|Posted on||Mon Dec 28 01:04:52 1998|
|In Reply to||Response|
Although I do not quite understand During's article either, I still try to express what I get either form this article or from our course. Then, we can invite more discusssion. I tried to reply your post first and then turn to my own response toward this essasy. As for the shift of During's points, During charaterizes (actually attatcks) posmoden thought in order to show the "Need" or possibilities of post-colonial identity and post-colonialism. (It is because the postmodern thoughts wipe out post-colonialism) With regard to Jameson, the strategy he uses is to use Jameson's view attacks Jameson' posmodernism. Indeed, During agrees with the features Jameson describes for postmodernity such as culture machines. However, he also points out the weakness of Jameson. For example, since Jameson regards culture as totality and history capitalism, but his view of multinational capitalism is also "a totality which is the effect of another totality." (Jameson's cultual pessimism is presented by Adorno before) Another example is Jameson's internationalism of postmodernity. Actually, this view is to "realize the end of nationalism so desired by some socialisms.
|HOME PAGE Contact Me|
WWWThreads Version 2.7.3