Why I’m Still Afraid: A Response To James K. A. Smith’s Who’s Afraid Of Postmodernism? -- By: John C. Poirier

Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 69:1 (Spring 2007)
Article: Why I’m Still Afraid: A Response To James K. A. Smith’s Who’s Afraid Of Postmodernism?
Author: John C. Poirier


Why I’m Still Afraid: A Response To James K. A. Smith’s Who’s Afraid Of Postmodernism?

John C. Poirier

John C. Poirier is Chair of Biblical Studies at the newly forming Kingswell Theological Seminary, Cincinnati, Ohio.

James K. A. Smith’s new book, Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism?, is very readable, and has an impressive grasp of details and interconnections.1 . do not target it because of any special weakness I find in it, but rather because it represents some of the best writing that postmodernists have produced. As such, it helps (albeit in an unintended way) to move forward the debate over postmodernism. That is because the problems that beset postmodernism become more obvious the more postmodernists explain themselves in plain language.

I. Postmodernism

Smith sets out to clear up misunderstandings (as he sees it) of postmodernism, particularly as these have been spread by misreadings of postmodernist formulas. He believes that a number of frequently repeated lines from postmodernist thinkers have been unduly turned into slogans, and names three in particular: “There is nothing outside the text” (Derrida), postmodernism is “incredulity toward met a narratives” (Lyotard), and “Power is knowledge” (Foucault). These lines have been torn from their context, Smith claims, causing them to be understood in ways that Derrida, Lyotard, and Foucault never intended. Anti-postmodernists have essentially been reading these lines as if they were “bumper stickers”:

Once we appreciate the context of these claims. .. we see two things: First, they mean something different than what the “bumper-sticker” reading suggests. The bumper-sticker readings that turn these claims into slogans tend to perpetuate a number of myths about postmodernism. My goal is to demythologize postmodernism by showing that what we commonly think so-called postmodernists are saying is usually not the case. Second, and perhaps more provocatively, I will demonstrate that, in fact, all these claims have a deep affinity with central Christian claims.2

While I grant that problems arise when readers fail to consult contexts, and that this problem is especially acute where slogans (intended or not) are at work, there are also problems with Smith’s attempts to set the record straight. The problems begin even before Smith tells us what these formulas originally meant. For one thing, Smith seems to imply that if the anti-postmodernists had only understood Derrida’s, Lyotard’s, and Foucault’s claims...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()