What is postmodernism?

[Il Penseroso]

I've only heard illusive definitions of this era in literature and the arts. "Modernism in its nascent phase" etc. What is postmodernism? Who are some distinctive postmodernist writers, and by what aesthetic ideas do they operate? Is there a definitive postmodern outlook, or is it a completely unclassifiable phase that took its name only by its relative place in time to what we know of as modernism?

What are your thoughts? (not necessarily limited to literature)

[Stieg]

I find the term quite loose and nebulous and choose to save the deeper discussion for the lit majors. But here is a hilarious quote from Richard Dawkins on postmodernism:

But don't the postmodernists claim only to be 'playing games'? Isn't it the whole point of their philosophy that anything goes, there is no absolute truth, anything written has the same status as anything else, no point of view is privileged? Given their own standards of relative truth, isn't it rather unfair to take them to task for fooling around with word-games, and playing little jokes on readers? Perhaps, but one is then left wondering why their writings are so stupefyingly boring. Shouldn't games at least be entertaining, not po-faced, solemn and pretentious?

[kathycf]

Nebulous is a good way to describe postmodernism. It applies to many different disciplines as varied as literature, art and architecture. I think it can be useful to familiarize oneself with the term "modernism" first, and move from there.

This link from Georgetown University might help a little bit. Approaches to postmodernism (http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/technoculture/pomo.html).

[Il Penseroso]

Thanks, very helpful link. And funny quote above.

I'll have to spend some time thinking over the information from that link, when I don't have a paper I should be doing first. But I appreciate it. What I get confused on is that works I think to be "modern" seem indistinguishable from "postmodern." I'll elaborate when I have some more time.

[kandaurov]

You see, the problem is that what we are doing is defining a contemporary epoch. Only in fifty years from now will we be able to look back and understand what this is all about.

It's funny, because just today I was talking with my sister about post-modernism. She's doing a big project on it, and every bit of information is welcome to me too.Stieg's quote will surely come handy, thanks for that.


What I get confused on is that works I think to be "modern" seem indistinguishable from "postmodern."

Spot on. There is a large grey area between the twenties and thirties' art (I hope no one comes around saying that T. S. Eliot or Joyce were post-modernists, that's just preposterous to me) and today's art. Both modernism and post-modernism deal with fragmentation, impossibility of having one single narrative in which everything is explained, the play with time and space, and so on. K has mentioned a good point: you ought to go first to modernism, and then try to make out the difference. One good way is with cinema. I'd suggest you two fantastic german films: modernist "Metropolis", and post-modernist "Der Himmer über Berlin" (in english: "Wings of Desire"). You could also check out "Blade Runner" as an american, post-modernist counterpart of "Metropolis".

I've been typing a lot but don't feel like I really added much; that shows how messed-up my own notion of these two concepts is. I'll keep an eye on this thread, so that I myself can understand this issue better.

[PeterL]

You might also want to read the Wikipedia article on Postmodernism (link below). One thing mentioned in that that I think is telling is that Postmodernism is "counter-enlightenment. Someone mentioned that it is difficult to define a contemporary situation, but Postmosdernism is coming to an end, so we can start to see that it was mostly gas about nothing in particular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

Consideration of such articles as this also put it into perspective.
http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo

[kandaurov]

Hey, actually K's URL is great, with the modernism vs post-modernism table! Thanks a million :)

[kathycf]

Heh, I actually found it helpful to me as well. Whatever I find I know, there is always so much more more to be learned.

(and that's "Big K" to you, kandaurov.) :p

[kandaurov]

Well, I take it back then. Your link stinks :crash:

:D

[Woland]

All of human history has just been a road to the glorious postmodernist era.

:lol:

[cuppajoe_9]

All of human history has just been a road to the glorious postmodernist era.

:lol:

If that's the case, I do believe we got off at the wrong exit.

[kandaurov]

Haha, do you think so, cuppa? I guess I do as well ;) I think this is a "we're all out of ideas, let's just recycle" phase, so I can't say I sympathise with it, but I do relate with modernism a lot. Its chaotic, pessimistic nature produced some fine works of art. Can't say that it's my favourite, though, don't have one. Do you have a favourite era?

[cuppajoe_9]

I'm a big fan of the modernist period, actually (Woolf, Joyce, Pound, Forst, Fitzgerald, &c.). Not that there isn't good postmodern lit out there, but I've never been able to handle Pynchon and his ilk.

[kandaurov]

My, great list of author's in there, too! In my queue of books to be read this year, there are Woolf's, Joyce's (The Dubliners, not Ulysses, God no, not yet :p) and Fitzgerald's (only The Great Gatsy for now). Never read anything from Ezra Pound, I only know that he was a great friend of T. S. Eliot's.

It's curious how I don't know of (m)any famous postmodernist authors. That Pynchon fellow, does he write poetry? I'd just check a poem or two, to see if I like it.

[Quark]

Post modernism can be seen as the literary form of relativism. From the early twentieth century onward people became disillusioned with the idea of a universal meaning that comes from either something concrete externally or universally human. Instead, they believed that meaning was created by a set of associations that were the result of personal or historical accident. Therefore, if one person says chair, someone else might understand something entirely different than what the first person meant. They might create a chair with totally different features than what the speaker was trying to intimate. This meant that--besides having problems ordering furniture--people could not maintain that there is a universal truth or morality. Literature which is based on these shared ideas reacted with the modernist and post-modernist movements. The modernist expressed a belief in universal ideals, but accepted that the world may not reflect them and that the artist may be miserable. In Thomas Mann's Death in Venice, the story centers on an artist who is physical and mentally drained by his artistic endeavor. His audience believes that his work is a spontaneous outpouring of universal beauty, by the reader learns that it is a concentrated effort and that it may not be as pure as the readers may hope. In Kafka's The Trial, the main character tries to reach Justice--a universal concept--but fails and dies. Post-modernists gave up this fight for order and accepted that universal concepts might not exist. Their works focused less on ideas like beauty, justice, or truth, but more on societal criticism and immediate concerns. Novelist like Don Dellilo and Kurt Vonnegut build meaning by appealing to everyday lives.

I don't mean to trail off here, but I have to go. I'll try and finish later...

[cuppajoe_9]

That Pynchon fellow, does he write poetry?No, Pynchon writes novels. Or rather, encyclopaedias (http://www.worldsgreatbooks.com/images/Modern%20firsts/gravitysmff.jpg). I'm about halfway through The Crying of Lot 49, at the moment, and I'm not enjoying it very much. It's a lot shorter, though.

[Leon Trotsky]

From a historical perspective, postmodernists denied that their was any 'grand narrative' or that human history is progressive as such. They dismiss the ideas of theories being applied to history, and thus dispute Marxist Historical Materialism and other theories. There is a good book about post modernism (not just about history, but literature and other forms too) called AGAINST Postmodernism by Alex Callinicos. You should be able to find it on amazon.

[Stieg]

No, Pynchon writes novels. Or rather, encyclopaedias (http://www.worldsgreatbooks.com/images/Modern%20firsts/gravitysmff.jpg). I'm about halfway through The Crying of Lot 49, at the moment, and I'm not enjoying it very much. It's a lot shorter, though.

Pynchon is another author that intimidates me as a reader because his books are too referential for my tastes. His earlier more popular works half the messages may be lost on me as they were written to readers 3-4 decades ago. I did have Vineland and Slow Learner in my hands recently before returning them to the bookshelf. Definitely should give him a try and seeing he is particularly caught the fancy of readers here at LitNet.

[Redzeppelin]

Post-modernism "eats itself" because it essentially asserts that truth is relative and self-referential. Ultimately, that means that there is no truth - even the "truth" of postmodernism is false. All of reality becomes this: This sentence is a lie.

[PeterL]

Post-modernism "eats itself" because it essentially asserts that truth is relative and self-referential. Ultimately, that means that there is no truth - even the "truth" of postmodernism is false. All of reality becomes this: This sentence is a lie.

Amen, and now it is safe to tell the world that the emperor is naked.

[Quark]

That Post-modernism is nonsense has become a stale cliché. But to feed the discontent here's a section of Delillo's White Noise which proves the point.

"It's going to rain tonight." [Heinrich said.]

"It's raining now," I [that is, Jack] said.

"The radio said tonight...."

"Just because it's on the radio doesn't mean we have to suspend belief in the evidence of our senses."

"Our senses? Our senses are wrong a lot more often than they're right. This has been proved in the laboratory. Don't you know about all those theorems that say nothing is what it seems? There's no past, present or future outside our own mind. The so-called laws of motion are a big hoax. Even sound can trick the mind. Just because you don't hear a sound doesn't mean it's not out there...."

"What if someone held a gun to your head?"

"Who, you?"

"Someone. A man in a trenchcoat and smoky glasses. He holds a gun to your head and says, 'Is it raining or isn't it? All you have to do is tell the truth and I'll put away my gun and take the next flight out of here.'"

"What truth does he want? Does he want the truth of someone traveling at almost the speed of light in another galaxy? Does he want the truth of someone in orbit around a neutron star? Maybe if these people could see us through a telescope we might look like we're two feet two inches tall and it might be raining yesterday instead of today."

"He's holding the gun to your head. He wants your truth."

"What good is my truth? My truth means nothing. What if this guy with the gun comes from a planet in a whole different solar system? What we call rain he calls soap. What we call apples he calls rain. So what am I supposed to tell him?"

"His name is Frank J. Smalley and he comes from St. Louis."

"He wants to know if it's raining now, at this very minute."

"Here and now, that's right."

"Is there such a thing as now? 'Now' comes and goes as soon as you say it. How can I say it's raining now if your so-called 'now' becomes 'then' as soon as I say it?"

"You said there was no past, present, or future."

"Only in our verbs. That's the only place we find it."

"Rain is a noun. Is there rain here, in this precise locality at whatever time within the next two minutes that you choose to respond to the question?"

"If you want to talk about this precise locality while you're in a vehicle that's obviously moving, then I think that's the trouble with this discussion"
...

"First-rate, A victory for uncertainty, randomness and chaos. Science's finest hour"


I think we have all felt the rage that Jack is experiencing when talking to a defender of Post-modernism.

[cuppajoe_9]

Gah. Perhaps it is not possible to define the words 'rain' and 'now' quite as precisely as the post-modernists would like, but if I ask 'Is it raining now?' you know perfectly well what I mean, you bunch of pedantic nitwits.

[PeterL]

"First-rate, A victory for uncertainty, randomness and chaos. Science's finest hour"


I think we have all felt the rage that Jack is experiencing when talking to a defender of Post-modernism.

I would say that it shows a character who thinks he knows a lot more than he does. I don't feel rage when talking with a postmodernist; for me it's pity and amusement. I really shouldn't laugh at them, but it's so hard not to.