Structuralism and Poststructuralism For Beginners Paperback – August 21, 2007

This text was used in my undergraduate anthropological theory course as a way to learn about the structural and post-structural movements in a fun and relaxed way. However, it did not work.The text is largely based on comic-style pictures. A cursory glance might lead one to think, "Wow, this sure looks like fun! What an easy way to learn about these complicated theories!" However, I did not finish this book with a firm understanding of any of the concepts presented. I did learn some new vocabulary, but I did not leave with a solid understanding of any of it, nor would I be able to explain it to another person.The book quickly became irritating. It was not enjoyable or fun. The other books used in my course, which were much more clear and to-the-point, were far more helpful in explaining these concepts. This was a waste of two hours of my life.Most of the other students in my course agreed with my view. However, there were a couple who enjoyed this text as a break from the other books we were using, but these students were also not able to adequately explain structuralism/post-structuralism after the reading.If you are a professor who insists on using this book in a course (which I do not recommend), I would highly recommend assigning a different reading on structuralist and post-structuralist thought BEFORE having your students read this book. Perhaps starting this book with some understanding might make it easier to grasp the points made by the silly comics and pictures.

After reading this I rhought I understood a little more of these writers than I did before, but that's not saying much. At the very least it gives potted biographies of Saussure, Levi-Strauss, Barthes, Lacan, Foucault and Derrida and an idea of how they related to each other and how to pronounce their names. Their works are sometimes so obscure that sometimes there's a suspicion that they write meaningless nonsense. Some British and American philosophers have expressed this suspicion openly, and it would have been fun to see Palmer answer them. For myself I'm still assuming I'm just too stupid to understand them fully, and this was more readable than the original works. It would have been even heavier going without the illustrations. I think that their simple and amateurish artistic quality is an asset in encouraging the reader to grapple with the text.

I am by no means a scholar or student, just some that wanted to learn a little more about these words I kept hearing. The book turned out to be pretty informative and as far as I can tell pretty accurate. That being said, my complaint with the book was that it appears to have been aimed at about a high school reading level. I found it to be a little too simplistic for my tastes. I'm sure there are folks that this book would be perfect for, unfortunately, it was not what I was looking for. I was hoping for a little more depth.

Exactly as the title suggests. This book gives a great overview of postmodernism and post structuralism. I’ve got a back ground in philosophy and I think it is very suitable for the beginner and the uninitiated. Some have complained about the comics in the book but I didn’t mind them.

Love it. The product is in a very good condition, though I bought the used one, but it is worthy enough with the price, the shipment is also faster than I expected

Excellent book. Makes content accessible.

This series, for the most part, appears to be attempting to fill a niche not covered by "Cliff's Notes" or the "Dummies" series. I had hoped for a reliable, intelligent representation of Structuralism/Post-structuralism along with the levity of humor. I was satisfied on the former account, but not the latter. The cartoons that are interspersed throughout the text are not well-drawn, humorous, or even instructive. Their function appears to be to provide enough blank space to allow the reader to slow down and digest a point before moving ahead to the next page. For the reader who is capable of close, careful, critical reading, any number of introductory texts to the field would serve as well as this. Try also the comprehensive volume, "An Incomplete Education," which gives you far more for the money.

This book really helped me to better understand structuralism

As a quick and easy reference, this book is OK. But there are at least a couple of inaccuracies, the ideas aren't covered in depth and not all the major ideas from each intellectual are covered in this volume.For example, the definition of metonym given is actually the definition of a synecdoche, which is admittedly a type of metonym but this would surely confuse a beginner which the book is aimed at. The explanations of ideas are rushed as substantial space on the page is given over to unhelpful cartoons and the Derrida section didn't mention traces or grafts.Presumably, they want to encourage readers to purchase their dedicated Foucault and Derrida volumes.On the plus side, I got the book cheap second hand and it contains a useful, if basic, glossary and is a quick easy book for revision purposes but should not be solely relied on.

Meh. It is OK. But the whole purpose of the book is making the complicated matters simplistic. However the layout and the texts are quite confusing.