One connection I have made between What is the What and the concepts that we learned earlier in the quarter is the use of personal story/flashbacks and trivialization. The modernists would say that trivialization present in the novel and the fact that personal narrative is used to inspire people to act on the behalf of the Lost Boys. I’m sure Habermas would like it if the discussion in the public sphere about the civil war in Sudan was strictly political. A postmodernist would view the trivialization of the topic of the Lost Boys as beneficial to the cause, and a useful tool for motivating people to help Sudanese refugees. My personal view on this issue leans towards the postmodern point of view. I believe that reading Valentino’s story is important because it humanizes the issue. Personal narrative also is more palatable to the public and is more likely to prompt readers to do anything they can to help.
I definitely agree that, in the case of this novel, including trivial aspects of the story of the second Sudanese civil war (Valentino's story) IS highly relevant to the discussion of the issue.
ReplyDeleteThis is where I find the idea of modernists and postmodernists a bit silly. Why would any modernist argue that Valentino's stories are not relevant?
Why would any postmodernist argue for the worth of Paris Hilton's latest televised shopping spree?