April DeConick (H.C.) responds to Aichelle, Miscall, and Walsh (P.M.)’s call for dialogue:
“… The postmodern approach, which divorces literature from historical context and questing for ‘authorial’ intent, is more amenable to churched traditions and theological readings which have been at odds with historical methods for 200 years…”
True? False? Somewhere inbetween? Or are “Truth-questions” merely a logocentric attempt to reinforce existing hegemonic and phallocentric societal structures?
For previous dialogue, see:
Postmodernism vs. Historical Critical Scholarship – George Aichele & Friends vs. John Van Seters
Historical Criticism as Postmodernism’s Fantastic Other: (1) Objectivity
Update:
All the hap’nin’ new dialogue between the postmods and the mods is over at Stalin’s Moustache
Pingback: Reflections on the so-called postmodern-historical debate « Stalin's Moustache
Pingback: New Years Resolution and Review of Late December Posts « The Golden Rule