1. IrvingSnodgrass - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:43 AM PT
I'll be honest with you. The entire Postmodern thing has passed me by like a speeding train while I've been stuck in a previous era of academic thought.
But I have a feeling that many fraygrants have an opinion or two to share about Postmodernism. Have at it...
2. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:44 AM PT
(walks in, sets up folding chair, blankets, and a supply of cappuccino.)
Oh boy.
3. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:46 AM PT
What -- no lattes?
4. MizPhys - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:47 AM PT
OK, Diva. If you're settled in now, could you educate an ingnorant Fraygrant and define Postmodernism for me?
5. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:48 AM PT
Oh, God, cellar. Here.
Fizzy
I am *the wrong* person to ask. Let's just wait until Dan and PE show up. Heh heh.
6. 109109 - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:48 AM PT
Before I get to deconstructing, could someone post a definition of postmodernism?
(cllrdr - I look forward to your visit in June. I shall be honored to squire you around Dupont Circle).
7. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:50 AM PT
ooh! ooh! Me too!
8. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:50 AM PT
Fabulous, Niner! I'll keep you posted.
meanwhile --
9. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:53 AM PT
Advancing a definition of anything is, as we all know, the fastest way to get Pseudo into a thread to declare how wrong you are.
10. IrvingSnodgrass - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:54 AM PT
Are we *all* waiting for Dan and PE?
11. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:55 AM PT
If always felt the crux of the whole thing stemed from a general weariness with modernism, coupled with the impact of the writings of a few smart-ass froggies -- especially Jean Baurillard.
12. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:55 AM PT
I'm still waiting for Godot.
13. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:57 AM PT
Diva
You wouldn't happen to have any malt liquor and pork rinds, would you?
14. 109109 - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:57 AM PT
I'm still waiting for a freaking definition.
15. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:57 AM PT
This might help
16. 109109 - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:58 AM PT
Diva
Thank you.
17. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 6:59 AM PT
Now you're Talkin' Post, bubbaette!
18. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:02 AM PT
Bubb
Well, I do have some pot likker and fatback. Is that okay?
Niner
Sure, fine, NOW you pay attention to me.
19. CalGal - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:02 AM PT
Diva gave one, here is what PBS says about it.
Here's another.
20. CoralReef - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:03 AM PT
Want PE in here? This may work....
Is the pretentious speech of postmodernism, the dressing up of ideas in the most elaborate words in order not just to impress but to obscure meaning, similar to academic economics' increasing reliance on mathematics to the point that other economists sometimes have no idea what a colleague is trying to say.
In other words, is it part of a university-wide problem?
21. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:04 AM PT
Diva
My back's already plenty fat. I'll settle for some Thunderbird and CheezDoodles.
Cllr
Does that mean I'm about to get deconstructed?
22. CalGal - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:05 AM PT
And here's another.
I offer these primarily so that Pseudo can come along and tell us what bunk they all are.
23. MrSocko - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:06 AM PT
Hello.
Pseudoerasmus can't be with us right now.
However, I'm pleased to bring a very special message from him to all of you who have posted thus far.
To all of you, including The Diva, bubba, lewisfein, and cllrdr:
You are idiots.
24. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:09 AM PT
Sorry, Socko.
That won't do.
There is a certain panache, a je nais sais kwa, an utterly nebulous fabulousness, about being called an idiot by PE.
Being called an idiot by you (pouty terrorist) just makes me giggle.
25. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:09 AM PT
Thanks Socko, but it's just not the same as the genuine article, I'm afraid.
26. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:10 AM PT
Bubb
This is a gubment office. No T-Bird allowed.
27. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:11 AM PT
Fun post, Deev. But what Katz is kvetching about is the *effect* of Post -- not its practitioners. Barthes and Baudrilerd are highly readable. Foucault slighly less so. Derrida is well-nigh inpenetrable.
*You* take a stab at "Glas," s'il vous plait! The other thing is they're very different writers. Barthes is a very traditional literary critc. Baurillard is opposed to all of that. Foucualt, as well all know thanks to james Miller's breathlessly trashy tome, was too busy gettin' down at the Slot and the Barracks to care about the nieceties of Post. And then there's that nasty Nazi Paul DeMann that's been cramping Derrida's style.
28. 109109 - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:11 AM PT
Socko
Ha ha ha.
Diva
I can't pay attention to you now. It won't do to have me squire both you and cllrdr about Dupont Circle. Mixed messages and all that.
Cal
Thanks for the links.
29. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:11 AM PT
The ramifications of PE's interpersonal communicatory stylings are debilitating and far-reaching, leaving one in a hyper-contemptuous funk.
30. MrSocko - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:13 AM PT
I love all of you. It was never my intention to bring such a dreadful message to any of you.
I beg a thousand pardons!
31. Msivorytower - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:14 AM PT
Some resources to read on the topic.....
Go to the Journals, and find the UofChicago Conference papers and proceedings on Postmodernism
32. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:14 AM PT
Gee, I kind of liked "Glas". Precisely because it's well-nigh impenetrable.
33. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:15 AM PT
*SOB*
I'm so touched!
Okay, let me try.
Is the hyper-post-meta reality of your sub-present-morning attire relative to my perception of what you are wearing?
34. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:18 AM PT
Diva
My dishabille is post-toasties.
35. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:21 AM PT
"It won't do to have me squire both you and cllrdr about Dupont Circle."
Sort of "Design for Living 2000." Ever-so Post.
36. Msivorytower - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:23 AM PT
Sheesh, that above link stinks.
When you get there, go to the site called Everything Postmodern. It will then have a sidebar for journals. The first entry on that page is the Uof Chicago conference. Hit that, then scroll down to the bottom where it links to all the papers presented.
Stupid arrangement at miningco.
37. bubbaette - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:24 AM PT
Well y'all have fun, I can see this is too many for me.
38. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:28 AM PT
I really don't think we're treating this topic with the proper reverence it deserves.
I'd better go before that happens.
39. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:33 AM PT
Maybe we should take baby steps Deev. Let's start with that key Po-Mo text, "Blade Runner."
40. PsychProf - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:39 AM PT
PMS...Post Modern Scatology...as in "Willy Loman coulda used a little help from PMS...
41. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:40 AM PT
cellar:
Would that be Burroughs' "Blade Runner: A Movie", or PKD's "Androids Dream..."?
42. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:41 AM PT
(I always get confused by that, thanks to Ridley Scott)
43. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:42 AM PT
Well, kids, this has been a real gas, but I gotta go deconstruct a memo now.
44. TabouliJones - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:42 AM PT
Tabouli Jones' thoroughly tentative definition of postmodernism, gleaned from dimly remembered -- and long abandoned -- enthusiasms vis-a-vis Derrida and his ilk:
Postmodernism is a radical denial of the correspondence theory of Truth or Being. It rejects the philosophical notion that we can talk of a pristine Truth or (Heideggerian) Being which functions as a static referant that is determinative of metaphysical meaning in our human lives. Consonant with this rejection, postmodernism maintains that there is no such thing as a fixed meaning or signified. Every manifestation of meaning (i.e. every text) is entirely chimerical; which is to say, every text is an entirely insular string of empty signifiers which have no connection to an external meaning (or signified). Which is to say: postmodernism states that every text ultimately says both nothing and everything and, therefore, the only useful philosophical task is that which denies fixed meaning -- i.e. deconstruction . . . . Which is to say: I have no fucking idea whatsoever how the hell one would define postmodernism.
One way to look at postmodernism, is to regard it as the radical acceptance of Dostoevsky's adage, "If God is dead, then everything is permitted."
Or, as I eventually did after spending too much time with a chain smoking alcoholic po-mo film student with a penchant for anti-social mayhem, you might define postmodernism as an infectuous excuse to be an asshole.
45. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:42 AM PT
(and now that KW Jeter has published "Blade Runner 2" as a sequel to PKD's "Androids...", it's just kind of hopeless)
46. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:47 AM PT
Kurt:
I'm not a big fan of BR, but I own a book about the making of the movie, just because I'm interested in how films get made.
What is this reference to Burroughs' "Blade Runner: A Movie"? What is that? A script? A treatment? An essay? Just curious. Please explain.
47. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:49 AM PT
Boba:
It's a short novel written in the form of a screenplay. Has little to nothing to do with either PKD or Ridley Scott.
48. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:51 AM PT
Oh, right right right....
Now I remember. The Blade Runner Partnership (the producers) had to pay Burroughs for the right to the name when they discovered he'd already used it, right?
49. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:54 AM PT
Stands to reason.
50. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:55 AM PT
I'm talking about the movie,Kurt. Not Burroughs book, whose title was borrowed, or even Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" whose mood is entirely different from the film. I'm talking about the film in *both* its originally released and "director's cut" versions. I call it a key PoMo text in that:
1) It has no specific author.
2) It has no particular "meaning."
3) It has no beginning or end -- it's all "middle."
4) It's "plot" is secondary to its effects; as if the mise en scene of say Tourneur's "Out of the Past," did in Mitchum and Greer and took primary control.
51. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:57 AM PT
5) It's boring and pointless and very pretty
52. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 7:59 AM PT
Other PoMo texts of note:
"Guilty," and "The Impossible" by Georges Bataille
"The Baphomet" by Pierre Klossowski
"Thomas the Obscure" by Maurice Blanchot
"Alma" by Gordon Burn
and anything by J.B. Ballard; particularly the short story "Why I Want To Fuck Ronald Reagan."
53. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:00 AM PT
cellar:
Ah, now I understand completely.
(incidentally, a rare 70mm print of the film recently played in Ourtown...it was an old test-screening print that didn't have either the voice-overs *or* the dumb unicorn...I suppose if you had to choose, that would be the one to watch).
54. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:00 AM PT
"The Dark Knight Returns" by Frank Miller
Part of my brother's introduction to Postmodernism course at Princeton. And a hell of a comic book too. I mean, Graphic Novel.
55. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:04 AM PT
Bande Desinees, Bobo.
56. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:04 AM PT
Kurt:
The voice over is much-maligned, but I find that the film needs it. The film was conceived as Noir Sci-fi, and Noir loves a world-weary voice over.
Unfortunately, the voice over isn't particularly well-written, and they kept harassing Ford to more and more versions of a voice over (after each previous voice over was deemed unacceptable). Ford's final effort is weak, phoning it in--he was just sick of being called back to the sound studio by that point.
57. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:05 AM PT
cellar:
What about Robbe-Grillet? Suppose he applies?
58. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:07 AM PT
The voice-over was a last-ditch attempt to turn "Blade Runner" into a conventional film. It imputes motive to a character that has none. Ford walks through the haze *in* a haze. "Blade Runner" is the opposite of "psychedelic" films like "2001." The "drug of choice" it evokes is clearly heroin.
59. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:07 AM PT
Cellar:
I don't know what Bande Desinees means. Please explain.
60. CoralReef - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:08 AM PT
Re: Blade Runner and the voice over.
I didn't see the voice over as dumbing down, as some have charged, but as setting a Raymond Chandleresque atmosphere for this detective (or whatever he was) that we were following. The films style was 1940s meets the godforsaken future and the voice over contributed to that style.
61. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:08 AM PT
Robbe-Grillet is on the edge, Kurt. A half-breed. The last modernist, and the John the Baptist of PoMo.
62. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:09 AM PT
Cellar:
Actually, the voice over was part of the movie from the first script. The film was always *intended* to have a voice over. It's a myth that the voice over was a "last ditch" thing.
The only thing "last ditch" about the voice over was the fact that the final version of it was written and recorded very late into the post-production process. And there was a thought that maybe they ought to just cut it out, since they couldn't get it right.
63. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:12 AM PT
....however, if you notice, key elements of the film are only explained in the Voice over. No one notices its absence in the Director's Cut, because they already know all the voice over information from previous viewings. But, for example, "Cityspeak" is only explained in the voice over. The "Blade Runner" unit is only explained in the voice over.
Clearly, if the film had been intended from the start to *not* include a voice over, this information would have been explained in dialogue.
64. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:14 AM PT
It may have been planned from the "beginning" -- and PoMo doesn't recognize origins, Bobo -- but the film that was eventually made has no real use for it. The characters in "Blade Runner" don;t have "motives," or pasts, or futures. They are all *present*
It's French for comic strip, Bobo.
65. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:14 AM PT
The John the Baptist of Pomo. I like that.
66. TabouliJones - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:17 AM PT
In Husbands and Wives, the Woody Allen charachter talks about how one of the things that really turned him on about the Juliette Lewis character was an earnest essay she wrote entitled "Masturbation in the Age of Deconstruction." I thonk that phrase "masturbation in the age of deconstruction" goes a long way towards defining the nature, the allure, and the excessiveness of postmodernism.
67. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:17 AM PT
Cellar:
Well, I defer to your understanding of PoMo. I agree that the voice over is basically useless, as it neither advances character, plot, or motive. But this is part and parcel of the fact that there were six writers scrambling to rewrite the Voice over into something more elegant and Chandleresque and coming up more or less bust-o.
68. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:18 AM PT
"Clearly, if the film had been intended from the start to *not* include a voice over, this information would have been explained in dialogue."
That's assuming such scenes were shot, Bobo. The film was running over budget and the plug was pulled. The same thing happened with "Blow Up," btw.
"Explanation" is the mortal enemy of PoMo.
69. KurtMondaugen - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:22 AM PT
Speaking of "Blow Up", you suppose the reference to that film in "Blade Runner" (Ford's neato photo-analyzing gadget) was intentional?
70. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:23 AM PT
Cellar:
Please. Don't argue. I will cite you Ridley Scott stating that the film was always conceived with a voice over. I've got a book about it.
And the "plug" wasn't really pulled on the film. The Bonding people came in and took over. But Scott was kept on as Director (even though he was, actually, "Fired" by the bonding people), and I believe that all scripted scenes were filmed.
Except one-- the unicorn dream. Which was actually shot, but the film was lost, and they wouldn't give Scott any money to reshoot it.
Which wasn't much of a loss, if you ask me.
71. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:31 AM PT
There was a lot more than that, Bobo. No one's gone on the record about it, but everybody in L.A.knew the story. They called the set (on the Warner Bros. lot) "Ridleyville." Scott worked *very slowly*
Maybe a page a day. Sometimes less.
Kurt, re. "Blow-Up" -- Who knows if it's a reference? PoMo doesn't care.
72. TabouliJones - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:36 AM PT
"Kurt, re. "Blow-Up" -- Who knows if it's a reference? PoMo doesn't care."
Cellar:
Actually, PoMo does care in so far as PoMo says that you cannot escape other texts and that ultimately every text (book, film, essay, etc.) is made up of references to other texts. Derrida's key adage "You can't escape the text" -- whatever that means.
73. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:37 AM PT
Yeah, I remember some expression of discontent by the crew. They all wore t-shirts one day which made a reference to a disparaging remark Scott had made about his American crew to a magazine or newspaper.
I'm just saying-- the voice over was intended from the beginning. The problem with BR isn't that it has a voice over. It's that it has a *bad* voice over.
74. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:40 AM PT
"The characters in "Blade Runner" don;t have "motives," or pasts, or futures. They are all *present*"
I recongnize this as a true PoMo critique, since it doesn't seem to mean anything in particular. All surface, no meaning.
75. TabouliJones - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:41 AM PT
Oh yeah Boba:
I forgot to mention how hard I laughed when you mentioned Jamie Lee Coitus and her movie "Swalloween" in the Person of the Millenium thread. I laughed and I laughed. I plan on muscling it into the conversation next time I hit the pubs. I figure it should get a lot of mileage.
76. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:41 AM PT
Whattaya mean Blade Runner has no motives, plot, beginning or end? This is one of my favorite movies. Explain yourself.
And the unicorn dream is crucial to the movie. Without it, the understanding that Deckard is a replicant himself is almost impossible.
77. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:45 AM PT
Rask:
The Unicorn Dream is wholly unnecessary, because there's already plenty of hints that Deckard is a replicant. The Unicorn Dream effectively takes away all doubt from which should have been left as insinuation.
(It takes away all doubt because Gaff leaves behind the Unicorn origami. Thus, Gaff knows something about Deckard's "programmed memories," just like Deckard knew about Rachel's memories of the spider outside of her window.)
It also doesn't frankly make all that much sense that Deckard really *is* a replicant. Why would they have him on the BR unit? Why isn't he gifted with the physical and mental prowess the other Replicants are?
78. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:45 AM PT
The voice over isn't necessary. I think it is acceptable because it does add a "noir" touch to the film, but what Ford says is unnecessary or redundant. The film works better when you have to think about what is going on.
79. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:52 AM PT
Boba: I don't think there are enough other hints. The original release version obscures the fact with the happy ending and the narration, which gives Deckard a past. And without the unicorn dream all you are left with is one out of focus shot of Ford with red eye, and the preponderance of pictures on his piano.
"It also doesn't frankly make all that much sense that Deckard really *is* a replicant. Why would they have him on the BR unit? Why isn't he gifted with the physical and mental prowess the other Replicants are?"
Having him in the BR unit makes perfect sense. They had already lost one officer to the replicants, why risk another? Just re-write the memories of a replicant and send him into action.
As to why he didn't have the prowess of the others, different models had different skills. He was certainly smart enough and able enough to track them down and personally kill two of the four.
80. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 8:57 AM PT
Rask:
Gaff: "You've done a *man's* job, sir!"
In addition to the red eyes, the pictures. Plus the very fact he goes off with Rachel, a replicant herself, at the end (which Rutger Hauer described as shacking up with a five-foot ten vibrator).
Plus Ford's zero-affect performance, itself.
Oh yeah-- plus the fact that Ford's boss explains that SIX replicants escaped, and only one has already been retired. Hmmm. Rutger Hauer, "Leon," Pris, and Joanna Cassidy. That's FOUR remaining androids. Where's the Fifth? Hm? Hm?
81. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:02 AM PT
Gaff's line is only evidence when you already suspect the conclusion. Running off with Sean Young is a non-starter as evidence. I had forgotten that last one, which I have heard mentioned as evidence before. Still most people had chalked that up to a continuity error, or thought that Rachel was the 6th android, until the director's cut with the unicorn dream came out.
82. jexster - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:03 AM PT
Thanks Diva for:
"We should listen to the views of people outside of Western society in order to learn about the cultural biases that affect us''.
``We should listen to the intertextual, multivocalities of postcolonial others outside of Western culture in order to learn about the phallogocentric biases thatmediate our identities''. Now you're talking postmodern!"
What rot!
83. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:04 AM PT
By the way, post any follow-ups to the Movies thread. We don't want to hijack this board with anything interesting while people are waiting for Pseudo and Dan to post that they aren'r going to post since they have gone over this many times before.
Unless someone wishes to offer themselves up as a human sacrifice to Pseudo by posting something illogically positive about po-mo.
84. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:04 AM PT
Rask:
Rachel was clearly explained in the film as *not* being an escaped android. Her "uncle" explained that she was essentially a floor model and was on Earth with permission of the government.
Frankly I'm biased on this point. I don't mind the hint that Deckard is a replicant, but I think the unicorn dream just takes all of the "hinting" out of it. Based on the Director's Cut, Ford *is* a replicant.
85. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:10 AM PT
Taboulie:
Thanks for the compliment. Just to give credit, a friend of a friend came up with "Jamie Lee Coitus." I came up with "Swalloween." But feel free to use it. Just mentally footnote it to BobaFett.
86. elliot803 - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:21 AM PT
Next up: A thread on Queer Theory in which Rask and Bobba debate whether Darth Vader really was Luke Skywalker's father.
87. TabouliJones - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:25 AM PT
Boba:
Will do sir. Expect your royalty payments some time soon.
88. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:26 AM PT
Bobo and Rask: To quote David Byrne (a PoMo adept if there ever was one) "Stop Making Sense." That's no way to deal with postmodernism in general or "Blade Runner" in particular.
89. elliot803 - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:26 AM PT
My take on Postmodernism: in its less extreme forms, it has something useful to contribute to our understanding of ourselves and the nature of the world. In its more extreme forms, it's a bunch of hooey.
The physicist Alan Sokal recently published a paper that parodied the postmodernist style of thought and writing (called, I believe, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity") but that was taken seriously by scholars in the field.
90. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:29 AM PT
Elliot:
That paper included a statement that the number Pi was different for different people, depending on their outlook.
91. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:29 AM PT
These parody papers are the last word in PoMo.
92. Pseudoerasmus - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:30 AM PT
Message #89
Please name something "post-modernist" that you've read that was also "less extreme".
You also mention Sokal as though it were something new. It's ancient hat.
the Sokal Affair and everything else related to him.
93. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:35 AM PT
elliot: (re: 86) The pot is calling the kettle black.
94. cllrdr - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:35 AM PT
I just *knew* Pseudo had a Sokal link up his sleeve!
How PoMo of him.
95. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:36 AM PT
Old hat, but funny hat.
96. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:37 AM PT
Rask:
I'm not really sure Darth Vader really *is* Luke's father. After all, we only have Vader's word for it. And he's not particularly trustworthy.
97. Raskolnikov - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:40 AM PT
Boba: Yoda and Obi Wan confirmed it. No argument.
98. ChristiPeters - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:42 AM PT
Hmmmm...
So in PoMo 2 + 2 = whatever the observer thinks it equals???
99. TheDiva - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:43 AM PT
Yippee! Pseudo's here!
Okay, PE, is post-modernism really all the bullshit it looks to be, and if so, why?
100. BobaFett - Feb. 2, 1999 - 9:45 AM PT
Rask:
Obi Wan originally told Luke that Darth Vader had *killed* his father. According to your standards of credibility as expressed in a different thread, this automatically makes his later statements untrue. Why should we favor his later statements? He lied once. He has no credibility.
And I don't believe Yoda "confirmed" the story. Luke asked him about it-- "Why didn't you tell me?" -- but Yoda blew him off and took a nap.