Liberation Theologies, Postmodernity. and the Americas. Edited by David Batstone, Eduardo Mendieta, Lois Ann Lorentzen, and Dwight N. Hopkins. London and New York: Routledge, 1997. Pages, ix + 309. Paper, $22.99 ISBN: 0415916593 Reviewed by: Will Coleman Liberation Theologies, Postmodernity. and the Americas is a collaborative endeavor of several emerging stars from among contemporary religious scholars, theologians, philosophers, hermeneuts, and cultural critics: Lois Ann Lorentzen, David Batstone, Dwight N. Hopkins, and Eduardo Mendieta. They are joined by Franz J. Hinkelammert, María Clara Bingemer, Josue A. Sathler, Amos Nascimento, Sharon D. Welch, Mark McClain Taylor, Robert Allen Warrior, and Edmund Arens. An impressive addition to their own collaborative effort is contributions from persons who are more established as scholars and/or intellectual activists: Elsa Tamez, Gustavo Gutiérrez, Jürgen Habermas, and Enrique Dussel. Collectively, in one way or another, they all share a commitment to the theme of liberation thought and praxis. In this text, they seek to take on the challenge of engaging in an intellectual discussion on postmodernity while maintaining a commitment to the theme of liberation. Moreover, they want to reflect on the advantages and disadvantages of cultural studies. Although the title suggests a primary focus on “liberation theologies,” it is clearly interdisciplinary in the strategies that the authors employ, drawing from semiotics, linguistics, hermeneutics, philosophy, aesthetics, political science, historiography, and ethics. Furthermore, the authors themselves cross gender, racial/ethnic, cultural appropriating the very idea of postmodernity as they explore the multifaceted configurations of oppression and liberation within the context of the Americas. This book fits well within the broader context of contemporary, and continental (US, Latin America, Europe) boundaries. Both individually and collectively they demonstrate a remarkable sensitivity to the complex terrain that any thinking person has to traverse in order to comprehend the implications of modernity's twilight and the dawning of a different era. Whether one chooses to call the latter late modernity or postmodernity is still debatable. Nevertheless, the modern paradigm has been severely disrupted. In my opinion, it is the profound and creative interpretation of this reality by nearly all of the contributors that merit a careful reading of this text. The text is divided into three parts: “Dangerous Hope & Liberating Memory;” “Crossing Borders: Remapping the Sacred/Secular;” and “Postmodern Praxes and Liberation Theories.” This thematic arrangement signifies those movements of continuity and discontinuity between modernist and postmodernist reflection and praxes. The tensions between modernist and postmodernist assumptions are succinctly summarized in the introduction (7-12), especially with respect to uniformity of meaning, the self/other dialectic, and the telos of history. In other words, with the disruption of modernity, a uniform system of meaning has dissipated in light of multiple meanings to any given situation, the notion of the autonomous self is challenged and the other (as in the oppressed) is no longer simply an object, but an interrelated subject, and history can be construed as contentious and retrogressive just as easily as harmoniously moving toward some omega point. These are some of the most significant changes that the contributors reveal in their writings. Although several of the essays complement each other, this book is not a conversation as such about the theme of its title. In other words, it is not a harmonized text, but a selection of representative discourses that take shape around the leitmotif of liberation theory and praxis. At the same time, it can be read as an example of how to engage in reflection on the meaning of liberation without adhering to a fixed set of assumptions on how it has to be achieved. In fact, the task of writing can be a form of liberative praxis, especially if one recognizes the epistemological issues that are at stake in being able to name and reframe how one talks about the reality in which most of the world's people live. In this vein, the present text offers a collection of readings that provide some intriguing insights into possibilities for liberation. I have already suggested what I think is a major strength of this volume: it is an anthology of intergenerational, multicultural, interdisciplinary discourses on liberation theologies, postmodernity, and the Americas. In terms of its limitations, I would advance the following observation. It seems to me that entertaining the idea of postmodernity is itself the most problematic agenda item. Indeed, most of the contributors themselves acknowledge frustration with the semiotic ambiguity that is associated with this term. The question arises, if this is the case, of why one should continue to give attention to this notion? Why not go on about the business of engaging in intellectual reflection and praxis while crafting meaning and proposing alternative praxes for the 21st century without making any specific reference to something that is called postmodernity? In light of the dismantlement of whatever modernity was, this is the opportune moment for a radical redefinition of the intellectual terrain. On the one hand, minimum homage should be given to postmodern double-talk. This is especially true in light of the confession that the oppressed have already experienced the traits of postmodernity long before those who thought of themselves as the cultured representatives of modernity began to fold under the collapse of their idol. On the other hand, maximum energy should be directed towards the next steps in formulating and implementing liberative themes, theories, and social praxes. A related observation has to do with appropriating more of the liberative languages and strategies that are arising from among the oppressed themselves in lieu of the terminology and categories that are still drawn primarily from Eurocentric frames of reference. With a few exceptions, most of the contributors do not utilize illustrations from the languages and practices of the people who inform their own sense of commitment to liberation. Ironically, and perhaps inevitably, most of their discourses remain esoteric and academic. In one sense, this is necessary in order to maintain a concerted presence within the marketplace of ideas. Nevertheless, intellectual activists such as the ones included in this volume should continue to struggle with the praxis of a multicontextual discourse that speaks with the voices of “the people” as well as those of the academic elites. In conclusion, I strongly recommend this text for religious scholars, theologians, philosophers, and cultural critiques who would appreciate the careful scholarship and creative imagination that it exhibits vis-à-vis its chosen theme.