Postmodernism is Dean's Stuffed Mouth.
Postmodernism kills my brain ded.
After the last day of Anthropological Theory, where we plunged into a two-hour discussion blitz of postmodern theory, I feel mentally drained. Like, numb. If you don't know what postmodernism is, let me break it down for you, Supernatural-style:
Postmodernism is Dean's stuffed mouth.
(See figure 1. Which is the only figure.)
Fig.1: Dean's candy-stuffed mouth in "Tall Tales" (2.15). Credit: Snagged from supernatural.tv because I'm to lazy to screencap right now.
More specifically, postmodernism is like what Jensen Ackles described his experience filming this scene:
"Dean’s stuffed mouth in Tall Tales, did they CGI it? Those were caramels, and they were real, and not sugar free, those were my cheeks. I think I had, each take I got in around 15. I didn’t eat any of them, and as soon as the take ended I’d spit them out. When you have that much sugar in your mouth, my tongue started swelling up and my mouth was going numb. And it was actually my idea because I thought it would be funnier to have like 15 instead of a few. Stupid idea." (from yourlibrarian's report)
Yeah. That's about it.
What? You want more?
Fine. Postmodernism, at least in anthropological theory, is horribly scarred by the Epistemological Monster, left slightly confused and lightly dazed by the happy adrenalin and endorphins pumping through its body to cover up the glaring priority of open wounds.
And I quote from McGee and Warm's "Anthropological Theory" (New York: McGrawHill, 2008):
"Postmodernists challenge the assertion that science and rationalism can lead to full and accurate knowledge of the world. They argue that these are specififc historically constituted ways of knowing. Therefore, they can create only specific historically constituted sorts of truths...Further, the methods of science and rationality, when applied to other cultures (or other groups within Western culture) are more likely to produce gross distortions than anything else. Other peoples have their own ways of knowing, and, since all knowledge is historically constituted, these are just as valid (or just as invalid) as any other. The postmodernist challenge has led anthropologists to examine the basis of their discipline..." (533).
Meaning: You don't know shit. If I say I see a cat and you say you see a towel on a stick, we both are right. How you gonna prove me wrong? Science? HA! Science is a viewpoint, an opinion.
Okay so far? That's like, maybe say, two caramels. Nice fresh perspective, sweet to taste. Chewing easy, right? And two to boot! Dandy treat of indulgence. Two!
"A second issue that underlies almost all postmodern writing lies in the area of interpretation. Postmodernists maintain that if a text is an author's interpretation and if that author's work is taken as an authoritative account, then all other voices and interpretations are silenced. Because everything is an interpretation in the postmodern view, the only way authors can generate an interpretation that is accepted as true is to 'delicense' all others. But can one person's interpretation be more valid than another's? Postmodernists maintain that it cannot. They insist that the acceptance of an interpretation is ultimately an issue of power and wealth. Historically, they say, the interpretations voiced by white Protestant males in Western industrialized nations have delicensed all others and silenced them. They ask why the Anglo-American view of events is the only acceptable interpretation and claim that deconstructing the work of this mainstream allows other opinions to be expressed. Postmodernists assert that in history, literature, and politics, the voices of women, minorities, and the poor are finally being heard" (534).
Meaning: You still don't know shit. So stop shoveling it on other people. In fact, step the hell back. I will pet the towel-stick (because, damn it, it IS a cat) and you can just STEP THE HELL BACK.
Still okay so far? That's like, maybe say, three caramels. Individual agency and the empowerment of previously supressed identities. Damn rosy. YUM! More caramels! (My jaw kinda hurts, and the taste is kinda floating into more of a sticky texture, but I love me my caramels.) BRING IT ON! Besides, more caramels is better than just a few, right?
"A final form of postmodern scholarship deals with textual analysis (and this, in fact, informs most other sorts of postmodern thinking). Postmodernists argue that data are, of themselves, mute. Data are just data. Anthropologists (and all others) construct meaning from the data through the process of writing. Because one must write according to certain literary conventions (tense, voice, and so on), the finished text is of necessity a literary construction of its author. Readers in turn, impose their own interpretation on the author's text. In other words, the written word can never be adequate to represent reality. Instead, writing involves the piling up of layer upon layer of convention and interpretation. Similarly, reading involves its own conventions and each reader brings their own histories and understandings to the act of reading. Thus - "
WHAT? Stop mumbling at me and dribbling brown goo.
"Thus, a finished text is a thing unto itself. It can not be an accurate representation of the reality it claims to portray, for this is impossible. Neither can it be understood as accurately reflecting the mind and understandings of its author (since these must be filtered through the conventions of reading and the reader's experience). So, what's a postmodernist to do? Well, the answer is that the postmodernist deconstructs the ways in which the devises and conventions of writing and reading are exploited in the text, explores the sorts of meanings that are promoted by the text as well as those that are deligitimized, and examines what this may tell us about the current or historical nature of the society in which the text is written and read. Of course, a text can tell use very little of the 'reality' of its purported subject. Further, since any form of deconstruction and analysis is itself a literary process, all deconstruction is subject to further deconstruction. There can be no end" (534).
Meaning: IT'S MY CAT GOVERNOR PUSSYWINKLE!
That's like, what, maybe say, ten caramels? Getting airway constriction because the caramels are swelling your tongue with too much sugar?
So the lesson here, in both contexts:
Don't try to stuff too much postmodernist caramels into your mouth.
You'll go numb.
(Like the pretty man said, it's a Stupid Idea.)
After the last day of Anthropological Theory, where we plunged into a two-hour discussion blitz of postmodern theory, I feel mentally drained. Like, numb. If you don't know what postmodernism is, let me break it down for you, Supernatural-style:
Postmodernism is Dean's stuffed mouth.
(See figure 1. Which is the only figure.)
Fig.1: Dean's candy-stuffed mouth in "Tall Tales" (2.15). Credit: Snagged from supernatural.tv because I'm to lazy to screencap right now.
More specifically, postmodernism is like what Jensen Ackles described his experience filming this scene:
"Dean’s stuffed mouth in Tall Tales, did they CGI it? Those were caramels, and they were real, and not sugar free, those were my cheeks. I think I had, each take I got in around 15. I didn’t eat any of them, and as soon as the take ended I’d spit them out. When you have that much sugar in your mouth, my tongue started swelling up and my mouth was going numb. And it was actually my idea because I thought it would be funnier to have like 15 instead of a few. Stupid idea." (from yourlibrarian's report)
Yeah. That's about it.
What? You want more?
Fine. Postmodernism, at least in anthropological theory, is horribly scarred by the Epistemological Monster, left slightly confused and lightly dazed by the happy adrenalin and endorphins pumping through its body to cover up the glaring priority of open wounds.
And I quote from McGee and Warm's "Anthropological Theory" (New York: McGrawHill, 2008):
"Postmodernists challenge the assertion that science and rationalism can lead to full and accurate knowledge of the world. They argue that these are specififc historically constituted ways of knowing. Therefore, they can create only specific historically constituted sorts of truths...Further, the methods of science and rationality, when applied to other cultures (or other groups within Western culture) are more likely to produce gross distortions than anything else. Other peoples have their own ways of knowing, and, since all knowledge is historically constituted, these are just as valid (or just as invalid) as any other. The postmodernist challenge has led anthropologists to examine the basis of their discipline..." (533).
Meaning: You don't know shit. If I say I see a cat and you say you see a towel on a stick, we both are right. How you gonna prove me wrong? Science? HA! Science is a viewpoint, an opinion.
Okay so far? That's like, maybe say, two caramels. Nice fresh perspective, sweet to taste. Chewing easy, right? And two to boot! Dandy treat of indulgence. Two!
"A second issue that underlies almost all postmodern writing lies in the area of interpretation. Postmodernists maintain that if a text is an author's interpretation and if that author's work is taken as an authoritative account, then all other voices and interpretations are silenced. Because everything is an interpretation in the postmodern view, the only way authors can generate an interpretation that is accepted as true is to 'delicense' all others. But can one person's interpretation be more valid than another's? Postmodernists maintain that it cannot. They insist that the acceptance of an interpretation is ultimately an issue of power and wealth. Historically, they say, the interpretations voiced by white Protestant males in Western industrialized nations have delicensed all others and silenced them. They ask why the Anglo-American view of events is the only acceptable interpretation and claim that deconstructing the work of this mainstream allows other opinions to be expressed. Postmodernists assert that in history, literature, and politics, the voices of women, minorities, and the poor are finally being heard" (534).
Meaning: You still don't know shit. So stop shoveling it on other people. In fact, step the hell back. I will pet the towel-stick (because, damn it, it IS a cat) and you can just STEP THE HELL BACK.
Still okay so far? That's like, maybe say, three caramels. Individual agency and the empowerment of previously supressed identities. Damn rosy. YUM! More caramels! (My jaw kinda hurts, and the taste is kinda floating into more of a sticky texture, but I love me my caramels.) BRING IT ON! Besides, more caramels is better than just a few, right?
"A final form of postmodern scholarship deals with textual analysis (and this, in fact, informs most other sorts of postmodern thinking). Postmodernists argue that data are, of themselves, mute. Data are just data. Anthropologists (and all others) construct meaning from the data through the process of writing. Because one must write according to certain literary conventions (tense, voice, and so on), the finished text is of necessity a literary construction of its author. Readers in turn, impose their own interpretation on the author's text. In other words, the written word can never be adequate to represent reality. Instead, writing involves the piling up of layer upon layer of convention and interpretation. Similarly, reading involves its own conventions and each reader brings their own histories and understandings to the act of reading. Thus - "
WHAT? Stop mumbling at me and dribbling brown goo.
"Thus, a finished text is a thing unto itself. It can not be an accurate representation of the reality it claims to portray, for this is impossible. Neither can it be understood as accurately reflecting the mind and understandings of its author (since these must be filtered through the conventions of reading and the reader's experience). So, what's a postmodernist to do? Well, the answer is that the postmodernist deconstructs the ways in which the devises and conventions of writing and reading are exploited in the text, explores the sorts of meanings that are promoted by the text as well as those that are deligitimized, and examines what this may tell us about the current or historical nature of the society in which the text is written and read. Of course, a text can tell use very little of the 'reality' of its purported subject. Further, since any form of deconstruction and analysis is itself a literary process, all deconstruction is subject to further deconstruction. There can be no end" (534).
Meaning: IT'S MY CAT GOVERNOR PUSSYWINKLE!
That's like, what, maybe say, ten caramels? Getting airway constriction because the caramels are swelling your tongue with too much sugar?
So the lesson here, in both contexts:
Don't try to stuff too much postmodernist caramels into your mouth.
You'll go numb.
(Like the pretty man said, it's a Stupid Idea.)