In 1926: living at the edge of time - Monoskop

USER'S MANUAL xv
philosophy" (the unwillingness to think History as a homogeneous,
totalizing movement, the argument in favor of a "weak" conception
of subjectivity, the fascination with material surfaces), there is, the
author thinks, only one reason that it should be recognized as "postmodern,"
and this is a negative reason. The author believes that the
academico-ideological battle for the preservation of "modern" and
"modernist" (i.e., "nonpostmodern") values is a lost cause. But
who's interested in the author's answer to a question that nobody
asked him? If the book has no political or ethical message, should
readers perhaps take its form as "the message"? This would imply
that the author is hoping many scholars will pick up, imitate, and
develop the discourse he "invented." The truth is, however, that he
would feel almost guilty if his book ever created such a fashion
(which does not seem to be a very serious threat anyway). For,
needless to say, there is no dearth of academic trends or schools.
Perhaps the problem is that, as things now stand, everything is
doomed to remain an experiment.