Postmodernism

A Very Short Introduction

De: Christopher Butler

Narrado por: Christine Williams

Postmodernism has become the buzzword of contemporary society over the last decade. But how can it be defined? In this highly engaging introduction, the mysteries of this most elusive of concepts are unraveled, casting a critical light upon the way we live now, from the politicizing of museum culture to the cult of the politically correct. The key postmodernist ideas are explored and challenged, as they figure in the theory, philosophy, politics, ethics, and artwork of the period, and it is shown how they have interacted within a postmodernist culture.

©2002 Christopher Butler (P)2021 Tantor

A wonderful succinct explanation of the massive phenomenon that is postmodernism. 

This is an excellent condensed explanation of the multifaceted, multidisciplinary, multicultural aspects, postmodernism attempts to criticize. 

Now I understand what postmodernism is!

I’ve read/listened to multiple books about this subject, but this book is the only one that gave me a systematic, progressive, noncondescending account and critique of the subject. The only problem is the robotic voice of the narrator, it didn’t bother my understanding, but still it deserves better narration.
Big “Thank You” to the author.

Awful Narration

Very good content yet awful narration. A bot reading this would not sound any different.

Basic but it’s gets to the point

I will listen to this book again. The author took the time to make important points about complicated subjects. Thanks

The author has no clue what they are talking about

The author could have written the same book by typing in "Describe for me a negative assessment of postmodernism" in ChatGPT. Postmodernism is certainly not perfect, but the author does not give a balanced report. It's so one-sided against that it's not even accurate in terms of just reporting what the actual views are. The author is clearly not a philosopher, and it shows a lot. He has no real grasp of anything he's talking about. He sounds more like a journalist than a field expert who actually comprehends anything he's talking about. Why they had him write this book for the series beats me, but it is by far one of the worst books on philosophy or theory or similar that I have ever seen.

Misleading and biased

First of all, the title is misleading. This is a critique of postmodernism, not a neutral overview of it, such as the title and most of the description would suggest. Tho admittedly, the phrasing “cult of the politically correct” in the description, speaks volumes about the authors ideological disposition, as well as his ability to treat opposing viewpoints seriously, and with respect. In fact defining people you disagree with as being a “cult” - as in unreasonable, fanatic, etc., is exactly the kind of rhetoric that postmodernists like Foucault criticized for attempting to disempower and dominate an opposition, not by necessarily being right, but by conceptually priming the audience to disagree or not to take seriously what your opponent says.

Which brings us to the content itself. Tho there are moments of fairly accurate and seemingly neutral retellings of postmodernist viewpoints, it’s regularly interrupted with loaded language like “magnificently overconfident generalizations”, often without expanding on why, or mounting much of a counter argument. Almost as if the author is trying to prime you to think that what is being described is obviously silly, without actually being able to articulate why, most of the time. It reads (or sounds) like someone who went into researching postmodernism with their mind already made up about whether they agree with it or not. It bleeds into the text, almost as if the descriptive parts are paraphrased from some other overviews of postmodernism, and where the primary contribution of the author himself, is his negative reactions to what he is reading. It seems superficial and fleeting (granted that it’s an “introduction”), as if the author has only read exactly what he has put to paper, and where there is no real interest in truly trying to understand what underlies the opinions and ideas, even tho it’s right in front of him.

There’s nothing wrong with criticizing postmodernism. I certainly don’t agree with all postmodernists, and neither do most postmodernists agree with each other. But if you’re going to write a critique, you should make that much more obvious in the advertisement. And if you’re going to criticize something, you should always be willing and able to substantiate it. Otherwise, you’re not providing any reasons for the reader/listener to disagree with these ideas, and it becomes about as constructive as your average youtube hate-comment.

I would not recommend this book to anyone who wants a neutral introduction to postmodernism, that attempts to understand it in good faith.

Misleading Title

This is not a book which gives an overview of Postmodernism as much as it is an attack on postmodernism. Critique of Postmodernism would be a more honest title. Not an even handed account by any means.