Interesting bits from a review (it's behind a wall so no point linking to it but it's in the Chronicle of Higher Ed if you have access and are interested) of a new book about the American embrace of French critical theory:
"As Cusset recounts, another major irony of French theory's American reception is that a paradigm radically opposed to the idea of a centered and cohesive "self" became the basis for American-style identity politics." This made me chuckle. It gets right to the heart of the postmodern legacy here.
more:
French theory's "antifoundationalism" jibes surprisingly well with the precepts of American pluralism. Both traditions are deeply wary of metaphysical absolutes and high-flown theoretical speculation. Liberalism can be frustratingly nonprescriptive: It democratically allows everyone the luxury of having his or her own opinion. Deconstruction — which, under Derrida's stewardship, embraced the confusions of "undecidability" instead of taking a firm position — similarly ended up in a state of self-canceling judgmental paralysis.He claims that it is the "sturdiness" of our liberalism that allows us to flirt with ideas and movements that call into question the very foundations of that same liberalism. The end result being that we defanged poststructuralism: "By appropriating the precepts of French theory, we Americans undermined its residual claims to theoretical and political radicalism — and thereby succeeded in domesticating it. In the end, it became grist for the mill of liberal pluralism."
I find that kind of comforting. I have no idea what kind of reception the book is getting in academic circles, and don't much care, but it seems to uh, depuff, if you will, a certain brand of self-important postmodern critical theory. Mind you, I really do mean a certain brand. I don't have much of a problem with Derrida.
