From: Alienthe@hotmail.com
Kevin Calder wrote:
> [Another resurrection. Actually I make a point of not replying to
> alienthe's until at least 8 months after he posts them :)]
With the upcoming holiday season my replies might be on
the same time scale too...
>> From: Alienthe (Alienthe@hotmail.com)
>> Subject: Re: Cyberpunk vs. Postmodernism
>> View: Complete Thread (19 articles)
>> Original Format
>> Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
>> Date: 2003-04-14 14:42:02 PST
>
>
>> OK, a late answer but the thread is too fun to leave alone.
>
> Yep!
>
>> Kevin Calder wrote:
>>
>>> In message
>>
>> alienthe@hotmail.com writes
>
>> [snip]
>
>
> [Snip of sokal throwing marx bros. style pies in pomo faces]
>
> >> Cmon, you know how perverse postmodernism is! It relishes this kind
> >> of stuff! Postmodernism is self-critiquing pretty much from the
> outset, >> by the time Groucho turned up Derrida had smacked himself in the
> >> face with innumerable pies!
>
> > Groucho had a sense of humor, does Derrida? Or the other POMOs?
> > Just to be clear: I am thinking of intentional humor here.
>
> Sokal clearly had a pretty pomo sense of humor, wouldn't you say?
I am not sure if it is late POMO or early Post-POMO. Still I
would agree there is something here. If we go sufficiently
retro will we reach plain modernism?
> In fact I hereby claim Sokal's work as postmodernism's greatest triumph!
>
> Refute my claim if you dare!
I won't refute, rather point out that the pomies seem to
sneer at their greatest achievement.
> And pomoism is well known for validating humour, parody and pastiche,
It does?
> which tend to be marginalised by other standards and more generally its
> so damned sceptical about everything that it can't possibly take itself
> to seriously, unlike every other approach to appraising literature I
> think of.
I can agree that humor has these qualities and more but as
for POMO I am not sure. WmG, to bring this writhing thread
briefly close to things cyberriffic, seems to be regarded
as highly POMO and claims himself to have a sense of humor
that he also feels is under-appreciated. The POMO-humor
connection does not appear to me to be a direct one.
> >> And if the Emperor has no clothes then what it suggests to me is that
> >> the method for determining whether the Emperor is clothed or not is
> >> inherently unreliable. Some people can see the clothes, some can't.
> >> *None* of them can produce a truth table to validate their perspective.
>
> >Alternatively the emperor is a streaker and those who claim to see the
> >clothes are just wanting to see some nudity.
>
> >>> Others had called them
> >>> charlatans before but Sokal made it amusing.
>
> What is exactly is pomoism guilty of pretending?
That the emperor actually has clothes.
> And what is wrong with pretending?
Indecent exposure? A tendency to catch a cold?
> Why should we feel guilty?
A sense of decency? A tendency to reply with new questions?
> Isn't fiction at least a bit about pretending?
Yes!
> >> What is wrong with reading Sokal's text as one worth interpreting?
> >> What
> >> is it about it that makes it 'bogus'? Authorial intention? Cmon, that
> >> argument hasn't been especially tenable for almost a century now. It
> >> got discredited long before postmodernism! Whether Sokal likes it or
> >> not, his text isn't demonstrably, intrinsically, and without a doubt,
> >> 'bogus'.
>
> >When in doubt bring out Occam's Razor and start slicing. To me Sokal
> >appears genuine while the POMOs appear to be short of a skeleton
> >which I guess they hid in the cupboard.
>
> We both agree that Sokal's text is valuable, its just that I, coming at
> it from a pomo-type perspective, am not hung up on whatever Sokal's
> intention was, or what he thought his intention was, or what he wanted
> us to think his intention was or whatever! From a pomo perspective the
> value of Sokal's text is more or less insensitive to his particular
Well, that seems to be the core of it. The works of the
originating artist is reinterpreted as something new where
said artist is disqualified. And critics claim artistry,
careful not to notice the full circle that leads to infinite
recursion.
> allegiance or intention. Isn't that a powerful \ interesting way of
> approaching it? Doesn't that suggest that pomoism has more to it than
> the absence of a skeleton?
It can be entertaining, at least occationally. My problem with
this is that the artists (originating rather than reinterpreting)
then no longer has anything valid to bring out to the masses
short of claiming there is no truth. The Matrix did at least
make some people take up thinking as a new hobby.
> >>> What gains have humanity gotten from POMO?
>
> >> Well, if you are measuring gain on the 'John Hiltman Gain Scale', as I
> >> assume you are, then, by my calculations, I make it about 6.7 gains
> >> per square meter.
>
> >I am getting a positive reading on my bogosity-meter, at least 5.8
> >spurions per bogon squared.
>
> >> You might want to check the figures yourself though.
>
> >Right on!
>
> Consensus!
Whoa!
==<)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
