Postmodernism: A Very Short Introduction

Despite some of the reviews that indicated Christopher Butler's tone was negative toward Postmodernism in this VERY SHORT INTRODUCTION, I found the book very helpful with my growing understanding of meta-narrative terminology and classifications. Also, as pointed out by other reviewers, is the fact that defining a meta-discourse that supposes universal definitions are not possible, poses special problems that I feel Butler handled very nicely. Butler, simply and rightly, maintained his neutrality on the subject, which it seems, should be the first of Post-modern goals. In other words, Postmodernism is neither good nor bad.

Butler touches on all aspects of PM thought/aesthetics in; literature, architecture, art theory etc. and nails it right on the head. It is fair to say, as some reviewers pointed out below, that he is certainly not a cheerleader for PM theory. He shows no mercy and points out all of the glaring contradictions of PM dogma as he sees them. (And so much the better, considering that much writing on the subject frustratingly skims over the absurd aspects of PM in favor of joining in on the lovefest). Nevertheless, this is a very clearly written and fair-minded little document.

This book is a great read, even for a total novice, if it is read quickly without fussing over names or knowedge of artists. You can still get the big picture about the concepts underlying Postmodernist thinking and work. It is filled with references to work done in the style which will require some research for the average reader to get a more precise understanding of the artistic developments made under the influence of these ideas.

Along with Culler's Literary Theory Butler's Postmodernism represents a commendable "Very Short Introduction" to controversial ideas in the humanities. Both volumes are even-handed and well-explained. This is in sharp contrast to Catherine Belsey's Poststructualism: A Very Short Introduction. In the latter volume, the reader doesn't get anything like an even-handed overview. Instead, the reader gets one-sided advocacy of poststructuralist thinking, complete with the movement's characteristically strained logic and unconcern for clear expression.

I was pleased to find that Prof. Butler discusses "post-modernist" theory critically and with intellectual rigor. I was concerned that this short introduction would be either a hymn to post-modernist theory or an uncritical recitation of post-modernist ideas. Instead, Prof. Butler analyzes and criticizes the sources, substance and implications of various post-modernist methodologies -- deconstruction, Foucaultian analysis, post-colonialism -- as these have been embraced, partially-embraced, and adapted in literature, the visual arts, architecture and popular culture. The reader learns alot about post-modernist theory, but from a critic who is skeptical as well as informed. Would the "episteme" have "replicated" his example.