Task: Sentiment Analysis
Input (English): A valid and persuasive discussion . Professor Eagleton takes no prisoners in this thorough albeit short critique on the theories of postmodernism. Focus is placed on postmodernism's general theories in relation to philosophy and political theory as opposed to postmodernism's contribution in the arts and architecture. This, in fact, could well be the subject of an entirely new book, however, aesthetics, in this case, is not Eagleton's main concern.     It probably should be stressed that a general knowledge of philosophy, postmodern theory and political science would be advantageous before cracking this text, however, someone with only a slight awareness of these subjects could push through the book (dictionary in hand) without too much difficulty.     By definition, post modernism is hard to define, as it claims no foundational tenets: it is more a method or perspective against established ideas in philosophy. As Eagleton writes, "It is animated by the critical spirit, and rarely brings to bear upon its own propositions." (P.26)      From a socio-political standpoint, postmodern theories are part of a culture of "unmaking". It can be characterized as a rejection of all "metanarratives" or "grandnarratives"; a protest of modernisms inclusion into the established order of the `canon', a snubbing of intellectual elites, a blurring between high and low art, where Bart Simpson sits comfortably with Shakespeare. I would characterize it as a cynical "anti" position on just about any idea that claims validity or application in society. The key principles of all postmodern theories include: "...decreation, disintergration, deconstruction, decentrement, displacement, difference, discontinuity, disappearance, demoralization and delegitimation." (Post Modern Theory, Best, Kellner, 1991)     In one respect, Eagleton applauds postmodernism's huge body of work over a short time, and its stubborn demystification of natural institutions and conventions, though, criticises its blatant lack of self-criticism and ability to offer any alternatives after its deconstruction of all other theories. There is a certain feeling of excitement and freedom after reading such postmodern luminaries as Derrida, Lyotard or Kristiva, but after wading through their dense and at times "cult-like" prose, one is left with the feeling of utter nihilism, realising that these theories are empty rhetoric, that over three thousand years of human progress was all a lie, a "grand-narrative" to keep us chained.     For the most part Eagleton criticises postmodern theory against the theories of Marxism and socialism, and does a remarkable job revealing postmodernism's na?ve, almost adolescent view of the present world situation.    He concludes that postmodern end-of-history thinking gives us no future other than the present. That there are many possible futures, including fascism: how would postmodern theory shape to such a future? In my opinion, not too well.    This book is a valid discussion and a persuasive argument on the many pitfalls of postmodern theory.
Output (English): POS