Customer Review

2 of 4 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Good but basic introduction, 10 April 2011
This review is from: Postmodernism and Holocaust Denial (Postmodern Encounters) (Paperback)
Postmodernism has been blamed for promoting a non-objective relativist view of reality which provides an intellectual environment within which holocaust deniers can flourish. This essay aims to show why this view is wrong and how postmodernism can actually provide the tools to fight holocaust deniers. It takes as its starting point the libel action holocaust denier David Irving took against Deborah Lipstadt regarding claims made in Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory.

Most of this short book is taken up with providing a context for the trial and discussing the methodology of history. Postmodernism is only mentioned in detail quite late on in order to show that history is written in a particular 'genre', that holocaust deniers don't follow the rules of this genre, and therefore that they aren't historians. This means that to debate with them is nonsense as there is no debate to be had, the two 'sides' would be playing two different games with two different sets of rules.

I approached this essay as a layperson, and as such it provides a clear and understandable introduction to the subject, acting as a good starting point for further reading. However, I am not sure how useful someone more familiar with the subject would find it.

I also approached this as someone sceptical about postmodernism and inclined to believe that it can have dangerous repercussions in the real world (issues excellently dealt with in Why Truth Matters and Beyond the Hoax: Science, Philosophy and Culture). This book does a good job of showing why holocaust denial can't be used to attack postmodernism, however I am still interested in how postmodernism can be defended regarding issues where the protagonists aren't as repugnant as holocaust deniers (something admittedly outside the scope of this particular book).

There is one small stylistic point which recurs throughout the book which I found incredibly irritating and distracting. Whenever a quoted author uses non-gender neutral language, Eaglestone highlights this by using 'sic', e.g.

"The historian confronts a veritable chaos of events already constituted, out of which he [sic] must choose the elements of the story he [sic] would tell. He [sic] makes his [sic] story by including some events and excluding others... That is to say he [sic] 'emplots' his [sic] story."

I think readers are intelligent enough to know that any text quoted is what the authors actually wrote, without the need of 'sic'; therefore its purpose seems to be to highlight their sexism and possibly to make a postmodern point as to the non-objectivity of any history, but this is patronizing to the reader and just serves to interrupt the flow of the text.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-2 of 2 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 16 Apr 2012 01:37:02 BDT
amantedofado says:
Adding [sic] after occurrences of 'he' is patently pointless and indicative of the constipated way in which many postmodernists write. What language has no indications of gender? No different words for 'he', 'she', or 'it', no distinction between 'his', 'her' and 'its'? Completely gender neutral as so many extreme feminists and others would like it to be. The language (there are some others) is Persian (Farsi). Where is Persian spoken? Iran, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan. Are conditions for women better in those countries than here? Quite the opposite. Therefore, I write 'u' in Persian and 'he', 'she' and 'it' in English.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Dec 2012 12:20:27 GMT
Eleanor says:
Cf. the following in Garner's Legal Usage:

"Using "[sic]" at every turn to point out old sexist phrases is at best an otiose exercise, at worst a historically irresponsible example of mean-spiritedness. For a choice example of this, see James R. Nafziger, A Sicness unto Death, 1 Scribes J. Legal Writing 149 (1990). "
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details

Item

3.7 out of 5 stars (3 customer reviews)
5 star:    (0)
4 star:
 (2)
3 star:
 (1)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:    (0)
 
 
 
Used & New from: 0.01
Add to wishlist
Reviewer

Eleanor
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)   

Location: Oxford, England

Top Reviewer Ranking: 338