Scan barcode
sofiacostalima's review against another edition
Okay, now I'm a Eagleton fan! I wish every theoric book was as good and as cool as this one.
mxleigh's review
5.0
A very amusing read on the critique of cultural theory and postmodernism (and America).
partypete's review
5.0
An interesting conclusive statement on postmodernism that attempts to resolve many of the issues that have governed art for the past few decades. Something I will have to come back to later in my life.
stefhyena's review
2.0
The difficulty I have with giving this book stars is I enjoyed and agreed with it more than the two star rating expresses. Eagleton comes across as sarcastic, creative in his metaphors, passionate and well read as he strives for meaning in the modern context (and largely in opposition to post-modernism but nearly every other way of thinking also gets criticised). I like a bit of coherent, passionate criticism and I enjoy sarcasm. If this was a ranty sort of a person at a party I would probably spend quite a long time talking and listening and being entertained.
But I read this, expecting more backed up opinions not just sermonising rants. I am convinced that Eagleton has read all the literature he refers to and is informed by, and in particular I found his interpretation of various biblical passages pretty informed and interesting. But at other times when he makes biting criticisms against opponents I wish he would reference properly so I could look for myself whether I agree with him. Otherwise his omniscient, pompous tone is a bit too much albeit he is saying awesome stuff from a political and moral point of view.
I think a couple of his criticisms are unfair, as when he constructs a type of person called an "anti-essentialist" (I never saw any theorist actually identify themselves with that particular label) and then turns them into a cartoonish pastiche of extremes of ideas that I don;t believe anyone actually espouses in that way (an arguing style he passionately condemns elsewhere in his book) and then pokes fun at. His arguing style is contradictory, hypocritical and know-it-all (and a lot more fun than I wanted to admit).
He says marxist things, strongly and beautifully pro-feminist things and some post-colonial things (although there is a bit of a colonist about some of his ways of expressing himself). He seeks meaning. He humanises. But he also remains completely non-reflexive speaking ponderously out of his high ivory tower of unacknowledged privilege...which doesn't mean he is wrong (I think a lot of what he says is either right or close to right) but just that he needs to back himself up better for his knowledge to be more useful.
I loved it, I hated it, I didn't really regret reading it although as a lowly student I know any of my lecturers would quickly deflate me if I took that tone (and also make me remove that level of sarcasm from my writing). I think it is worth reading if you are enough of a thinker and reader to have your own thoughts as well. It's eloquent and entertaining. It lacks humility. It did help me work out why I am hating another book I am reading ([b:Hot Six|6858|Hot Six (Stephanie Plum, #6)|Janet Evanovich|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1388177839s/6858.jpg|1268422]) so much.
Flawed but with wisdom.
But I read this, expecting more backed up opinions not just sermonising rants. I am convinced that Eagleton has read all the literature he refers to and is informed by, and in particular I found his interpretation of various biblical passages pretty informed and interesting. But at other times when he makes biting criticisms against opponents I wish he would reference properly so I could look for myself whether I agree with him. Otherwise his omniscient, pompous tone is a bit too much albeit he is saying awesome stuff from a political and moral point of view.
I think a couple of his criticisms are unfair, as when he constructs a type of person called an "anti-essentialist" (I never saw any theorist actually identify themselves with that particular label) and then turns them into a cartoonish pastiche of extremes of ideas that I don;t believe anyone actually espouses in that way (an arguing style he passionately condemns elsewhere in his book) and then pokes fun at. His arguing style is contradictory, hypocritical and know-it-all (and a lot more fun than I wanted to admit).
He says marxist things, strongly and beautifully pro-feminist things and some post-colonial things (although there is a bit of a colonist about some of his ways of expressing himself). He seeks meaning. He humanises. But he also remains completely non-reflexive speaking ponderously out of his high ivory tower of unacknowledged privilege...which doesn't mean he is wrong (I think a lot of what he says is either right or close to right) but just that he needs to back himself up better for his knowledge to be more useful.
I loved it, I hated it, I didn't really regret reading it although as a lowly student I know any of my lecturers would quickly deflate me if I took that tone (and also make me remove that level of sarcasm from my writing). I think it is worth reading if you are enough of a thinker and reader to have your own thoughts as well. It's eloquent and entertaining. It lacks humility. It did help me work out why I am hating another book I am reading ([b:Hot Six|6858|Hot Six (Stephanie Plum, #6)|Janet Evanovich|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1388177839s/6858.jpg|1268422]) so much.
Flawed but with wisdom.
piccoline's review against another edition
4.0
I found this book a great tonic. Very readable and filled with passion. Eagleton has some serious theoretical chops, but here he's trying to both make clear the stakes and also urge, in non-jargon, greater engagement with the world from our Postmoderns and our Left.
Postmodernism does not equal relativism.
Postmodernism does not equal relativism.
More...