PoMo Studies Hoax (gets taken seriously)

[Laura Kelber]

Long as it is, I simply have to read his new book. I don't know if it's the
internet that's befuddled my brain or just the aging process. But it seems
to take me much longer to read than it used to. Becky, I don't know how you
do it!

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:44 AM Becky Lindroos <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

> Yes.  And I am so glad someone besides myself has read this and that you
> did, Laura!  (NYC courts, indeed!)
>
> Also, de Pavo doesn’t take himself or his writing seriously at all and he
> doesn't play that yucky winky-wink game with the reader, either.
>
> He’s got a new one out -  “The Lost Empress”  -  it’s long and has had
> good press.   I’m so tempted.  lol
>
> "(de Pavo) introduces readers to a cast of characters unlike any other in
> modern fiction: dreamers and exiles, immigrants and night-shift workers, a
> lonely pastor and others on the fringes of society—each with their own
> impact on the fragile universe they navigate."
>
> “De la Pava . . . can seem like an avenging angel, at least for those with
> a certain view of what ails contemporary American literature . . . .
> Hilariously profane . . . . Thrilling . . . . Colloquial in tempo yet nerdy
> in content, divinely detached yet intimately casual in tone, impossibly
> learned and improvisational at the same time . . . . There are, to be sure,
> trace elements in Lost Empress of David Foster Wallace and William Gaddis
> and other postmodern giants. What’s unusual—electrifyingly so—is to see
> this kind of polyphonic, self-conscious literary performance and
> all-stops-pulled-out postmodernist production value brought to bear on
> underclass lives, and on questions of social justice that tend not to
> penetrate the soundproofing of the ivory tower.”
> —The New Yorker
>
> “The book oscillates between hilarious surrealism and shocking reality. As
> in his first novel, A Naked Singularity, Mr de la Pava (a public defender)
> deploys his expertise in a maximalist form reminiscent of Thomas Pynchon
> and David Foster Wallace . . . . With messianic fervour, he conjures up
> marginalised voices and the horrors of mass incarceration, against a
> backbeat of sporting thrills and that apocalyptic crescendo.”
> —The Economist
>
> Becky
> finally reading Wm Vollmann’s “The Ice Shirt”   -  sigh - loving it -
>
>
> > On Oct 8, 2018, at 7:58 AM, Laura Kelber <laurakelber at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think the pomo elements in Dee Pava's book work better than they might
> because of the brutal reality (NYC courts) he's describing. The first
> chapter is a highly accurate portrayal of a legal aid lawyer's day in the
> utterly insane justice system. On the way home he encounters a
> roller-skating chimpanzee (if I recall) on the Brooklyn Bridge. Not that
> jarring after what comes before.
> >
> > Laura
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 7, 2018, 6:50 PM Becky Lindroos <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> > Thank you John.   You always make sense.
> >
> > I think pomo has kind of exhausted itself in the 21st century but some
> of the ideas and techniques are still around - usefully,  imo. Like for
> Serio de la Pava’s funky chunky little legal crime caper book,  "A Naked
> Singularity”  (2010?)
> >
> >
> > Becky
> > https://beckylindroos.wordpress.com
> >
> > > On Oct 7, 2018, at 2:41 PM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > When I first studied a smattering of pomo theory at university I found
> > > it a wonderfully useful way of sidestepping a bunch of power
> > > structures that otherwise seemed unchallengeable in our society.
> > > Later I taught a course in it and found myself much more ambivalent
> > > about that usefulness.
> > > A long while later, today, I think the best thinking on postmodern
> > > theory remains Fredric Jameson's Postmodernism, or The Logic of Late
> > > Capitalism (which also popularised the term itself). Jameson's was a
> > > very critical analysis of a network of cultural artefacts he thought
> > > said something about late capitalism, ie postmodernism is the cultural
> > > face of hyper-capitalism. I haven't found anything to refute this and
> > > it's why I think postmodernism is both very troubling and absolutely
> > > of our times.
> > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 1:32 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> yes.
> > >>
> > >> I like the word "real' here in its straightforward, hard-working way.
> Some
> > >> say Reality, a real conception of it as real,[sic] so to speak, has
> been
> > >> weakened in our understanding because of Po-Mo. I can't judge.   I do
> like
> > >> this nuanced statement and only want to accent Kafka on the 'art' of a
> > >> 'book/novel':  It must be like an axe to crack the frozen ice within
> us.
> > >>
> > >> "The real issue with all arts is the degree to which it generates
> genuine
> > >> awe, insight, laughter, enjoyment, and the degree to which it stirs
> the
> > >> waters and compels us to think and question and see in fresh ways."
> > >>
> > >> And I think talking about any work of art clearly and with whatever
> > >> intelligence we can bring to it is what criticism is--or should be.
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 10:41 PM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> While I find Morris's insults juvenile and unnecessarily troll-like.
> I
> > >>> remember when I first joined the list and Post Modernism was used by
> most
> > >>> participants as hip and insightful and descriptive of Pynchon.I was
> openly
> > >>> dubious. I tried to get a grasp on what it was and found strains of
> thought
> > >>> that were important: cultural and personal context as needed to
> understand
> > >>> a phenomena, deconstrution as a tool, the rejection of isms you
> mention,
> > >>> and to a lesser degree the difficulty or in some arguments the
> > >>> impossibility of all communication mediated by language or symbols.
> I just
> > >>> never saw the value or intelligence of the term itself, which seemed
> mostly
> > >>> a way to seem hiply contemporary. It has the same obvious flaw as
> the term
> > >>> modernism; it just can’t last. It also became obvious that people
> meant
> > >>> different things when they used it.
> > >>>
> > >>> At the time I had come to the conclusion in thinking about the labels
> > >>> applied to art history that there was something misleading about
> these
> > >>> labels. Can a “modern” artist be inspired by ancient tribal arts?
> But more
> > >>> than such anomalies it is the individual nature of making art, the
> > >>> uniqueness of artists and their work that is the problem. Often a
> single
> > >>> one or 2 two artists or artist fit the label  and others are ineptly
> > >>> crammed into the package. If these labels were really needed and
> helpful
> > >>> they would be more justified but they seem to be a by-product of a
> cultural
> > >>> obsession with labels rather than a clarifying and informing use of
> > >>> language. Some such terms are more useful than others. Art nouveau
> was a
> > >>> style movement affecting many products and buildings and evokes a
> useful
> > >>> image to anyone who has seen some of the work. Of course if you
> tranlate it
> > >>> into English it would be called new art and no-one would know what
> you are
> > >>> talking about.
> > >>>
> > >>> For me the problem with these “conservative” thinkers is that they
> apply
> > >>> what could be called post modern analysis to Post Modernism but they
> refuse
> > >>> to apply this same critical thinking to their own meaningless labels
> and
> > >>> cultural blind spots. They themselves want to be associated with
> > >>> “traditional” values, but they are not Christians, they are not
> > >>> capitalists, they are not constitutionalists, they despise other
> people’s
> > >>> “freedom”, and it is virtually impssible to tell what the fuck they
> want to
> > >>> “conserve”. Do they really love the flag in some bizarre symbolic
> > >>> relationship or is it the ultimate representative of their violent
> embrace
> > >>> of conformity and the identity politics they claim to despise?
> > >>>
> > >>> The real issue with all arts is the degree to which it generates
> genuine
> > >>> awe, insight, laughter, enjoyment, and the degree to which it stirs
> the
> > >>> waters and compels us to think and question and see in fresh ways.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Oct 5, 2018, at 1:24 AM, Matthew Taylor <
> matthew.taylor923 at gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You: David Morris
> > >>>> Me: Matthew Taylor
> > >>>>
> > >>>> (Did I do that right?)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> My point was that postmodernism is as misunderstood as it is
> denigrated,
> > >>>> and Jordan Peterson—who is (unfortunately) extremely popular and
> > >>>> influential right now—has popularized the term as a bogeyman among a
> > >>> bunch
> > >>>> of people who have confused and contradictory ideas about what it
> means.
> > >>>> You can't really talk about contemporary popular understandings of
> > >>>> "postmodernism" or "myth" or "archetypes" without at least
> mentioning
> > >>> him.
> > >>>> I was responding to John Bailey, agreeing with his point that it is
> now
> > >>> the
> > >>>> "catch-all term encompassing everything despised by the conservative
> > >>>> neolibs who follow Jordan Peterson and the like."
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Peterson himself politicizes the term, trying to associate it with
> things
> > >>>> like Marxism. My post also argued that whatever postmodernism may
> or may
> > >>>> not be, it sure as hell *isn't* that. I wasn't talking about
> politics to
> > >>>> "ignore" postmodernism, I was saying that a great deal of the
> popular
> > >>>> discourse about postmodernism politicizes it in a way that is
> flat-out,
> > >>>> demonstrably wrong. I think any discussion about contemporary
> > >>> understanding
> > >>>> of postmodernism has to contend with Jordan Peterson—he is a force
> to be
> > >>>> reckoned with even if he's a dummy. Writing a bestselling book and
> > >>> getting
> > >>>> ~$80k/month on Patreon means he has a hell of a platform, and I
> think a
> > >>> lot
> > >>>> of the misunderstanding of what postmodernism might mean can be
> > >>> attributed
> > >>>> directly to him.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> "Like" it or not, I think it's probably important to at least have
> an
> > >>>> accurate understanding.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:24 PM David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> You: I genuinely don't know what you mean by saying that my post
> > >>> "confirms
> > >>>>>> PoMo school to be drowning in politics."
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Me: your post focused on a political asshole, and ignored anything
> about
> > >>>>> what PoMo is/was.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> David Morris
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >>>
> > >> --
> > >> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>
>