[RE-EDITED 09.12.01 13:40]
It's not about abandoning 'grand narratives', it's about contextualizing them.
No. "Contextualizing" grand narratives kills them.
Regarding your last assumption: "There is no Truth, only truths."
As for multiple truths, let me remind you of some of the earlier posts, aka "but you're still standing on my neck".
Postmodernism is only looking at the truth that "there are multiple truths" while selfishly disregarding everything else, so it can never be a great narrative itself. You've said yourself truth is subjective. So there may not be multiple truths. The whole concept of postmodernism is a crazy hallucination of the post-Auschwitz era, like a sick dog constantly running after its tail while barking nonesense.
Setting truth aside - what about structure, efficiency, companionship, rationality? I don't care the LEAST tiny bit about paradoxical mentalmasturbation generated by our lack of knowledge and historical necessity while 1 billion people are living from an average of 2$/day. You can not build a society upon uncertainty and disappointment.
It is elitistic because the "intellectual elite" is desperately trying to dissociate itself from the masses of people since the dawn of the consumer society and the birth of modern plutocracy, and its only way to do that is pulling bullshit theories from their asses. You might not be a nihilist, but postmodernism breeds nihilism.
Fortunately, I don't take it too serious and try to see it as it is: a way of transition.
They're not stating that "reason alone is not necessary", they're saying "we don't know anything for sure, and we have NO WAY to find out anything for sure in the future",
ignoramus et ignorabimus. How do you know, if the only thing you know is that you can't tell anything for sure?
Postmodernism is a retarded and short-sighted concept disregarding 6000 years of human development. We should've sent every fucker like Baudrillard back to a cave with a stick and some crayon to paint on the walls, then we could talk about subjectivity.