it seems as though there exists in many places an overt prejudice against
>post-structuralism/postmodernism as a whole. I think that Chomsky, whose
>work I
>studied a few years ago, highlights something on this. Unfailingly, his
>response
>to any question involving postmodernism is 'Sorry, I don't understand that.
>Maybe I'm missig a gene or something.' I think that this is actually quite
>dishonest. When such a renowned intellectual makes a comment like this, it's
>quite a resounding dismissal. The dishonesty comes in when you discover
>that he
>never has never made any effort to engage seriously with a body of work he is
>dismissing out of hand.
Well, maybe Chomsky's giving a Foucauldian non-answer to
post-structuralism, evading the ruse of discursive power, you know. Or
maybe he is busy and/or has better things to do.
Yoshie