Reed
James Mulholland (jsm5q@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU)
Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:40:59 -0400
Noting that I've only read (hmmm) half the book, I was just thinking about
what we were talking about in class, especially the dichotomies that prof
unsworth drew on the board-- the separation between postmodernism and "older
artistic traditions" particularly the idea that Reed is establishing a
critical avant-garde. I think, like Nick said the key factor is the way the
project is defined, what perception we have ... and it seems that Jes Grew,
for me at least, has a number of problems. Reed seems to be interested in
trying to figure how certain critical elements of postmodernism can be used,
or even were used historically (continuities between postmodernism features
and hoodoo ?), but he also seems to have a great deal of revelance to the
debates that often occur now about representation of race, as people pointed
out. The problem for me is the sense of naturalness that Jes Grew has-- its
not a plague, its an anti-plague, but it spreads infectiously, without any
particular instigation. There's something attractive about it that motivates
it seemingly without any interventions of people. A new form of spirtualism
that Jes Grew engenders doesn't need people making efforts, even lifelong
effort, to try and correct or shift the perception of race, or the
organizing features of life. The only people who seem to actively intervene
are the Atonists and perhaps someone like Abdul. And (so far) Abdul seems to
reprsent the other side of Papa LaBas' spiritualism, the side that considers
every gain to be one that must be fought for and won in the sense of actual
confrontational work that must occur. This is a real debate that occured and
still occurs today.
james