So many introductions to postmodernism are boring, or even unreadable simply because they are written by people who cannot write. These "writers" simply parrot the same pomobabble that so many postmodern thinkers indulge in--as if they were all members of some wierd cult. Powell--who CAN actually write--frys them for this, but then goes on to present excellent overviews of several important writers. One would not expect to find such depth in a comic book. The summary of Baudrillard's work, for instance, is often more insightful than those found in much weightier and intentionally serious volumes. Powell, explains the evoultion of Baudrillard's thoughts from its Marxist roots. Powell is especially good when it comes to the enigmatic Derrida, and his 'deconstruction.' Although Postmodernism for Beginners does not tackle Derrida's major works--as does Powell's Derrida for Beginners--it does make Derrida less mercurial, so that readers can then go on to read Derrida's works forewarned and forearmed. Powell really brings postmodernism to light, however, in his presentation of postmodern artifacts: Madonna, Bladerunner, cyberpunk, etc. Joe Lee's illustrations often present subtle asides to Powell's Proustian prose. All-in-all, one of the best I've read in the For-Beginners series.
This book is a good introduction to the introductions of various postmodern thinkers, and is as good only as far as that can go. My major problem, like the Nietzsche reader below, was a mis/nonrepresentation of the subject brought on by the ultimate brevity of the complete work. Foucault, for instance, is given a paragraph or two of treatment and then is immediately dismissed by a nonsensical (possibly just unexplained) assumption that because power/sexuality are everywhere they are also nowhere, and therefore Foucault's works are essentially meaningless in the postmodern landscape. And yet, that critique ultimately becomes a meaningless one as gender, race, sexual orientation and other cultural constructs could be subjected to the same analysis, but this wouldn't change the fact that these are all very powerful ways to separate and systematically oppress people in our culture.
For instance, Q: the critique holds that since sexuality is everywhere it is nowhere. But what kind of sexuality is everywhere? A: Heterosexual relations holding the constructed feminine gender subordinate to the constructed masculine gender; mostly what we call "white," rarely "interracial"; and mostly in the context of pre-marital (read committed) relationships. This form is everywhere and nowhere--pervasive but invisible. But what does this then do? As Foucault himself might say, this dynamic impresses itself onto the lives of everyone not within this hetero conception--it turns them into society's perverts; it touches their lives and bodies in the most intimate ways.
Of course, my comments here could be seen as a (feminist) critique of postmodernism itself, but my intent is only to show how difficult it is to handle such a large concept or thinker within a few lines. So this is not so much a failing of the book per se, but a failing of any introduction of this length to introduce such a gigantic concept as "Postmodernism." If you are really interested in the subject, I would recommend either reading the original thinkers or reading books (like Foucault's Power/Knowledge) which contain interviews and overviews of the thinker's major works. This gives you a much better feel for the subject than a 100 page cartoon is, simply, able to do.
