POSTMODERNISM

A Reader
edited and
introduced by
THOMAS DOCHERTY
Longman
An imprint of Pearson Education
Harlow, England London - ew Yor! " Reading, Massac#usetts - San $rancisco
Toronto Don Mills, Ontario S%dne% - To!%o Singa&ore Hong 'ong Seoul
Tai&ei Ca&e Town Madrid Me(ico Cit% - Amsterdam - Munic# Paris Milan
$irst &u)lis#ed *++, )% Har-ester .#eats#ea/
Pearson Education Limited T#is one0s /or t#e .ee 1arra0
Edin)urg# 2ate and in memo riam 3434D4
Harlow
Esse( CM5O 53E
England
and Associated Com&anies t#roug#out t#e world
Visit us on the World Wide Web at:
#tt&6 1/ www4&earsoneduc4com
Selection and editorial material 7 *++, T#omas Doc#ert%
T#e te(ts are re&rinted )% &ermission o/ ot#er &u)lis#ers
All rig#ts reser-ed4 o &art o/ t#is &u)lication ma% )e re&roduced, stored
in a retrie-al s%stem, or transmitted, in an% /orm, or )% an% means,
electronic, mec#anical, &#otoco&%ing, recording or ot#erwise, wit#out
&rior &ermission, in writing, /rom t#e &u)lis#ers, or a licence &ermitting
restricted co&%ing in t#e 8nited 'ingdom issued )% t#e Co&%rig#t
Licensing Agenc% Ltd, +9 Totten#am Court Road, London .*P OLP4
T%&eset in *9:*5 Pt Sa)on )%
Mat#ematical Com&osition Setters Ltd, Salis)ur%
Printed and )ound in 2reat 1ritain )%
1iddies Ltd, www.biddles.co.uk
1ritis# Li)rar% Cataloguing in Pu)lication Data
A catalogue record /or t#is )oo! is a-aila)le
/rom t#e 1ritis# Li)rar%
;S1 9-<=>9-*5=5-? @#)!A
;S1 0-7!0-1"#- @&)! A
*9 + S < ?
9, 95 9* 99
Contents
List o/ ;llustrations
Pre/ace Blii
Postmodernism6 An introduction *
PART ONE: $oundin% &ropositions ,,
'ntroduction #!
1 Jean-Francois Lyotard Answering t#e Cuestion6 .#at is
&ostmodernismD ,E
2 Jean-Francois Lyotard ote on t#e Meaning o/ FPost-0 7
, Jren !a"er#as T#e Entr% into Postmodernit%6 ietGsc#e as a
turning &oint $1
= Fredric %a#eson Postmodernism, or T#e Cultural Logic o/ Late
Ca&italism ?5
PART Two6 (odernity )omplete and 'ncomplete *#
'ntroduction *!
! Jren !a"er#as Modernit% H An ;ncom&lete ProIect +E
+ &ianni 'atti#o T#e Structure o/ Artistic Re-olutions **9
7 Da(id )oo* T#e Last Da%s o/ Li)eralism *59
E +y#,nt -a,#an T#e $all o/ t#e Legislator *5E
PART T!REE: Aesthetic and )ultural &ractices *=*
'ntroduction *=,
* ./a" Hassan Toward a Conce&t o/ Postmodernism *=?
*9 Sa..y -anes ;ntroduction to ,erpsichore in -neakers 1!7
11 Do,.as )ri#0 T#e P#otogra&#ic Acti-it% o/ Postmodetiiism *<5
*5 Pa,. )ro1t/er Postmodernism in t#e Jisual Arts6 A Kuestion o/
ends *E9
(ii
(iii )ontents )ontents i2
*, Jean -a,dri..ard T#e E-il Demon o/ ;mages and T#e Precession o/ Simulacra
*= 3#"erto Eco T#e Cit% o/ Ro)ots
*> Mic/ae. Ny#an Against ;ntellectual Com&le(it% in Music
PART FO3R: )risis in the A.ant-/arde
'ntroduction
*? Andreas !,yssen T#e Searc# /or Tradition6 A-ant-garde and &ostmodernism in t#e *+<9s
*< Peter -,rer T#e egation o/ t#e Autonom% o/ Art )% t#e A-ant-2arde
*E Jean-Francois Lyotard T#e Su)lime and t#e A-ant-2arde
*+ Ac/i..e -onito O.i(a T#e ;nternational Trans-A-ant-2arde
PART FI'E: Architecture and 0rbanicity
'ntroduction
59 4ennet/ Fra#0ton Toward a Critical Regionalism6 Si( &oints /or an arc#itecture o/ resistance
5* )/ar.es Jenc*s T#e Emergent Rules
55 Ro"ert 'ent,ri T#e Duc! and t#e Decorated S#ed
5, Pao.o Porto/esi Postmodern
PART SI5: &olitics
'ntroduction
5= Ric/ard Rorty Postmodernist 1ourgeois Li)eralism
5> Ernesto Lac.a, Politics and t#e Limits o/ Modernit%
5? Andr6 &or7 T#e Condition o/ Post-Mar(ist Man
5< Jean -a,dri..ard Toward a Princi&le o/ E-il
PART SE'EN: $eminism
'ntroduction
5E Mea/an Morris $eminism, Reading, Postmodernism
5+ Sa"ina Loyi"ond $eminism and Postmodernism
89 Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son Social Criticism wit#out P#iloso&#%6 An encounter )etween /eminism and &ostmodernism
,* A.ice Jardine T/e Demise o/ E(&erience6 $iction as stranger t#an trut#D
PART EI&!T: &eriphery and &ostmodernism
*+=
599
59?
5*>
5*<
559
5,<
5==
5><
'ntroduction
,5 Si#on D,rin Postmodernism or Post-colonialism Toda%
88 Ne..y Ric/ard Postmodernism and Peri&#er%
,= Rey )/o1 Rereading Mandarin Duc!s and 1utter/lies6 A res&onse to t#e F&ostmodern0 condition
1i)liogra&#%
Ac!nowledgements
;nde(
5?,
5?>
5?E
5E*
5+>
,9E
,*<
,*+
,5,
,5+
,==
#!!
,?,
,?>
,?E
,+9
a
=*>
=,,
==,
==>
==E
=?,
=<*
=+*
>*5
!1!
List of Illustrations
5*4*, 5 3ames Stirling and Mic#ael .il/ord, FClore 2aller%0,
addition to
t#e Tate 2aller%, London, *+E5H? @P#otogra&#s R4
1r%antA4 5E=
5*4, Leon 'rier, FS&ital/ields Mar!et0, aerial -iew o/
rede-elo&ment
&roIect, London, *+E?4 5E?
5*4= Mic#ael 2ra-es, FPloce! House0, detail o/ rear
ele-ation,
.arren, ew 3erse%, *+<EHE5 @P#otogra&# C4 3enc!sA4
5E<
5*4> C#arles 3enc!s and Terr% $arrell, FT#ematic House0,
garden
ele-ation, London, *+<EHE5 @P#otogra&# C4 3enc!sA4
5E<
5*4? C#arles Janden#o-e, FHotel Torrentius Reno-ation0,
ground
/loor, Liege, *+E*H5, decoration )% Oli-ie De)rL
@P#otogra&#
courtes% t#e arc#itectA4 5E+
5*4< C#arles Janden#o-e, F$aMade o/ t#e Museum o/
Decorati-e
Arts0, reno-ation, 2#ent, *+E? @P#otogra&# courtes% t#e
arc#itectA4 5+9
5*4E Moore 2ro-er Har&er, FSammis Hall0, central lig#t well,
Cold
S&ring Har)our, *+E9H* @P#otogra&# courtes% t#e
arc#itectA4 5+5
554* FT#e Long ;sland Duclding0 /rom /od1s 2wn 3unk yard.
5+?
5545 Duc!4 5+?
554, Road scene /rom /od1s 2wn 3unkyard. 5+<
554= Decorated s#ed4 5+<
2i
Preface
Recent announcements regarding t#e end o/ #istor% #a-e )een muc# e(aggerated4 Histor% is not onl% continuing, it is also &roli/erating6 t#e reco-er% o/ #istories and o/ local
traditions is &roceeding in suc# a wa% and to suc# an e(tent t#at a disconcerting range o/ &ossi)le /utures H some com/orting, ot#ers distressing H is )ecoming a&&arent4 T#e
de)ates o-er w#ic# direction to /ollow, o-er w#ic# roads to ta!e in t#ese generati-e narrati-es, ta!e t#eir &lace wit#in an e(tensi-e set o/ arguments o-er w#at constitutes Ft#e
contem&orar%04 Anot#er name /or t#e /ocus o/ t#ese de)ates is Ft#e &ostmodern Kuestion04 .e are not at t#e end o/ #istor%N we are rat#er at t#e )eginning o/ a ret#in!ing o/
modernit%, a ret#in!ing o/ t#e world under t#e sign o/ &ostmodernism4
Yet alt#oug# t#e term F&ostmodern0 #as )ecome one o/ t#e most insistentl% used terms in t#e cultural de)ates o/ recent %ears, it is a term w#ic# #as o/ten )een used wit# a
great deal o/ im&recision4 $or some, &ostmodern eKuates wit# Fni#ilistic0 or Fanarc#ic0N /or ot#ers, it re/ers to a culture dominated )% t#e )analit% o/ tele-isual re&resentations
and Las Jegas-st%le neon-signs w#ose &resence e-er%w#ere reminds us o/ t#e McDonaldisation o/ an ot#erwise -egetarian worldN %et ot#ers t#in! o/ t#at e(&losion o/
&oststructuralist t#eor% w#ic# arose in t#e *+?9s and *+<9s as a &ostmodern manner o/ t#in!ing4 T#e &re-alence o/ suc# &o&ulist, rat#er su&er/icial and essentiall% misleading
c#aracterisations o/ t#e &ostmodern is trou)ling /or an%one w#o would ta!e t#e issues o/ contem&orar% culture seriousl%4
T#e central rationale /or t#is ant#olog% is to indicate t#e enormous and eclectic )od% o/ interests u&on w#ic# t#e &ostmodern de)ate #as made a signi/icant mar!4 T#e
gat#ering o/ &ieces will also re-eal #ow &#iloso&#icall% serious and di//icult muc# o/ t#e argument is H and t#ere/ore, #ow necessar% is t#e &roduction o/ t#e &resent 4eader.
;t is t#us a good moment to gat#er toget#er in one -olume a di-erse and e(tensi-e )od% o/ writings on t#e su)Iect w#ic# #a-e s#a&ed t#e -aried de)ates4 Critics w#o are
&ro/oundl% aware o/ t#e arguments wit#in arc#itecture, /or instance, will /ind #ere t#at t#ere is some o-erla& )etween &a&ers t#e% ma% alread% !now and &a&ers ta!en /rom
t#e /ield o/ &olitics or /eminismN readers well -ersed in literar% #istor% will /ind t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ cross-re/erencing t#eir !nowledge in t#is area wit# t#e area o/ &#otogra&#%
or dance or &#iloso&#%N &eo&le interested in Su)altern studies will disco-er t#e wa%s in w#ic# t#at area ena)les a &ossi)le inter/ace wit# t#e a-antgardeN and so on4
; #a-e constructed t#is ant#olog% o/ &ieces wit# se-eral aims in mind4 $irst, t#e
2iii
2i( &reface
s&eci/ic articles collected toget#er constitute a com)ination o/ t#e most in/luential and t#e most su)stantial essa%s w#ic# #a-e s#a&ed t#e &ostmodern Kuestion4 Secondl%, ;
#a-e included articles w#ic# are anti&at#etic to &ostmodernism as well as some w#ic# are more /a-oura)l% dis&osedN )ut t#e reader will realise /airl% Kuic!l% t#at most o/ t#e
&ieces #ere ma!e a genuine engagement wit# !e% cultural issues rat#er t#an a sim&le &olemical attac! on or de/ence o/ a sim&le &osition4
Most im&ortant is m% t#ird aim4 ; #a-e organised t#ese &ieces into eig#t categories to allow a reader to orientate #ersel/ or #imsel/ to t#e )oo! as a w#ole and to &lot #er or
#is own traIector% t#roug# it4 Eac# section #as its own internal logic and can )e H t#oug# it need not )e H read se&aratel%4 T#e w#ole mig#t )e t#oug#t o/ as a Fma& o/
&ostmodernism0, in w#ic# eac# section determines its own Forder o/ t#ings0 internall%, w#ile %et retaining t#e &ossi)ilit% and e-entuall% t#e necessit% o/ re/erring to ot#er,
di//erent Forders0 to su)stantiate its signi/icance4 T#e seKuential arrangement o/ t#ese sections #ints at m% own orientation to t#e Kuestions, starting /rom &#iloso&#%, mo-ing
into cultural Kuestions, and on into o-ertl% &olitical issues4 M% section introductions, #owe-er, are meant to alert t#e reader more or less co-ertl% to &ossi)le lines w#ic# will
ena)le a reading F)etween0 or across t#e demarcated section )oundaries6 t#e reader o/ t#is 4eader will /ind it &ossi)le in time to )e transgressi-e, and will e-entuall% start to
draw #er or #is own di//erent lines across t#e terrain4 Suc# a redrawing o/ )oundaries, wit# t#e concomitant reorganisation o/ m% c#ronological or tem&oral seKuencing o/ t#e
articles, is o/ t#e essence o/ a &ostmodern #istor% w#ose a)iding Kuestions address t#e ret#in!ing o/ t#e tem&oral and s&atial categories wit#in w#ic# social and &olitical
)eing is &ossi)le4
Man% &eo&le H a&art /rom t#e &eo&le w#o actuall% wrote it H #a-e contri)uted to t#e s#a&ing o/ t#is )oo!4 M% colleagues and students in 8ni-ersit% College Du)lin and, more
recentl%, in Trinit% College Du)lin, ga-e me t#e time and energ% to underta!e t#e &roIect4 ;t would not #a-e )een &ossi)le wit#out t#e e(tensi-e and muc#-a&&reciated #el&
o/ t#e li)rar% sta// in 8CD and in t#e 1odleian Li)rar%, O(/ord4 As alwa%s, 1ridie Ma% Sulli-an sustained me w#ile t#e &roIect was in &rogress, ena)ling it in t#e most
/undamental wa%s4 2eraldine Mangan ga-e muc#-needed secretarial and administrati-e #el& at a crucial stage4 T#e &roIect was initiall% suggested to me )% 3ac!ie 3ones o/
Har-ester .#eats#ea/, w#o #as s#e&#erded t#e -olume t#roug# its entire &roduction, and wit#out w#ose e(&ert assistance t#e )oo! sim&l% would not #a-e )een made4 ;t
would not #a-e )een &ossi)le to #a-e #ad a more care/ul H and caring H editor, w#ose -ision and encouragement #a-e )een more t#an ; could #a-e as!ed /or, and more t#an ;
deser-ed4 M% t#an!s to all t#ese &eo&le does not im&licate t#em in an% in/elicities in t#e arrangement o/ materials #ere, w#ic# remain m% /ault4
Postmodernism: An
Introduction
A s&ectre is #aunting Euro&e H t#e s&ectre o/ communism4
MARB, )ommunist (anifesto5 *E=E
FA s&ectre is roaming t#roug# Euro&e6 t#e Postmodern40
PORTO2HES;, citing 6e (onde5 *+E,
8n s&ectre #ante la &ensLe contem&oraine6 le s&ectre du suIet4
$ERRY, *++9
T#ere is #ardl% a single /ield o/ intellectual endea-our w#ic# #as not )een touc#ed )% t#e s&ectre o/ Ft#e &ostmodern04 ;t lea-es its traces in e-er% cultural disci&line /rom
arc#itecture to Goolog%, ta!ing in on t#e wa% )iolog%, /orestr%, geogra&#%, #istor%, law, literature and t#e arts in general, medicine, &olitics, &#iloso&#%, se(ualit%, and so on4
Yet t#is amor&#ous t#ing remains g#ostl% H and /or some, g#astl% H /or t#e sim&le reason t#at t#e de)ate around t#e &ostmodern #as ne-er &ro&erl% )een engaged4 T#e term
itsel/ #o-ers uncertainl% in most current wrttings )etween H on t#e one #and H e(tremel% com&le( and di//icult &#iloso&#ical senses, and H on t#e ot#er H an e(tremel% sim&listic
mediation as a ni#ilistic, c%nical tendenc% in contem&orar% culture4
.#at is at issue in t#e &ostmodernD ;t would )e a /utile and &ointless e(ercise to o//er an% sim&le de/inition o/ t#e term itsel/N indeed, muc# argument arises o-er t#e
Kuestion o/ &recisel% #ow t#e &ostmodern s#ould )e de/ined4 T#e term was &ro)a)l% /irst used )% Arnold To%n)ee in *+,+, and &re/igured )% #im in *+,=4 ;n #is massi-e A
-tudy of 7istory5 To%n)ee &ro&osed in a /ootnote on t#e /irst &age o/ t#e /irst -olume t#at t#e &eriod re/erred to )% #istorians as t#e Omodern0 &eriod ends more or less in t#e
t#ird Kuarter o/ t#e nineteent# centur% H t#at is, sometime )etween *E>9 and *E<>4 T#is suggests t#at t#ere is /rom t#at moment a !ind o/ )rea! into a &eriod Fa/ter
modernism0, a &ostmodernit% located not in t#e twentiet# centur% )ut rat#er in t#e nineteent#4 As To%n)ee &roceeded wit# #is wor!, #e consolidated t#is notion o/ an end o/
t#e modern &eriod, and in Jolume - o/ t#e stud%, &u)lis#ed in *+,+, #e used t#e term F&ost-modern0, com&lete wit# scare Kuotes, /or t#e /irst
5 &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction ,
time4 At t#is &oint #e #ad s#i/ted t#e c#ronolog% slig#tl%, suggesting t#at t#e modern now comes to an end during t#e $irst .orld .ar, *+*=H*E, and t#at t#e &ostmodern
)egins to articulate and s#a&e itsel/ in t#e %ears )etween t#e two wars, )etween *+*E and *+,+45
To%n)ee was a &roduct o/ t#e late-nineteent#-centur% desire to /ound a s%no&tic and uni-ersal #istor%, )elie-ing in t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a totalised #uman #istor%4 T#is
demand was answered in To%n)ee0s wor! )% t#e /act t#at #is own #istoriogra&#% is, in /act, a C#ristian t#eodic%4 His tas! was, in a sense, to write a #istor% w#ic# would
redeem #umanit%, )% disco-ering t#e traIector% o/ uni-ersal #istor% to )e a mo-ement o/ di-ergence /rom an original t#eocentric moment H a sundering /rom 2od H dri-en
su)seKuentl% )% t#e im&ulse o/ return to t#at same origin6 a narrati-e, li!e t#e 2dyssey5 o/ ad-enture and return, in w#ic# secularit% itsel/ is seen as an enormous digression in
w#at is /undamentall% a circular narrati-e structure4 T#e /acts o/ #istor% would ma!e sense, according to To%n)ee, in relation to a &residing, go-erning narrati-e structure
w#ic#, i/ not necessaril% alwa%s e(&licit, would none t#e less )e gi-en and legitimated in ad-ance4
T#is notion o/ #istor% is one inde)ted to a certain con/lict in t#e Enlig#tenment4 As Ha%den .#ite &oints out, t#e Enlig#tenment )roadl% agreed wit# Lei)niG0s
monadolog% in t#e sense t#at t#e &#iloso&#ers o/ t#e Enlig#tenment su)scri)ed to t#e -iew t#at t#ere was an underl%ing unit% or direction to #uman #istor%4 1ut t#e
di//erence )etween Lei)niG and t#e Enlig#tenment is t#at Lei)niG t#in!s t#at t#is essential unit% o/ t#e #uman race is sim&l% immanent, w#ereas t#e &#iloso&#ers o/
Enlig#tenment -iew it as an ideal w#ic# lies in t#e /uture, an ideal w#ic# is6
yet to be reali8ed in #istorical time4 T#e% could not ta!e it as a presupposition o/ t#eir #istorical writing, not merel% )ecause t#e data did not )ear it out, )ut )ecause it did not accord
wit# t#eir own e(&erience o/ t#eir own social worlds4 $or t#em t#e unit% o/ #umanit% was an ideal w#ic# t#e% could pro9ect into t#e /uture 4
To%n)ee0s in-ocation o/ a &ostmodern moment can t#us )e seen to )e consonant wit# t#e idealist dri-e o/ Lei)niG, )ut one w#ic# ac!nowledges t#is necessaril% /uturist
orientation o/ #istor% itsel/4 Li!e t#e critic Eric# Auer)ac#, w#o also wanted to -alidate t#e idea o/ a s#ared #umanit% in w#ic# F)elow t#e sur/ace con/licts0, Ft#e elementar%
t#ings w#ic# our li-es #a-e in common come to lig#t0,
=
To%n)ee sees t#at t#e Fmodern0 moment is not one o/ suc# uni-ersal #armon%6 )ot# writers were writing under t#e
sign o/ t#e Second .orld .ar4 1ut To%n)ee0s answer is to #%&ot#esise a moment in t#e /uture, a &ostmodern moment, w#en #istor% and #umanit% can )e redeemed4
T#e word F&ostmodern0 is t#us, c#aracterised, /rom its -er% ince&tion, )% an am)iguit%4 On t#e one #and it is seen as a #istorical &eriodN on t#e ot#er it is sim&l% a desire, a
mood w#ic# loo!s to t#e /uture to redeem t#e &resent4 T#e word, wit# t#is am)i-alence, t#en #o-ers around t#e edges o/ sociological arguments and t#e Fend o/ ideolog%0
de)ates in t#e *+>9s4 1ut it is in t#e t#eories o/ arc#itecture and in t#e discourses o/ literar% criticism t#at t#e &eculiar tension in t#e term )egins to
articulate itsel/ more &ointedl%4 ;n )ot#, t#ere is a tension )etween, on t#e one #and, t#in!ing o/ t#e &ostmodern as a c#iliastic #istorical &eriod w#ic#, Fa/ter modernit%0, we
eit#er #a-e entered or are a)out to enter, w#ile on t#e ot#er realising t#at we are condemned to li-e in a &resent, and ado&ting a s&eci/ic H some #a-e said Fsc#iGo&#renic0 H
mood as a result o/ ac!nowledging t#at t#is &resent is c#aracterised )% struggle or contradiction and inco#erence4 ;n t#is latter case, t#e mood in Kuestion is in t#e /irst
instance seemingl% determined )% a KuasiietGsc#ean Facti-e /orgetting0 o/ t#e &ast-#istorical conditioning o/ t#e &resent, in t#e dri-e to a /uturit%4 ?
T#is tension is one w#ic# also la%s )are t#e underl%ing tension )etween an attitude to &ostmodernism as an aest#etic st%le and &ostmodernit% as a &olitical and cultural
realit%N t#at is, it o&ens a Kuestion w#ic# #ad )een de)ated )e/ore, on t#e &ro&er relation )etween aest#etics and &olitics4 T#e &articular intimac% o/ t#e relation )etween t#e
aest#etic and t#e &olitical under t#e ru)ric o/ t#e &ostmodern is a&&arent e-en /rom t#e earliest engagements4 $iedler, /or instance, c#aracterises t#e emergence o/ a new
artistic &riorit% in t#e no-els o/ t#e mid-*+?9s as a Fcritical &oint0 in w#ic# we are &eculiarl% aware Fo/ t#e sense in w#ic# literature i/ not in-ents, at least colla)orates in t#e
in-ention o/ time04 He goes On6
At an% rate, we #a-e long )een aware @in t#e last decades uncom/orta)l% awareA t#at a c#ie/ /unction o/ literature is to e(&ress and in &art to create not onl% t#eories o/
time )ut also attitudes toward time4 Suc# attitudes constitute, #owe-er, a &olitics as well as an est#etics 444
Suc# reconsiderations o/ culture in terms o/ t#e relation )etween t#e aest#etic and t#e &olitical come to t#eir /ullest de-elo&ment in t#e more recent wor! o/ 3ameson and
L%otard4 1ut it s#ould immediatel% )e noted t#at a dee& /ormati-e in/luence l%ing )e#ind muc# o/ t#e contem&orar% de)ate is t#e legac% o/ t#e $ran!/urt Sc#ool, &er#a&s
most es&eciall% t#e wor! o/ Adorno, to w#ic# ; s#all return in more detail )elow4 $or &resent &ur&oses, t#e salient /act is t#at aest#etic &ostmodernism is alwa%s intimatel%
im)ricated wit# t#e issue o/ a &olitical &ostmodernit%4
As a result o/ t#is legac% in#erited /rom $ran!/urt, t#e issue o/ t#e &ostmodern is also H tangentiall%, at least H an issue o/ Mar(ism4 Mar(ism, in &lacing t#e la)ouring )od%
at t#e inter/ace )etween consciousness and material #istor%, is t#e necessar% e(&lanator% and critical correlati-e o/ a modern culture w#ose tec#nolog% @in t#e /orm o/ an
industrial re-olutionA di-ides #uman !nowledge or consciousness /rom #uman &ower or material #istor%4 1ut t#e continuing re-olutionar% s#i/ts wit#in ca&italism itsel/ #a-e
necessitated in recent %ears a mar!ed and -igorous sel/re/lection on t#e &art o/ Mar(ism4 ;n Ha)ermas, /or instance, Mar(ism #as ta!en Ft#e linguistic turn0, in arguments /or
a continuation o/ t#e emanci&ator% goals o/ Mar(ist t#eor% and &ractice under a slig#tl% re-ised ru)ric o/ Fcommunicati-e action04
t
Ha)ermas0s /ait# in t#e continuing -ia)ilit%
o/ a -igorousl% sel/-re-ising Mar(ism is s#ared )% a t#in!er suc# as 3ameSOil, w#o models #is -ersion o/ FLate Mar(ism0 to corres&ond to Mandel0s descri&tions o/ FLate
Ca&italism04
+
: &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
A !e% date #ere is, o/ course, *+?E4 T#e seeming a-aila)ilit% o/ a re-olution w#ic# )roug#t wor!ers and intellectuals toget#er all across Euro&e re&resented a #ig# &oint /or
a s&eci/ic !ind o/ Mar(ist t#eoretical &ractice4 1ut w#en t#ese re-olutions /ailed, man% )egan, at &recisel% t#at moment, to ret#in! t#eir commitment to t#e /undamental
&remisses o/ Mar(ist t#eor%4 Rudol&# 1a#ro and AndrL 2orG )egan, /rom an economistic &ers&ecti-e, to ret#in! issues o/ growt# and sustaina)le de-elo&ment4 T#eir
emergent ecologism coincided nicel% wit# t#e Fimaginati-e0 as&ects o/ *+?E, and Co#n-1endit )egan #is own mo-ement /rom red to green4 T#ese all Ioined neatl% wit# t#e
growing awareness o/ Kuestions o/ colonialism and im&erialismN and t#e de-elo&ed countries )egan to Kuestion not onl% t#e desire o/ t#e underde-elo&ed countries /or t#e
same le-els o/ consumerist tec#nolog% as t#ose enIo%ed )% t#e $irst .orld, )ut also t#e reliance o/ t#at $irst .orld u&on e(#austi)le &lanetar% resources4 $or man%, Mar(ism
now )egan to a&&ear as &art o/ t#e &ro)lem, es&eciall% in its assum&tion o/ t#e desira)ilit% o/ #uman master% o-er nature4 T#e emerging 2reen mo-ement in t#is &eriod
mo-ed closel% towards a F&ost-Mar(ism0 o/ sorts, s#aring t#e emanci&ator% ideals and t#e desire /or t#e /ullest &ossi)le enIo%ment o/ #uman ca&acities, )ut tem&ering t#at
wit# t#e idea o/ a necessar% co#a)itation )etween #umanit% and t#e rest o/ nature4 O 2ramsci )egan to assume a &rominent &osition in t#is !ind o/ t#in!ing, and #is ideas on
F#egemon%0 )egan to re&lace Kuestions o/ class in im&ortance /or some &olitical t#eorists4 Laclau and Mou//e can t#us &ro&ose a socialist strateg% w#ic# is, strictl% s&ea!ing,
not Mar(ist )ut F&ost-Mar(ist04 O
Per#a&s t#e most e(treme ret#in!ing o/ Mar( )egan wit# t#e so-called F&#iloso&#% o/ desire0 in te(ts suc# as L%otard0s :conomie libidinale5 or in t#e wor! o/ DeleuGe and 2uattari
in t#e two -olumes o/ t#eir )apitalisme et schi8ophr;nie. T#is wor! led L%otard and DeleuGe to t#e &osition w#ere t#e% seem to /a-our t#e su&er-ention o/ a micro&olitics w#ic#
will attend to t#e local and t#e s&eci/ic wit#out recourse to some grand &rogramme or macro&olitical t#eor% suc# as Mar(ism, or &s%c#oanal%sis, or e-olutionar% &rogress4
T#e most e(&licit attac! on t#e /undamental Mar(ist categor% o/ &roduction is /ull% de-elo&ed in 1audrillard0s 6e (iroir de 'a production. T#is wor! set 1audrillard /irml% on a
traIector% awa% /rom an% /orm o/ classical Mar(ism4 His wor! since t#at time #as increasingl% sustained a case against t#e o&&ositional im&etus inscri)ed in Mar(ist t#eor%4
$or 1audrillard, o&&osition is itsel/ alwa%s accounted /or in an% go-erning ideological /ormation4 Mar(ism acts as a !ind o/ inoculation, inserted wit#in t#e )od% o/
ca&italism t#e )etter to sustain it6 Fcritical0 or Fo&&ositional0 t#in!ing is, so to s&ea!, t#e last re/uge o/ t#e )ourgeois4 12
T#eor% H )% w#ic# ; #ere mean an% critical &ractice w#ic# ma!es a &#iloso&#icall% /oundational claim H now enters into crisis itsel/4 ot onl% #as !nowledge )ecome
uncertain, )ut more im&ortantl% t#e w#ole Kuestion o/ #ow to legitimise certain /orms o/ !nowledge and certain contents o/ !nowledge is /irml% on t#e agenda6 no single
satis/actor% mode o/ e&istemological legitimation is a-aila)le4 E-en i/ one were, t#e -er% Su)Iect o/ consciousness #as, as a result o/ deconstruction and &s%c#oanal%sis, also
)een t#rown into dou)t, &ro-o!ing 1adiou
$
into t#e &ro&osition o/ an entirel% new and &ost-Lacanian t#eor% o/ t#e Su)Iect4 ;n t#e &ostmodern, it #as )ecome di//icult to ma!e t#e &ro&osition F; !now t#e meaning o/
&ostmodernism0 H not onl% )ecause t#e &ostmodern is a /raug#t to&ic, )ut also )ecause t#e F;0 w#o su&&osedl% !nows is itsel/ t#e site o/ a &ostmodern &ro)lematic4 18
; &ro&ose to introduce t#e nature o/ t#e de)ate under t#ree main #eadings4 $irst, ; s#all address t#e issue o/ t#e Enlig#tenment and its legac%4 T#is leads into a necessar%
reconsideration o/ t#e conce&tions and constructions o/ t#e 'antian categories o/ time and s&ace4 T#irdl%, ; s#all raise directl% t#e Kuestion o/ &olitics, s&eci/icall% under t#e ru)ric o/ a t#eor%
o/ Iustice4
I En.i/ten#ent;s Leacies
A maIor source /or t#e contem&orar% de)ates around t#e &ostmodern is to )e /ound in t#e wor! o/ t#e $ran!/urt Sc#ool, most s&eci/icall% in t#e te(t &ro&osed )% Adorno and
Hor!#eimer in *+==, <ialectic of :nli%htenment5 a wor! Fwritten w#en t#e end o/ t#e aGi terror was wit#in sig#t04 T#is wor! &re/igures some o/ L%otard0s later Kuestioning o/
Enlig#tenment, and seriousl% engages t#e issue o/ mass culture in a wa% w#ic# in/luences 2orG0s t#oug#ts on t#e Fleisure merc#ants0 o/ contem&orar% ca&italist societies4 ;t is
wort# indicating in &assing t#at it is Adorno and Hor!#eimer, not L%otard, w#o &ro&ose t#at FEnlig#tenment is totalitarian04 i: T#e -ulgar c#aracterisation o/ t#e 2erman
&#iloso&#ical tradition as &ro-Enlig#tenment and t#e $renc# as anti-Enlig#tenment is sim&listic and /alse4
T#e Enlig#tenment aimed at #uman emanci&ation /rom m%t#, su&erstition and ent#ralled enc#antment to m%sterious &owers and /orces o/ nature t#roug# t#e &rogressi-e
o&erations o/ a critical reason4 According to 2a%, FT#e Enlig#tenment ma% )e summed u& in two words6 criticism and &ower06 criticism would )ecome creati-e &recisel% )%
its ca&acit% /or em&owering t#e indi-idual and ena)ling #er or #is /reedom4 1$ .#% do Adorno and Hor!#eimer set t#emsel-es in o&&osition to t#is ostensi)l% admira)le
&rogrammeD .#% do t#e% argue t#at FT#e /ull% enlig#tened
eart# radiates disaster trium&#ant0D 1< -
T#e &ro)lem lies not so muc# in t#e t#eoretical &rinci&le o/ Enlig#tenment as in its &ractice4 ;n t#e desire to contest an% /orm o/ animistic enc#antment )% nature,
Enlig#tenment set out to t#in! t#e natural world in an a)stract /orm4 As a result, t#e material content o/ t#e world )ecomes a merel% /ormal conce&tual set o/ categories4 As
Adorno and Hor!#eimer &ut it6
$rom now on, matter would at last )e mastered wit#out an% illusion o/ ruling or in#erent &owers, o/ #idden Kualities4 $or t#e Enlig#tenment, w#ate-er does not con/orm to t#e rule o/ com&utation and utilit% is
sus&ect4 *<
;n a word, reason #as )een reduced to rnathesis: t#at is, it #as )een reduced to a s&eci/ic form o/ reason4 More im&ortantl%, t#is s&eci/ic in/lection o/ reason is also
< &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction =
now &resented as i/ it were reason-as-suc#, as i/ it were t#e onl% -alid or legitimate /orm o/ rational t#in!ing4 1ut Adorno and Hor!#eimer s#are a /ear t#at, in t#is &rocedure, reason #as itsel/
sim&l% )ecome a /ormal categor%, w#ic# reduces or translates t#e s&eci/ic contents o/ material realities into rational conce&ts, or into a /orm amena)le to mat#ematisation4 Reason )ecomes no
more t#an a discourse, a language o/ reason @mat#ematicsA, w#ic# deals wit# t#e F/oreign0 matter o/ realit% )% translating it into reason0s own termsN and somet#ing H non-conce&tual realit% itsel/
H gets lost in t#e translation4 As Adorno and Hor!#eimer &ut it6 FT#e multi&licit% o/ /orms is reduced to &osition and arrangement, #istor% to /act, t#ings to matter40
*E
A mat#ematical
consciousness t#us &roduces t#e world, not sur&risingl%, as mat#ematics4 So a desired !nowledge o/ t#e world is reduced to t#e merest anamnesis5 in w#ic# t#e consciousness ne-er cognises t#e
world as it is, )ut rat#er reco%nises t#e world as its own &ro&er image and correlate4 *+
Enlig#tenment0s Femanci&ator%0 !nowledge turns out to in-ol-e itsel/ wit# a Kuestion o/ &ower, w#ic# com&licates and &er#a&s e-en restricts its emanci&ator% Kualit%4 'nowledge,
concei-ed as a)stract and utilitarian, as a master% o-er recalcitrant nature, )ecomes c#aracterised )% &owerN as a result, FEnlig#tenment )e#a-es toward t#ings as a dictator toward man4 He
!nows t#em in so /ar as #e can mani&ulate t#em4 T#e man o/ science !nows t#ings in so /ar as #e can ma!e t#em40
59
'nowledge is reduced to tec#nolog%, a tec#nolog% w#ic# ena)les t#e
illusion o/ &ower and o/ domination o-er nature4 ;t is im&ortant to stress t#at t#is is an illusion4 T#is !ind o/ !nowledge does not gi-e actual &ower o-er nature, /or t#at in nature w#ic# is
unamena)le to its /ormal or conce&tual categories sim&l% esca&es consciousness entirel%4 .#at it does gi-e in t#e wa% o/ &ower is, o/ course, a &ower o-er t#e consciousness o/ ot#ers w#o ma%
)e less /luent in t#e language o/ reason4 'nowledge t#us )ecomes caug#t u& in a dialectic o/ master% and sla-er% in w#ic# t#e mastered or o-ercome is not nature )ut rat#er ot#er #uman
indi-idualsN it is t#ere/ore not &urel% c#aracterised )% disenc#antment and emanci&ation4 $rom now on, to !now is to )e in a &osition to ensla-e4
T#e -er% m%t#s /rom w#ic# Enlig#tenment claims t#e ca&acit% to disenc#ant #umanit% are t#emsel-es t#e &roducts o/ Enlig#tenment, constructed and &roduced in order to )e unmas!ed )%
Enlig#tenment, and #ence to legitimise t#e utilitarian acti-it% o/ an Enlig#tenment e&istemolog%4 1ut we can no longer claim t#at Enlig#tenment sim&l% &roduces a !nowledge o/ t#e contents o/
t#e material worldN rat#er, it &roduces a /ormall% em&owered Su)Iect o/ consciousness4 As L%otard would later &ut it6 Fw#at was and is at issue is t#e introduction o/ t#e will into reason04
5*
Anot#er wa% o/ &utting t#is would )e to suggest t#at w#at is at issue is a con/usion )etween t#e o&erations o/ a &ure reason on t#e one #and and a &ractical reason on t#e ot#er4 T#at is, t#e
con/usion is )etween t#eor% and &ractice, or H as t#at o&&osition #as most o/ten articulated itsel/ H )etween %nosis and pra=is. T#is is an old Aristotelian distinction !nown /or modern times to
literar% t#eor% -ia P#ili& Sidne%0s mediation o/ Aristotle and Horace in t#e Renaissance4 Sidne% considers a Kuarrel )etween t#e /aculties o/ &oetr% and &#iloso&#%, reO,44rding t#eir res&ecti-e
claims tO legislati-e &riorit%4 Poetr%, #e claims, is F&#ilo&#iloso&#ical0, &#iloso&#% raised to t#e second &ower, )ecause it com)ines e&istemolog% wit# emotion Hcom)ines t#e utile wit# t#e
dulce:
And t#at mo-ing is o/ a #ig#er degree t#an teac#ing, it ma% )% t#is a&&ear, t#at it is wellnig# t#e cause and t#e e//ect o/ teac#ing4 $or w#o will )e taug#t, i/ #e )e not mo-ed wit# desire to )e taug#t,
and w#at so muc# good dot# t#at teac#ing )ring /ort# @; s&ea! still o/ moral doctrineA as t#at it mo-et# one to do t#at w#ic# it dot# teac#D $or, as Aristotle sait#, it is not 2nosis )ut Pra(is must )e
t#e /ruit4 And #ow Pra(is cannot )e, wit#out )eing mo-ed to &ractise, it is no #ard matter to consider4 55
T#is &re/igures man% contro-ersial and &ertinent twentiet#-centur% issues, /rom
34 L4 Austin0s &er/ormati-e linguistics, t#roug# 'ennet# 1ur!e0s ad-ocac% o/ Flanguage as s%m)olic action0, to t#e resurgence o/ t#e Few Pragmatism0 in $is#, Rort% and ot#ers, all o/ w#ic#
mig#t &ro&erl% )% c#aracterised as attem&ts to )ring toget#er t#e e&istemological /unction o/ language wit# t#e ontological4
5,
T#e idea is most widel% !nown t#roug# t#e &ractices o/ Stanle%
$is#, w#o once argued t#at criticism s#ould )e attending not to w#at a te(t Fmeans0 )ut to w#at it Fdoes0N and, more &recisel%, t#at t#e meaning o/ a te(t is, in /act, w#at it does to its reader4
Meaning is located #ere in an acti-it% o/ readingN it )ecomes a &ractice rat#er t#an a merel% e&istemological listing o/ -er)al senses4
All o/ t#is is stri-ing to deal wit# t#e same /undamental &ro)lem6 t#e relation )etween t#e realm o/ language and t#e realm o/ 1eing4 More &recisel%, it is an attem&t to deal wit# t#e
&ercei-ed ru&ture )etween t#ese two di//erent orders H a ru&ture articulated most in/luentiall% /or our times )% Saussurean linguistics, w#ic# &ro&osed t#e ar)itrariness o/ t#e relation )etween t#e
linguistic signi/ier and t#e conce&tual signi/ied4 1% inserting t#e cogniti-e acti-it% o/ a real #istorical reader )etween t#e te(t and its e&istemological content, critics suc# as $is# tried to
circum-ent t#e t#reatened s&lit )etween, on t#e one #and, t#e structure o/ consciousness @i4e4 t#e conce&tual /orms in w#ic# a consciousness a&&ro&riates t#e world /or meaningA and, on t#e
ot#er, #istor% @t#e material content o/ a te(t w#ic# ma% H indeed, in $is#0s arguments, must H distur) suc# /ormal or aest#etic structuresA4 5=
Twentiet#-centur% Euro&ean criticism #as )een &ro/oundl% aware o/ t#e &ro)lem #ere, w#ic# can also )e /ormulated in terms o/ a &olitical Kuestion4 .#at is at sta!e is an old 'antian
Kuestion regarding t#e &ro&er F/it0 )etween t#e noumenal and t#e &#enomenal 'ant was aware t#at t#e world outside o/ consciousness does not necessaril% matc# &recisel% our &erce&tual
cognitions o/ t#at worldN and in t#e )riti>ue of &ure 4eason #e argued t#at it was an error to con/use t#e two4 T#e two elements o/ signi/ication )eing con/used were distinguis#ed )% $rege as
Osense0 and Fre/erence0N and it is a distinction similar to t#is w#ic# is maintained )% Paul de Man, w#o argued t#at suc# a con/usion is &recisel% w#at we !now as Fideolog%06 F.#at >e call
ideolog% is &recisel% t#e con/usion o/ linguistic wit# natural realit%, o/ re/erence wit# &#enomenalism40
5>
E &ostmoclc1rniso8: An 6iii 10?ll)c 10?1@ &) ?stnloAlerllisnl: ABB liii rod 8tction
Dc Mans concern was to tr% to ensure t#at literar% criticism made no &remattire assum&tions o/ t#e a#solute -alidit% o/ re/erenceN in t#is #e sim&l% /ollowed t#e deconstructi-e &ractice o/
maintaining a -igiiant sce&ticism a)out t#e legitimacO or trtit#Hcontents o/ an% linguistic &ro&osition made a)out t#ose as&ects o/ t#e real world t#at could &ro&erlP #e called Fnon-linguistic04
He was aware t#at t#e &remature assum&tion t#at t#e real was amena)le to &recise, Faccurate0 or trut#/ul linguistic /ormulation was itsel/ an asstim&tion nut onl% grounded in )ut &recisel%
denmnstrati-e o/ ideolog%4 1ut t#is, o/ course, is a reiteration o/ Adorno and Hor!#eimer in t#eir com&laint a)out t#e assum&tion made )% @mat#ematicalA reason t#at t#e world is a-aila)le /or a
rational com&re#ension4 ;/ we sti#scri)e to de Man0s warning, a warning w#ic# re#earses t#e arguments o/ Adorno and Hor!#eimer, we can see t#at t#e /undamental )urden o/ t#e <ialectic of
:nli%htenment is t#at Enlig#tenment itsel/ is not t#e great dem%sti/%0ing /orce w#ic# will re-eal and unmas! ideolog%N rat#er, it is &recisel% t#e locus o/ ideolog%0, t#oroug#l% contaminated
internall%0 )% t#e ideological assum&tion t#at t#e world can matc# H indeed, can )e encom&assed )% H our reasoning a)out it, or t#at t#e #uman is not alienated )%0 t#e -er%0 &rocesses o/
consciousness itsel/ /rom t#e material world o/ w#ic# it desires !nowledge in t#e /irst &lace4 Enlig#tenment, &ostulated u&on reason, is H &otentiall%, at least H undone )% t#e /orm t#at suc#
reason ta!es4
Eor Adorno and Hor!#eimer, t#is argument assumed a s&eci/ic s#a&e recognisa)le as an a)iding Kuestion in 2erman &#iloso&#% /rom 'ant to Heidegger4 .#at s-orried Adotno and
Hor!#eimer was t#at under t#e sign o/ Enlig#tenment, t#e Su)Iect was ca&a)le o/ an engagement wit# t#e world in a manner w#ic# would )e Frational0 onl% in t#e most &urel% /ormal sense o/
t#e word4 T#at is, t#e% were an(ious t#at w#at s#ould )e a &ro&erl% &olitical engagement w#ic# in-ol-es t#e Su)Iect in a &rocess called intellection ot t#in!ing could )e reduced to a ritual o/
t#in!ing, to a merel% /ormal a&&earance o/ t#in!ing w#ic# would mani/est itsel/ as a legitimation not o/ a &erce&tion o/ t#e world )ut o/ t#e anal%tical modes o/ mat#ematical reason itsel/4 T#e
&olitical distur)ance o/ t#e Su)Iect &ro&osed )% an engagement wit# a materiall% di//erent Ot#er (-ould )e reduced to a con/irmation o/ t#e aest#etic )eaut% and -alidit% o/ t#e &rocess o/
mat#ematical reason itsel/, a reason w#ose o)Iect would t#us )e not t#e world in all its alterit- )ut rat#er t#e &rocess o/ reason w#ic# con/irms t#e identit% o/ t#e Su)Iect, an identit% untram -
melled )%, t#e distur)ance o/ &olitics4 ;n s#ort, t#e Sti)Iect would #e reduced to an engagement wit# and a con/irmation o/ its own rational &rocesses rat#er t#an )eing committed to an
engagement wit# t#e material alterit% o/ an o)Iecti-e world4
T#e Faest#etic engagement0 wit# t#e s-orld mig#t )e c#aracterised as /ollows6 t#e structure o/ consciousness determines w#at can #e &ercei-ed, and &rocesses it in accordance Q-it# its o(-n
internal logic, its own internal, /ormal or ritualistic
"t# t#e o&erations o/ reason4 T#ere is t#us a ritual ot a&&earance o/ engagement s-i
material world onl%04 FPolitical engagement would )e c#aracterised )% t#e ru&ture o/ suc# ritual, t#e eru&tion o/ #istor% into t#e consciousness in suc# a wa% t#at t#e aest#etic or /ormal
structures o/ consciousness must )e distur)ed4 Enlig#tenment0s commitment to a)straction is seen as a mode o/ disengOc-rNent o/ t#e ideological,
+
o&inionated sel/6 a)straction is itsel/ meant to address &recisel% t#is &ro)lem4 1ut it leads, according to Adorno and Hor!#eimer, not to a &ractice o/ t#in!ing #ut rat#er to t#e ritualistic /orm o/
t#oug#t6 it o//ers a /orm wit#out content4 Adorno and Hor!#eimer0s /ear is t#at Enlig#tenment e-ades t#e &olitical &recisel% w#en it addresses t#e &olitical4
One twentiet#-centur% legac% o/ t#e Enlig#tenment is t#e so-called FCo&ernican re-olution0 &ro&osed initiall% )% structuralism and semiotics4 ;n t#e wa!e o/ 1art#es, t#e world )ecame an
e(tremel% Fnois%R &lace6 signs e-er%w#ere announced t#eir &resence and demanded to )e decoded4 Suc# decoding was o/ten done under t#e aegis o/ a &residing /ormal structure, suc# as m%t# in
ant#ro&olog%, desire in &s%c#oanal%sis, or grammar in literature4 ;n semiotics, it is alwa%s im&ortant to )e a)le to disco-er a !ind o/ eKui-alence )etween ostensi)l% di//erent signs6 t#is is, in /act,
t#e &rinci&le o/ decoding or translation itsel/4 1ut as Adorno and Hor!#eimer indicate6 F1ourgeois societ% is ruled )% eKui-alence4 ;t ma!es t#e dissimilar com&ara)le )% reducing it to a)stract
Kualities40
5?
Suc# a)straction must wil/ull% disregard t#e s&eci/icit% o/ t#e material o)Iects under its consideration6 FA)straction, t#e tool o/ enlig#tenment, treats its o)Iects as did /ate, t#e notion
o/ w#ic# it reIects6
it liKuidates t#em40
5<
T#e semiotic re-olution H a re-olution w#ic# /reKuentl% masKueraded as a &olitical, emanci&ator% #eir o/ Enlig#tenment H is, li!e Enlig#tenment, irredeema)l% )ourgeois,
irredeema)l% caug#t u& in a &#iloso&#% o/ ;dentit% w#ic# negates material and #istorical realit%, in t#e interests o/ constructing a recognisa)le Su)Iect o/ consciousness as a sel/-identical entit%4
T#e <ialectic was written in a &ro/ound awareness o/ t#e material and #istorical realities o/ /ascism and t#e aGi atrocities4 ;t is a te(t w#ic# inserts itsel/ into a s&eci/ic tradition o/
&#iloso&#ical and et#ical tracts w#ic# as! /or an e(&lanation o/ t#e &resence o/ e-il in t#e world4 ;n t#e eig#teent# centur%, t#is tradition was &ro&erl% inaugurated )% t#e de)ates around Lei)niG
and O&timism4 O&timism is )ased u&on t#e idea t#at nature is a Lei)niGian monad H t#at t#ere is a great uni/%ing c#ain in nature w#ic# lin!s toget#er, in a necessar% conIunction, all t#e
ostensi)l% random and di-erse elements o/ a seemingl% #eterogeneous and &luralistic world4 More im&ortantl%, O&timism is )ased u&on a s&eci/ic idea o/ &rogressi-e time (-#ic# c#anges t#e
meaning o/ e-ents4 ;t argues t#at w#at a&&ears Fnow0 to )e a local e-il will )e re-ealed Fin t#e /ullness o/ time0 to ser-e t#e realisation o/ a greater good4 As Joltaire0s Pangloss #as it in
/andide5 Fall is /or t#e )est in t#e )est o/ all &ossi)le worlds04 5E Histor% would re-eal t#e immanent goodness in t#e most a&&arentl% e-il acts0 under t#e sign o/ a #omogeneous and monadic
eternit%, t#e #eterogeneous and secular (-ould )e redeemed4
;n a sense, t#is &#iloso&#% is a &recursor o/ some contem&orar% t#eoretical Princi&les4 According to O&timistic &#iloso&#%, t#e meaning o/ an e-ent is not immediatel% a&&arent, as i/ it were
ne-er &resent-to-itsel/6 its /inal sense H to )e re-ealed as t#e necessit% o/ goodness H is alwa%s de/erred @to )e re-ealed under t#e sign o/ eternit%0A and t#us alwa%s di//erent @or not w#at it ma%
a&&ear to t#e local e%e caug#t u& in t#e e-ent itsel/A4 T#e maIor di//erence )etween deconstruction and
&ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction II
I9 &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
O&timism is t#at O&timism )elie-es t#at t#e /inal sense lies immanently wit#in an e-ent, w#ereas deconstruction consistentl% warns against suc# meta&#%sical notions4
O&timism, as a means o/ e(&laining awa% t#e /act o/ e-il, came under great &ressure in t#e eig#teent# centur%, and was e(&licitl% attac!ed )% 3o#nson and Joltaire, among ot#ers4 1ut one
s&eci/ic e-ent was so catastro&#ic t#at t#e &#iloso&#% )ecame incredi)le4 On t#e morning o/ Sunda% * o-em)er *<>>, an eart#Kua!e struc! Lis)on and destro%ed t#e cit%, !illing )etween
t#irt% t#ousand and /ort% t#ousand &eo&le4 T#is single e-ent was t#e /inal nail in t#e co//in o/ a mori)und O&timistic &#iloso&#% in Euro&e4 1ut now a di//erent idea o/ &rogress in #istor% arises4
A/ter 17!!5 &rogress is c#aracterised as a gradual emanci&ation /rom t#e demands o/ t#e sign o/ eternit%4 T#e secularisation o/ consciousness )ecomes a necessar% &recondition /or t#e
&ossi)ilit% o/ an et#ics6 t#at is to sa%, t#e et#ical is increasingl% determined )% t#e &#iloso&#icall% rational, or t#e good is determined )% t#e true4 1lumen)erg is eloKuent testimon% to t#e
in/lection t#at t#is gi-es to &#iloso&#% and to trut#4 Traditionall%, t#e &ursuit o/ trut# #ad )een considered as &leasura)le, eudaemonicN /rom now on, t#e a)soluteness o/ trut#, and
corres&ondingl% its ascetic #ars#ness, )ecomes a measure o/ its -alidit%6 FLac! o/ consideration /or #a&&iness )ecomes t#e stigma o/ trut# itsel/, a #omage to its a)solutism40
5+
Hence/ort#, t#ere arises t#e &ossi)ilit% H and 'ant would sa% t#e necessit% H o/ se&arating t#e realm o/ /acts /rom t#e realm o/ -alues4 O&timism &roceeded on t#e grounds t#at t#ese were
intimatel% conIoinedN and it /ollowed t#at t#e &rogressi-e mo-ement /rom e-il to good was seen as ine-ita)le4 1ut once e&istemolog% is se&arated /rom et#ics, t#e w#ole idea o/ #istorical
&rogress is itsel/ cal3ed into Kuestion4 o longer do we !now wit# an% certaint% t#e &oint towards w#ic# #istor% is su&&osedl% &rogressing4 ;n t#e wa!e o/ t#is, #umanit% )ecomes ensla-ed not
to t#e enc#antments o/ m%t#, )ut rat#er to t#e necessities o/ narrati-e, /or #umanit% #as em)ar!ed u&on a secular mo-ement w#ose teleolog% is uncertain, w#ose &lot is not in#erentl%
&redetermined )% -alues or )% an et#ical end4 ,9
T#e critiKue o/ &rogress w#ic# )ecomes a-aila)le once 'ant ma!es t#e se&aration )etween &ure and &ractical reason ma!es a resurgence in t#e twentiet# centur%, s&eci/icall% around t#e idea
o/ t#e &ostmodern4 ;n arc#itecture, to ta!e a &aradigmatic e(am&le, t#ere #as grown a resistance to t#e Fmodernist0 idea t#at all )uilding must )e inno-ati-e in its aims and designN rat#er as
3enc!s and Portog#esi suggest, it is &ossi)le to relearn /rom t#e &ast, to de-elo& a Fnew classicism0 or sim&l% to engage wit# an a)iding F&resence o/ t#e &ast04 T#e result is H in &rinci&le, i/ not in
/act H a #eterogeneous Iu(ta&osing o/ di//erent st%les /rom di//erent arc#itectural e&oc#s as a &utati-e res&onse to t#e #omogenising tendenc% o/ t#e so-called F;nternational St%le04 T#is argument
leads to t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ an awareness in arc#itecture and ur)an &lanning in general t#at t#e local traditions o/ a &lace s#ould )e res&ected in all t#eir s&eci/icit%, w#ile at t#e same time t#ose
local traditions s#ould )e o&ened to a !ind o/ criticism )% t#eir Iu(ta&osition wit# st%les /rom ot#er localities, di//erent traditions4 T#is is a localism wit#out &aroc#ial insularit%, in &rinci&le4
Muc# t#e same arises in some contem&orar% &#iloso&#%4 L%otard #as argued t#at it is )ecoming increasingl% di//icult to su)scri)e to t#e great H and t#era&euticall% O&timistic H
metanarrati-es w#ic# once organised our li-es4 ,* .#at #e #as in #is sig#ts are totalising metanarrati-es, great codes w#ic# in t#eir a)straction necessaril% den% t#e s&eci/icit% o/ t#e local and
traduce it in t#e interests o/ a glo)al #omogeneit%, a uni-ersal #istor%4 Suc# master narrati-es would include t#e great narrati-e o/ emanci&ation &ro&osed )% Mar(N t#e narrati-e o/ t#e
&ossi)ilit% o/ &s%c#oanal%tic t#era&% and redem&tion &ro&osed )% $reudN or t#e stor% o/ constant de-elo&ment and ada&tation &ro&osed under t#e ru)ric o/ e-olution )% Darwin4 Suc# narrati-es
o&erate li!e Enlig#tenment reason6 in order to accommodate widel% di-erging local #istories and traditions, t#e% a)stract t#e meaning o/ t#ose traditions in a Ftranslation0 into t#e terms o/ a
master code, a translation w#ic# lea-es t#e s&eci/ic traditions sim&l% unrecognisa)le4 As metanarrati-es, t#e% also )ecome coerci-e and normati-e6 L%otard argues t#at t#e% e//ecti-el% control
and miss#a&e t#e local under t#e sign o/ t#e uni-ersal4 Suc# a dri-e to totalit% cannot res&ect t#e #istorical s&eci/icities o/ t#e genuinel% #eterogeneous4 L%otard0s de)t to t#e t#in!ing o/ Critical
T#eor% is o)-ious #ere4
Adorno and Hor!#eimer0s &essimism wit# regard to t#e di//icult% o/ e(&laining e-il and its &lace in a su&&osedl% &rogressi-e #istor% was /oreseen in anot#er im&ortant source /or t#e
&ostmodern contro-ers%4 ;n #is /amous se-ent# t#esis on t#e &#iloso&#% o/ #istor%, 1enIamin indicates t#e &ro)lems o/ #istoricism4 Historicism is li!e a critical /ormalism6 it acti-el% /orgets t#e
#istorical e//ects and conseKuences /lowing /rom t#e moment it wis#es to in-estigate, t#e )etter to Fem&at#ise0 wit# t#e moment Fas in itsel/ it reall% is0, so to s&ea!4 ;t /ormall% F)rac!ets o//0 its
o)Iect /rom #istor% to e(&lore it in itsel/4 T#e em&at#% in Kuestion is, o/ course, an em&at#% wit# t#e -ictors in t#e struggles in#erent in an% #istorical conIunctureN #ence #istoricism )ene/its and
is com&licit wit# t#e ruling class at t#e moment o/ t#e #istorian0s own writing4 T#e -ictors in #istor% t#us &roceed in trium&#al &rocession, )earing wit# t#em t#e s&oils o/ t#eir -ictor%,
including t#ose documents w#ic# record, legitimise and corro)orate t#e necessit% o/ t#eir -ictor%4 Suc# documents t#e -ictors call Fculture04 T#e #istorical materialist, unli!e t#e #istoricist, is
&ro/oundl% aware o/ w#at is )eing tram&led under/oot in t#is &rocess6
t#e #istorical materialist remem)ers w#at t#e #istoricist ignores4 Hence #istorical materialism !nows t#at H in t#e words o/ t#e /amous &assage H FT#ere is no document o/ ci-iliGation w#ic# is
not at t#e same time a document o/ )ar)arism40
,5
FModernit%0 is increasingl% )eing considered as Iust suc# a Fdocument o/ ci-iliGation04 T#ere is, certainl%, an enormous amount o/ good, emanci&ator% t#in!ing and &ractice associated wit#
it, and t#e de-elo&ment o/ #istor% o-er t#e last two #undred %ears #as not )een an ine(ora)le &rogress towards e-il4 A )etter attitude to modernit% t#an unmitigated adulation, #owe-er, mig#t )e
one w#ic# was analogous to Mar(0s attitude to t#e )ourgeoisie6 on t#e one #and /ull o/ admiration /or its ci-ilising energiesN on t#e ot#er critical o/ its inci&ient )ar)arous tendencies4
;n #is consideration o/ t#e im&lications o/ modernit%, S%gmunt 1auman &roceeds on t#ese 1enIaminian lines4 He cites researc# into t#e e(&eriences o/ t#e -ictims o/ terrorism6 &eo&le
in-ol-ed in #iIac!s, &eo&le ta!en #ostage4 Suc# &eo&le are o/ten
*5 &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostn8odernisBn: An 'ntroduction *,
a&&arentl% /undamentall% Fc#anged0 )% t#eir e(&erience6 t#eir entire &ersonalit% a/ter t#e e-ent is di//erent /rom w#at it was )e/ore4 1ut sociolog% #as contested t#is notion o/ a &ersonalit%
c#ange4 T#e &erson a/ter t#e e-ent is, in /act, /undamentall% t#e same as t#e &erson )e/oreN sim&l% certain as&ects o/ t#e &ersonalit% w#ic# la% dormant in t#e li/e )e/ore a&&ear now, )ecause t#e
#istorical conditions are more &ro&itious /or t#eir /oregrounding4 A di//erent as&ect o/ t#e &ersonalit% assumes t#e normati-e &osition, re&ressing certain as&ects w#ic# were &ercei-ed to
constitute t#e essence o/ t#e &ersonalit% )e/ore t#e trauma, ;t is not t#e indi-idual w#o #as c#anged )ut t#e #istorical situation o/ t#e indi-idual w#ic# demands t#e a&&earance o/ certain as&ects
o/ t#e &ersonalit% t#at #ad alwa%s )een immanentl% t#ere,
1auman t#en allegorises t#is, using it as a &aradigm to e(&lain t#e eru&tion o/ e-il in t#e Holocaust in t#e midst o/ modernit%6
T#e uns&o!en terror &ermeating our collecti-e memor% o/ t#e Holocaust 444 is t#e gnawing sus&icion t#at t#e Holocaust could )e more t#an an a)erration, more t#an a de-iation /rom an
ot#erwise straig#t &at# o/ &rogress, more t#an a cancerous growt# on t#e ot#erwise #ealt#% )od% o/ t#e ci-iliGed societ%N t#at, in s#ort, t#e Holocaust was not an antit#esis o/ modern
ci-iliGation and e-er%t#ing @or so we li!e to t#in!A it stands /or4 .e sus&ect @e-en i/ we re/use to admit itA t#at t#e Holocaust could merel% #a-e unco-ered anot#er /ace o/ t#e same modern
societ% w#ose ot#er, so /amiliar, /ace we so admire4 And t#at t#e two /aces are &er/ectl% com/orta)l% attac#ed to t#e same )od%4
,,
So it is not t#at modernit% leads ine(ora)l% to t#e Holocaust, Rat#er, t#e ci-ilised /ace o/ modernit% is attended constantl% )% a )ar)arism w#ic# is its ot#er side, T#e #istorical situation o/
2erman% in t#e *+,9s and *+=9s was in#os&ita)le to t#e ci-ilised &riorit% o/ modernit%, and &ro-ided a &ro&itious )reeding ground in w#ic# t#e dar! and carceral )ar)arit% o/ modernit% could H
and did H /louris#,
T#e #orror at t#e e-il o/ t#e Holocaust is, /or 1auman, actuall% a #orror at t#e rationalit% o/ t#e Holocaust, T#e Enlig#tenment &roIect, w#ic# was to some e(tent conditioned )% #umanit%0s
desire to master nature in t#e &rocess o/ disenc#antment ena)led t#e de-elo&ment o/ an e(tremel% rationall% ordered and sel/-sustaining social &rocess4 Part o/ t#e legac% o/ t#is is t#e
de-elo&ment o/ e//icienc% in industr%, and t#e ongoing de-elo&ment H o/ten a sel/-ser-ing de-elo&ment H o/ tec#nolog%4 T#e trut# o/ t#e matter, according0 to 1auman, is t#at6
e-er% Fingredient0 o/ t#e Holocaust 444 was normal, Fnormal0 not in t#e sense o/ t#e /amiliar 444 )ut in t#e sense o/ )eing /ull% in !ee&ing wit# e-er%t#ing we !now a)out our ci-iliGation, its
guiding s&irit, its &riorities, its immanent -ision o/ t#e world4 O
Structurall%, t#e gas c#am)ers are dri-en )% t#e same &residing &rinci&les t#at were ta!en /or granted as t#e &ositi-e as&ects o/ modernit%6 t#e &rinci&les o/ rational e//icienc%4 T#e structure o/
t#oug#t w#ic# /acilitates t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ t#e Holocaust is inscri)ed in t#e &#iloso&#ical structure o/ Enlig#tenmeot itsel/, /or t#e dri-e towards a rational societ% #as )een contro-erted into a
do-e towards rationalism
itsel/, a rationalism w#ic# can )e used /or /ascist as well as emanci&ator% ends4 $or 1auman, it )ecomes di//icult to disintricate t#e Frationalit% o/ e-il0 /rom Ft#e e-il o/ rationalit%04 O ;n t#e
world o/ t#e deat# cam&s, e-er%t#ing was rationalised6
Eac# ste& on t#e road to deat# was care/ull% s#a&ed so as to )e calcula)le in terms o/ gains and losses, rewards and &unis#ments4 $res# air and music rewarded t#e long, unremitting
su//ocation in t#e cattle carriage4 A )at#, com&lete wit# cloa!rooms and )ar)ers, towel and soa&, was a welcome li)eration /rom lice, dirt, and t#e stenc# o/ #uman sweat and e(crement4 ,?
T#e >> also !new t#at in a &er-ersion o/ Enlig#tenment, rationalit% was t#eir )est and most e//icient single all% in ensuring t#at t#eir -ictims would )ecome com&licit in t#e atrocities4 ;n some
situations in t#e deat# cam&s it was &er/ectl% reasona)le to )etra% one0s /ellow--ictims, in t#e #o&e o/ &rolonging one0s own li/e6
to /ound t#eir order on /ear alone, t#e SS would #a-e needed mote troo&s, arms and mone%4 Rationalit% was more e//ecti-e, easier to o)tain, and c#ea&er4 And t#us to destro% t#em, t#e SS
men care/ull% culti-ated t#e rationalit% o/ t#eir -ictims4 O
Clearl%, modernist reason is not in#erentl% good6 it can )e used /or /oul &ur&oses, and can )e an all% o/ e-il4
Deconstruction &ro-ides a &#iloso&#ical ground /or some o/ t#is4 Derrida &laces certain strictures u&on reason in #is /amous F.#ite m%t#olog%0 essa%4 ;n t#at &iece, Derrida c#aracterises
meta&#%sics not in terms o/ reason as suc# )ut rat#er in terms o/ a #ea-il% circumscri)ed reason4 He considers meta&#%sics as6
t#e w#ite m%t#olog% w#ic# reassem)les and re/lects t#e culture o/ t#e .est6 t#e w#ite man ta!es #is own m%t#olog%, ;ndo-Euro&ean m%t#olog%, #is own lo%os5 t#at is, t#e mythos o/ #is
idiom, /or t#e uni-ersal /orm o/ w#at #e must still wis# to call Reason4 .#ic# does not go uncontested4 ,E
T#e Su)Iect o/ reason, t#e F#e0 w#o identi/ies #imsel/ #ere as reasona)le, is called into Kuestion as a s&eci/ic #istorical, cultural and H in a corro)oration o/ 1auman0s argument H e-en racial
Su)Iect4 To Iust t#e same e(tent @no more, no lessA t#at Enlig#tenment is totalitarian, Reason is racist and im&erialist, ta!ing a s&eci/ic in/lection o/ consciousness /or a uni-ersal and necessar%
/orm o/ consciousness4 Here Derrida e(&oses t#e .est0s tendenc% to legitimise itsel/6 t#e .est is reasona)le )ecause it sa%s so, and, since it is t#e de/iner and )earer o/ reason, it must )e
uni-ersall% reasona)le to accede to t#is &ro&osition4 T#is, as Derrida argues, is clearl% a /alse and trou)ling logic4
Reason, w#ic# was su&&osed to legitimise t#e neo-&agaii and emanci&ator%0 acti-ities o/ Enlig#tenment, is now itsel/ in need o/ legitimation4 O ;t can no longer assume t#e ca&acit% /or sel/-
legitimation wit#out assuming an e(clusi-it%N and #ence/ort# its claims u&on uni-ersalit% are sullied )% its in#erent tendenc% to /all into rationalism4 ;t &roduces an administered societ%, not a
rational societ%6 reason
*= &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &os tmodernism: An 'ntroduction
is re&laced )% e//icienc% and )% t#e aest#etic and /ormal -acuities o/ rationalism, ;n $olie et d;raison $oucault &oints out t#at t#e &roduction o/ reason is itsel/ de&endent u&on a &rimar% act o/
e(clusion and incarceration6 w#at reason identi/ies as its Ot#er H madness H #as to )e identi/ied and im&risoned in order to ena)le reason to legitimise itsel/4 Enlig#tenment reason is in /act a
&otent wea&on in t#e &roduction o/ social normati-it%, dri-ing &eo&le towards a con/ormit% wit# a doO Finant and centred Fnorm0 o/ )e#a-iour4 Reason, in s#ort, #as to &roduce t#e Fscandal0 o/
its Ot#er to !ee& itsel/ going4
=9
1audrillard #as argued t#at in t#e &resent centur%, t#is #as an e(tremel% im&ortant corollar% e//ect4 ;n our time, it is not so muc# reason itsel/ w#ic# reKuires
legitimation as t#e -er% &rinci&le o/ realit% @w#ic#, it is assumed, is /ounded u&on reasona)le, rational &rinci&lesA4 Societ% t#us &roduces t#e Ot#er o/ t#e real H /antas% H to legitimise t#e
normati-it% o/ its own &ractices4 As 1audrillard &uts it in FT#e &recession o/ simulacra06
Disne%land is t#ere to conceal t#e /act t#at it is t#e Freal0 countr%, all o/ Freal0 America, w#ic# is Disne%land @Iust as &risons are t#ere to conceal t#e /act t#at it is t#e social in its entiret%, in
its )anal omni&resence, w#ic# is carceralA4
=
i
T#e emanci&ation &ro&osed )% Enlig#tenment )rings wit# it its own incarcerating im&etus6 its F/reedom0 turns out to )e sim&l% t#e /orm o/ a /reedom, an aest#etics rat#er t#an a &olitics o/
/reedom4 T#e name /or t#is aest#eticisation o/ t#e &olitical is representation. ;n t#e &ostmodern, re&resentation, as )ot# a &olitical and an aest#etic categor%, #as come under increasing &ressureN
and it is to t#is t#at we can now turn4
2 T/e Ti#e is o,t o? Joint
.#en DeleuGe summarises 'antian &#iloso&#%, #e does so in /our F&oetic /ormulas0, t#e /irst o/ w#ic# is Hamlet0s great &ro&osition t#at FT#e time is out o/ Ioint04 Time comes Fun#inged0 in
'ant, sa%s DeleuGe, wit# t#e e//ect o/ a re-olution in t#e relation )etween time and s&ace, and time and mo-ement6
Time is no longer de/ined )% succession )ecause succession concerns onl% t#ings and mo-ements w#ic# are in time4 ;/ time itsel/ were succession, it would need to succeed in anot#er time,
and on to in/init%4 T#ings succeed eac# ot#er0in -arious times, )ut t#e% are also simultaneous in t#e same time, and t#e% remain in an inde/inite time4 ;t is no longer a Kuestion o/ de/ining
time )% succession, nor s&ace )% simultaneit%, nor &ermanence )% eternit%4
=5
T#e reconsiderations o/ time and s&ace in relation to aest#etics were on t#e 2erman &#iloso&#ical agenda e-en )e/ore 'ant0s maIor )riti>ues5 /or 24 E4 Lessing, in 6aokCon @*<??A &ro-o!ed a
de)ate on t#e relati-e &rioritie o/ time and s&ace in t#e di//erent /ields o/ t#e &oetic and t#e &lastic arts4
1$
T#at t#e &resent time is also out o/ Ioint is &art o/ m% contention in t#ese &ages4 ;t is increasingl% a&&arent t#at man% o/ t#e de)ates around t#e issue o/ t#e &ostmodern not onl% #a-e t#eir
sources in eig#teent#-centur% contro-ersies, )ut also reca&itulate t#ose earlier de)ates and reconsider t#em6 t#e late twentiet# centur% is contaminated )% t#e late eig#teent#4 As L%otard #as
recentl% &ut it, t#e w#ole idea o/ F&ostmodernism0 is &er#a&s )etter ret#oug#t under t#e ru)ric o/ Frewriting modernit%04
==
1ut t#e &resent da%0s Fun#inged0 time is measured structurall% as well
in its aest#etic &roduction6 t#e twentiet# centur% is t#e great moment o/ an aest#etic w#ic# &roclaims itsel/ e(&licitl% as Funtimel%0, t#e moment o/ t#e a-ant-garde4 T#is a-ant-garde #as &ut t#e
issue o/ taste and contem&oraneit% )ac! on t#e critical agenda Iust as /irml% as 1aumgarten and 'ant &ro)lematised it in t#e eig#teent# centur%4
T#e Kuestion o/ taste is intimatel% lin!ed to t#e Kuestions o/ time and !nowledge4 1ourdieu indicates t#at t#e soi-disant Faristocrac% o/ culture0 dis&arages F!nowledge0 a)out art, /a-ouring
instead an intuiti-e sense o/ re/inement in t#e Fconnoisseur0 2ood taste, w#ic# de-elo&s /or t#is Faristocrac%0 t#roug# an aest#etic e(&erience o/ art at /irst #and and t#us necessaril% de-elo&s in
t#e time w#ic# suc# a class can a//ord to de-ote to aest#etic e(&erience, des&ises Feducation0 in Kuestions o/ taste, w#ic# it stigmatises as a time-sa-ing s#ort cut, as su&er/icial, and as a /orm o/
askesis rat#er t#an aes thesis. =? $or 'ant, suc# aest#etic e(&erience #ad alwa%s to )e /ormal i/ it were to #a-e an% serious claims to -alidit% in t#e matter o/ taste4 8nli!e Sidne%, 'ant
dis&araged as F)ar)aric0 t#at !ind o/ taste Fw#ic# needs a mi(ture o/ charms and emotions in order t#at t#ere ma% )e satis/action04
=<
T#e a-ant-garde made /ormal e(&eriments w#ose F)ar)aric0 e//ect was care/ull% contri-ed, and was o/ten nearl% guaranteed )ecause t#e wor!s &ro&osed t#emsel-es as )eing ina&&ro&riate to
t#eir &resent moment, &re/erring t#e stance o/ &role&sis4 1ut t#is #as )ecome &ro)lematic as a strateg% in t#e twentiet# centur%4 T#e &ro)lem o/ t#e a-ant-garde is t#at its scurrilous &ractices
t#emsel-es, in time, )ecome normati-e4 T#at is, w#en t#e% /irst e(&lode u&on t#e scene, t#e% &ro&ose an eru&tion w#ic# s#oc!s t#oug#t out o/ t#e /orms o/ t#oug#t and into t#e &ractices o/
t#in!ing6 t#e% critiKue t#e Faristocrac% o/ culture04 T#ere is a mo-ement /rom gnosis to &ra(is, /rom aest#etics to &olitics H a mo-ement t#at ma!es t#oug#t as material and real as Ft#e smell o/
t#%me and t#e taste o/ &otatoes04 =E T#e a-ant-garde #as traditionall% ser-ed t#is /unction o/ attac!ing t#e idealist and /ormalist Sensi)ilit%4 1ut t#e trou)lesome word in t#is /ormulation is, o/
course, traditionall%06 t#e a-ant-garde #as entered crisis )ecause it #as )ecome a tradition4
Luc $err%0 Kuotes Luciano 1erio0s scat#ing comment on t#e a-ant-garde6 FAn%one w#o calls #imsel/ a-ant-garde is an idiot 444 t#e a-ant-garde is a -acuum40 And $err% t#en models an
interrogation o/ t#e a-ant-garde on Octa-io PaG0s astute comments6
Modern art is )eginning to lose its &owers o/ negation4 $or some time now, its negations #a-e )een ritual re&etitions6 re)ellion #as )ecome met#od, criticism #as )ecome r#etoric,
transgression #as )ecome ceremon%4 egation #as ceased to )e creati-e O
*? &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
1% )ecoming &ure criticism, t#e modernism o/ t#e a-ant-garde #as H in a manner a!in to t#e dialectic o/ Enlig#tenment H turned )ac! against its own in/orming &rinci&le and su)-erted it4 T#e
searc# /or no-elt% and inno-ation #as degenerated into its o&&osite6 sim&le re&etition o/ t#e /ormal gestures o/ inno-ation /or its own sa!e4 As $err% succinctl% &uts it, FT#e )rea! wit# tradition
itsel/ )ecomes tradition40
>9
T#e arising Fdialectic o/ t#e a-ant-garde0 results in an enormous s&eculati-e and critical &ressure u&on t#e a-ant-garde to Iusti/% itsel/4
T#e a-ant-garde used to legitimise itsel/ &recisel% )% )eing untimel% and incom&re#ensi)le6 a c#allenge to #istor% and to reason4 T#e wor! o/ t#e a-ant-garde #ad to )e &ro&osed )% one w#o
was some#ow in ad-ance o/ #er or #is own #istorical moment4 T#e wor! &roduced de/ies com&re#ension, in t#e sense t#at it de/ies t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ )eing assimilated into or under t#e
go-erning &#iloso&#ical ru)ric or ideolog% o/ its moment o/ &roduction4 ;t cannot )e easil% Ftranslated0 into t#e terms and categories o/ t#e alread% !nown, and t#us c#allenges t#e structure o/
anamnesis. T#e a-ant-garde necessaril% im&lies t#at a merel% Fcon-entional0 art cannot o//er a moment o/ cognition, )ut instead indulges in a su&er/icial recognitionN and t#e name /or t#is is
re&resentation4 $or t#e a-ant-garde, con-entional art was t#us an art )uilt entirel% u&on ana%norisis5 u&on t#e structure o/ recognition in w#ic# t#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness /inds t#e com/ort o/
;dentit% and sel/-sameness6
t#e world as it is re&resented as it is, tel >uel.-i P#iloso&#icall%, t#ere/ore, t#e &ercei-ed Fconser-atism0 o/ con-entional art is also a!in to t#e structure o/ &ragmatism, w#ic# is also concerned to
engage in &ractice wit# t#e world as it is4 >5
1% contrast, t#e a-ant-garde &resents t#e world as it is notN more &recisel%, it #as to &resent a world w#ic# is, strictl% s&ea!ing, unre&resenta)le4 T#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness is #ere going to
)e re/used w#at L%otard calls Ft#e solace o/ good /orms0N O and, most im&ortantl%, w#at is re/used is t#e solace o/ t#e /orm o/ ;dentit%4 T#e Fs#oc! o/ t#e new0 s#oc!s its audience or s&ectator
out o/ t#e /orms o/ ;dentit% and into t#e an(ieties o/ alterit% and #eterogeneit%, into t#e &erce&tion o/ a world and a Su)Iect o/ consciousness w#ic# is alwa%s radicall% Ot#er4 O T#e rationale
)e#ind t#e &roIect o/ t#e a-ant-garde, t#ere/ore, is t#e re/usal o/ gnosis and its re&lacement wit# &ra(is H a s#i/t /rom e&istemolog% to ontolog%4
Suc# a F&ractical art0 in-ol-es t#e artist in w#at a&&ears to )e a tem&oral or c#ronological im&ossi)ilit%4 S#e or #e re-&resents, in a wor! or an e-ent, somet#ing w#ic# cannot %et e-er #a-e
)een &resent6 re-&resenting comes )e/ore &resence in t#is state o/ a//airs4 $or t#e a.ant-%ardiste5 it is no longer t#e case t#at art re-&resents an alread% e(isting essential worldN rat#er, t#is
relation is re-ersed and t#e /act or &ractice o/ re-&resentation itsel/ &roduces a world4 Howe-er, suc# a &roduction &ro&oses a world w#ic# is unrecognisa)le H or, &er#a&s more strictl%, non-
cognisa)le6 a world is &resented w#ic# is Fessentiall%0 di//erent /rom t#e world w#ic# we #ad Fconsensuall%0 !nown )e/ore t#e a-ant-garde &roduction4 1ot# consensus as suc# and t#e identit%
o/ t#e Su)Iect w#o is im&licated in t#is consensuall% agreed F!nowledge0 are t#ere)% c#allenged4
Structurall%, in t#e a-ant-garde, aest#etics &recedes &olitics4 Yet it is also argued t#at t#e aest#etic &recisel% is &olitics in t#is, )ecause tat w#at McHale calls t#is
1=
Fc#ange o/ dominant0,
>>
/or as a result o/ t#e &rioritisation o/ &ra(is o-er gnosis t#ere is a corres&onding attac! u&on t#e &#iloso&#% o/ ;dentit% @F'now t#%sel/0A and its re&lacement wit# a
&#iloso&#% o/ alterit% @FAc!nowledge t#e un!nowa)ilit% o/ t#e Ot#er0A4 T#is &ro&oses a &olitical s#i/t )ased u&on t#e com&lication, /or t#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness, o/ locating itsel/ alwa%s
Felsew#ere04 1a!#tin would #a-e t#oug#t o/ t#is in terms o/ a Fdialogical0 construction o/ t#e world in languageN Ha)ermaS t#in!s o/ it in terms o/ an intersu)Iecti-e idea o/ communicati-e
actionN Lacanian &s%c#oanal%sis would under&in t#ese and ot#er in#erentl% &olitical attac!s on t#e &#iloso&#% o/ ;dentit%4 Lacan argued t#at6
T#e Ot#er is 444 t#e locus in w#ic# is constituted t#e ; w#o s&ea!s to #im w#o #ears, t#at w#ic# is said )% t#e one )eing alread% t#e re&l%, t#e ot#er deciding to #ear it w#et#er t#e one #as or
#as not s&o!en4 !+
Alterit% suc# as t#is is /undamental to t#e a-ant-garde, w#ic# must alwa%s )e in t#e time o/ t#e ot#er, $err% &oints out t#at t#e a-ant-garde &roIect, at least since 'andins!%, is &redicated u&on H
and t#at it necessaril% @e-en i/ unwittingl%A su)scri)es to H t#ree central /orces, all o/ t#em &oliticall% c#arged6 elitism, #istoricism, indi-idualism4 T#e a-ant-garde is elitist )ecause t#e artist is
t#e #ero w#o #as seen t#e /uture in ad-ance o/ e-er%one else, and w#ose tas! is to ris! #er or #is own greater &owers on )e#al/ o/ t#e tard% common masses4 T#e a-ant-garde is #istoricist
)ecause its artists are necessaril% #istoricall% out o/ ste& wit# t#e masses around t#emN )ut also )ecause t#is #as to )e ac!nowledged as a merel% &ro-isional state o/ a//airs4 T#e masses, once
#istor% &rogresses, will see t#at t#e artist was alwa%s-alread% rig#t in an% caseN and, in ac!nowledging t#eir own tardiness, t#e masses #a-e to su)scri)e to a -ersion o/ #istor% as t#e site o/ an
ine-ita)le linear &ro%ress.
T#is relates )ac! to Lu!Tcs0s t#in!ing on t#e a-ant-garde4 Parado(icall%, t#e genuinel% a-ant-garde, /or Lu!/lcs, was alwa%s &ro/oundl% realist6 in order to Kuali/% as a-ant-garde, it #ad to )e
not merel% &ro&#etic )ut accuratel% &ro&#etic, antici&ator%4 T#is means t#at t#e a-ant-garde can ne-er )% identi/ied as suc# until time #as &assed to allow /or t#e -eri/ication o/ its &ro&ositions6
one can onl% e-er #a-e )een0 a-ant-garde6
.#et#er a writer reall% )elongs to t#e ran!s o/ t#e a-ant-garde is somet#ing t#at onl% #istor% can re-eal, /or onl% a/ter t#e &assage o/ time will it )ecome a&&arent w#et#er #e #as &ercei-ed
signi/icant Kualities, trends, and t#e social /unctions o/ indi-idual t%&es, and #as gi-en t#em e//ecti-e and lasting /orm 444 onl% t#e maIor realists are ca&a)le o/ /orming a genuine a-ant-garde4R
;t s#ould )e noted, in &assing, t#at t#is is not -er% /ar remo-ed /rom L%otard0s /lOtions o/ t#e /uture anteriorit% o/ t#e &ostmodern4 >E T#e same tem&oral d;ca6a%e is in-ol-ed in )ot# Lu!/lcs
and L%otard4
$inall%, and most e(&licitl%, /or $err% t#e ideolog% o/ t#e a-ant-garde #as to )e
1@ &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &os tmodernism: An 'ntroduction
indi-idualist, /or its w#ole &ractice is )ased on t#e Fe(&ression du Moi06
ou, &our re&rendre ;a /ormule mUme de 'andins!%, Fe(&ression &ure de ;a -ie intLrieure0 de celui Kui, &ar son originalitL, se trou-e tout a la /ois au sommet du triangle @LlitismeA et en
a-ance sur son tem&s @#istoricismeA et Kui, &ar suite, constitue seul une -erita)le
Vor, to &ic! u& t#e -er% /ormulation o/ 'andins!%, F&ure e(&ression o/ t#e interior li/e0 o/ s#e or #e w#o, )% -irtue o/ originalit%, /inds #ersel/ or #imsel/ all at once at t#e a&e( o/ t#e triangle
@elitismA and in ad-ance o/ #er or #is time @#istoricismA and w#o, in conseKuence, constitutes alone a true indi.iduality.D
T#e Fe(&ression du Moi0 necessaril% distinguis#es t#e a-ant-garde Sel/ /rom its Ot#ers, and in /act t#ere)% &roduces its Ot#er4 Alternati-el%, one could sa% t#at it is &recisel% suc# an
indi-iduation o/ t#e a-ant-garde artist w#ic# &roduces all ot#er indi-iduals as a Fmass0, a mass culture in t#e /orm o/ a des&ised culture industr%4 So t#e a-ant-garde constructs and attac!s its
own enem%4 Structurall%, t#is &arallels t#e manner in w#ic# Enlig#tenment reduces reason to rationalism6 in t#e case o/ t#e a-ant-garde, w#at we see is t#e reduction o/ &olitical acti-it% to t#e
ritual /orm o/ suc# acti-it% H or, in a &#rase, t#e aest#eticisation o/ &olitics4 T#is is w#% )ot# t#e a-ant-garde and t#e notion o/ a mass culture enter into crisis in t#e middle o/ t#e twentiet#
centur%4
T#e Kuestion o/ t#e a-ant-garde is t#ere/ore, /undamentall%, a Kuestion o/ t#e intimate relations )etween s&eed and &olitics4 ;n some wa%s, o/ course, t#is is also t#e Kuestion o/
Enlig#tenment4 ;n &olitical terms, Enlig#tenment &ro&osed a demarcation )etween t#e Fad-anced0 and t#e Funderde-elo&ed0N and in t#is distinction t#e ad-anced /eels itsel/ to )e legitimised in
its acti-ities o/ mastering, controlling, dominating and colonising w#at it stigmatises as t#e underde-elo&ed4 ?9 ;t is also im&ortant to Enlig#tenment and its legac% to maintain a structural sense
o/ de-elo&ment @in accordance wit# t#e .#iggis# idea o/ a #istorical linear &rogressA4 1ut w#at Enlig#tenment mista!es a)out t#is &rocess is t#at t#ere ma% )e a num)er o/ #istorical lineages, a
num)er o/ F&rogressions0 or directions in w#ic# #istor% is /lowing simultaneousl%6 t#at #istor% is not a singular line, )ut a networ! o/ /orces w#ic# all &roceed in t#eir own directions,
#eterogeneousl%4 T#at is, Enlig#tenment /ails to see t#at instead o/ t#e ru)ric Fad-anced:underde-elo&ed0 @more recognisa)l% c#aracterised )% t#e terms F$irst .orld0 and FT#ird .orld0A, it is
)etter to t#in! t#at t#e world is sim&l% li-ed at di//erent s&eeds, in di//erent times, in di//erent &laces4 ;n s#ort, t#ere is not one world @nor e-en t#reeA, )ut rat#er man%N all )eing li-ed at di//erent
r#%t#ms, none o/ w#ic# need e-er con-erge into #armon%4 ?*
T#ere is t#us a &olitical dimension to t#e Funtimel% meditation0 o/ t#e a-ant-garde6
a &olitics to s&eed4 ;t is, o/ course, Paul Jirilio w#o #as considered t#is most /ull%4 Jirilio0s wor! on ur)anism and on t#e t#eor% and strateg% o/ war o//ers a di//erent angle on t#e Kuestion o/
t#e O&timism o/ t#e a-ant-garde4 i#e a-ant-garde is in con/lict wit# w#at we mig#t call t#e dominant aest#etit44 o/ its time6 it is also,
AB
F#owe-er, in con/lict wit# time itsel/, )eing out o/ its &ro&er moment6 it is alwa%s necesSaril% anachronistic. T#is collocation o/ time and con/lict is o/ t#e essence o/ t#e &olitical /or Jirilio4
Jirilio returns to ClausewitG, w#o s#ared wit# Mar( an interest in t#e dialectical &rocess o/ #istor%, and w#ose conce&tion o/ t#e structure o/ war /ound ec#oes in Lenin4 Yet t#ere are certain
/undamental di//erences )etween t#e Mar(istHLeninist tradition and ClausewitG4 ClausewitG t#oug#t o/ #istor% as a dialectical &rocess o/ struggles not )etween s&eci/ic classes, )ut /ormall%
)etween t#e im&ulse to attac! and t#e im&ulse to de/end4 T#e resulting dialectic o/ de/ence and attac! would e-entuall% lead to a state o/ &ure war4 ?5 T#is dialecticHt#is warHis t#e /oundation
o/ t#e &olitical /or Jirilio, )ecause it is t#roug# war t#at t#ere arises t#e need /or and t#e maintenance o/ t#ose geogra&#ical organisations t#at delimit t#e s&ace o/ cit% or state4 1ut t#e /ormation
o/ t#ese )oundaries is neit#er sim&l% nor &rimaril% s&atialN on t#e contrar%, t#e cit%, t#e polis itsel/, is /ormed /rom a &articular relation to timeN and its )oundaries are grounded in a s&eci/ic
internal #istoricit%, a F&rogress0 w#ic# is relati-el% autonomous /rom t#e time Foutside04 So t#e cit% is not a sta)le &oint in s&ace )ut rat#er a #istorical Fe-ent06 it is not &unctual, )ut e-entual4
T#is reKuires some e(&lanation4 How does a &olitical s&ace de-elo& and consolidate itsel/ as a recognisa)le entit%D Jirilio cites, /or an e(&lanator% instance, t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#e ele-ated
o)ser-ation &ost in t#e #istor% o/ war struggles4 1ecause it ena)les sur-eillance, suc# an ele-ated &ost gi-es a grou& o/ /ig#ters or a communit% t#e time in w#ic# to decide among a num)er o/
&ossi)le militar% attitudes a-aila)le to it in a s&eci/ic gi-en situation4 ;t is in t#is time H t#at is, in the production of time or of a temporal difference between two cA2mmunities H t#at a war
mentalit% )ecomes genuinel% &ossi)le, re&lacing t#e immediac% w#ic# is integral to more F&rimiti-e0 conditions o/ struggle4 .it# t#is &roduction o/ time6
ii ne su//ira &lus d0Utre ra&idement in/ormL sur son milieu, ii faudra aussi lit5 former5 c0est-W-dire tenter de conser-er sur place son a.ance sur l0ennemi, d0oX la construction autour du tertre,
d0encla-es &rotLgLes, d0enceintes, de &alisades, destinLes a ralentir l0aggresseur4 ?,
Vit will no longer )e enoug# to )e in/ormed a)out one0s milieu, one must also form it5 t#at0s to sa% tr% to maintain there and then one0s ad.ance o-er t#e enem%, w#ence arises t#e
construction, around t#e #illoc!, o/ &rotected encla-es, o/ surrounding walls, o/ stoc!ades, w#ose &ur&ose is to slow down t#e aggressor4Y
T#is dialectic o/ s&eed and slowness, maintaining one0s &rogress awa% /rom t#e enem% w#ile also slowing t#at enem%0s &ursuit as muc# as &ossi)le, &roduces a di//erence in time )etween
aggressor and -ictim4 T#e result is t#e &roduction o/ t#e origin o/ t#e cit% )uilt u&on t#e ram&art4 T#is s&ace o/ t#e polis is t#us conditional 8&on a logicall% &rior tem&oral dialectic )etween t#e
s&eed o/ t#e settler in claiming #er or #is ground and t#e slowness w#ic# s#e or #e can im&ose u&on t#e new, slig#tl% more tard%, aggressor4 Suc# a dialectic o/ s&eed and slowness is o/ t#e
essence o/ war itsel/4 T#e tension )etween t#e relati-e s&eeds o/ t#e F$irst0 world
-
59 &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction 5*
@w#ic# esta)lis#es t#e ram&artA and its tard% Ot#ers @w#ose &olitical sta)ilities are less assuredA is endemic to w#at we mig#t call Fsigni/icant s&ace0, )% w#ic# ; mean an% s&ace to w#ic# we can
assign a mar! o/ identit%, )e it a name, a #istor% or a culture6 in s#ort, a &olitical entit%4 T#at w#ic# a&&ears to )e a sta)le &oint in s&ace, t#e &olitical cit%, is in /act an e-ent in time, and an e-ent
w#ose -er% essence is t#at it is /raug#t wit# an internal #istoricit% or muta)ilit%4 ;t is t#ere/ore not a &oint, )ut
?=
an e-ent4
T#is &olitics is not de-oid o/ aest#eticsN on t#e contrar%, Kuestions s&eci/icall%
relating to t#e &erce&tion o/ )eaut% enter into t#e war mentalit% itsel/, long )e/ore Marinetti and t#e $uturists laid suc# Kuestions )are in t#eir adulation o/ t#e )eaut% o/ t#e mac#iner% o/ war4 ?>
.ar strateg% is &ro/oundl% Faest#etic0, in t#e strict sense o/ t#e term w#ic# relates it to &erce&tionN /or war is a)out t#e control o/ a&&earance and disa&&earance, a control resting u&on a logistics
o/ &erce&tion4 Jirilio considers t#e &aradigmatic e(am&le o/ t#e ma>uisard5 w#o #ad to melt into t#e surrounding to&ogra&#% and e-en into t#e -acuous and immaterial atmos&#ere6
F#e li-es t#en under t#e co-er o/ grass and trees, in atmos&#eric -i)rations, dar!ness04 << .ar de&ends u&on a mode o/ su)ter/uge in w#ic#, )% ma!ing onesel/ less -isi)le, one can )ring t#e
enem% into one0s sig#t and t#en ma!e #er or #im disa&&ear in t#e !ill4 Jirilio c#arts t#is in a logical seKuence4 $irst t#ere is t#e #unt /or /ood, w#ose -ictim is t#e animal4 T#is gi-es wa% to a
second stage o/ #unting6
a #unt w#ose -ictim is woman4 T#e domestication o/ woman ena)les a t#ird stage o/ t#e #unt, w#ic# Jirilio identi/ies as t#e /undamentall% #omose(ual #unt6 war as we commonl% !now it4 T#e
#omose(ualit% o/ t#e resulting duel is t#e )asis o/ t#e )eauti/ul in its more con-entional sense, a )eaut% car-ed in t#e semiotics o/ t#e )od%6
L0#omme /atal est le modZle de ;a /emme, le maKuillage des &reliminaires de ;a mise a mort &recede celui des amours, ;a seduction du guerrier tra-esti est comme &our route l0es&Zce
animal la caracteristiKue du male, l0#omose(ualitL du duel est a l0origine du )eau, ce )eau Kui n0est Kue le &remier degrL d0une torture in/ligLe au( cor&s, &ar les traits, les scari/icatIons, les
cicatrices, en attendant les mutilations, la mort4 Le )eau est &eut-Utre le &remier un8forme. ?<
VT#e deadl% male El1homme fatalD is t#e model /or t#e woman E6a femmefataleD , ma!eu& /or t#e &reliminaries to t#e !illing &recedes t#at /or lo-ing, t#e seduction o/ t#e warrior in drag is, as
/or t#e w#ole animal s&ecies, t#e c#aracteristic o/ t#e male, t#e #omose(ualit% o/ t#e duel is at t#e origin o/ t#e )eauti/ul, t#at )eauti/ul w#ic# is )ut t#e /irst degree o/ a torture in/licted u&on
)odies, )% stro!es, scari/ications, scars, all t#e wa% t#roug# to multilations and deat#4 T#e )eauti/ul is, &er#a&s, t#e /irst uniform.D
Suc# a -iolence in t#e /oundation o/ t#e aest#etic mig#t use/ull% )e considered alongside 1audrillard0s comments, in w#ic# #e argues6
Le dLnI de l0anatomie et du cor&s comme destin ne date &as a0#ier4 ;i /ut )ien &lus -irulent dans toutes les societes anterieures a la n[tre4 Rituaiiser, ceremonialiser,
a//u)ler, masKuer, mutiler, dessiner, torturer H &our sLduire6 seduire les dieu(, seduire les es&rits, seduire les morts4 Le cor&s est le &remier grand su&&ort de cette gigantesKue entre&rise de la
seduction4 ?E
VT#e denial o/ anatom% and o/ t#e )od% as destin% does not date Iust /rom %esterda%4 ;t was muc# more wides&read in all societies anterior to our own4 Ritualising, ceremonialising, getting
dec!ed out, mas!ing, dis/iguring, mar!ing, torturing H to seduce6 to seduce t#e gods, to seduce t#e s&irits, to seduce t#e dead4 T#e )od% is t#e /irst great &ro& /or t#e gigantic -enture o/
seduction4Y
Seduction, in 1audrillard, is muc# more t#an sim&l% a se(ual acti-it%N #e &ro&oses it as a c#allenge to t#e logical &rimac% o/ t#e Mar(ist categor% o/ &roduction as a &rimar% determinant o/ t#e
condition o/ #istor%4 2i-en t#e &olitical nature o/ suc# seduction, t#en, t#ese statements /rom Jirilio and 1audrillard turn out @&er#a&s sur&risingl%A to )e muc# closer to Eagleton0s recent wor!
t#an we mig#t #a-e e(&ected4 ;n ,he 'deolo%y of the Aesthetic5 Eagleton &ro&oses an argument w#ic#, grounded in t#e Ya)ouring )od% o/ Mar(ism, will aim to restore to t#e )od% its &lundered
&owers -ia t#e aest#etic6 in s#ort, Eagleton H li!e 1audrillard, L%otard, Jirilio and man% ot#ers w#o #a-e c#allenged Mar(ism H wis#es to restore to t#e aest#etic its /ull ca&acit% /or t#e &olitical4
T#e site /or suc# a restoration is t#e #uman )od%4
.#en Hamlet suggests t#at Ft#e time is out o/ Ioint0, #e mig#t well also #a-e indicated t#at H in t#is &la%, at least H t#e )od% is also and eKuall% Fout o/ Ioint0, or disIuncti-e4 T#e #uman )od%
in 7amlet is itsel/ a central site o/ t#e &la%0s &eculiar status as a Fmodern0 drama4 $irst, t#ere are a series o/ deli)erations a)out t#e material status o/ t#e )od%, in t#e /igure o/ t#e 2#ostN t#is t#en
gi-es wa% to re/lections on t#e )od% as t#e site o/ t#eatrical enactment and re&resentation w#en Hamlet considers t#e e//ects o/ t#e Pla%er 'ing0s s&eec#, a s&eec# w#ic# #as a &#%sical e//ect on
t#e Pla%er, )ringing tears to #is e%esN t#en Hamlet, wit# t#e gra-ediggers, &onders t#e location o/ t#e #uman s&irit in a s&eci/ic cor&oral location w#en #e /ictionalises t#e down/all o/ Ale(ander6
Ale(ander died, Ale(ander was )uried4 Ale(ander returnet# into dust, t#e dust is eart#, o/ eart# we ma!e loam, and w#% o/ t#at loam w#ereto #e was con-erted mig#t t#e% not sto& a )eer-
)arrelD ?+
T#us )egins a series o/ more or less comic re/lections on t#e FdisIuncti-e0 #uman )od% in literature, &er#a&s culminating in 1ec!ett, w#ose Mur&#% )ecomes &recisel% t#e as#es and dust mi(ed
wit# t#e detritus o/ Ale(ander0s )eer-)arrel4 <9 Suc# a disIuncti-e )od% determines t#e necessit% /or t#e modern and &ostmodern aest#etic o)session wit# t#e )od% H a )od% now /irml% in time,
)ut in a disIuncti-e time, Producing w#at 'ro!er c#aracterises as a s&eci/icall% &ostmodern F&anic06
.#at is &ostmodernismD ;t is w#at is &la%ing at %our local t#eatre, TJ studio, o//ice tower, doctor0s o//ice, or se( outlet4 ot t#e )eginning o/ an%t#ing new or t#e end o/
-
&ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction 5,
22 &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
an%t#ing old, )ut t#e catastro&#ic, )ecause /un, im&losion o/ contem&orar% culture into a w#ole series o/ &anic scenes at t#e finFdeFmillennium.
7
i
8 J,st Po.itics
As $oucault indicated in <iscipline and &unish5 t#e #uman )od% is t#e site /or t#e inscri&tion o/ Iustice4 Yet at t#e )eginning o/ Fmodernit%0, in t#e late eig#teent# centur%, t#is )od% undergoes a
signi/icant c#ange4 ;n t#e immediatel% &receding &eriod, t#e )od% was e(tremel% -isi)le in t#e moment o/ t#e e(acting o/ Iustice6 it ena)led Iustice to )e seen in t#e &#%sical torments o/
&unis#ment /or crime, e(#i)ited as &u)lic s&ectacle4 1ut t#en a /undamental dis&lacement ta!es &lace wit#in t#e Iudicial s%stem, w#ose e//ect is to c#ange t#e signi/icance H e-en t#e e(&erience
H o/ t#e &#%sical )od%4 $oucault &oints out t#at )etween roug#l% *<<9 and *E=9 in Euro&e, t#e s&ectacle o/ &u)lic &#%sical torture disa&&earsN )ut it is re&laced )% a su&&lementar% Iudicial code6
T#e )od% now ser-es as an instrument or intermediar%6 i/ one inter-enes u&on it to im&rison it, or to ma!e it wor!, it is in order to de&ri-e t#e indi-idual o/ a li)ert% t#at is regarded )ot# as a
rig#t and as &ro&ert%4 T#e )od%, according to t#is &enalit%, is caug#t u& in a s%stem o/ constraints and &ri-ations, o)ligations and &ro#i)itions4 P#%sical &ain, t#e &ain o/ t#e )od% itsel/, is no
longer t#e constituent element o/ t#e &enalt%4 $rom )eing an art o/ un)eara)le sensations &unis#ment #as )ecome an econom% o/ sus&ended rig#ts4 ;/ it is still necessar% /or t#e law to reac#
and mani&ulate t#e )od% o/ t#e con-ict, it will )e at a distance, in t#e &ro&er wa%, according to strict rules, and wit# a muc# F#ig#er0 aim4 As a result o/ t#is new restraint, a w#ole arm% o/
tec#nicians too! o-er /rom t#e e(ecutioner, t#e immediate anatomist o/ &ain6
warders, doctors, c#a&lains, &s%c#iatrists, &s%c#ologists, educationalists4 <5
T#is s#i/t in t#e Iudicial s%stem is re/lected in t#e de-elo&ment o/ aest#etics as well4 ;n t#e late-se-enteent#-centur% Englis# t#eatre, /or instance, a c#aracter0s res&onse to #er or #is &erce&tion is
mar!ed )% and on t#e )od%, w#ic# is e(tremel% e(&ressi-e4 St%le comes to t#e /ore/ront o/ e-er%t#ing6 Restoration t#eatre in England and MoliZresKue comed% in $rance /eature c#aracters w#o
lac! su)stanti-e &s%c#ological content and #a-e onl% t#e /orm o/ st%le H a st%le e(&ressed in manners, costume, cor&oreal decorum4 1% t#e late eig#teent# centur%, #owe-er, in a te(t suc# as
Mac!enGie0s ,he (an of $eelin% @*<<*A, t#is #as )ecome almost &arodic4 T#is no-el loo!s )ac!wards to a moment w#en a sociological norm o/ a s&eci/ic Fsensi)ilit%0 was a mar!er o/ class,
and o/ sociocultural legitimac% and -alidation4 ;/ one0s res&onse to t#e world was so re/ined t#at it was immediately -isi)le, legi)le in t#e tears or t#e general de&ortment o/ t#e indi-idual, t#en
t#at indi-idual, and #er or #is social -alues, were -alidated4 Here, a matter o/ aest#etics or taste determines social and &olitical law4 T#ose w#ose re/inement was o/ a lesser order @i4e4 t#ose w#o
were less F/as#iona)le0A were also t#esc)% stigmatised as t#e -ictims H t#e o)Iects H o/ t#e law o/ t#e aest#ete4 As 1ourdieu drgued, taste )ecomes
law in a situation suc# as t#isN and, as in $oucault0s #orri/ic tales o/ &unis#ment and torture, t#e )od% )ecomes t#e site o/ an inscri&tion o/ sense as well as o/ sensi)ilit%4
A mere t#irt% %ears later, #owe-er, t#e entire sensi)ilit% tradition is )eing t#oroug#l% satirised in Austen and ot#ers4 T#e )od% is more Fdistanced0 /rom t#e &u)lic dis&la% o/ emotion6 t#e
)eginnings o/ a s&eci/icall% FEnglis#0 sang-/roid or &#legmatic nature are )eing de-elo&ed, at a moment w#en, as Deane #as s#own, t#e idea o/ a Fnational c#aracter0 is gaining ground4 FG T#at
&#legmatic nature, #owe-er, is one w#ic# distances H or, )etter, alienates H t#e #uman )od% /rom art
H indeed, e-en /rom &erce&tion4 T#e #istor% o/ t#at alienation, an do/its conseKuent &olitical e//ect, is c#arted in Eagleton0s 'deolo%y of the Aesthetic and in $err%0s 7omo Aestheticus.
So t#e modern mig#t )e c#arted in terms o/ an attitude to t#e #uman )od% and, more im&ortantl%, to its a&&earance and disa&&earance4 $or $oucault, t#e de-elo&ing #istor% o/ &unis#ment is
one w#ic# eradicates t#e traces o/ t#e )od% as suc#6 e-en t#e condemned &risoner0s last &ain is denied #er or #im under t#e anaest#etising needle o/ t#e doctor, so t#at t#e #uman )od% as a
material entit% almost entirel% disa&&ears, e-en /or t#e #uman Su)Iect itsel/4 T#is &rocess, w#ic# )egins in t#e eig#teent# centur%, /inds its culmination in anot#er attitude to t#e )od% in t#e aGi
atrocities w#ic# were also concerned to ma!e certain #uman )odies disa&&ear in t#e interests o/ maintaining a m%t#ic, &urel% /ormal )od%4
.#at #a&&ens to Iustice in all t#isD .#at is t#e &ro&er relation, in t#is modernism, )etween t#e aest#etic and t#e &olitical insertion o/ t#e )od% in #uman s&aceD T#e Iust #as alwa%s )een
intimatel% lin!ed to t#e trueN and Iustice de&ends u&on a re-elation o/ trut#4 T#ere is a clear structural similarit% )etween t#is and a Mar(ist #ermeneutic4 T#e &roIect o/ an ideological
dem%sti/ication starts /rom t#e &resu&&osition t#at a te(t @or t#e o)Iect o/ an% criticismA is alwa%s in/ormed )% a s&eci/ic #istorical and &olitical ne(us, and t#at t#e te(t is t#e site /or t#e co-ering
o-er @t#e disa&&earanceA o/ t#e contradictions im&licit in t#is #istorical conIuncture4 T#e tas! o/ criticism #ere is one w#ic# is in t#e /irst instance e&istemological6 it in-ol-es t#e necessar%
re-elation o/ a trut# l%ing concealed )e#ind an a&&earance4 1ut it is &recisel% t#is o&&osition H )etween ideological a&&earance on t#e one #and and true realit% on t#e ot#er H w#ic# #as come
under strong s&eculati-e &ressure4 As a result, t#e Kuestion o/ Iustice #as also reKuired /undamental reconsideration4
T#is can )e e(&lained /urt#er4 ; #a-e alread% argued /or a consideration o/ t#e cit% not as a &oint in s&ace )ut rat#er as an e-ent in time4 ;n general, t#at w#ic# .e #ad assumed to )e a
relati-el% sta)le essence w#ose true s#a&e can )e re-ealed in anal%sis turns out to )e unsta)le, tra-ersed )% an internal #istoricit%4 1% e(tension now, Iustice cannot )e indicated )% a series o/
s&eci/ic legal Fcases0, &resented as F/actual0, /or instanceN rat#er, Iustice itsel/ can e(ist onl% as an e-ent, not as t#e re&etition o/ a /ormula or as a Iudgment made in con/ormit% wit# a &re-gi-en
rule4 T#e real, as modernism alread% !new, is alwa%s in /lu(4 1ut it now /ollows t#at t#e real is itsel/ not somet#ing w#ic# can )e determined according to a dialectic o/
2: &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction 2$
a&&earance and realit%N rat#er, t#e real de&ends u&on t#e dialectical H and &olitical
H s&eed regulating a&&earance and disa&&earance4
T#e essence o/ t#e &olitical in our time is /ormulated u&on &recisel% t#is relation )etween a&&earance and disa&&earance4 Since we li-e in w#at De)ord c#aracterised as a Fsociet% o/ t#e
s&ectacle0,
<>
our &olitics H and our Iustice H #a-e )ecome increasingl% Fs&ectacular0, a matter o/ Fs#ow trials0 and Fli-e0 TJ courtroom drama4 A &oignant icon o/ t#is state o/ a//airs is to )e /ound
in t#e e(am&le o/ten cited )% Jirilio o/ t#e women o/ t#e PlaGa de Ma%a, w#o congregate in silence at regular inter-als sim&l% to )ear witness to t#eir relati-es w#o #a-e )een made to
Fdisa&&ear04 Political s%stems H including soi-disant Fdemocratic0 s%stems H increasingl% deal wit# dissident t#oug#t )% controlling and regulating its a&&earancesN and, on occasion, dissident
t#in!ers t#emsel-es are entirel% Fdisa&&eared0 H or, as Orwell c#aracterised t#is in Hineteen :i%hty-$our5 F-a&oriGed04 <?
To !now t#e real is no longer to !now somet#ing sta)le6 e&istemolog% is contaminated )% #istor%4 As a result, !nowledge itsel/ H &redicated u&on a sta)le relation )etween Su)Iect and O)Iect
o/ !nowledge, a moment o/ anagnorisis or recognition &roducing t#e ;dentit% o/ t#e Su)Iect H #as entered into crisis4 T#is crisis was /oreseen, long )e/ore Lacan and Derrida, )% 'ant4 ;n t#e
)riti>ue of &ure 4eason5 'ant /aced u& to t#e Kuestion o/ t#e scienti/icit% H )% w#ic# #e meant -eri/ia)ilit% H o/ !nowledge a)out t#e world4 He argued /or t#e necessit% o/ a priori Iudgement in
suc# matters4 1ut more t#an t#is, #e argued t#at an a priori !nowledge gleaned sim&l% /rom anal%tic met#odolog% would sim&l% tell us a great deal a)out t#e met#odolog%, and not necessaril%
an%t#ing new a)out t#e world6 it would &ro-ide onl% anamnesis4 T#at is to sa%, to &ercei-e t#e world at all, consciousness needs a /orm in w#ic# to com&re#end itN t#at /orm H t#e anal%tic
met#od o/ &erce&tion H ser-es &rimaril% t#e /unction o/ sel/-legitimation4 'ant wanted t#e world to )e a)le to s#oc! us into new !nowledgeN #e wanted t#e realit% o/ t#e world to ser-e t#e
/unction o/ an a-ant-garde6 t#at is, to )e a)le to s#oc! us out o/ t#e ideological conditioning o/ our mental structures H t#ose structures w#ic#, according to t#e Romanticism o/ 'ant0s time,
s#a&e t#e world4 He wanted, t#us, w#at #e called a synthetic a priori5 w#ic# would e(ceed t#e ana6ytic a priori. T#is would not onl% con/irm t#e met#od o/ e&istemological anal%sis o/ t#e
world, it would also allow /or t#e structural modi/ication o/ t#e -er% anal%tic met#od itsel/ to account /or and encom&ass a new gi-en, t#e new and t#ere/ore un&redicta)le data o/ t#e world4 ;t
would t#us &ro-ide not Iust anamnesis, )ut t#e actual e-ent o/ !nowledge4
;n t#e )riti>ue of 3ud%ement5 t#is distinction )etween anal%tic and s%nt#etic a priori more or less ma&s on to a distinction )etween determining and re/lecti-e Iudgement4 ;n a determining
Iudgement, t#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness is not im&licated in t#e act or e-ent o/ Iudging at all6 a met#od, a structure, determines t#e result o/ t#e Iudgement4 ;n re/lection, we #a-e a state o/
a//airs a!in to t#at w#en we consider t#e aest#eticall% )eauti/ul6 we Iudge H in w#at #as )ecome t#e /amous and contro-ersial &#rase H Fwit#out criteria040R ;n s#ort, all t#is means is t#at we Iudge
wit#out a &redetermining t#eor%4 3udgements are t#en re&laced )% IudgingN
and t#e form o/ Iustice @a Iustice w#ic# is Fseen to )e done0, and is legitimised simply because it is Fseen0, tele-ised, disseminated and distri)uted Fdemocraticall%0A )% t#e e.ent o/ Iustice4
;n t#is state o/ a//airs, t#e o&eration o/ reason is e(tending itsel/ )e%ond its own internall% co#erent /ramewor!, and attem&ting to gras& t#e new4 T#is e(tension is one in w#ic# we )egin to
see a s#i/t in em&#asis awa% /rom w#at we could call scienti/ic !nowledge towards w#at s#ould &ro&erl% )e considered as a /orm o/ narrati-e !nowledge4 Rat#er t#an !nowing t#e sta)le essence
o/ a t#ing, we )egin to tell t#e stor% o/ t#e e-ent o/ Iudging it, and to enact t#e narrati-e o/ #ow it c#anges consciousness and t#us &roduces a new !nowledge4 1art#es once ad-ocated
, <E
a s#i/t F/rom wor! to te(t0N t#e &ostmodern ad-ocates a s#i/t F/rom te(t to e-ent4
L%otard understands t#is in terms o/ a mo-ement awa% /rom an% su)scri&tion to totalit%4 A scientistic !nowledge would )e one w#ic# is grounded in t#e totalit% o/ a gd-erning t#eor%N and
w#ose /ormulations and &ro&ositions are tested Finternall%0, )% re/erence to t#at t#eor% itsel/4 T#is is also w#at L%otard descri)es as a modern moodN t#e &ostmodern, )% contrast, is c#aracterised
)% an Fincredulit% towards metanarrati-es0
<+
or, more sim&l% &ut, )% a sus&icion o/ t#e scientistic nature o/ muc# t#eor%4 T#e &ostmodern &re/ers t#e e-ent o/ !nowing to t#e /act o/ !nowledge,
so to s&ea!4
An old &ro)lem now returns6 #ow can one legitimise an Fe-ent0 o/ IudgingD .it# res&ect to w#at can one -alidate w#at must e//ecti-el% )e a singular actD $or L%otard, credulit% towards
metanarrati-es @i4e4 su)scri&tion to a &re-ailing t#eor% against w#ose norms single e-ents o/ Iudging mig#t t#emsel-es )e Iudged and -alidatedA is tantamount to a concession to s%stems t#eor%4
E-en Ha)ermas, w#o is o&&osed to L%otard on man% counts, o&&oses t#is4 Ha)ermas attac!s Lu#mann, /or instance, a/ter w#om t#ere is a danger t#at F)elie/ in legitimac% 444 s#rin!s to a )elie/ in
legalit%04
E9
$or Ha)ermas, t#e correcti-e to t#is lies in a discursi-el% organised social rationalit%4 Ha)ermas acce&ts Apace t#e recei-ed wisdomA in large measure t#e )asis o/ L%otard0s critiKue o/
Enlig#tenment reason4 He is &ro/oundl% aware t#at t#ere is a &otential ineKualit% in a s%stem w#ic# claims reason /or itsel/ and stigmatises all t#ose wit# w#om it will communicate as )eing
in#erentl% unreasona)le4 T#at is, Ha)ermas is aware t#at t#e consciousness w#ic# &ronounces itsel/ reasona)le is in danger o/ im&osing its norms, in im&erious manner, u&on all and e-er% ot#er
&ossi)le consciousness4 T#e counter to t#is lies in a Ft#eor% o/ communicati-e action0N )ut #ere Ha)ermas and L%otard di-erge once more4
$or Ha)ermas, it is not onl% desira)le )ut also &ossi)le to esta)lis# a consensus among t#e &artici&ants in t#e e-ent o/ communication6 and it is logicall% &ossi)le to organise a social
/ormation on more rational terms, t#roug# a discursi-el% agreed consensus4 L%otard associates suc# consensus wit# t#e end o/ t#in!ing, and @rat#er li!e Adorno, in /actA suggests t#at suc#
consensus (-ould )e merel% /ormal, a means o/ co-ering u& inIustice under a -eneer o/ Iustice4 ;n a de)ate wit# Rort% H w#o s#ares wit# Ha)ermas a /ait# in some !ind o/ Fcon-ersation0 H
L%otard indicates t#at t#ere is a Fso/t im&erialism0, a Fcon-ersational im&erialism0 at wor! in t#e dri-e to esta)lis# consensus )etween &artici&ants in a dialogue4 OO Onl% i/ we res&ect H and
5? &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
stress H t#e #eterogeneit% o/ language-games will we sa-e t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ t#in!ing4 ;n s#ort, t#is means t#at it is onl% in t#e re/usal o/ consensus and in t#e searc# /or Fdissensus0 t#at we will )e
a)le to e(tend t#in!ing, to allow it to )e s#oc!ed into t#e new, t#e @c#ronologicalA &ostmodern4 Consensus is a means o/ arresting t#e /low o/ e-ents, a mode w#ere)% e-entualit% can )e reduced
to &unctualit%N it is a wa% o/ reducing t#e &#iloso&#% o/ 1ecoming to a &#iloso&#% o/ 1eing4 T#e modernist assumes t#at it is &ossi)le to &ass /rom 1ecoming to 1eingN t#e &ostmodernist
)elie-es t#at an% suc# mo-e is alwa%s necessaril% &remature and unwarranted4
Politics, as we usuall% t#in! it, de&ends u&on consensusN most o/ten, o/ course, suc# consensus articulates itsel/ under t#e ru)ric o/ Fre&resentation0 @a categor% w#ic# #as alread% come under
&ressure in its aest#etic /ormulationA, in w#ic# t#ere is /irst an assumed consensus )etween re&resentati-e and re&resented, and secondl% t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ consensus among re&resentati-es4 T#is
is )ourgeois democrac%, #ardl% a democrac% at all4 ;n &lace o/ suc# a &olitics, it mig#t )e wiser to loo! /or a Iustice4 3ustice cannot #a&&en under )ourgeois democrac%, w#ic# is alwa%s
grounded in t#e t%rann% o/ t#e man% @and e-en, o/ course, in man% Fdemocractic0 s%stems, on t#e t%rann% o/ t#e /ew H on t#e #egemonic control o/ t#oug#t e(ercised )% a /ew w#o mediate t#e
norms o/ a social /ormationA4 .e can no longer legislate com/orta)l% )etween o&&osing or com&eting &olitical s%stems, /or we no longer su)scri)e to an% suc# totalising /ormsN )ut we can
address t#e instance, t#e e-ents, o/ Iustice4
Here lies t#e )asis o/ an et#ical demand in t#e &ostmodern, a demand w#ose &#iloso&#ical roots lie in t#e wor! o/ a t#in!er suc# as Le-inas4 .e must Iudge6
t#ere is no esca&e /rom t#e necessit% o/ Iudging in an% s&eci/ic case4 Yet we #a-e no grounds u&on w#ic# to )ase our Iudging4 T#is is a!in to Le-inas6
; #a-e s&o!en a lot a)out t#e /ace o/ t#e Ot#er as )eing t#e original site o/ t#e sensi)le4
T#e &ro(imit% o/ t#e Ot#er is t#e /ace0s meaning, and it means in a wa% t#at goes )e%ond t#ose &lastic /orms w#ic# /ore-er tr% to co-er t#e /ace li!e a mas! o/ t#eir &resence to &erce&tion4
1ut alwa%s t#e /ace s#ows t#roug# t#ese /orms4 Prior to an% &articular e(&ression and )eneat# all &articular e(&ressions, w#ic# co-er o-er and &rotect wit# an immediatel% ado&ted /ace or
countenance, t#ere is t#e na!edness and destitution o/ t#e e(&ression as suc#, t#at is to sa% e(treme e(&osure, de/encelessness, -ulnera)ilit% itsel/4 444 ;n its e(&ression, in its mortalit%, t#e /ace
)e/ore me summons me, calls /or me, )egs /or me, as i/ t#e in-isi)le deat# t#at must )e /aced )% t#e Ot#er,
E5
&ure ot#erness, se&arated, in some wa%, /rom an% w#ole, were m% )usiness4
T#e /ace-to-/ace im&licates us in a res&onse, in t#e necessit% o/ socialit%4 .e must )e#a-e Iustl% towards t#e /ace o/ t#e Ot#erN )ut we cannot do t#at according to a &redetermined s%stem o/
Iustice, a &redetermined &olitical t#eor%4 T#e Ot#er is itsel/ alwa%s ot#er t#an itsel/6 it is not sim&l% a dis&laced ;dentit% in w#ic# we ma% once more recognise and reconstitute oursel/4 T#e
demand is /or a Iust relating to alterit%, and /or a cognition o/ t#e e-ent o/ #eterogeneit%4 ;n s#ort, t#ere/ore, we must disco-er H &roduce H Iustice4 ;t is #ere t#at t#e real &olitical )urden and
traIector%
5<
o/ t#e &ostmodern is to )e /ound6 t#e searc# /or a Iust &olitics, or t#e searc# /or Iust a &olitics4
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 T#e areas in w#ic# &ostinodernism is alread% well !nown can )e /ound in t#e )i)liogra&#%, )ut ; draw attention #ere to some random articles w#ic# demonstrate #ow &ostmodernism #as )egun to
in/iltrate une(&ected areas6 D4 R4 2ri//in @ed4A, ,he 4eenchantment of -cience: &ostmodern proposals5 *+EEN Har-e% Co(, 4eli%ion in the -ecular )ity: ,oward a postmodern theolo%y5
*+E=N Da-id Har-e%, ,he )ondition of &ostmodernity @on geogra&#%A, *+E+N Edward SoIa, &ostmodern /eo%raphies5 *++9N Da-id Platten, FPostmodern engineering0, *+E?, E=H?N Da-id
.idger%, FPostmodern medicine0, *+E+, E+<N 34 H4 .i!strom, FMo-ing into t#e &ost-modern world0, @on /orestr%A *+E<, +!.
-54 See Arnold To%n)ee, A -tudy of 7istory5 -ol4 *4 @*+,=N 5nd edn, O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, 1*#!?5 &4 *, n5N -ol4 ! @O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, 1*#*?5 &4 =,4
,4 Ha%den .#ite, (etahistory @3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore, *+<,N re&r4
*+E<, &&4 ?*H54
. Eric# Auer)ac#, (imesis5 *+=?N transl4 .illard R4 Tras!N re&r4 Princeton 8ni-ersit% Press, Princeton, 3, *+<=, &4 !!"B c/4 m% comments on t#is in Doc#ert%, After ,heory5 *++9, &&4 *55H,4
!. On sc#iGo&#renia and its relation to t#e &ostmodern, see e4g4, $redric 3ameson, &ostmodernism5 *++*, &&4 5> i/4 T#e larger de)ates around sc#iGo&#renia and culture )egan largel% in t#e *+?9s,
most es&eciall% in t#e wor! o/ t#e Fanti-&s%c#iatrists0 suc# as R4 D4 Laing, Rollo Ma%, Da-id Coo&er, orman 94 1rownN and it was related directl% to &olitical culture in t#e writings o/ $eli(
2uattari4 T#is mo-ement /ed directl% into t#e F&#iloso&#% o/ desire0, and led 2il;es DeleuGe and $eli( 2uattari to colla)orate on w#at t#e% called Fsc#iGanal%sis0 in t#eir two--olume
)apitalism and -chi8ophrenia: see DeleuGe and 2uattari, Anti-2edipus5 *+<5N transl4 *+E=, es&eciall% c#4 =N and A ,housand &lateaus5 *+E9, transl4 *+E<4
?4 $or an e(&lanation o/ t#is in terms o/ acti-e and reacti-e /orces in ietGsc#e see 2illes DeleuGe, Hiet8sche and &hilosophy5 *+?5N transl4 Hug# Tomlinson, At#lone Press, *+E,, &&4 ,+//4
<4 Leslie A4 $iedler, FT#e new mutants0, 1*+!5 !0!I+.
E4 See, e4g4,3urgen Ha)ermas, ,he ,heory of )ommunicati.e Action5 -ol4 *, *+E*N transl4
*+E=, es&4 section ;;;, F;ntermediate Re/lections6 Social action, &ur&osi-e acti-it%, and
Communication0
+4 Ernest Mandel, 6ate )apitalism5 *+<EN $redric 3ameson, 6ate (ar=ism5 1**0.
*94 $or a /ull account o/ t#is, see Andrew Do)son, /reen &olitical ,hou%ht5 *++94
**4 Ernesto Laclau and C#antal Moui/e, 7e%emony and -ocialist -trate%y5 *+E>4 2ramsci and $oucault, in general, )egan to )e read in wa%s w#ic# o//ered more &urc#ase /or an Fo&&ositional0
&olitical criticism t#an did t#e conce&t o/ class4 ;t would &ro)a)l% )e accurate, i/ a little o-ersim&li/ied, to indicate t#at it is largel% 1ritis# cultural t#eorists w#o #a-e retained and wis# to re#a)ilitate
t#e conce&t o/ class4
2@ &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
*54 See 3ean-$rancois L%otard, 61:conomie libidinale5 *+<=N DeleuGe and 2uattari, o&4 cit4N 3ean 1audrillard, ,he (irror of &roduction5 *+<,N transl4 1*7!B c/4 m% comments on t#is in After
,heory5 &&4 59<H*,4
*,4 See Alain 1adiou, ,h;orie du su9et5 *+E54 T#is &ro)lematisation o/ t#e status o/ t#e Su)Iect is /airl% central to t#e wor! o/ critics suc# as Cat#erine 1else% in, e4g4, ,he -ub9ect of ,ra%edy5
Met#uen, London, 1*J!B and )ritical &ractice5 Met#uen, London *+E9N or in t#at o/ Anton% East#o&e, &oetry and &hantasy5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E+4 $or a di//erent,
e(tremel% &roducti-e and suggesti-e argumentation relating t#e Kuestioning o/ t#e su)Iect to &ostmodernism, and es&eciall% to &o&ular cultural /orms, see Sla-oI SiOe!, 6ookin% Awry5
*++*4
*=4 T#eodor Adorno and Ma( Hor!#eimer, <ialectic o/ :nli%htenment5 *+==N transl4
*+E?, &4 ?4
1!. Peter 2a%, ,he :nli%htenment5 -ol4 *, *+??, &4 (iii4 T#is collocation o/ criticism and creati-it% &re/igures t#e twentiet#-centur% a-ant-gardeN see Section 5 )elow4
*?4 Adorno and Hor!#eimer, <ialectic5 &4 ,4
*<4 'bid.5 &4 ?4
*E4 'bid.5 &4 <4
*+4 See Plato, FT#e Meno0 in $i.e <ialo%ues Kearin% on &oetic 'nspiration5 Dent, London,
*+*,, &4 +*6 Fall our !nowledge is reminiscence04 T#e reduction o/ cognition to recognition is &articularl% &ertinent to Englis# Romanticism, &er#a&s most es&eciall% in .ordswort#, w#ose
&oetr% t%&icall% cele)rates t#e re&etition o/ an emotion, t#e recognition o/ a &lace or o/ a state o/ a//airs4 T#ere is t#us a neo-Romantic #ango-er in t#is tendenc% to mat#esis in reason4
594 Adorno and Hor!#eimer, <ialectic5 &4 +4
5*4 34-$4 L%otard, FS-elte a&&endi( to t#e &ostmodern Kuestion0 @transl4 T#omas Doc#ert%A in Ric#ard 'earne% @ed4A, Across the $rontiers5 .ol/#ound Press, Du)lin, *+EE, &4 5?>4
554 P#ili& Sidne%, FA&olog% /or &oetr%0, in Edmund D4 3ones @ed4A, :n%lish )ritical :ssays:
-i=teenth5 se.enteenth and ei%hteenth centuries5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+55N re&r4 1*7!5 &&4 59H*4
5,4 See, e4g4, JC L4 Austin, 7ow to <o ,hin%s with Words5 5nd edn, O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, 1*7!B 'ennet# 1ur!e, 6an%ua%e as -ymbolic Action5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press,
1er!ele%, *+??N Stanle% $is#, -elf-)onsumin% Artifacts5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%, *+<5N and 's ,here a ,e=t in this )lass@ Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+E9N
.4 JC T4 Mitc#ell, ed4, A%ainst ,heory5 1*J!5 w#ic# includes a Fmore-&ragmatist-t#an-t#ou0 statement )% Ric#ard Rort%, t#e most e(&licitl% Few Pragmatist0 o/ current F&ragmatic0
t#eorists4
5=4 See $is#, -elf-)onsumin% Artifacts. 1ut c/4 3onat#an Culler, On <econstruction5 Routledge \ 'egan Paul, *+E,, &4 ??6 F.#at distinguis#es $is#0s reader is t#is &ro&ensit% to /all into t#e
same tra&s o-er and o-er again4 Eac# time it is &ossi)le to inter&ret t#e end o/ a line o/ -erse as com&leting a t#oug#t, #e does so, onl% to /ind, in numerous cases, t#at t#e )eginning o/ t#e
ne(t line )rings a c#ange o/ sense4 One would e(&ect an% real reader, es&eciall% one stri-ing to )e in/ormed, to notice t#at &remature guesses o/ten &ro-e wrong and to antici&ate t#is
&ossi)ilit% as #e reads4 Stanle% E4 $is#, a/ter all, not onl% notices t#is &ossi)ilit% )ut writes )oo!s a)out itC; ;n $is#0s wor!, t#is #as )ecome increasingl% acce&ted4 $is#0s answer to t#is is to
ado&t a &ragmatist &osition in w#ic# #e is, as Culler suggests #ere, &recisel% ena)led to &redict t#e res&onse o/ a reader4 $or e(am&le, gi-en a reader0s &redis&osition /or deconstruction,
sa%, it is entirel%
&redicta)le t#at #er or #is engagement wit# a te(t will )e a deconstructi-e one, and #er or #is reading is entirel% &redicta)le4
5>4 Paul de Man, ,he 4esistance to ,heory5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester,
*+E?, &4 **4 See also 2ottlo) $rege, FOn sense and meaning0, in Ma( 1lac! and P4 T4 2eac# @edsA, ,ranslations from the &hilosophical Writin%s of /ottlob $re%e5 *+>54
5?4 Adorno and Hor!#eimer, <ialectic5 &4 <4
5<4 'bid.5 &4 *,4
5E4 Joltaire, )andide5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+?E, passim.
5+4 Hans 1lumen)erg, ,he 6e%itimacy of the (odern A%e5 *+??N transl4 *+E,, O4 =9=4
,94 T#e inde)tedness o/ t#is mode o/ t#in!ing to 'ier!egaard s#ould )e clear4 T#e sense t#at one is alwa%s Fem)ar!ed0 and t#at t#e grounds u&on w#ic# one ma!es Iudgements are constantl%
s#i/ting was alwa%s close to t#e centre o/ 'ier!egaardian t#in!ing4 Consider, /or e(am&le, a t%&ical &assage in :ither/2r5 in R4 1retall @ed4A, A Lierke%aardian Antholo%y5 Princeton
8ni-ersit% Press, Princeton, 3, *+=?, &&4 *95H,6 FT#in! o/ t#e ca&tain on )oard #is s#i& at t#e instant w#en it #as to come a)out4 He will &er#a&s )e a)le to sa%, ]; can do eit#er t#is or
t#atRN )ut in case #e is not a &rett% &oor na-igator, #e will )e aware t#at at t#e same time #is s#i& is all t#e w#ile ma!ing its usual #eadwa%, and t#at t#ere/ore it is onl% an instant w#en t#ere
is no longer an% Kuestion o/ an eit#er:or, not )ecause #e #as c#osen )ut )ecause #e #as neglected to c#oose, w#ic# is eKui-alent to sa%ing, )ecause ot#ers #a-e c#osen /or #im, )ecause #e
#as lost #is sel/40
,*4 See 34-$4 L%otard, ,he &ostmodern )ondition5 *+<+N transl4 *+E=, &4 ((i-4
,54 .alter 1enIamin, 'lluminations5 ed4 Hanna# Arendt, *+<,, &4 5>E4
,,4 S%gmunt 1auman, (odernity and the 7olocaust5 *+E+, &4 <4
,=4 'bid.5 &4 E4
35. 'bid.5 &4 5954
,?4 'bid.5 &&4 595H,4
,<4 'bid.5 &4 59,4
,E4 3acKues Derrida, (ar%ins: 2f philosophy5 *+<5N transl4 Alan 1ass, Har-ester, 1rig#ton,
*+E5, &4 5*,4
,+4 2a%, :nli%htenment5 -ol4 *, &4 5=, argues t#at Enlig#tenment t#oug#t was itsel/ contaminated )% t#e -er% religiosit% it #o&ed to circumscri)e4 C/4 L%otard on contem&orar% &aganism in #is
4udiments paiens @8nion gLnLrale d0Lditions, Paris, *+<<A, and 'nstructions paiennes5 *+<<4 See also 3urgen Ha)ermas, 6e%itimation )risis5 *+<,N transl4 *+<?4
=94 Mic#el $oucault, $olie et d;raison5 Plon, Paris, *+?*, passim.
=*4 3ean 1audrillard, -imulations5 transl4 Paul $oss, Paul Patton and P#ili& 1eitc#manN Semiote(t@eA, ew Yor!, *+E,, &4 "!.
=54 2illes DeleuGe, Lant1s )ritical &hilosophy5 *+?,N transl4 *+E=, &&4 -iiH-iii4
=,4 24 E4 Lessing, 6aokbon5 *<??N transl4 .illiam A4 Steel, Dent, London, *+,94
==4 34-$4 L%otard, FReLcrire ;a modernitL0, in 61'nhumain5 2alilee, Paris, *+EE, &&4 ,,H==4
45. See, e4g4, Ale(ander 1aumgarten, 4eflections on &oetry5 transl4 '4 Asc#en)renner and .4 14 Holt#er, 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%, 1*!B ;mmanuel 'ant, )riti>ue of
3ud%ement5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+>54
=?4 Pierre 1ourdieu, <istinction5 *+<+N transl4 *+E=, &&4 ??H<54
7. 'ant, )riti>ue of 3ud%ement5 &ara4 *, sect4 *,, &4 <54
=E4 Terr% Eagleton, ,he 'deolo%y of the Aesthetic5 1BB9D &4 *=4 T#e sentiment e(&ressed at t#is and similar moments in t#e )oo! are oddl% reminiscent o/ Eliot0s com&laints at t#e
&ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction 81
89 &ostmodernism: An 'ntroduction
Fdissociation o/ sensi)ilit%06 see T4 S4 Eliot, FT#e Meta&#%sical &oets0, in -elected :ssays5 ,rd edo, $a)er \ $a)er, London *+>*N re&r4 *+E9, &&4 5E*H+*, es&4 5E?HE4
=+4 Luc $err%, 7omo Aestheticus5 *++9, &&4 5>?n, 5>+N m% translation4
>94 'bid.5 &4 5?9N m% translation4
>*4 T#e re/erence #ere is to t#e Iournal ,el Muel5 w#ic#, it mig#t )e argued, continued t#e wor! o/ surrealism -ia a &rolonged engagement wit# structuralism, w#ose )urden was t#e im&ortance
o/ &olitical de)ate o-er t#e -alues o/ identi/ia)le cultural &ractices4
>54 FRecognition0 #as #ad a s&eci/ic &lace in t#e structure o/ traged% at least since Aristotle0s &oetics @es&4 c#4 *?A4 An art )ased u&on t#e !ind o/ ana%norisis ; descri)e #ere mig#t t#us )e
aligned wit# traged%4 2i-en t#at ; am now also suggesting t#at it lin!s not onl% to a s&eci/ic tradition o/ Frealism0 )ut also to &ragmatism, one mig#t intercalate at t#is &oint a comment on
'ennet# 1ur!e, in w#ose 6an%ua%e as -ymbolic Action5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%, CA, *+??, t#ere is a terse /ootnote, &4 59, n56
;n #is &arts of Animals5 C#a&ter B, Aristotle mentions t#e de/inition o/ man as t#e Flaug#ing animal,0 )ut #e does not consider it adeKuate4 T#oug# ; would #asten to agree, ; o)-iousl%
#a-e a )ig in-estment in itD owing to m% con-iction t#at man!ind0s onl% #o&e is a cult o/ comed%4 @T#e cult o/ traged% is too eager to #el& out wit# t#e #olocaust CCCEC
Suc# a comed%, as &art o/ t#e Frisi)ilit%0 w#ic# 1ur!e aligns in t#e same /ootnote wit# Fs%m)olicit%0, is germane to t#e !inds o/ incongruit% w#ic# are an im&ortant structural /eature o/ t#e
e//ect o/ t#e a-ant-garde4
>,4 L%otard, &ostmodern )ondition5 &4 E*4
>=4 See Ro)ert Hug#es, ,he -hock of the HewB )ut c/4 Peter 1urger on FT#e new0 in #is ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 *+<=N transl4 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E=, &&4 >+H?,4
!!. 1rian McHale, &ostmodernist $iction5 *+E<, Part *4
>?4 3acKues Lacan, :crits: A selection5 *+??N transl4 Alan S#eridanN Ta-istoc!, London,
*+<<, &4 *=*4 See also M4 M4 1a!#tin, ,he <ialo%ical 'ma%ination5 ed4 Mic#ael HolKuist, transl4 Car%l Emerson and Mic#ael HolKuist, 8ni-ersit% o/ Te(as Press, Austin, 1B@1F 3urgen
Ha)ermas, ,heory of )ommunicati.e Action.
><4 2eorg Lu!Ocs, FRealism in t#e )alance0, in Ernst 1loc# et al.5 Aesthetics and &olitics5
*+<<N Jerso, London, *+E9, &4 =E4
>E4 L%otard, &ostmodern )ondition5 &4 E*4
>+4 $err%, 7omo Aestheticus5 &4 5?=N m% translation4
?94 See, e4g4, Samir Amin, 6e <;.eloppement in;%al. T#ere is, o/ course, and es&eciall% in Englis# studies, a w#ole new growt# area in Su)altern Studies and t#e logic o/ cultural im&erialisms4
1ut /or a di//erent -iew o/ t#e )ases o/ suc# im&erialist &ro)lematics, see Al/red Cros)%, :colo%ical 'mperialism5 *+E?4
?*4 ;nterestingl%, t#is corres&onds #istoricall% wit# t#e &o&ular de-elo&ment in music o/ crisscross r#%t#ms, es&eciall% in /reest%le IaGG and in t#e odd musical tem&o /reKuentl% ado&ted )%
)ands suc# as So/t Mac#ine or Osi)isa in t#e *+<9s4 C/4 3acKues Attali, Hoise5 *+<<N transl4 *+E>, /or a di//erent in/lection o/ t#e &olitical econom% o/ music4
?54 See Carl -on ClausewitG, 2n War5 ed4 Anatol Ra&o&ort, *E,5N Penguin Classics, Harmondswort#, *+E5N Paul Jirilio, <efense populaire et luttes ;colo%i>ues5 *+<E, &&4 *=H*>4
?,4 Jirilio, <efense populaire5 &4 *<N m% translation4
?=4 T#e e-ent, as ; descri)e it #ere, is necessaril% conditioned )% muta)ilit%4 It is im&ortant to note in &assing, moreo-er, t#at t#e Englis# term Fstatic0, w#ic# is ostensi)l% t#e o&&osite o/ suc#
muta)ilit%, in /act contains wit#in its et%molog% &recisel% t#e same !ind o/ muta)ilit%4 ;t deri-es /rom stasis w#ic# means in modern 2ree! a )us sto&, )ut in Ancient 2ree! a ci-il war6 t#at
is, a state in w#ic# t#ere is a great deal o/ internal dissent and struggle, )ut w#ere t#e e(ternal )oundaries o/ suc# a state are not t#emsel-es called intO Kuestion4 $or a &er#a&s more
con-entional wa% o/ e(&ressing t#e )asic idea #ere, see Lewis Mum/ord, ,he )ity in 7istory5 *+?*N Penguin, Hamondswort#, *+<+, &4 *,6
FHuman li/e swings )etween two &oles6 mo-ement and settlement40
+!. See 8m)ro A&&olonio @edA4, $uturist (anifes toes5 T#ames \ Hudson, London, *+<,, passim.
??4 Paul Jirilio, 617ori8on n;%at8f5 *+E=, &4 *994
?<4 'bid.5 &&4 *9*H5N m% translation4
?E4 3ean 1audrillard, <e la seduction5 *+<+, &4 *5,N m% translation4
?+4 .illiam S#a!es&eare, 7amlet5 Act !5 scene i4
<94 Samuel 1ec!ett, (urphy5 Routledge, London, *+,E4
=1C Art#ur 'ro!er and Da-id Coo!, ,he &ostmodern -cene5 *+EE, &&4 iiHiii4
<54 Mic#el $oucault, <iscipline and &unish5 *+<>N transl4 Alan S#eridan, Penguin, Harmondswort#, *+<<N re&r4 *+E>, &4 **4
<,4 ;n relation to t#is, one mig#t add Malcolm McLaren6 F$as#ion is alwa%s rig#t0, in discussion on 11C5, ODid %ou seeD0
<=4 Seamus Deane, ,he $rench 4e.olution and :nli%htenment in :n%land 17J *I1J#"5
*+EE, es&4 c)s * and 54
7!. 2u% De)ord, 6a -oci;t; du spectacle5 *+?EN c/4 De)ord, )omments on the -ociety of the -pectacle5 *++94
<?4 2eorge Orwell, Hineteen :i%hty-$our5 1**B Penguin, Harmondswort#, *+>=N re&r4
*+E5, &4 *+4 and passim.
<<4 See 34-$4 L%otard and 3ean-Lou& T#L)aud, 3ust /amin%5 *+<+N transl4 *+E>, /or t#e most &ressing de)ate on t#e Fcriterion0 Kuestion4
<E4 See Roland 1art#es, 'ma%e H (usic H ,e=t5 ed4 Ste&#en Heat#, $ontana, 2lasgow,
*+<<4
<+4 L%otard, &ostmodern )ondition5 &4 ((i-N see es&eciall% sections + and *94
E94 Ha)ermas, 6e%itimation )risis5 &4 +E4
E*4 *4-$4 L%otard and Ric#ard Rort%, FDiscussion0, )riti>ue5 =*, >E*H=4
E54 Emmanuel Le-inas, ,he 6e.inas 4eader5 ed4 Sean Hand, *+E+, &&4 E5, E,4
PART OE
$O8D;2 PROPOS;T;OS
Introduction
T#e de)ate around &ostmodernism #as a long #istor%4 Yet it would )e true to sa% t#at t#e contem&orar% interest in t#e Kuestion dates /rom *+?E, t#at annus mirabilis w#ic#
is t#e great F*E=E0 o/ modern Euro&e4 A/ter t#e &ercei-ed /ailures o/ certain Fre-olutionar%0 mo-ements in *+?E, a su)stantial ret#in!ing o/ t#e Kuestion o/ cultural
&olitics )ecame not onl% necessar% )ut also H t#roug# a Kuestioning o/ t#e Fmodern0 itsel/ H a-aila)le in new, interesting and c#allenging, wa%s4 ;/ t#e logic o/ a
structuralist Mar(ism was, /or w#ate-er reasons, unsuccess/ul w#en &ut into &ractice, t#en #ow mig#t a le/t-wing &olitics ad-ance its causeD How can t#e critic o/
culture know or predict t#e &olitical e//ects o/ #er or #is discourseD ;n s#ort, i/ a &olitical t#eor% #ad /ailed on t#e occasion o/ Ma% *+?E to &roduce t#e reKuisite OrOtice,
t#en /rom now on, #ow does one sa/el% ground an emanci&ator% cultural &oliticsD ;n &#iloso&#%, t#ere arises a w#ole series o/ Fanti-/oundational0 modes o/ i#in!ing,
alread% /ores#adowed in t#e earl% deconstruction o/ Derrida in #is t#ree great *+?< te(ts4 ;n more general terms, one mig#t sa% t#at t#e critiKue o/ a /Oundational H or,
&er#a&s, Ftotalising0 H t#eor% )egins /rom wit#in t#eor% itsel/4 Ft#e general culture /aces w#at Ha)ermas diagnosed in *+<, as a Flegitimation crisis04
;n t#e arena o/ science, t#ere was t#e )eginning o/ t#e same &ro)lem, t#oug# mediated in a slig#tl% di//erent manner4 So-called Frogue scientists0, suc# as Paul
Oe%era)end and $ritIo/ Ca&ra, #ad )egun to Kuestion w#at we mig#t call t#e t#eoreticist0 )asis o/ contem&orar% science4 ;n t#e anarc#ist science o/ $e%era)end, more
attention is &aid to t#e wa%s in w#ic# em&irical &ractice actuall% de-iates /rom =#e t#eoreticall% reasoned scienti/ic t#eorem, /or instanceN and t#e t#eorem itsel/ ,OOins to
)e considered as somet#ing carceral, as a F/orm0 w#ic# &olices t#e actual COntent0 o/ scienti/ic e(&eriment4 'nowledge, /or $e%era)end and #is li!e, s#ould Fnot )e t#us
Fim&risoned0 wit#in t#e )ounds o/ a series o/ .estern rationalist models w#ose sole &ur&ose is to )olster .estern modes o/ t#in!ing and o/ re&resenting t#e wtrut#O
a)out t#e world4
;n *+?5, T#omas 'u#n #ad &ro&osed a s&eci/ic wa% o/ understanding t#e Procedures t#roug# w#ic# our scienti/ic Fmodels0 /or e(&laining t#e world c#ange across
#istor%4 T#ere were, #e argued, certain F&aradigms0 according to w#ic# t#e
could )e satis/actoril% e(&lained4 1ut, gi-en an e(&anding scienti/ic researc#
% increasingl% e(acting testing o/ s&eci/ic &ro)lems wit#in science, t#e &aradigms
)egin to come under &ressure, &roducing less satis/actor%, less &redicta)le
/ 44 A/ter a long time, w#en t#e e(isting &aradigm is seen as increasingl% useless,
8$
'ntroduction ,<
,? &art 2ne: $oundin% &ropositions
a new &aradigmatic model /or e(&laining t#e world )egins to gain swa%4 T#is s#i/t )etween &aradigms constitutes t#e Fstructure o/ scienti/ic re-olutions04 T#e )oo! )earing
t#is title #ad enormous in/luence across all /ields o/ !nowledge4 ;t is itsel/ a s%m&tom &recisel% o/ a &aradigm s#i/t in t#e /ield o/ !nowledge and &#iloso&#%, awa% /rom a
model w#ic# &roclaimed t#e a-aila)ilit% o/ Ftrut#0 towards one w#ic# &roclaims instead t#e muc# more modest F&ragmatic use/ulness
Cultural criticism at t#is moment #as )egun to go Orelati-ist0, so to s&ea!4 Since t#e eig#teent# centur% in Euro&e, it #ad )een ta!en more or less /or granted t#at
!nowledge ga-e an entitlement to legislation4 T#at is, social and &olitical /ormations were grounded u&on a trut#/ul !nowledge a)out t#e wa%s o/ t#e world4 1ut a/ter *+?E,
all suc# !nowledges )egin to )e deemed Flocal0 and s&eci/ic to t#e &ragmatic necessities o/ t#e s&eci/ic culture /rom w#ic# t#e !nowledges emanate and w#ose interests t#e%
ser-e4 ow, !nowledge does not gi-e &owerN rat#er, it is utterl% im)ricated wit# &ower /rom t#e outset, and is t#us not a &ure !nowledge at all )ut a &ractical !nowledge, a
!nowledge w#ose raison d1Ntre is &ower itsel/4 $rom *+?E, t#e le/tist intellectual )egins to )e sus&icious o/ a !nowledge w#ic# will legislate /or an% culture ot#er t#an t#e -er%
culture w#ic# &roduced t#at !nowledge in t#e /irst &lace4
;ncreasingl%, t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ criticism itsel/ enters into crisis4 ;t seemed t#at t#ere was a )asic alternati-e4 On t#e one #and, one could retain t#e idea o/ a F/oundational0
criticism, according to w#ic# t#e critic, wor!ing /rom a Frational0 ground, mig#t legislate /or an% and e-er% e-entualit% and mig#t ma!e all t#e necessar% and determined
Iudgements regarding an% cultural &ractice4 On t#e ot#er #and, t#is mode o/ criticism )egins to )e reIected as a s%m&tom o/ an im&erialist cast o/ mind, according to w#ic#
one culture arrogates to itsel/ t#e rig#t to legislate /or all ot#er cultures w#ose /oundations mig#t )e radicall% di//erent4
Once t#e legitimation crisis )ecomes articulated in t#ese terms, it )ecomes more and more o)-ious to re/er to t#e /irst model as a Euro&ean and FEnlig#tenment0 model o/
criticism4 $urt#er, gi-en t#e /act t#at t#e eig#teent#-centur% Enlig#tenment &#iloso&#ers saw t#emsel-es as F&rogressi-e0 and Fmodernising0, t#e /oundationalist mode o/
criticism )ecame increasingl% stigmatised as s&eci/icall% Fmodernist04 T#e anti-/oundationalist criticism, )% dint o/ t#e -er% /act t#at it su)Iects modernist t#oug#t to
s&eculati-e &ressure, &ostulates t#ere)% t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ an Foutside0 o/ modernist t#in!ing4
T#e word F&ostmodern0 was increasingl% used to descri)e t#is Foutside0 o/ modernist t#oug#tN )ut its meaning was somew#at o)/uscated )% t#e &re/i( F&ost-0, w#ic#
carried too muc# t#e weig#t o/ a sim&le c#ronological tardiness4 T#e articles #ere address t#is situation4 L%otard0s FAnswering t#e Cuestion6 .#at ;s PostmodernismD0 not
onl% )egins to o//er a serious de/inition o/ t#e term, )ut alludes directl% in t#e title to t#e #istor% o/ t#e Kuestion4 L%otard0s title is meant e(&licitl% to call to mind 'ant0s
/amous &iece F.#at is Enlig#tenmentD04 To )egin to address t#e &ostmodern, one #as also to address an entire traIector% o/ Euro&ean &#iloso&#% dating /rom t#e
Enlig#tenment4 T#e more immediate Flocal0 reason /or t#is allusion to 'ant, o/ course, is t#at in t#e $renc# &#iloso&#ical instituion attention #ad
)egun to turn to 'ant, swer-ing awa% /rom t#e e(tremel% in/luential -ersion o/ Hegel &ro&osed )% 'oIZ-e in t#e *+,9s4 ;n #is letter o/ *+E> to 3essam%n 1lau, L%otard
maintains a rigorous sense /or t#e trou)lesome &re/i( F&ost-0, in t#e /ace o/ O increasingl% sio&&% c#ronological usage4
T#e &ro&er sense in w#ic# F&ostmodern0 descri)es an Fa/ter0 o/ t#e modern reall% deri-es /rom a sociological discourse re/erring not to modernism )ut to modernit%4 Here,
Ha)ermas and 3ameson s#are somet#ing o/ t#e same terrain, in t#e sense t#at t#e% )ot# discern t#e )eginning o/ a s#i/t in consciousness w#ic# is a&&ro&riate to t#e
contem&orar% moment4 Ha)ermas is muc# trou)led )% suc# a s#i/t, and #as maintained a -igilant regard /or t#e serious and continuing elucidation o/ modernit%, in t#e /ace o/
w#at #e sees as a neo-ietGsc#ean tendenc% to ni#ilism in t#e contem&orar% -alidations o/ relati-ism4 T#e /ragment included #ere dates /rom #is *+E> lectures, and is a
succinct /ormulation o/ w#at Ha)ermas sees as t#e main dangers /or t#e )uilding o/ a rational societ% H dangers w#ic# are e(acer)ated )% t#e &ostmodern tendenc% in
contem&orar% culture4 3ameson0s &iece is t#e /amous, muc# rewor!ed and muc# discussed FPostmodernism, or T#e Cultural Logic o/ Late Ca&italism0, /irst &u)lis#ed in t#is
e(tended /orm in Hew 6eft 4e.iew in *+E= @and su)seKuentl% /urt#er re-ised in #is )oo! &ostmodernism?. 3ameson seems muc# more am)i-alent a)out t#e &ostmodern6 on t#e
one #and, #e is dee&l% sus&icious o/ it as t#e articulation o/ a continued ca&italism w#ic# is )randed )% co-ert e(&loitation and o&&ressionN %et on t#e ot#er #and #e is, )% #is
own admission, more t/ian #al/ in lo-e wit# t#e -er% &ractices and o)Iects o/ a &ostmodern culture w#ic# #e wis#es to e(&ose as &oliticall% disre&uta)le4 T#e /our &ieces
toget#er o//er a )road sur-e% o/ a -ariet% o/ F&ostmodern0 concerns a&&arent in t#e wor! o/ t#e t#ree most in/luential /igures in t#e /ield o/ t#e contem&orar% de)ate4 T#e% are
/ounding H i/ sometimes anti-/oundational H &ro&ositions /or all t#e wor! w#ic# /ollows4
What 's &ostmodernism@ ,+
1 w Answering the Question:
What Is Postmodernism
Jean-Francois Lyotard
A De#and
T#is is a &eriod o/ slac!ening H ; re/er to t#e color o/ t#e times4 $rom e-er% direction we are )eing urged to &ut an end to e(&erimentation, in t#e arts and elsew#ere4 ; #a-e
read an art #istorian w#o e(tols realism and is militant /or t#e ad-ent o/ a new su)Iecti-it%4 ; #a-e read an art critic w#o &ac!ages and sells FTransa-antgardism0 in t#e
mar!et&lace o/ &ainting4 ; #a-e read t#at under t#e name o/ &ostmodernism, arc#itects are getting rid o/ t#e 1au#aus &roIect, t#rowing out t#e )a)% o/ e(&erimentation wit#
t#e )at#water o/ /unctionalism4 ; #a-e read t#at a new &#iloso&#er is disco-ering w#at #e droll% calls 3udaeo-C#ristianism, and intends )% it to &ut an end to t#e im&iet%
w#ic# we are su&&osed to #a-e s&read4 ; #a-e read in a $renc# wee!l% t#at some are dis&leased wit# (ule &lateau= V)% DeleuGe and 2uattariY )ecause t#e% e(&ect, es&eciall%
w#en reading a wor! o/ &#iloso&#%, to )e grati/ied wit# a little sense4 ; #a-e read /rom t#e &en o/ a re&uta)le #istorian t#at writers and t#in!ers o/ t#e *+?9 and *+<9 a-ant-
gardes s&read a reign o/ terror in t#e use o/ language, and t#at t#e conditions /or a /ruit/ul e(c#ange must )e restored )% im&osing on t#e intellectuals a common wa% o/
s&ea!ing, t#at o/ t#e #istorians4 ; #a-e )een reading a %oung &#iloso&#er o/ language w#o com&lains t#at Continental t#in!ing, under t#e c#allenge o/ s&ea!ing mac#ines, #as
surrendered to t#e mac#ines t#e concern /or realit%, t#at it #as su)stituted /or t#e re/erential &aradigm t#at o/ Fadlinguisticit%0 @one s&ea!s a)out s&eec#, writes a)out writing,
interte(tualit%A, and w#o t#in!s t#at t#e time #as now come to restore a solid anc#orage o/ language in t#e re/erent4 ; #a-e read a talented t#eatrologist /or w#om
&ostmodernism, wit# its games and /antasies, carries -er% little weig#t in /ront o/ &olitical aut#orit%, es&eciall% w#en a worried &u)lic o&inion encourages aut#orit% to a
&olitics o/ totalitarian sur-eillance in t#e /ace o/ nuclear war/are t#reats4
; #a-e read a t#in!er o/ re&ute w#o de/ends modernit% against t#ose #e calls t#e
$rom Hassan, ;4 and Hassan, S4 @edsA, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation5 8ni-ecsitO o/ .isconsin Press, Madison, .;, *+E,, 00C <*HE54
neoconser-ati-es 8nder t#e )anner o/ &ostmodernism, t#e latter would li!e, #e )elie-es, to get rid o/ t#e uncom&leted &roIect o/ modernism, t#at o/ t#e O/l#ig#tenment4 E-en
t#e last ad-ocates o/ AufklOrun%5 suc# as Po&&er or Adorno, were onl% a)le, according to #im, to de/end t#e &roIect in a /ew &articular s&#eres o/ li/e H t#at o/ &olitics /or t#e
aut#or o/ ,he 2pen -ociety5 and t#at o/ art /or t#e aut#Or of Asthetische ,heorie. 3urgen Ha)ermas @e-er%one #ad recogniGed #imA t#in!s t#at i/ modernit% #as /ailed, it is in
allowing t#e totalit% o/ li/e to )e s&lintered into inde&endent s&ecialties w#ic# are le/t to t#e narrow com&etence o/ e(&erts, w#ile t#e concrete indi-idual e(&eriences
Fdesu)limated meaning0 and Fdestructured /orm0, not as a li)eration )ut in t#e mode o/ t#at immense ennui w#ic# 1audelaire descri)ed o-er a centur% ago4
$ollowing a &rescri&tion o/ Al)rec#t .ellmer, Ha)ermas considers t#at t#e remed% /or t#is s&lintering o/ culture and its se&aration /rom li/e can onl% come /rom
Fc#anging t#e status o/ aest#etic e(&erience w#en it is no longer &rimaril% e(&ressed in Iudgments o/ taste0, )ut w#en it is Fused to e(&lore a li-ing #istorical situation0, t#at is,
w#en Fit is &ut in relation wit# &ro)lems o/ e(isOence04 $or t#is e(&erience t#en F)ecomes a &art o/ a language game w#ic# is no longer t#at o/ aest#etic criticism0N it ta!es
&art Fin cogniti-e &rocesses and normati-e e(&ectations0N Fit alters t#e manner in w#ic# t#ose di//erent moments refer to one anot#er04 .#at Ha)ermas reKuires /rom t#e arts
and t#e e(&eriences t#e% &ro-ide is, in s#ort, to )ridge t#e ga& )etween cogniti-e, et#ical, and &olitical discourses, t#us o&ening t#e wa% to a unit% o/ e(&erience4
M% Kuestion is to determine w#at sort o/ unit% Ha)ermas #as in mind4 ;s t#e aim o/ t#e &roIect o/ modernit% t#e constitution o/ sociocultural unit% wit#in w#ic# all t#e
elements o/ dail% li/e and o/ t#oug#t would ta!e t#eir &laces as in an organic w#oleD Or does t#e &assage t#at #as to )e c#arted )etween #eterogeneous language-games H
t#ose o/ cognition, o/ et#ics, o/ &olitics H )elong to a di//erent order /rom t#atD And i/ so, would it )e ca&a)le o/ e//ecting a real s%nt#esis )etween t#emD
T#e /irst #%&ot#esis, o/ a Hegelian ins&iration, does not c#allenge t#e notion o/ a dialecticall% totaliGing e=perienceB t#e second is closer to t#e s&irit o/ 'ant0s )riti>ue of
3ud%ementB )ut must )e su)mitted, li!e t#O )riti>ue5 to t#at se-ere ree(amination w#ic# &ostmodernit% im&oses on t#e t#oug#t o/ t#e Enlig#tenment, on t#e idea o/ a unitar%
end o/ #istor% and o/ a su)Iect4 ;t is t#is critiKue w#ic# not onl% .ittgenstein and Adorno #a-e initiated, )ut also a /ew ot#er t#in!ers @$renc# or ot#erA w#o do not #a-e t#e
#onor to )e read )% Pro/essor Ha)ermas H w#ic# at least sa-es t#em /rom getting a &oor grade /or t#eir neoconser-atism4
Rea.is#
T#e demands ; )egan )% citing are not all eKui-alent4 T#e% can e-en )e
Contradictor%4 Some are made in t#e name o/ &ostmodernism, ot#ers in order to
Com)at it4 ;t is not necessaril% t#e same t#ing to /ormulate a demand /or some
re/erent @and o)Iecti-e realit%A, /or some sense @and credi)le transcendenceA, /or an
Jean-Francois Lyotard What 's &ostmodernism@ =*
addressee @and audienceA, or an addressor @and su)Iecti-e e(&ressi-enessA or /or some communicational consensus @and a general code o/ e(c#anges, suc# as t#e genre o/
#istorical discourseA4 1ut in t#e di-erse in-itations to sus&end artistic e(&erimentatiOn, t#ere is an identical call /or order, a desire /or unit%, /or identit%, /or securit%, or
&o&ularit% @in t#e sense o/ 2ffentlichkeit5 o/ F/inding a &u)lic0A4 Artists and writers must )e )roug#t )ac! into t#e )osom o/ t#e communit%, or at least, i/ t#e latter is considered
to )e ill, t#e% must )e assigned t#e tas! o/ #ealing it4
T#ere is an irre/uta)le sign o/ t#is common dis&osition6 it is t#at /or all t#ose writers not#ing is more urgent t#an to liKuidate t#e #eritage o/ t#e a-ant-gardes4 Suc# is t#e
case, in &articular, o/ t#e so-called transa-antgardism4 T#e answers gi-en )% Ac#ille 1onito Oli-a to t#e Kuestions as!ed )% 1ernard Lamarc#e-Jadel and Mic#el Enric lea-e
no room /or dou)t a)out t#is4 1% &utting t#e a-ant-gardes t#roug# a mi(ing &rocess, t#e artist and critic /eel more con/ident t#at t#e% can su&&ress t#em t#an )% launc#ing a
/rontal attac!4 $or t#e% can &ass o// t#e most c%nical eclecticism as a wa% o/ going )e%ond t#e /ragmentar% c#aracter o/ t#e &receding e(&erimentsN w#ereas i/ t#e% o&enl%
turned t#eir )ac!s on t#em, t#e% would run t#e ris! o/ a&&earing ridiculousl% neoacademic4 T#e -alons and t#e Academies5 at t#e time w#en t#e )ourgeoisie was esta)lis#ing
itsel/ in #istor%, were a)le to /unction as &urgation and to grant awards /or good &lastic and literar% conduct under t#e co-er o/ realism4 1ut ca&italism in#erentl% &ossesses
t#e &ower to derealiGe /amiliar o)Iects, social roles, and institutions to suc# a degree t#at t#e so-called realistic re&resentations can no longer e-o!e realit% e(ce&t as nostalgia
or moc!er%, as an occasion /or su//ering rat#er t#an /or satis/action4 Classicism seems to )e ruled out in a world in w#ic# realit% is so desta)iliGed t#at it o//ers no occasion
/or e(&erience )ut one /or ratings and e(&erimentation4
T#is t#eme is /amiliar to all readers o/ .alter 1enIamin4 1ut it is necessar% to assess its e(act reac#4 P#otogra&#% did not a&&ear as a c#allenge to &ainting /rom t#e
outside, an% more t#an industrial cinema did to narrati-e literature4 T#e /ormer was onl% &utting t#e /inal touc# to t#e &rogram o/ ordering t#e -isi)le ela)orated )% t#e
KuattrocentoN w#ile t#e latter was t#e last ste& in rounding o// diac#ronies as organic w#oles, w#ic# #ad )een t#e ideal o/ t#e great no-els o/ education since t#e eig#teent#
centur%4 T#at t#e mec#anical and t#e industrial s#ould a&&ear as su)stitutes /or #and or cra/t was not in itsel/ a disaster H e(ce&t i/ one )elie-es t#at art is in its essence t#e
e(&ression o/ an indi-idualit% o/ genius assisted )% an elite cra/tsmans#i&4
T#e c#allenge la% essentiall% in t#at &#otogra&#ic and cinematogra&#ic &rocesses can accom&lis# )etter, /aster, and wit# a circulation a #undred t#ousand times larger t#an
narrati-e or &ictorial realism, t#e tas! w#ic# academicism #ad assigned to realism6 to &reser-e -arious consciousnesses /rom dou)t4 ;ndustrial &#otogra&#% and cinema will
)e su&erior to &ainting and t#e no-el w#ene-er t#e o)Iecti-e is to sta)iliGe t#e re/erent, to arrange it according to a &oint o/ -iew w#ic# endows it wit# a recogniGa)le
meaning, to re&roduce t#e s%nta( and -oca)ular% w#ic# ena)le t#e addressee to deci&#er images and seKuences Kuic!l%, and so to an t-e easil% at t#e consciousness o/ #is
own identit% as well as t#e a&&ro-al w#ic# #O t#ere)% recei-es
/rom ot#ers H since suc# structures o/ images and seKuences constitute a communication code among all o/ t#em4 T#is is t#e wa% t#e e//ects o/ realit%, or i/ one &re/ers, t#e
/antasies o/ realism, multi&l%4
;/ t#e% too do not wis# to )ecome su&&orters @o/ minor im&ortance at t#atA o/ w#at e(ists, t#e &ainter and no-elist must re/use to lend t#emsel-es to suc# t#era&eutic uses4
T#e% must Kuestion t#e rules o/ t#e art o/ &ainting or o/ narrati-e as t#e% #a-e learned and recei-ed t#em /rom t#eir &redecessors4 Soon t#ose rules must a&&ear to t#em as a
means to decei-e, to seduce, and to reassure, w#ic# ma!es it im&ossi)le /or t#em to )e Ftrue04 8nder t#e common name o/ &ainting and literature, an un&recedented s&lit is
ta!ing &lace4 T#ose w#o re/use to ree(amine t#e rules o/ art &ursue success/ul careers in mass con/ormism )% communicating, )% means o/ t#e Fcorrect rules0, t#e endemic
desire /or realit% wit# o)Iects and situations ca&a)le o/ grati/%ing it4 Pornogra&#% is t#e use o/ &#otogra&#% and /ilm to suc# an end4 ;t is )ecoming a general model /or t#e
-isual or narrati-e arts w#ic# #a-e not met t#e c#allenge o/ t#e mass media4
As /or t#e artists and writers w#o Kuestion t#e rules o/ &lastic and narrati-e arts and &ossi)l% s#are t#eir sus&icions )% circulating t#eir wor!, t#e% are destined to #a-e little
credi)ilit% in t#e e%es o/ t#ose concerned wit# Frealit%0 and Fidentit%0N t#e% #a-e no guarantee o/ an audience4 T#us it is &ossi)le to ascri)e t#e dialectics o/ t#e a-ant-gardes to
t#e c#allenge &osed )% t#e realisms o/ industr% and mass communication to &ainting and t#e narrati-e arts4 Duc#am&0s Fread%-made0 does not#ing )ut acti-el% and
&arodisticall% signi/% t#is constant &rocess o/ dis&ossession o/ t#e cra/t o/ &ainting or e-en o/ )eing an artist4 As T#ierr% de Du-e &enetratingl% o)ser-es, t#e modern aest#etic
Kuestion is not F.#at is )eauti/ulD0 )ut F.#at can )e said to )e art @and literatureAD0
Realism, w#ose onl% de/inition is t#at it intends to a-oid t#e Kuestion o/ realit% im&licated in t#at o/ art, alwa%s stands somew#ere )etween academicism and !itsc#4 .#en
&ower assumes t#e name o/ a &art%, realism and its neoclassical com&lement trium&# o-er t#e e(&erimental a-ant-garde )% slandering and )anning it H t#at is, &ro-ided t#e
Fcorrect0 images, t#e Fcorrect0 narrati-es, t#e Fcorrect0 /orms w#ic# t#e &art% reKuests, selects, and &ro&agates can /ind a &u)lic to desire t#em as t#e a&&ro&riate remed% /or
t#e an(iet% and de&ression t#at &u)lic e(&eriences4 T#e demand /or realit% H t#at is, /or unit%, sim&licit%, communica)ilit%, etc4 H did not #a-e t#e same intensit% nor t#e same
continuit% in 2erman societ% )etween t#e two .orld wars and in Russian societ% a/ter t#e Re-olution6 t#is &ro-ides a )asis /or a distinction )etween aGi and Stalinist
realism4
.#at is clear, #owe-er, is t#at w#en it is launc#ed )% t#e &olitical a&&aratus, t#e attac! on artistic e(&erimentation is s&eci/icall% reactionar%6 aest#etic Iudgment .ould
onl% )e reKuired to decide w#et#er suc# or suc# wor! is in con/ormit% wit# t#e esta)lis#ed rules o/ t#e )eauti/ul, ;nstead o/ t#e wor! o/ art #a-ing to in-estigate .#at ma!es
it an art o)Iect and w#et#er it will )e a)le to /ind an audience, &olitical academicism &ossesses and im&oses a priori criteria o/ t#e )eauti/ul, w#ic# designate some wor!s and a
&u)lic at a stro!e and /ore-er4 T#e use o/ categories
aest#etic Iudgment would t#us )e o/ t#e same nature as in cogniti-e Iudgment4
=5 Jean-Francois Lyotard What 's &ostmodernism@
To s&ea! li!e 'ant, )ot# would )e determining Iudgments6 t#e e(&ression is Fwell /ormed0 /irst in t#e understanding, t#en t#e onl% cases retained in e(&erience are t#ose
w#ic# can )e su)sumed under t#is e(&ression4
.#en &ower is t#at o/ ca&ital and not t#at o/ a &art%, t#e Ftransa-antgardist0 or F&ostmodern0 @in 3enc!s0s senseA solution &ro-es to )e )etter ada&ted t#an t#e anti-modern
solution4 Eclecticism is t#e degree Gero o/ contem&orar% general culture6 one listens to reggae, watc#es a western, eats McDonald0s /ood /or lunc# and local cuisine /or
dinner, wears Paris &er/ume in To!%o and Fretro0 clot#es in Hong 'ongN !nowledge is a matter /or TJ games4 ;t is eas% to /ind a &u)lic /or eclectic wor!s4 1% )ecoming
!itsc#, art &anders to t#e con/usion w#ic# reigns in t#e Ftaste0 o/ t#e &atrons4 Artists, galler% owners, critics, and &u)lic wallow toget#er in t#e Fan%t#ing goes0, and t#e e&oc#
is one o/ slac!ening4 1ut t#is realism o/ t#e Fan%t#ing goes0 is in /act t#at o/ mone%N in t#e a)sence o/ aest#etic criteria, it remains &ossi)le and use/ul to assess t#e -alue o/
wor!s o/ art according to t#e &ro/its t#e% %ield4 Suc# realism accommodates all tendencies, Iust as ca&ital accommodates all Fneeds0, &ro-iding t#at t#e tendencies and needs
#a-e &urc#asing &ower4 As /or taste, t#ere is no need to )e delicate w#en one s&eculates or entertains onesel/4
Artistic and literar% researc# is dou)l% t#reatened, once )% t#e Fcultural &olic%0 and once )% t#e art and )oo! mar!et4 .#at is ad-ised, sometimes t#roug# one c#annel,
sometimes t#roug# t#e ot#er, is to o//er wor!s w#ic#, /irst, are relati-e to su)Iects w#ic# e(ist in t#e e%es o/ t#e &u)lic t#e% address, and second, wor!s so made @Fwell
made0A t#at t#e &u)lic will recogniGe w#at t#e% are a)out, will understand w#at is signi/ied, will )e a)le to gi-e or re/use its a&&ro-al !nowingl%, and i/ &ossi)le, e-en to
deri-e /rom suc# wor! a certain amount o/ com/ort4
T#e inter&retation w#ic# #as Iust )een gi-en o/ t#e contact )etween t#e industrial and mec#anical arts, and literature and t#e /ine arts, is correct in its outline, )ut it remains
narrowl% sociologiGing and #istoriciGing H rn ot#er words, one-sided4 Ste&&ing o-er 1enIamin0s and Adorno0s reticences, it must )e recalled t#at science and industr% are no
more /ree o/ t#e sus&icion w#ic# concerns realit% t#an are art and writing4 To )elie-e ot#erwise would )e to entertain an e(cessi-el% #umanistic notion o/ t#e
Me&#isto&#elian /unctionalism o/ sciences and tec#nologies4 T#ere is no den%ing t#e dominant e(istence toda% o/ tec#no-science, t#at is, t#e massi-e su)ordination o/
cogniti-e statements to t#e /inalit% o/ t#e )est &ossi)le &er/ormance, w#ic# is t#e tec#nological criterion4 1ut t#e mec#anical and t#e industrial, es&eciall% w#en t#e% enter
/ields traditionall% reser-ed /or artists, are carr%ing wit# t#em muc# more t#an &ower e//ects4 T#e o)Iects and t#e t#oug#ts w#ic# originate in scienti/ic !nowledge and t#e
ca&italist econom% con-e% wit# t#em one o/ t#e rules w#ic# su&&orts t#eir &ossi)ilit%6 t#e rule t#at t#ere is no realit% unless testi/ied )% a consensus )etween &artners o-er a
certain !nowledge and certain commitments4
T#is rule is o/ no little conseKuence4 ;t is t#e im&rint le/t on t#e &olitics o/ t#e scientist and t#e trustee o/ ca&ital )% a !ind o/ /lig#t o/ realit% out o/ t#e meta&#%sical,
religious, and &olitical certainties t#at t#e mind )clie-ed it #eld4 T#is wit#drawal is a)solutel% necessar% to t#e emergence o/ science and ca&italism4 o
=,
industr% is &ossi)le wit#out a sus&icion o/ t#e Aristotelian t#eor% o/ motion, no Industr% wit#out a re/utation o/ cor&oratism, o/ mercantilism, and o/ &#%siocrac%
Modernit%, in w#ate-er age it a&&ears, cannot e(ist wit#out a s#attering o/ )elie/ and wit#out disco-er% o/ t#e Flac! o/ realit%0 o/ realit%, toget#er wit# t#e in-ention of ot#er
realities4
.#at does t#is Flac! o/ realit%0 signi/% i/ one tries to /ree it /rom a narrowl% #istoriciGed inter&retationD T#e &#rase is o/ course a!in to w#at ietGsc#e calls ni#ilism4 1ut '
see a muc# earlier modulation o/ ietGsc#ean &ers&ecti-ism in t#e 'antian t#eme o/ t#e su)lime4 ; t#in! in &articular t#at it is in t#e aest#etic o/ t#e su)lime t#at modern art
@including literatureA /inds its im&etus and t#e logic o/ a-ant-gardes /inds its a(ioms4
T#e su)lime sentiment, w#ic# is also t#e sentiment o/ t#e su)lime, is, according to 'ant, a strong and eKui-ocal emotion6 it carries wit# it )ot# &leasure and &ain4 1etter
still, in it &leasure deri-es /rom &ain4 .it#in t#e tradition o/ t#e su)Iect, w#ic# comes /rom Augustine and Descartes and w#ic# 'ant does not radicall% c#allenge, t#is
contradiction, w#ic# some would call neurosis or masoc#ism, de-elo&s as a con/lict )etween t#e /aculties o/ a su)Iect, t#e /acult% to concei-e o/ somet#ing and t#e /acult% to
F&resent0 somet#ing4 'nowledge e(ists i/, /irst, t#e statement is intelligi)le, and second, i/ Fcases0 can )e deri-ed /rom t#e e(&erience w#ic# Fcorres&onds0 to it4 1eaut% e(ists
i/ a certain Fcase0 @t#e wor! o/ artA, gi-en /irst )% t#e sensi)ilit% wit#out an% conce&tual determination, t#e sentiment o/ &leasure inde&endent o/ an% interest t#e wor! ma%
elicit, a&&eals to t#e &rinci&le o/ a uni-ersal consensus @w#ic# ma% ne-er )e attainedA4
Taste, t#ere/ore, testi/ies t#at )etween t#e ca&acit% to concei-e and t#e ca&acit% to &resent an o)Iect corres&onding to t#e conce&t, an undetermined agreement, wit#out
rules, gi-ing rise to a Iudgment w#ic# 'ant calls re/lecti-e, ma% )e e(&erienced as &leasure4 T#e su)lime is a di//erent sentiment4 ;t ta!es &lace, on t#e Contrar%, w#en t#e
imagination /ails to &resent an o)Iect w#ic# mig#t, i/ onl% in &rinci&le, come to matc# a conce&t4 .e #a-e t#e ;dea o/ t#e world @t#e totalit% o/ w#at isA, )ut we do not #a-e
t#e ca&acit% to s#ow an e(am&le o/ it4 .e #a-e t#e ;dea o/t#e sim&le @t#at w#ic# cannot )e )ro!en down, decom&osedA, )ut we cannot illustrate it wit# a sensi)le o)Iect
w#ic# would )e a Fcase0 o/ it4 .e can concei-e t#e in/initel% great, t#e in/initel% &ower/ul, )ut e-er% &resentation o/ an o)Iect destined to Fma!e -isi)le0 t#is a)solute
greatness or &ower a&&ears to us &ain/ull% inadeKuate4 T#ose are ;deas o/ w#ic# no &resentation is &ossi)le4 T#ere/ore, t#e% im&art no !nowledge a)out realit% @e(&erienceAN
t#e% also &re-ent t#e /ree union o/ t#e /aculties w#ic# gi-es rise to t#e sentiment o/ t#e )eauti/ulN and t#e% &re-ent t#e /ormation and t#e sta)iliGation o/ taste4 T#e% can )e
said to )e un&resenta)le4
; s#all call modern t#e art w#ic# de-otes its Flittle tec#nical e(&ertise0 Eson Gpetit technu>ueFi as Diderot used to sa%, to &resent t#e /act t#at t#e un&resenta)le e(ists4
ma!e -isi)le t#at t#ere is somet#ing w#ic# can )e concei-ed and w#ic# can neit#er )e seen nor made -isi)le6 t#is is w#at is at sta!e in modern &ainting4 1ut #ow to ma!e
-isi)le t#at t#ere is somet#ing w#ic# cannot )e seenD 'ant #imsel/ s#ows t#e .a% w#en #e names F/ormlessness, t#e a)sence o/ /orm0, as a &ossi)le inde( to
Jean-Francois Lyotard What 's &ostmodernism@ =>
::
t#e un&resenta)le4 He also sa%s o/ t#e em&t% Fa)straction0 w#ic# t#e imagination e(&eriences w#en in searc# /or a &resentation o/ t#e in/inite @anot#er un&resenta)leA6
t#is a)straction itsel/ is li!e a &resentation o/ t#e in/inite, its Fnegati-e &resentation04 He cites t#e commandment FT#ou s#alt not ma!e gra-en images0 @E(odusA as t#e most
su)lime &assage in t#e 1i)le in t#at it /or)ids all &resentation o/ t#e A)solute4 Little needs to )e added to t#ose o)ser-ations to outline an aest#etic o/ su)lime &aintings4 As
&ainting, it will o/ course F&resent0 somet#ing, t#oug# negati-el%N it will t#ere/ore a-oid /iguration or re&resentation4 ;t will )e Fw#ite0 li!e one o/ Male-ic#0s sKuaresN it will
ena)le us to see onl% )% ma!ing it im&ossi)le to seeN it will &lease onl% )% causing &ain4 One recogniGes in t#ose instructions t#e a(ioms o/ a-ant-gardes in &ainting, inasmuc#
as t#e% de-ote t#emsel-es to ma!ing an allusion to t#e un&resenta)le )% means o/ -isi)le &resentations4 T#e s%stems in t#e name o/ w#ic#, or wit# w#ic#, t#is tas! #as )een
a)le to su&&ort or to Iusti/% itsel/ deser-e t#e greatest attentionN )ut t#e% can originate onl% in t#e -ocation o/ t#e su)lime in order to legitimiGe it, t#at is, to conceal it4 T#e%
remain ine(&lica)le wit#out t#e incommensura)ilit% o/ realit% to conce&t w#ic# is im&lied in t#e 'antian &#iloso&#% o/ t#e su)lime4
;t is not m% intention to anal%Ge #ere in detail t#e manner in w#ic# t#e -arious a-ant-gardes #a-e, so to s&ea!, #um)led and disKuali/ied realit% )% e(amining t#e &ictorial
tec#niKues w#ic# are so man% de-ices to ma!e us )elie-e in it4 Local tone, drawing, t#e mi(ing o/ colors, linear &ers&ecti-e, t#e nature o/ t#e su&&ort and t#at o/ t#e
instrument, t#e treatment, t#e dis&la%, t#e museum6 t#e a-ant-gardes are &er&etuall% /lus#ing out arti/ices o/ &resentation w#ic# ma!e it &ossi)le to su)ordinate t#oug#t to t#e
gaGe and to turn it awa% /rom t#e un&resenta)le4 ;/ Ha)ermas, li!e Marcuse, understands t#is tas! o/ derealiGation as an as&ect o/ t#e @re&ressi-eA Fdesu)limation0 w#ic#
c#aracteriGes t#e a-ant-garde, it is )ecause #e con/uses t#e 'antian su)lime wit# $reudian su)limation, and )ecause aest#etics #as remained /or #im t#at o/ t#e )eauti/ul4
T/e Post#odern
.#at, t#en, is t#e &ostmodernD .#at &lace does it or does it not occu&% in t#e -ertiginous wor! o/ t#e Kuestions #urled at t#e rules o/ image and narrationD ;t is undou)tedl% a
&art o/ t#e modern4 All t#at #as )een recei-ed, i/ onl% %esterda% Amodo5 modo5 Petronius used to sa%A, must )e sus&ected4 .#at s&ace does CeGanne c#allengeD T#e
;m&ressionists04 .#at o)Iect do Picasso and 1raKue attac!D CeGanne0s4 .#at &resu&&osition does Duc#am& )rea! wit# in *+*5D T#at w#ic# sa%s one must ma!e a &ainting,
)e it cu)ist4 And 1uren Kuestions t#at ot#er &resu&&osition w#ic# #e )elie-es #ad sur-i-ed untouc#ed )% t#e wor! o/ Duc#am&6
t#e &lace o/ &resentation o/ t#e wor!4 ;n an amaGing acceleration, t#e generations &reci&itate t#emsel-es4 A wor! can )ecome modern onl% i/ it is /irst &ostmodern4
Postmodernism t#us understood is not modernism at its end lI0ut in t#e nascent state, and t#is state is constant4
Yet ; would li!e not to remain wit# t#is slig#tl% mec#anistic meaning o/ t#e word4
;/ it is true t#at modernit% ta!es &lace in t#e wit#drawal o/ t#e real and according to t#e su)lime relation )etween t#e &resenta)le and t#e concei-a)le, it is &ossi)le, wit#in
t#is relation, to distinguis# two modes @to use t#e musician0s languageA4 T#e em&#asis can )e &laced on t#e &owerlessness o/ t#e /acult% o/ &resentation, on t#e nostalgia /or
&resence /elt )% t#e #uman su)Iect, on t#e o)scure and /utile will w#ic# in#a)its #im in s&ite o/ e-er%t#ing4 T#e em&#asis can )e &laced, rat#er, on t#e &ower o/ t#e /acult% to
concei-e, on its Fin#umanit%0 so to s&ea! @it was t#e Kualit% A&ollinaire demanded o/ modern artistsA, since it is not t#e )usiness o/ our understanding w#et#er or not #uman
sensi)ilit% or imagination can matc# w#at it concei-es4 T#e em&#asis can also )e &laced on t#e increase o/ )eing and t#e Iu)ilation w#ic# result /rom t#e in-ention o/ new
rules o/ t#e game, )e it &ictorial, artistic, or an% ot#er4 .#at ; #a-e in mind will )ecome clear i/ we dis&ose -er% sc#ematicall% a /ew names on t#e c#ess)oard o/ t#e #istor%
o/ a-ant-gardes6 on t#e side o/ melanc#olia, t#e 2erman E(&ressionists, and on t#e side o/ no.atio5 1raKue and Picasso, on t#e /ormer Male-ic# and on t#e latter Lissits!%, on
t#e one C#irico and on t#e ot#er Duc#am&4 T#e nuance w#ic# distinguis#es t#ese two modes ma% )e in/initesimalN t#e% o/ten coe(ist in t#e same &iece, are almost
indistinguis#a)leN and %et t#e% testi/% to a di//erence Eun diff;rendl on w#ic# t#e /ate o/ t#oug#t de&ends and will de&end /or a long time, )etween regret and assa%4
T#e wor! o/ Proust and t#at o/ 3o%ce )ot# allude to somet#ing w#ic# does not allow itsel/ to )e made &resent4 Allusion, to w#ic# Paolo $a))ri recentl% called m% attention,
is &er#a&s a /orm o/ e(&ression indis&ensa)le to t#e wor!s w#ic# )elong to an aest#etic o/ t#e su)lime4 ;n Proust, w#at is )eing eluded as t#e &rice to &a% /or t#is allusion is
t#e identit% o/ consciousness, a -ictim to t#e e(cess o/ time Eau trop de tern psD 4 1ut in 3o%ce, it is t#e identit% o/ writing w#ic# is t#e -ictim o/ an e(cess o/ t#e )oo! Eau trop
de li. reD or o/ literature4
Proust calls /ort# t#e un&resenta)le )% means o/ a language unaltered in its s%nta( and -oca)ular% and o/ a writing w#ic# in man% o/ its o&erators still )elongs to t#e genre
o/ no-elistic narration4 T#e literar% institution, as Proust in#erits it /rom 1alGac and $lau)ert, is admittedl% su)-erted in t#at t#e #ero is no longer a c#aracter )ut t#e inner
consciousness o/ time, and in t#at t#e diegetic diac#ron%, alread% damaged )% $lau)ert, is #ere &ut in Kuestion )ecause o/ t#e narrati-e -oice4 e-ert#eless, t#e unit% o/ t#e
)oo!, t#e od%sse% o/ t#at consciousness, e-en i/ it is de/erred /rom c#a&ter to c#a&ter, is not seriousl% c#allenged6 t#e identit% o/ t#e .riting wit# itsel/ t#roug#out t#e
la)%rint# o/ t#e intermina)le narration is enoug# to Connote suc# unit%, w#ic# #as )een com&ared to t#at o/ ,he &henomenolo%y of (ind
3o%ce allows t#e un&resenta)le to )ecome &erce&ti)le in #is writing itsel/, in t#e Signi/ier T#e w#ole range o/ a-aila)le narrati-e and e-en st%listic o&erators is &ut into
&la% wit#out concern /or t#e unit% o/ t#e w#ole, and new o&erators are tried4 T#e grammar and -oca)ular% o/ literar% language are no longer acce&ted as gi-enN rat#er t#e%
a&&ear as academic /orms, as rituals originating in &iet% @as ietGsc#e SaidA w#ic# &re-ent t#e un&resenta)le /rom )eing &ut /orward4
=? Jean-Francois Lyotard
Here, t#en, lies t#e di//erence6 modern aest#etics is an aest#etic o/ t#e su)lime, t#oug# a nostalgic one4 ;t allows t#e un&resenta)le to )e &ut /orward onl% as t#e missing
contentsN )ut t#e /orm, )ecause o/ its recogniGa)le consistenc%, continues to o//er to t#e reader or -iewer matter /or solace and &leasure4 Yet t#ese sentiments do not
constitute t#e real su)lime sentiment, w#ic# is in an intrinsic com)ination o/ &leasure and &ain6 t#e &leasure t#at reason s#ould e(ceed all &resentation, t#e &ain t#at
imagination or sensi)ilit% s#ould not )e eKual to t#e conce&t4
T#e &ostmodern would )e t#at w#ic#, in t#e modern, &uts /orward t#e un&resenta)le in &resentation itsel/N t#at w#ic# denies itsel/ t#e solace o/ good /orms, t#e consensus
o/ a taste w#ic# would ma!e it &ossi)le to s#are collecti-el% t#e nostalgia /or t#e unattaina)leN t#at w#ic# searc#es /or new &resentations, not in order to enIo% t#em )ut in
order to im&art a stronger sense o/ t#e un&resenta)le4 A &ostmodern artist or writer is in t#e &osition o/ a &#iloso&#er6 t#e te(t #e writes, t#e wor! #e &roduces are not in
&rinci&le go-erned )% &reesta)lis#ed rules, and t#e% cannot )e Iudged according to a determining Iudgment, )% a&&l%ing /amiliar categories to t#e te(t or to t#e wor!4 T#ose
rules and categories are w#at t#e wor! o/ art itsel/ is loo!ing /or4 T#e artist and t#e writer, t#en, are wor!ing wit#out rules in order to /ormulate t#e rules o/ w#at will ha.e
been done. Hence t#e /act t#at wor! and te(t #a-e t#e c#aracters o/ an e.entB #ence also, t#e% alwa%s come too late /or t#eir aut#or, or, w#at amounts to t#e same t#ing, t#eir
)eing &ut into wor!, t#eir realiGation Emise en oeu.reD alwa%s )egin too soon4 &ost modern would #a-e to )e understood according to t#e &arado( o/ t#e /uture EpostD anterior
EmodoD.
;t seems to me t#at t#e essa% @MontaigneA is &ostmodern, w#ile t#e /ragment A,he Athaeneum? is modern4
$inall%, it must )e clear t#at it is our )usiness not to su&&l% realit% )ut to in-ent allusions to t#e concei-a)le w#ic# cannot )e &resented4 And it is not to )e e(&ected t#at t#is
tas! will e//ect t#e last reconciliation )etween language-games @w#ic#, under t#e name o/ /aculties, 'ant !new to )e se&arated )% a c#asmA, and t#at onl% t#e transcendental
illusion @t#at o/ HegelA can #o&e to totaliGe t#em into a real unit%4 1ut 'ant also !new t#at t#e &rice to &a% /or suc# an illusion is terror4 T#e nineteent# and twentiet#
centuries #a-e gi-en us as muc# terror as we can ta!e4 .e #a-e &aid a #ig# enoug# &rice /or t#e nostalgia o/ t#e w#ole and t#e one, /or t#e reconciliation o/ t#e conce&t and
t#e sensi)le, o/ t#e trans&arent and t#e communica)le e(&erience4 8nder t#e general demand /or slac!ening and /or a&&easement, we can #ear t#e mutterings o/ t#e desire /or
a return o/ terror, /or t#e realiGation o/ t#e /antas% to seiGe realit%4 T#e answer is6 Let us wage a war on totalit%N let us )e witnesses to t#e un&resenta)leN let us acti-ate t#e
di//erences and sa-e t#e #onor o/ t#e name4
5 D !ote on the "eaning
of #Post$%
Jean-FranGois Lyotard
,o 3essamyn K/au
Milwau!ee, Ma% *,*+E>
; would li!e to &ass on to %ou a /ew t#oug#ts t#at are merel% intended to raise certain &ro)lems concerning t#e term F&ostmodern0, wit#out wanting to resol-e t#em4 1% doing
t#is, ; do not want to close t#e de)ate )ut rat#er to situate it, in order to a-oid con/usion and am)iguit%4 ; #a-e Iust t#ree &oints to ma!e4
$irst, t#e o&&osition )etween &ostmodernism and modernism, or t#e modern mo-ement A1*10I!? in arc#itecture4 According to Portog#esi, t#e ru&ture o/ &ostmodernism
consists in an a)rogation o/ t#e #egemon% o/ Euclidean geometr% @its su)limation in t#e &lastic &oetics o/ de StiIl, /or e(am&leA4 To /ollow 2regotti, t#e di//erence )etween
modernism and &ostmodernism would )e )etter c#aracteriGed )% t#e /ollowing /eature6 t#e disa&&earance o/ t#e close )ond t#at once lin!ed t#e &roIect o/ modern
arc#itecture to an ideal o/ t#e &rogressi-e realiGation o/ social and indi-idual emanci&ation encom&assing all #umanit%4 Postmodern arc#itecture /inds itsel/ condemned to
underta!e a series o/ minor modi/ications in a S&ace in#erited /rom modernit%, condemned to a)andon a glo)al reconstruction o/ t#e S&ace o/ #uman #a)itation4 T#e
&ers&ecti-e t#en o&ens onto a -ast landsca&e, in t#e sense t#at t#ere is no longer an% #oriGon o/ uni-ersalit%, uni-ersaliGation, or generOO emanci&ation to greet t#e e%e o/
&ostmodern man, least o/ all t#e e%e o/ t#e arc#itect4 T#e disa&&earance o/ t#e ;dea t#at rationalit% and /reedom are Progressing would e(&lain a Ftone0, st%le, or mode
s&eci/ic to &ostmodern arc#itecture ; would sa% it is a sort o/ F)ricolage06 t#e multi&le Kuotation o/ elements ta!en /rom earlier st%les or &eriods, classical and modernN
disregard /or t#e en-ironmentN and so on4
One Point a)out t#is &ers&ecti-e is t#at t#e F&ost-0 o/ &ostmodernism #as t#e sense o/ a Sim&le succession, a diac#ronic seKuence o/ &eriods in w#ic# eac# one is clearl%
$rom L%otard, 34, ,he &ostmodern :=plained: )orrespondence 1*J"I1*J!5 8ni-ersit% o/ OMinnes
ota Press, Minnea&olis, M:Power Pu)lications, S%dne%, *++5, &&4 ?=HE4
=E Jean-Francois Lyotard Hote on the (eanin% of G&ost-1 =+
identi/ia)le4 T#e F&ost-0 indicates somet#ing li!e a con-ersion6 a new direction /rom t#e &re-ious one4
ow t#is idea o/ a linear c#ronolog% is itsel/ &er/ectl% Fmodern04 ;t is at once &art o/ C#ristianit%, Cartesianism, and 3aco)inism6 since we are inaugurating somet#ing
com&letel% new, t#e #ands o/ t#e cloc! s#ould )e &ut )ac! to Gero4 T#e -er% idea o/ modernit% is closel% correlated wit# t#e &rinci&le t#at it is )ot# &ossi)le and necessar% to
)rea! wit# tradition and institute a)solutel% new wa%s o/ li-ing and t#in!ing4
.e now sus&ect t#at t#is Fru&ture0 is in /act a wa% o/ /orgetting or re&ressing t#e &ast, t#at is, re&eating it and not sur&assing it4
; would sa% t#at, in t#e Fnew0 arc#itecture, t#e Kuotation o/ moti/s ta!en /rom earlier arc#itectures relies on a &rocedure analogous to t#e wa% dream wor! uses diurnal
residues le/t o-er /rom li/e &ast, as outlined )% $reud in ,he 'nterpretation of <reams E,raumdeutun%D. T#is destin% o/ re&etition and Kuotation H w#et#er it is ta!en u& ironicall%,
c%nicall%, or nai-el% H is in an% e-ent o)-ious i/ we t#in! o/ t#e tendencies t#at at &resent dominate &ainting, under t#e names o/ transa-antgardism, neoe(&ressionism, and so
/ort#4 ; will return to t#is a )it later4
T#is de&arture /rom arc#itectural F&ostmodernism0 leads me to a second connotation o/ t#e term F&ostmodern0 @and ; #a-e to admit t#at ; am no stranger to its
misunderstandingA4
T#e general idea is a tri-ial one4 .e can o)ser-e and esta)lis# a !ind o/ decline in t#e con/idence t#at, /or two centuries, t#e .est in-ested in t#e &rinci&le o/ a general
&rogress in #umanit%4 T#is idea o/ a &ossi)le, &ro)a)le, or necessar% &rogress is rooted in t#e )elie/ t#at de-elo&ments made in t#e arts, tec#nolog%, !nowledge, and /reedoms
would )ene/it #umanit% as a w#ole4 ;t is true t#at ascertaining t#e identit% o/ t#e su)Iect w#o su//ered most /rom a lac! o/ de-elo&ment H t#e &oor, t#e wor!er, or t#e illiterate
H continued to )e an issue t#roug#out t#e nineteent# and twentiet# centuries4 As %ou !now, t#ere was contro-ers% and e-en war )etween li)erals, conser-ati-es, and Fle/tists0
o-er t#e true name to )e gi-en to t#e su)Iect w#ose emanci&ation reKuired assistance4 Yet all t#ese tendencies were united in t#e )elie/ t#at initiati-es, disco-eries, and
institutions onl% #ad legitimac% in so /ar as t#e% contri)uted to t#e emanci&ation o/ #umanit%4
A/ter two centuries we #a-e )ecome more alert to signs t#at would indicate an o&&osing mo-ement4 eit#er li)eralism @economic and &oliticalA nor t#e -arious Mar(isrns
#a-e emerged /rom t#ese )loodstained centuries wit#out attracting accusations o/ #a-ing &er&etrated crimes against #umanit%4 .e could ma!e a list o/ &ro&er names H &laces,
&eo&le, dates H ca&a)le o/ illustrating or su)stantiating our sus&icions4 $ollowing T#eodor Adorno, ; #a-e used t#e name FAusc#witG0 to signi/% Iust #ow im&o-eris#ed recent
.estern #istor% seems /rom t#e &oint o/ -iew o/ t#e Fmodern0 &roIect o/ t#e emanci&ation o/ #umanit%4 .#at !ind o/ t#oug#t is ca&a)le o/ Frelie-ing0 Ausc#witG H relie-ing
Ere/e.erD in t#e sense o/ aufheben H ca&a)le o/ situating it in a general, em&irical, or e-en s&eculati-e &rocess directed toward uni-ersal emanci&ationD T#ere is a sort o/ grie/ in
t#e P1it%eist. ;t can /ind
e(&ression in reacti-e, e-en reactionar%, attitudes or in uto&ias H )ut not in a &ositi-e orientation t#at would o&en u& a new &ers&ecti-e4
Tec#nOScienti/ic de-elo&ment #as )ecome a means o/ dee&ening t#e malaise rat#er t#an alla%ing it4 ;t is no longer &ossi)le to call de-elo&ment &rogress4 ;t seems to
&roceed o/ its own accord, wit# a /orce, an autonomous motoricit% t#at is inde&endent o/ us4 ;t does not answer to demands issuing /rom #uman needs4 On t#e contrar%,
#uman entities H w#et#er social or indi-idual H alwa%s seem desta)iliGed )% t#e results and im&lications o/ de-elo&ment4 ; am t#in!ing o/ its intellectual and mental results as
well as its material results4 .e could sa% t#at #umanit%0s condition #as )ecome one o/ c#asing a/ter t#e &rocess o/ t#e accumulatiOn o/ new o)Iects @)ot# o/ &ractice and o/
t#oug#tA4
As %ou mig#t imagine, understanding t#e reason /or t#is &rocess o/ com&le(i/ication is an im&ortant Kuestion /or me H an o)scure Kuestion4 .e could sa% t#ere e(ists a sort
o/ destin%, or in-oluntar% destination toward a condition t#at is increasingl% com&le(4 T#e needs /or securit%, identit%, and #a&&iness s&ringing /rom our immediate condition
as li-ing )eings, as social )eings, now seem irrele-ant ne(t to t#is sort o/ constraint to com&le(i/%, mediatiGe, Kuanti/%, s%nt#esiGe, and modi/% t#e siGe o/ eac# and e-er%
o)Iect4 .e are li!e 2ulli-ers in t#e world o/ tec#noscience6 sometimes too )ig, sometimes too small, )ut ne-er t#e rig#t siGe4 $rom t#is &ers&ecti-e, t#e insistence on
sim&licit% generall% seems toda% li!e a &ledge to )ar)arism4
On t#is same &oint, t#e /ollowing issue also #as to )e ela)orated4 Humanit% is di-ided into two &arts4 One /aces t#e c#allenge o/ com&le(it%, t#e ot#er t#at ancient and
terri)le c#allenge o/ its own sur-i-al4 T#is is &er#a&s t#e most im&ortant as&ect o/ t#e /ailure o/ t#e modern &roIect H a &roIect t#at, need ; remind %ou, once a&&lied in
&rinci&le to t#e w#ole o/ #umanit%4
; will gi-e m% t#ird &oint H t#e most com&le( H t#e s#ortest treatment4 T#e Kuestion o/ &ostmodernit% is also, or /irst o/ all, a Kuestion o/ e(&ressions o/ t#oug#t6 in art,
literature, &#iloso&#%, &olitics4
.e !now t#at in t#e domain o/ art, /or e(am&le, or more &recisel% in t#e -isual and &lastic arts, t#e dominant -iew toda% is t#at t#e great mo-ement o/ t#e a-ant gardes is
o-er and done wit#4 ;t #as, as it were, )ecome t#e done t#ing to indulge or deride t#e a-ant-gardes H to regard t#em as t#e e(&ression o/ an outdated modernit%4
; do not li!e t#e term a-ant-garde, wit# its militar% connotations, an% more t#an an%one else4 1ut ; do o)ser-e t#at t#e true &rocess o/ a-ant-gardism was in realit% a !ind o/
wor!, a long, o)stinate, and #ig#l% res&onsi)le wor! concerned wit# in-estigating t#e assum&tions im&licit in modernit%4 ; mean t#at /or a &ro&er 8nderstanding o/ t#e wor!
o/ modern &ainters /rom, sa%, Manet to Duc#am& or 1arnett ewman, we would #a-e to com&are t#eir wor! wit# anamnesis5 in t#e Sense o/ a &s%c#oanal%tic t#era&%4 3ust as
&atients tr% to ela)orate t#eir current Pro)lems )% /reel% associating a&&arentl% inconseKuential details wit# &ast Situations H allowing t#em to unco-er #idden meanings in
t#eir li-es and t#eir
4
$9 Jean-Francois Lyotard
)e#a-ior H so we can t#in! o/ t#e wor! o/ CeGanne, Picasso, Delauna%, 'andins!%, 'lee, Mondrian, Male-ic#, and /inall% Duc#am& as a wor!ing t#roug# EdurcharbeitenD
&er/ormed )% modernit% on its own meaning4
;/ we a)andon t#at res&onsi)ilit%, we will surel% )e condemned to re&eat, wit#out an% dis&lacement, t#e .est0s Fmodern neurosis0 H its sc#iGo&#renia, &aranoia, and so on,
t#e source o/ t#e mis/ortunes we #a-e !nown /or two centuries4
You can see t#at w#en it is understood in t#is wa%, t#e F&ost-0 o/ F&ostmodern0 does not signi/% a mo-ement o/ comeback5 flashback5 or feedback H t#at is, not a mo-ement o/
re&etition )ut a &rocedure in Fana-06 a &rocedure o/ anal%sis, anamnesis, anagog%, and anamor&#osis t#at ela)orates an Finitial /orgetting40
3 w &he 'ntr( into Postmodernit(. !iet)sche
as a turning *oint
Jren !a"er#as
eit#er Hegel nor #is direct disci&les on t#e Le/t or Rig#t e-er wanted to call into Kuestion t#e ac#ie-ements o/ modernit% /rom w#ic# t#e modern age drew its &ride and sel/-
consciousness4 A)o-e all t#e modern age stood under t#e sign o/ su)Iecti-e /reedom4 T#is was realiGed in societ% as t#e s&ace secured )% ci-il law /or t#e rational &ursuit o/
one0s own interestsN in t#e state, as t#e in &rinci&le eKual rig#ts to &artici&ation in t#e /ormation o/ &olitical willN in t#e &ri-ate s&#ere, as et#ical autonom% and sel/-
realiGationN /inall%, in t#e &u)lic s&#ere related to t#is &ri-ate realm, as t#e /ormati-e &rocess t#at ta!es &lace )% means o/ t#e a&&ro&riation o/ a culture t#at #as )ecome
re/lecti-e4 E-en t#e /orms o/ t#e a)solute and o/ t#e o)Iecti-e s&irit, loo!ed at /rom t#e &ers&ecti-e o/ t#e indi-idual, #ad assumed a structure in w#ic# t#e su)Iecti-e s&irit
could emanci&ate itsel/ /rom t#e natureli!e s&ontaneit% o/ t#e traditional wa% o/ li/e4 ;n t#e &rocess, t#e s&#eres in w#ic# t#e indi-idual led #is li/e as bour%eois5 citoyen5 and
homme t#ere)% grew e-er /urt#er a&art /rom one anot#er and )ecame sel/-su//icient4 T#is se&aration and sel/-su//icienc%, w#ic#, considered /rom t#e stand&oint o/ &#iloso&#%
o/ #istor%, &a-ed t#e wa% /or emanci&ation /rom age-old de&endencies, were e(&erienced at t#e same time as a)straction, as alienation /rom t#e totalit% o/ an et#ical conte(t o/
li/e4 Once religion #ad )een t#e un)rea!a)le seal u&on t#is totalit%N it is not )% c#ance t#at t#is seal #as )een )ro!en4
T#e religious /orces o/ social integration grew wea!er in t#e wa!e o/ a &rocess o/ enlig#tenmO9t t#at is Iust as little susce&ti)le o/ )eing re-o!ed as it was ar)itraril% )roug#t
a)out in t#e /irst &lace4 One /eature o/ t#is enlig#tenment is t#e irre-ersi)ilit% o/ learning &rocesses, w#ic# is )ased on t#e /act t#at insig#ts cannot )e /orgotten at willN t#e% can
onl% )e re&ressed or corrected )% )etter insig#ts4 Hence, enlig#tenment can onl% ma!e good its de/icits )% radicaliGed enlig#tenmentN
$rom Ha)ermas, ;4, &hilosophical <iscourse o3 (odernity5 M;T PressO, Cam)ridge, MA, *+E<, &&4 E,HE, +<H*9>4
$;
$2 Jren !a"er#as ,he :ntry into &ostmodernity $8
t#is is w#% Hegel and #is disci&les #ad to &lace t#eir #o&e in a dialectic o/ enlig#tenment in w#ic# reason was -alidated as an eKui-alent /or t#e uni/%ing &ower o/ religion4
T#e% wor!ed out conce&ts o/ reason t#at were su&&osed to /ul/ill suc# a &rogram4 .e #a-e seen #ow aiid w#% t#ese attem&ts /ailed4
Hegel concei-ed o/ reason as t#e reconciling sel/-!nowledge o/ an a)solute s&iritN t#e Hegelian Le/t, as t#e li)erating a&&ro&riation o/ &roducti-el% e(ternaliGed, )ut
wit##eld, essential &owersN t#e Hegelian Rig#t, as t#e rememorati-e com&ensation /or t#e &ain o/ ine-ita)le direm&tions4 Hegel0s conce&t &ro-ed too strongN t#e a)solute
s&irit was &osited un&ertur)ed, )e%ond t#e &rocess o/ a #istor% o&en to t#e /uture and )e%ond t#e unreconciled c#aracter o/ t#e &resent4 Against t#e Kuietistic wit#drawal o/
t#e &riestl% caste o/ &#iloso&#ers /rom an unreconciled realit%, t#ere/ore, t#e Young Hegelians in-o!ed t#e &ro/ane rig#t o/ a &resent t#at still awaited t#e realiGation o/
&#iloso&#ical t#oug#t4 ;n doing so, t#e% )roug#t to )ear a conce&t o/ &ra(is t#at /ell s#ort4 T#is conce&t onl% en#anced t#e /orce o/ t#e a)solutiGed &ur&osi-e rationalit% t#at it
was su&&osed to o-ercome4 eoconser-ati-es could s&ell out /or &ra(is &#iloso&#% t#e social com&le(it% t#at stu))ornl% asserted itsel/ in t#e /ace o/ all re-olutionar% #o&es4
T#e% in turn altered Hegel0s conce&t o/ reason in suc# a wa% t#at modern societ%0s need /or com&ensation was )roug#t to t#e /ore at t#e same time as its rationalit%4 1ut t#is
conce&t did not reac# /ar enoug# to ma!e intelligi)le t#e com&ensator% /unction o/ a #istoricism t#at was su&&osed to )ring traditional /orces )ac! to li/e t#roug# t#e medium
o/ t#e /eisteswissenschaften.
Against t#is contem&orar% culture /ed /rom t#e s&rings o/ an antiKuarian #istoriogra&#%, ietGsc#e )roug#t t#e modern time-consciousness to )ear in a wa% similar to t#at
in w#ic# t#e Young Hegelians once did against t#e o)Iecti-ism o/ t#e Hegelian &#iloso&#% o/ #istor%4 ;n t#e second o/ #is 0ntimely 2bser.ations5 2n the Ad.anta%e and
<isad.anta%e of 7istory for 6ife5 ietGsc#e anal%Ges t#e /ruitlessness o/ cultural tradition uncou&led /rom action and s#o-ed into t#e s&#ere o/ interiorit%4 F'nowledge, ta!en in
e(cess wit#out #unger, e-en contrar% to need, no longer acts as a trans/orming moti-e im&elling to action and remains #idden in a certain c#aotic inner world 444 and so t#e
w#ole o/ modern culture is essentiall% internal 444 a ]Hand)oo! o/ ;nner Culture /or E(ternal 1ar)ariansR40
*
Modern consciousness, o-er)urdened wit# #istorical !nowledge,
#as lost Ft#e &lastic &ower o/ li/e0 t#at ma!es #uman )eings a)le, wit# t#eir gaGe toward t#e /uture, to Finter&ret t#e &ast /rom t#e stand&oint o/ t#e #ig#est strengt# o/ t#e
&resent4 1ecause t#e met#odicall% &roceeding /eisteswissenschaften are de&endent on a /alse, w#ic# is to sa% unattaina)le, ideal o/ o)Iecti-it%, t#e% neutraliGe t#e standards
necessar% /or li/e and ma!e wa% /or a &aral%Ging relati-ism6 FT#ings were di//erent in all agesN it does not matter w#o %ou are40
,
T#e% )loc! t#e ca&acit% Fto s#atter and
dissol-e somet#ing V&astY0 /rom time to time, in order Fto ena)le VusY to li-e Vin t#e &resentY F4O Li!e t#e Young Hegelians, ietGsc#e senses in t#e #istoricist admiration o/ t#e
F&ower o/ #istor%0 a tendenc% t#at all too easil% turns into an admiration o/ na!ed success in t#e st%le o/ 4ealpolitik.
.it# ietGsc#e0s entrance into t#e discourse o/ modernitO4 t#e argument s#i/ts,
4
/rom t#e ground u&4 To )egin wit#, reason was concei-ed as a reconciling sel/!nowledge, t#en as a li)erating a&&ro&riation, and /inall% as a com&ensator% remem)rance, so
t#at it could emerge as t#e eKui-alent /or t#e uni/%ing &ower o/ religion and o-ercome t#e direm&tions o/ modernit% )% means o/ its Own dri-ing /orces4 T#ree times t#is
attem&t to tailor t#e conce&t o/ reason to t#e &rogram o/ an intrinsic dialectic o/ enlig#tenment miscarried4 ;n t#e conte(t o/ t#is constellation, ietGsc#e #ad no c#oice )ut to
su)mit su)Iect-centered reason %et again to an immanent critiKue H or to gi-e u& t#e &rogram entirel%4 ietGsc#e o&ts /or t#e second alternati-e6 He renounces a renewed
re-ision o/ t#e conce&t o/ reason and bids farewell to t#e dialectic o/ enlig#tenment4 ;n &articular, t#e #istoricist de/ormation o/ modern consciousness, in w#ic# it is /looded
wit# ar)itrar% contents and em&tied o/ e-er%t#ing essential, ma!es #im dou)t t#at modernit% could still /as#ion its criteria out o/ itsel/ H F/or /rom oursel-es we moderns #a-e
not#ing at all04
>
;ndeed ietGsc#e turns t#e t#oug#t-/igure o/ t#e dialectic o/ enlig#tenment u&on t#e #istoricist enlig#tenment as well, )ut t#is time wit# t#e goal o/ e(&loding
modernit%0s #us! o/ reason as suc#4
ietGsc#e uses t#e ladder o/ #istorical reason in order to cast it awa% at t#e end and to gain a /oot#old in m%t# as t#e ot#er o/ reason6 F/or t#e origin o/ #istorical education H
and its inner, Kuite radical contradiction wit# t#e s&irit o/ a ]new ageR, a modern consciousnessR H t#is origin must itsel/ in turn )e #istoricall% understood, #istor% must itsel/
dissol-e t#e &ro)lem o/ #istor%, !nowledge must turn its sting against itsel/ H t#is t#ree/old must is t#e im&erati-e o/ t#e new s&irit o/ t#e ]new ageR i/ it reall% does contain
somet#ing new, mig#t%, original and a &romise o/ li/e04 ? ietGsc#e is t#in!ing #ere o/ #is Kirth of ,ra%edy5 an in-estigation, carried out wit# #istoricalO&#ilological means,
t#at led #im )e%ond t#e Ale(andrian world and )e%ond t#e Roman-C#ristian world )ac! to t#e )eginnings, )ac! to t#e Fancient 2ree! world o/ t#e great, t#e natural and
#uman04 On t#is &at#, t#e antiKuarian-t#in!ing Flatecomers0 o/ modernit% are to )e trans/ormed into F/lrstlings0 o/ a Postmodern age H a &rogram t#at Heidegger will ta!e u&
again in Kein% and ,ime. $or ietGsc#e, t#e starting situation is clear4 On t#e one #and, #istorical enlig#tenOO9O onl% strengt#ens t#e now &al&a)le direm&tions in t#e
ac#ie-ements o/ modernit%N reason as mani/ested in t#e /orm o/ a religion o/ culture no longer de-elo&s an% s%nt#etic /orces t#at could renew t#e uni/%ing &ower o/
traditional religion4 On t#e ot#er #and, t#e &at# o/ restoration is )arred to modernit%4 T#e religiousmeta&#%>OOOY world--iews o/ ancient ci-iliGations are t#emsel-es alread% a
Product o/ enlig#tenmentN t#e% are too rational5 t#ere/ore, to )e a)le to &ro-ide
9
PPOsition to t#e radicaliGed enlig#tenment o/ modernit%4
Li!e all w#o lea& out o/ t#e dialectic o/ enlig#tenment, ietGsc#e underta!es a cons&icuous le-eling4 Modernit% loses its singular statusN it constitutes onl% a last e&oc# in
t#e /ar-reac#ing #istor% o/ a rationaliGation initiated )% t#e dissolution o/ arc#aic li/e and t#e colla&se o/ m%t#4 O ;n Euro&e, Socrates and C#rist, t#e /ounders O? P#iloso&#ical
t#oug#t and o/ ecclesiastical monot#eism, mar! t#is turning &oint6
Fl#e tremendous #istorical need o/ our unsatis/ied #istorical culture, t#e assem)ling around one o/ t#e countless ot#er cultures, t#e consuming desire /or !nowledge H
$: %ren !a"er#as ,he :ntry into &ostmodernity
w#at does all t#is &oint to, i/ not to t#e loss o/ m%t#, t#e loss o/ t#e m%t#ical #omeD0
E
T#e modern time-consciousness, o/ course, &ro#i)its an% t#oug#ts o/ regression, o/ an
unmediated return to m%t#ical origins4 Onl% t#e /uture constitutes t#e #oriGon /or t#e arousal o/ m%t#ical &asts6 FT#e &ast alwa%s s&ea!s as an oracle6 Onl% as master)uilders
o/ t#e /uture w#o !now t#e &resent will %ou understand it40
+
T#is utopian attitude, directed to t#e god who is comin%5 distinguis#es ietGsc#e0s underta!ing /rom t#e reactionar%
call o/ F1ac! to t#e origins^0 Teleological t#oug#t t#at contrasts origin and goal wit# eac# ot#er loses its &ower com&letel%4 And )ecause ietGsc#e does not negate t#e
modern time-consciousness, )ut #eig#tens it, #e can imagine modern art, w#ic# in its most su)Iecti-e /orms o/ e(&ression dri-es t#is time-consciousness to its summit, as t#e
medium in w#ic# modernit% ma!es contact wit# t#e arc#aic4 .#ereas #istoricism &resents us wit# t#e world as an e(#i)ition and trans/orms t#e contem&oraries enIo%ing it
into )lase s&ectators, onl% t#e su&ra#istorical &ower o/ an art consuming itsel/ in actualit% can )ring sal-ation /or Ft#e true neediness and inner &o-ert% o/ man04 *9
Here t#e %oung ietGsc#e #as in mind t#e &rogram o/ Ric#ard .agner, w#o o&ened #is FEssa% on religion and art0 wit# t#e statement6 FOne could sa% t#at w#ere-er
religion #as )ecome artistic, it is le/t to art to sa-e t#e core o/ religion, in t#at it gras&s t#e m%t#ic s%m)ols @w#ic# religion wants to )elie-e are true in a real senseA in terms o/
t#eir s%m)olic -alues, so t#at t#e &ro/ound trut# #idden in t#em can )e recogniGed t#roug# t#eir ideal re&resentation40 OF T#e religious /esti-al )ecome wor! o/ art is
su&&osed, wit# a culturall% re-i-ed &u)lic s&#ere, to o-ercome t#e inwardness o/ &ri-atel% a&&ro&riated #istorical culture4 An aest#eticall% renewed m%t#olog% is su&&osed to
rela( t#e /orces o/ social integration consolidated )% com&etiti-e societ%4 ;t will decenter modern consciousness and o&en it to arc#aic e(&eriences4 T#is art o/ t#e /uture
denies t#at it is t#e &roduct o/ an indi-idual artist and esta)lis#es Ft#e &eo&le itsel/ as t#e artist o/ t#e /uture04 *5 T#is is w#% ietGsc#e cele)rates .agner as t#e
FRe-olutionar% o/ Societ%0 and as t#e one w#o o-ercomes Ale(andrian culture4 He e(&ects t#e e//ect o/ Dion%sian traged% to go /ort# /rom 1a%reut# H Ft#at t#e state and
societ% and, Kuite generall%, t#e gul/s )etween man and man gi-e wa% to an o-erw#elming /eeling o/ unit% leading )ac! to t#e -er% #eart o/ nature04 *,
As we !now, later on ietGsc#e turned awa% in disgust /rom t#e world o/ t#e .agnerian o&era4 .#at is more interesting t#an t#e &ersonal, &olitical, and aest#etic reasons
/or t#is a-ersion is t#e &#iloso&#ical moti-e t#at stands )e#ind t#e Kuestion, F.#at would a music #a-e to )e li!e t#at would no longer )e o/ Romantic origin @li!e .agner0sA
H )ut Dion%sianDR
=
T#e idea o/ a new m%t#olog% is o/ Romantic &ro-enance, and so also is t#e recourse to Dion%sus as t#e god w#o is coming4 ietGsc#e li!ewise distances
#imsel/ /rom t#e Romantic use o/ t#ese ideas and &roclaims a mani/estl% more radical -ersion &ointing /ar )e%ond .agner4 1ut w#erein does t#e Dion%sian di//er /rom t#e
RomanticD
V4 4
I'
OeIdegger wants to ta!e o-er t#e essential moti/s o/ ietGsc#e0s Dion%sian mesSia/lism w#ile a-oiding t#e a&orias o/ a sel/-enclosed critiKue o/ reason4 ietGSc#e, o&erating
in a Fsc#olarl%0 mode, wanted to cata&ult modern t#in!ing )e%ond itsel/ )% wa% o/ a genealog% o/ t#e )elie/ in trut# and o/ t#e ascetic idealN *-_eidegger, w#o es&ies an
uncleansed remnant o/ enlig#tenment in t#is &ower-t#eoretical strateg% o/ unmas!ing, would rat#er stic! wit# ietGsc#e t#e F&#iloso&#er04 T#e goal t#at ietGsc#e &ursued
wit# a totaliGed, sel/-consuming critiKue o/ ideolog%, Heidegger wants to reac# t#roug# a destruction o/ .estern meta&#%sics t#at &roceeds immanentl%4 ietGsc#e #ad
s&anned t#e arc# o/ t#e Dion%sian e-ent )etween 2ree! traged% and a new m%t#olog%4 Heidegger0s later &#iloso&#% can )e understood as an attem&t to dis&lace t#is e-en
/rom t#e area o/ an aest#eticall% re-italiGed m%t#olog% to t#at o/ &#iloso&#%4 *> Heidegger is /aced /irst o/ all wit# t#e tas! o/ &utting &#iloso&#% in t#e &lace t#at art occu&ies
in ietGsc#e @as a countermo-ement to ni#ilismA, in order t#en to trans/orm &#iloso&#ical t#in!ing in suc# a wa% t#at it can )ecome t#e area /or t#e ossi/ication and renewal
o/ t#e Dion%sian /orces H#e wants to descri)e t#e emergence and o-ercoming o/ ni#ilism as t#e )eginning and end o/ meta&#%sics4
Heidegger0s /irst ietGsc#e lecture is entitled FT#e will to &ower as art04 ;t is )ased a)o-e all on t#e &ost#umous /ragments, w#ic# in t#eir com&ilation )% Elisa)et#
$oerster-ietGsc#e were &u//ed u& into an unwritten magnum o&us, ,he Will to &ower. *? Heidegger attem&ts to su)stantiate t#e t#esis t#at FietGsc#e mo-es in t#e or)it o/
.estern &#iloso&#%04 *< He does call t#e t#in!er w#o Fin #is meta&#%sics
re-erts to t#e )eginnings o/ .estern &#iloso&#%R
E
and leads t#e countermo-ement to ni#ilism an Fartist-&#iloso&#er04 Howe-er, ietGsc#e0s ideas a)out t#e sa-ing &ower o/
art are su&&osed to )e Faest#etic0 onl% Fat /irst glance0 )ut Fmeta&#%sical
according to Vt#eirY innermost will04 *+ Heidegger0s classicist understanding o/ art reKuires t#is inter&retation4 Li!e Hegel, #e is con-inced t#at art reac#ed its essential end
wit# Romanticism4 A com&arison wit# .alter 1enIamin would s#ow #ow little Heidegger was in/luenced )% genuine e(&eriences o/ a-ant-garde art4 And so #e was also
una)le to gras& w#% it is t#at onl% a su)Iecti-isticall% #eig#tened and radicall% di//erentiated art, w#ic# consistentl% de-elo&s t#e meaning &ro&er to t#e aest#etic dimension
out o/ t#e sel/-e(&erience o/ a decentered su)Iecti-it%, recommends itsel/ as t#e inaugurator o/ a new m%t#olog%4 59 T#us, #e #as little di//icult% in imagining t#e le-eling o/
t#e Faest#etic &#enomenon0 and t#e assimilation o/ art to meta&#%sics4 T#e )eauti/ul allows 1eing to s#ow /ort#6 F1ot# )eaut% and trut# are related to
O5i
1eing, indeed )% wa% o/ un-eiling t#e 1eing o/ )eings4
Later on t#is will read6 FT#e &oet &roclaims t#e #ol%, w#ic# re-eals itsel/ to t#e t#in!er4 Poetr% and t#in!ing are o/ course interde&endent, )ut in t#e end it is &oetr% t#at
stems /rom t#in!ing in its initial stages04
55
9
nce art #as )een ontologiGed in t#is wa%,
5,
&#iloso&#% must again ta!e on t#e tas! t#at it #ad #anded o-er to art in Romanticism, namel%, creating an eKui-alent
$< J ren !a"er#as
,he :ntry into &ostmodernity
/or t#e uni/%ing &ower o/ religion, in order e//ecti-el% to counter t#e direm&tions o/ modernit%4 ietGsc#e #ad entrusted t#e o-ercoming o/ ni#ilism to t#e aest#eticall%
re-i-ed Dion%sian m%t#4 Heidegger &roIects t#is Dion%sian #a&&ening onto t#e screen o/ a critiKue o/ meta&#%sics, w#ic# t#ere)% ta!es on world-#istorical signi/icance4
ow it is 1eing t#at #as wit#drawn itsel/ /rom )eings and announces its indeterminate arri-al )% an a)sence made &al&a)le and )% t#e mounting &ain o/ de&ri-al4 T#in!ing,
w#ic# stal!s 1eing t#roug# t#e destin% o/ t#e /orget/ulness o/ 1eing to w#ic# .estern &#iloso&#% #as )een doomed, #as a catal%tic /unction4 T#e t#in!ing t#at
simultaneousl% emerges out o/ meta&#%sics, inKuires into t#e origins o/ meta&#%sics, and transcends t#e limits o/ meta&#%sics /rom inside no longer s#ares in t#e sel/-
con/idence o/ a reason )oasting o/ its own autonom%4 To )e sure, t#e di//erent strata wit#in w#ic# 1eing is )uried #a-e to )e e(ca-ated4 1ut t#e wor! o/ destruction, in
contrast wit# t#e &ower o/ re/lection, ser-es to train one in a new #eteronom%4 ;t /ocuses its energ% singlemindedl% on t#e sel/-o-ercoming and t#e sel/-renunciation o/ a
su)Iecti-it% t#at #as to learn &erse-erance and is su&&osed to dissol-e in #umilit%4 As /or reason itsel/, it can onl% )e e(ercised in t#e )ale/ul acti-it% o/ /orgetting and
e(&elling4 E-en memor% lac!s t#e &ower to &romote t#e return o/ w#at #as )een e(iled4 As a result, 1eing can onl% come a)out as a /ate/ul dis&ensationN t#ose w#o are in
need can at most #old t#emsel-es o&en and &re&ared /or it4 Heidegger0s critiKue o/ reason ends in t#e distancing radicalit% o/ a c#ange in orientation t#at is all-&er-asi-e )ut
em&t% o/ content H awa% /rom autonom% and toward a sel/-surrender to 1eing, w#ic# su&&osedl% lea-es )e#ind t#e o&&osition )etween autonom% and #eteronom%4
1ataille0s ietGsc#e-ins&ired critiKue o/ reason ta!es anot#er tac!4 ;t too em&lo%s t#e conce&t o/ t#e sacred /or t#ose decentering e(&eriences o/ am)i-alent ra&ture in
w#ic# a #ardened su)Iecti-it% transgresses its )oundaries4 T#e actions o/ religious sacri/ice and o/ erotic /usion, in w#ic# t#e su)Iect see!s to )e Floosed /rom its relatedness
to t#e ;0 and to ma!e room /or a reesta)lis#ed Fcontinuit% o/ 1eing0, are e(em&lar% /or #im4 5= 1ataille, too, &ursues t#e traces o/ a &rimordial /orce t#at could #eal t#e
discontinuit% or ri/t )etween t#e rationall% disci&lined world o/ wor! and t#e outlawed ot#er o/ reason4 He imagines t#is o-er&owering return to a lost continuit% as t#e
eru&tion o/ elements o&&osed to reason, as a )reat#ta!ing act o/ sel/-de-limiting4 ;n t#is &rocess o/ dissolution, t#e monadicall% closed-o// su)Iecti-it% o/ sel/-asserti-e and
mutuall% o)Iecti/%ing indi-iduals is dis&ossessed and cast down into t#e a)%ss4
1ataille does not a&&roac# t#is Dion%sian -iolence directed against t#e &rinci&le o/ indi-iduation )% wa% o/ t#e restrained &at# o/ a sel/-o-ercoming o/ !nowledge t#at is
caug#t u& in meta&#%sics, )ut )% wa% o/ an em&irical and anal%tic gras& o/ &#enomena associated wit# t#e sel/-transgression and sel/-e(tinction o/ t#e &ur&osi-e-rational
su)Iect4 He is o)-iousl% interested in t#e 1acc#analian traits o/ an orgiastic will to &ower H t#e creati-e and e(u)erant acti-it% o/ a mig#t% will mani/ested as muc# in &la%,
dance, ra&ture, and giddiness as in t#e !inds o/ stimulation aroused )% destruction, )% -iewing &ain t#at incites cruelt% and
$=
&lea>8reO )% witnessing -iolent deat#4 T#e curious gaGe wit# w#ic# 1ataille Patientl% dissects t#e limit e(&eriences o/ ritual sacri/ice and se(ual lo-e is guided and
in/ormed )% an aest#etics o/ terror4 T#e %ears-long /ollower and later o&&onent o/ AndrL 1reton does not, li!e Heidegger, &ass )% t#e /oundational aest#etic e(&erience o/
ietGsc#e, )ut /ollows out t#e radicaliGation o/ t#is e(&erience into surrealism4 Li!e one &ossessed, 1ataille in-estigates t#ose am)i-alent, o//&utting emotiOnal reactions
o/ s#ame, loat#ing, s#oc!N #e anal%Ges t#e sadistic satis/action released )% sudden, inIurious, intrusi-e, -iolentl% inter-ening im&ressions4 ;n t#ese e(&losi-e stimuli are
Ioined t#e counter-ailing tendencies o/ longing and o/ #orri/ied wit#drawal into &aral%Ging /ascination4 Loat#ing, disgust, and #orror /use wit# lust, attraction, and cra-ing4
T#e consciousness e(&osed to t#ese rending am)i-alenceE enters a s&#ere )e%ond com&re#ension4 T#e Surrealists wanted to arouse t#is state o/ s#oc! wit# aggressi-el%
em&lo%ed aest#etic means4 1ataille &ursues t#e traces o/ t#is F&ro/ane illumination0 @1enIaminA rig#t )ac! to t#e ta)oos regarding t#e #uman cor&se, canni)alism, na!ed
)odies, menstrual )leeding, incest, and so on4
T#ese ant#ro&ological in-estigations, w#ic# we s#all consider )elow, &ro-ide t#e starting &oint /or a t#eor% o/ so-ereignt%4 3ust as ietGsc#e did in t#e /enealo%y of
(orals5 so 1ataille studies t#e demarcating and e-er /uller e(tir&ating o/ e-er%t#ing #eterogeneous )% w#ic# t#e modern world o/ &ur&osi-el% rational la)or, consum&tion,
and domination is constituted4 He does not a-oid constructing a #istor% o/ .estern reason w#ic#, li!e Heidegger0s critiKue o/ meta&#%sics, &ortra%s modernit% as an e&oc# o/
de&letion4 1ut in 1ataille0s account t#e #eterogeneous, e(traneous elements a&&ear not in t#e guise o/ an a&ocal%&ticall% /ate/ul dis&ensation, m%sticall% tac!ed on, )ut as
su)-ersi-e /orces t#at can onl% )e con-ulsi-el% released i/ t#e% are un/ettered wit#in a li)ertarian socialistic societ%4
Parado(icall% 1ataille /ig#ts /or t#e rig#ts o/ t#is renewal o/ t#e sacral wit# t#e tools o/ scienti/ic anal%sis4 1% no means does #e regard met#odical t#oug#t as Sus&ect4
Fo one VcanY &ose t#e &ro)lem o/ religion i/ #e starts out /rom ar)itrar% solutions not allowed )% t#e &resent climate of e=actitude. ;nso/ar as ; tal! a)out internal e(&erience
and not a)out o)Iects, ; am not a man o/ scienceN )ut t#e moment ; tal! a)out o)Iects, ; do so wit# t#e una-oida)le rigor o/ t#e scientist4
F5>
1ataIlle is se&arated /rom Heidegger )ot# )% #is access to a genuinel% aest#etic e(&erience @/rom w#ic# #e draws t#e conce&t o/ t#e sacredA and )% #is res&ect /or t#e
scienti/ic c#aracter o/ t#e !nowledge t#at #e would li!e to enlist in t#e ser-ice o/ #is anal%sis o/ t#e sacred4 At t#e same time, i/ one considers t#eir res&ecti-e COntri)utions
to t#e &#iloso&#ical discourse o/ modernit%, t#ere are &arallels )etween
t#e two t#in!ers4 T#e structural similarities can )e e(&lained )% t#e /act
t#at Heidegger and 1ataille want to meet t#e same c#allenge in t#e wa!e o/ ietGsc#e4 T#e% )ot# want to carr% out a radical critiKue o/ reason H one t#at attac!s t#e roots o/
t#e critiKue itsel/4 Similar constraints on argumentation result /rom t#is agreement a)out t#e &osing o/ t#e &ro)lem4
To )egin wit#, t#e o)Iect o/ t#e critiKue #as to )e determined s#ar&l% enoug# so t#at we can recogniGe in it su)Iect-centered reason as t#e &rinci&le o/ modernit%4
;itidegger &ic!s t#e o)Iecti/%ing t#oug#t o/ t#e modern sciences as #is &oint o/
Jren !a"er#as
,he :ntry into &ostmodernity $B
de&artureN 1ataille, t#e &ur&osi-el% rational )e#a-ior o/ t#e ca&italist enter&rise and o/ t#e )ureaucratiGed state a&&aratus as #is4 T#e one, Heidegger, in-estigates t#e )asic
ontological conce&ts o/ t#e &#iloso&#% o/ consciousness in order to la% )are t#e will to tec#nical control o/ o)Iecti/ied &rocesses as t#e underl%ing im&ulse go-erning t#e train
o/ t#oug#t /rom Descartes to ietGsc#e4 Su)Iecti-it% and rei/ication distort our -iew o/ t#e unmani&ula)le4 T#e ot#er, 1ataille, in-estigates t#e im&erati-es to utilit% and
e//icienc%, to w#ic# wor! and consum&tion #a-e )een e-er more e(clusi-el% su)ordinated, in order to identi/% wit#in industrial &roduction an in#erent tendenc% toward sel/-
destruction in all modern societies4 RationaliGed societies #inder t#e un&roducti-e s&ending and generous sKuandering o/ accumulated wealt#4
Since suc# totaliGing critiKue o/ reason #as gi-en u& all #o&e o/ a dialectic o/ enlig#tenment, w#at /alls under t#is totaliGing critiKue is so com&re#ensi-e t#at t#e ot#er o/
reason, t#e counter/orce o/ Kein% or o/ so.erei%nty5 can no longer )e concei-ed o/ onl% as re&ressed and s&lit-o// moments o/ reason itsel/4 ConseKuentl%, li!e ietGsc#e,
Heidegger and 1ataille must reac# )e%ond t#e origins o/ .estern #istor% )ac! to arc#aic times in order to redisco-er t#e traces o/ t#e Dion%sian, w#et#er in t#e t#oug#t o/
t#e &re-Socratics or in t#e state o/ e(citement surrounding sacred rites o/ sacri/ice4 ;t is #ere t#at t#e% #a-e to identi/% t#ose )uried, rationaliGed-awa% e(&eriences t#at are to
/ill t#e a)stract terms F1eing0 and Fso-ereignt%0 wit# li/e4 1ot# are Iust names to start wit#4 T#e% #a-e to )e introduced as conce&ts contrasting wit# reason in suc# a wa% t#at
t#e% remain resistant to an% attem&ts at rational incor&oration4 F1eing0 is de/ined as t#at w#ic# #as withdrawn itsel/ /rom t#e totalit% o/ )eings t#at can )e gras&ed and !nown
as somet#ing in t#e o)Iecti-e worldN Fso-ereignt%0 as t#at w#ic# #as )een e=cluded /rom t#e world o/ t#e use/ul and calcula)le4 T#ese &rimordial /orces a&&ear in images o/ a
&lenitude t#at is to )e )estowed )ut is now wit##eld, missing H o/ a wealt# t#at awaits e(&ending4 .#ereas reason is c#aracteriGed )% calculating mani&ulation and
-aloriGation, its counter&art can onl% )e &ortra%ed negati-el%, as w#at is sim&l% unmani&ula)le and not -aloriGa)le H as a medium into w#ic# t#e su)Iect can &lunge i/ it gi-es
itsel/ u& and transcends itsel/ as su)Iect4
T#e two moments H t#at o/ reason and t#at o/ its ot#er H stand not in o&&osition &ointing to a dialectical Aufhebun%5 )ut in a relations#i& o/ tension c#aracteriGed )% mutual
re&ugnance and e(clusion4 T#eir relations#i& is not constituted )% t#e d%namics o/ re&ression t#at could )e re-ersed )% counter-ailing &rocesses o/ sel/-re/lection or o/
enlig#tened &ractice4 ;nstead, reason is deli-ered o-er to t#e d%namics o/ wit#drawal and o/ retreat, o/ e(&ulsion and &roscri&tion, wit# suc# im&otence t#at narrow-minded
su)Iecti-it% can ne-er, )% its own &owers o/ anamnesis and o/ anal%sis, reac# w#at esca&es it or #olds itsel/ at a remo-e /rom it4 Sel/-re/lection is sealed o// /rom t#e ot#er o/
reason4 T#ere reigns a &la% o/ /orces o/ a meta#istorical or cosmic sort, w#ic# calls /or an e//ort o/ a different o)ser-ance altoget#er4 ;n Heidegger, t#e &arado(ical e//ort o/ a
reason transcending itsel/ ta!es on t#e c#iliastic /orm o/ an urgent meditation conIuring u& t#e dis&ensation o/ 1eing, w#ereas, wit# #is #eterological sociolog% o/ t#e sacred,
1ataille &romises
Oin*sel/ enlig#tenment a)out, )ut ultimatel% no in/luence o-er, t#e transcendent &la% o/ /orces4
1ot# aut#ors de-elo& t#eir t#eor% )% wa% o/ a narrati-e reconstruction o/ t#e #istor% o/ .estern reason4 Heidegger, w#o inter&rets reason as sel/-consciousness in line
wit# moti/s /rom t#e &#iloso&#% o/ t#e su)Iect, concei-es o/ ni#ilism as t#e e(&ression o/ a tec#nical world-master% loosed in totalitarian /as#ion4 T#e ill /ate o/ meta&#%sical
t#oug#t is su&&osed to culminate in t#is wa% H a t#oug#t t#at was set in motion )% t#e Kuestion a)out 1eing, )ut t#at more and more loses sig#t o/ w#at is essential in -iew o/
t#e totalit% o/ rei/ied entities4 1ataille, w#o inter&rets reason as la)or in line wit# moti/s /rom &ra(is &#iloso&#%, concei-es o/ ni#ilism as t#e conseKuence o/ a com&ulsi-e
accumulation &rocess4 T#e ill /ate o/ sur&lus &roduction t#at at /irst still ser-ed cele)rator% and so-ereign e(u)erance, )ut t#en uses u& e-er more resources /or t#e &ur&ose o/
Iust raising t#e le-el o/ &roducti-it%, culminates in t#is wa%6 E(tra-agance c#anges into &roducti-e consum&tion and remo-es t#e )asis /or creati-e, sel/-transcending
so-ereignt%4
$orget/ulness o/ 1eing and t#e e(&ulsion o/ t#e outlawed &art are t#e two dialectical images t#at #a-e till now ins&ired all t#ose attem&ts to dissociate t#e critiKue o/
reason /rom t#e &attern o/ a dialectic o/ enlig#tenment and to raise t#e ot#er o/ reason to a court o/ a&&eal )e/ore w#ic# modernit% can )e called to order4 ;n w#at /ollows, ;
will e(amine w#et#er Heidegger0s later &#iloso&#% @and t#e &roducti-e continuation o/ #is &#iloso&#ical m%sticism )% DerridaA, on t#e one #and, and 1ataille0s general
econom% @and $oucault0s genealog% o/ !nowledge grounded on a t#eor% o/ &owerA, on t#e ot#er H t#ese two wa%s suggested )% ietGsc#e H reall% lead us out o/ t#e
&#iloso&#% o/ t#e su)Iect4
Heidegger #as resolutel% ontologiGed art and )et e-er%t#ing on t#e one card6 a mo-ement o/ t#oug#t t#at li)erates )% destro%ing, t#at is su&&osed to o-ercome meta&#%sics
on its own ground4 He t#ere)% e-ades t#e a&orias o/ a sel/-re/erential critiKue o/ reason t#at is )ound to undermine its own /oundations4 He gi-es an O/ltological turn to
Dion%sian messianismN wit# t#is #e ties #imsel/ to t#e st%le o/ t#oug#t and t#e mode o/ reasoning o/ 0rsprun%sphilosophie in suc# a wa% t#at #e can Onl% o-ercome t#e
/oundationalism o/ Husserlian &#enomenolog% at t#e &rice o/ a /oundationaliGing o/ #istor%, w#ic# leads into a -oid4 Heidegger tries to )rea! Out o/ t#e enc#anted circle o/
t#e &#iloso&#% o/ t#e su)Iect )% setting its /oundations a/low tem&orall%4 T#e su&er/oundationalism o/ a #istor% o/ 1eing a)stracted /rom all concrete #istor% s#ows t#at #e
remains /i(ated on t#e t#in!ing #e negates4 1% COntrast, 1ataille remains /ait#/ul to an aut#entic aest#etic e(&erience and o&ens #imsel/ to a realm o/ &#enomena in w#ic#
su)Iect-centered reason can )e o&ened 8P to its ot#er4 To )e sure, #e cannot admit t#e modern &ro-enance o/ t#is e(&erience out o/ surrealismN #e #as to trans&lant it into an
arc#aic conte(t wit# t#e #el& o/ ant#ro&ological t#eories4 T#us, 1ataille &ursues t#e &roIect o/ a scienti/ic anal%sis o/ t#e sacred and o/ a general econom%, w#ic# are
S8&&osed to illuminate t#e world-#istorical &rocess o/ rationaliGation and t#e Possi)ilit% o/ a /inal re-ersal4 ;n t#is wa%, #e gets into t#e same dilemma as ietGsc#e6 His
t#eor% o/ &ower cannot satis/% t#e claim to scienti/ic o)Iecti-it% and,
<9 Jiiren !a"er#as
<1
,he :ntry into &ostmodernity
at t#e same time, &ut into e//ect t#e &rogram o/ a total and #ence sel/-re/erential
5,4 Oeidegget sums u& #is /irst ietGsc#e lectures wit# t#e words6
F$rom t#e &ers&ecti-e o/
critiKue o/ reason t#at also a//ects t#e trut# o/ t#eoretical &ro&ositions4 t#e essence o/ 1eing, art #as to )e concei-ed o/ as t#e )asic
#a&&ening o/ )eings, as t#e
aut#enticall% creati-e moment40
5=4 2eorges 1ataille, introduction to <er heili%e :ros5 $ran!/urt,
*+E5, O *9 i/4
"!. 'bid.5 &4 5+4
otes
*4 $riedric# ietGsc#e, On the Ad.anta%e and <isad.anta%e of 7istory for 6ife5 Cam)ridge, *+E9, &&4 5=H>4
54 'bid.5 &&4 ?5, ,<4
,4 'bid.5 &4
=*
4
. 'bid.5 &4 5*4
!. 'bid.5 &4 5=4
?4 'bid.5 &4 =>4
<4 T#is is true o/ Hor!#eimer and Adorno as wellN in t#is res&ect t#e% are close to ietGsc#e, 1ataille, and Heidegger4
E4 $riedric# ietGsc#e, ,he Kirth of ,ra%edy and the )ase of Wa%ner5 ew Yor!, *+?<,
&4 *,?4
*. ietGsc#e, Ad.anta%e and <isad.anta%e5 &4 ,E4
*94 'bid.5 &&4 ,5, ?=4
**4 Ric#ard .agner, -Omtlich -chriften und <ichtun%en5 -ol4 *9, &4 5**4
*54 'bid.5 &4 *<54
*,4 ietGsc#e, ,he Kirth of ,ra%edy5 &4 !*.
*=4 ietGsc#e, FAttem&t at sel/-criticism0, in ,he Kirth of ,ra%edy5 &4 "!. See t#e Hachlass5 -ol4 *5 o/ ietGsc#e0s -dmtliche Werke5 ed4 C4 Colli and M4 Montinari, 1erlin, *+?< if.5
&4 **<4
1!. 1etween *+,? and *+=? @t#at is, )etween t#e 'ntroduction to (etaphysics5 w#ic# still s#ows traces o/ t#e /ascist Heidegger, and t#e FLetter on Humanism0, w#ic# introduces t#e
&ostwar &#iloso&#%A, Heidegger was continuall% occu&ied wit# ietGsc#e4 T#e idea o/ t#e #istor% o/ 1eing was /ormed in an intensi-e dialogue wit# ietGsc#e4 Heidegger
e(&licitl% ac!nowledges t#is in t#e *+?* /oreword to t#e two -olumes t#at document t#is segment o/ #is &at# o/ t#oug#t4 See Martin Heidegger, Hiet8sche5 P/ullingen, *+?*, &&4 * if.
*?4 T#is /iction #as )een demolis#ed wit#out remainder )% t#e edition o/ 2iorgio Colli and MaGGino MontinarN see t#eir commentar% to t#e late wor!, in ietGsc#e0s -dmtliche
Werke5 -ol4 *=, &&4 ,E, if.5 and t#e c#ronolog% o/ ietGsc#e0s li/e, in -ol4 *>, &4 *4
*<4 Martin Heidegger, Hiet8sche5 -ol4 *6 ,he Will to &ower as Art5 ew Yor!, *+<+, &4
=
*E4 'bid.5 &4 *+4
*+4 'bid.5 &4 *,*4
594 ;n t#is res&ect, Os!ar 1ec!er demonstrates an incom&ara)l% greater sensi)ilit% wit# #is dualistic counter&ro&osal to Heidegger0s /undamental ontolog%N see Os!ar 1ec!er, FJon der
Hin/allig!eit des Sc#`nen und der A)enteuerlic#!eit des 'Onstlers0 and FJon der A)enteuerlic#!eit des 'Onstlers und der -orsic#tigen Jerwegen#eit des P#iloso&#en0, in
<asein und <awesen. /esammelte philosophische Aufsdt8e5 P/ullingen, *+?,, &&4 ** i/4, *9, i/4
5*4 Heidegger, Hiet8sche5 -ol4 *, &4 5994
554 Martin Heidegger, Oac#wort Gu .as ist metaphysik@1 in We%ma-ken5 $ran!/urt, *+<E, &4 ,9+4
&ostmodernism <8
4 + Postmodernism, or
&he Cultural Logic of
Late Ca*italism
Fredric Ja#eson
T#e last /ew %ears #a-e )een mar!ed )% an in-erted millenarianism, in w#ic# &remonitions o/ t#e /uture, catastro&#ic or redem&ti-e, #a-e )een re&laced )% senses o/ t#e end o/ t#is or t#at
@t#e end o/ ideolog%, art, or social classN t#e Fcrisis0 o/ Leninism, social democrac%, or t#e wel/are state, etc4, etc4A6 ta!en toget#er, all o/ t#ese &er#a&s constitute w#at is increasingl% called
&ostmodernism4 T#e case /or its e(istence de&ends on t#e #%&ot#esis o/ some radical )rea! or coupure5 generall% traced )ac! to t#e end o/ t#e *+>9s or t#e earl% *+?9s4 As t#e word
itsel/ suggests, t#is )rea! is most o/ten related to notions o/ t#e waning or e(tinction o/ t#e #undred-%ear-old modern mo-ement @or to its ideological or aest#etic re&udiationA4
T#us, a)stract e(&ressionism in &ainting, e(istentialism in &#iloso&#%, t#e /inal /orms o/ re&resentation in t#e no-el, t#e /ilms o/ t#e great auteurs5 or t#e modernist sc#ool o/ &oetr%
@as institutionaliGed and canoniGed in t#e wor!s o/ .allace Ste-ensA6 all t#ese are now seen as t#e /inal, e(traordinar% /lowering o/ a #ig#- modernist im&ulse w#ic# is s&ent and e(#austed
wit# t#em4 T#e enumeration o/ w#at /ollows t#en at once )ecomes em&irical, c#aotic, and #eterogeneous6 And% .ar#ol and &o& art, )ut also &#otorealism, and )e%ond it, t#e
Fnew e(&ressionism0N t#e moment, in music, o/ 3o#n Cage, )ut also t#e s%nt#esis o/ classical and O&o&ular0 st%les /ound in com&osers li!e P#il 2lass and Terr% Rile%, and also
&un! and new wa-e roc! @t#e 1eatles and t#e Stones now standing as t#e #ig#-modernist moment o/ t#at more recent and ra&idl% e-ol-ing traditionAN in /ilm, 2odard, &ost-
2odard and e(&erimental cinema and -ideo, )ut also a w#ole new t%&e o/ commercial /ilm @a)out w#ic# more )elowAN 1urroug#s, P%nc#on, or ;s#mael Reed, on t#e one
#and, and t#e $renc# nou.eau roman and its succession on t#e ot#er, along wit# alarming new !inds o/ literar% criticism, )ased on some new aest#etic o/ te(tualit% or ;criture.
T#e list mig#t )e e(tended inde/initel%N )ut does it im&l% an% more /undamental c#ange or )rea! t#an t#e &eriodic st%le- and /as#ion-c#anges determined )% an older
#ig#-modernist im&erati-e o/ st%listic inno-ationD
$rom 3ameson, $4, &ostmodernisn85 or ,he )ultural 6o%ic of 6ate A
7F
p8talism5 Jerso, London:Du!e 8ni-ersit% Press, Dur#am, C, *++*, &&4 >,H<, >EH<* E9H+54
T/e Rise o? Aest/etic Po0,.is#
;t is in t#e realm o/ arc#itecture, #owe-er, t#at modi/ications in aest#etic &roduction are most dramaticall% -isi)le, and t#at t#eir t#eoretical &ro)lems #a-e )een most centrall% raised
and articulatedN it was indeed /rom arc#itectural de)ates t#at m% ow/l conce&tion o/ &ostmodernism H as it will )e outlined in t#e /ollowing &ages
H initiall% )egan to emerge4 More decisi-el% t#an in t#e ot#er arts or media, &ostmodernist &ositions in arc#itecture #a-e )een inse&ara)le /rom an im&laca)le critiKue o/
arc#itectural #ig# modernism and o/ t#e so-called ;nternational St%le @$ran! Llo%d .rig#t, Le Cor)usier, MiesA, w#ere /ormal criticism and anal%sis @o/ t#e #ig#-modernist
trans/ormation o/ t#e )uilding into a -irtual scul&ture, or monumental Fduc!0, as Ro)ert Jenturi &uts itA are at one wit# reconsiderations on t#e le-el o/ ur)anism and o/ t#e
aest#etic institution4 Hig# modernism is t#us
credited wit# t#e destruction o/ t#e /a)ric o/ t#e traditional cit% and o/ its older O neig#)our#ood culture @)% wa% o/ t#e radical disIunction o/ t#e new 8to&ian #ig#-
modernist )uilding /rom its surrounding conte(tAN w#ile t#e &ro&#etic elitism and aut#oritarianism o/ t#e modern mo-ement are remorselessl% denounced in t#e im&erious gesture o/ t#e
c#arismatic Master4
Postmodernism in arc#itecture will t#en logicall% enoug# stage itsel/ as a !ind o/ aest#etic &o&ulism, as t#e -er% title o/ Jenturi0s in/luential mani/esto, i.earnin% from 6as
Ve%as5 suggests4 Howe-er we ma% ultimatel% wis# to e-aluate t#is &o&ulist r#etoric, it #as at least t#e merit o/ drawing our attention to one /undamental /eature o/ all t#e
&ostmodernisms enumerated a)o-e6 namel%, t#e e//acement in t#em o/ t#e older @essentiall% #ig#-modernistA /rontier )etween #ig# culture and so-called mass or commercial
culture, and t#e emergence o/ new !inds o/ te(ts in/used wit# t#e /orms, categories and contents o/ t#at -er% Culture ;ndustr% so &assionatel% denounced )% all t#e ideologues
o/ t#e modern, /rom Lea-is and t#e American ew Criticism all t#e wa% to Adorno and t#e $ran!/urt Sc#ool4 T#e &ostmodemnisms #a-e in /act )een /ascinated &recisel% )% t#is
w#ole Fdegraded0 landsca&e o/ sc#loc! and !itsc#, o/ TJ series and 4eader1s <i%est culture, o/ ad-ertising and motels, o/ t#e late s#ow and t#e grade-1 Holl%wood /ilm, o/ so-
called &araliterature wit# its air&ort &a&er)ac! categories o/ t#e got#ic and t#e romance, t#e &o&ular )iogra&#%, t#e murder m%ster% and science-/iction or /antas% no-el6
materials t#e% no longer Sim&l% FKuote0, as a 3o%ce or a Ma#ler mig#t #a-e done, )ut incor&orate into t#eir Jer% su)stance4
or s#ould t#e )rea! in Kuestion )e t#oug#t o/ as a &urel% cultural a//air6 indeed, t#eories o/ t#e &ostmodern H w#et#er cele)rator% or couc#ed in t#e language o/ moral
re-ulsion and denunciation H )ear a strong /amil% resem)lance to all t#ose more am)itious sociological generaliGations w#ic#, at muc# t#e same time, )ring us t#e news o/ t#e
arri-al and inauguration o/ a w#ole new t%&e o/ societ%, most /amousl% )a&tiGed F&ost-industrial societ%0 @Daniel 1ellA, )ut o/ten also designated COnSumer societ%, media
societ%, in/ormation societ%, electronic societ% or F#ig# tec#0, and t#e li!e4 Suc# t#eories #a-e t#e o)-ious ideological mission o/ demonstrating, to t#eir own relie/, t#at t#e
new social /ormation in Kuestion no
<:
longer o)e%s t#e laws o/ classical ca&italism, namel% t#e &rimac% o/ industrial &roduction and t#e omni&resence o/ class struggle4 T#e Mar(ist tradition #as t#ere/ore resisted
t#em wit# -e#emence, wit# t#e signal e(ce&tion o/ t#e economist Ernest Mandel, w#ose )oo! 6ate )apitalism sets out not merel% to anatomiGe t#e #istoric originalit% o/ t#is new
societ% @w#ic# #e sees as a t#ird stage or moment in t#e e-olution o/ ca&italA, )ut also to demonstrate t#at it is, i/ an%t#ing, a purer stage o/ ca&italism t#an an% o/ t#e moments
t#at &receded it4 ; will return to t#is argument laterN su//ice it /or t#e moment to em&#asiGe a &oint ; #a-e de/ended in greater detail elsew#ere,0 namel% t#at e-er% &osition on
&ostmodernism in culture H w#et#er a&ologia or stigmatiGation H is also at one and t#e same time, and necessarily5 an im&licitl% or e(&licitl% &olitical stance on t#e nature o/
multinational ca&italism toda%4
Post#odernis# as ),.t,ra. Do#inant
A last &reliminar% word on met#od6 w#at /ollows is not to )e read as st%listic descri&tion, as t#e account o/ one cultural st%le or mo-ement among ot#ers4 ; #a-e rat#er meant
to o//er a &eriodiGing #%&ot#esis, and t#at at a moment in w#ic# t#e -er% conce&tion o/ #istorical &eriodiGation #as come to seem most &ro)lematical indeed4 ; #a-e argued
elsew#ere t#at all isolated or discrete cultural anal%sis alwa%s in-ol-es a )uried or re&ressed t#eor% o/ #istorical &eriodiGationN in an% case, t#e conce&tion o/ t#e Fgenealog%0 largel%
la%s to rest traditional t#eoretical worries a)out so-called linear #istor%, t#eories o/ Fstages0, and teleological #istoriogra&#%4 ;n t#e &resent conte(t, #owe-er, lengt#ier
t#eoretical discussion o/ suc# @-er% realA issues can &er#a&s )e re&laced )% a /ew su)stanti-e remar!s4
One o/ t#e concerns /reKuentl% aroused )% &eriodiGing #%&ot#eses is t#at t#ese tend to o)literate di//erence, and to &roIect an idea o/ t#e #istorical &eriod as massi-e
#omogeneit% @)ounded on eit#er side )% ine(&lica)le Fc#ronological0 metamor&#oses and &unctuation mar!sA4 T#is is, #owe-er, &recisel% w#% it seems to me essential to
gras& F&ostmodernism0 not as a st%le, )ut rat#er as a cultural dominant6 a conce&tion w#ic# allows /or t#e &resence and coe(istence o/ a range o/ -er% di//erent, %et
su)ordinate /eatures4
Consider, /or e(am&le, t#e &ower/ul alternati-e &osition t#at &ostmodernism is itsel/ little more t#an one more stage o/ modernism &ro&er @i/ not, indeed, o/ t#e e-en older
romanticismAN it ma% indeed )e conceded t#at all o/ t#e /eatures o/ &ostmodernism ; am a)out to enumerate can )e detected, /ull-)lown, in t#is or t#at &receding modernism
@including suc# astonis#ing genealogical &recursors as 2ertrude Stein, Ra%mond Roussel, or Marcel Duc#am&, w#o ma% )e considered outrig#t &ostmodernists, a.ant 'a
lettre?. .#at #as not )een ta!en into account )% t#is -iew is, #owe-er, t#e social &osition o/ t#e older modernism, or )etter still, its &assionate re&udiation )% an older
Jictorian and &ost-Jictorian )ourgeoisie, /or w#om its /orms and et#os are recei-ed as )eing -ariousl% ugl%, dissonant, o)scure, scandalous, immoral, su)-ersi-e and
generall% Fanti-social04 ;t will )e argued #ere
<$
t#at a mutation in t#e s&#ere o/ culture #as rendered suc# attitudes arc#aic4 ot onl% are Picasso and 3o%ce no longer ugl%N t#e% now stri!e us, on t#e w#ole, as rat#er Frealistic0N and t#is is t#e
result o/ canoniGation and an academic institutionaliGation o/ t#e modern mo-ement generall%, w#ic# can )e traced to t#e late *+>9s4 T#is is indeed surel% one o/ t#e most
&lausi)le e(&lanations /or t#e emergence o/ &ostmodernism itsel/, since t#e %ounger generation o/ t#e l
+
?9s will now con/ront t#e /ormerl% o&&ositional modern mo-ement as
a set o/ dead classics, w#ic# Fweig# li!e a nig#tmare O/l t#e )rains o/ t#e li-ing0, as Mar( once said in a di//erent conte(t4
As /or t#e &ostmodern re-olt against all t#at, #owe-er, it must eKuall% )e stressed t#at its own o//ensi-e /eatures H /rom o)scurit% and se(uall% e(&licit material to
&s%c#ological sKualor and o-ert e(&ressions o/ social and &olitical de/iance, w#ic# transcend an%t#ing t#at mig#t #a-e )een imagined at t#e most e(treme moments o/ #ig#
modernism H no longer scandaliGe an%one and are not onl% recei-ed wit# t#e greatest com&lacenc% )ut #a-e t#emsel-es )ecome institutionaliGed and are at one wit# t#e
o//icial culture o/ .estern societ%4
.#at #as #a&&ened is t#at aest#etic &roduction toda% #as )ecome integrated into commodit% &roduction generall%6 t#e /rantic economic urgenc% o/ &roducing /res# wa-es
o/ e-er more no-el-seeming goods @/rom clot#ing to air&lanesA, at e-er greater rates o/ turno-er, now assigns an increasingl% essential structural /unction and &osition to
aest#etic inno-ation and e(&erimentation4 Suc# economic necessities t#en /ind recognition in t#e institutional su&&ort o/ all !inds a-aila)le /or t#e newer art, /rom
/oundations and grants to museums and ot#er /orms o/ &atronage4 Arc#itecture is, #owe-er, o/ all t#e arts t#at closest constituti-el% to t#e economic, wit# w#ic#, in t#e /orm
o/ commissions and land -alues, it #as a -irtuall% unmediated relations#i&6 it will t#ere/ore not )e sur&rising to /ind t#e e(traordinar% /lowering o/ t#e new &ostmodern
arc#itecture grounded in t#e &atronage o/ multinational )usiness, w#ose e(&ansion and de-elo&ment is strictl% COntem&oraneous wit# it4 T#at t#ese two new &#enomena
#a-e an e-en dee&er dialectical interrelations#i& t#an t#e sim&le one-to-one /inancing o/ t#is or t#at indi-idual &roIect we will tr% to suggest later on4 Yet t#is is t#e &oint at
w#ic# we must remind t#e reader o/ t#e o)-ious, namel% t#at t#is w#ole glo)al, %et American, Postmodern culture is t#e internal and su&erstructural e(&ression o/ a w#ole
new .a-e o/ American militar% and economic domination t#roug#out t#e world6 in t#is Sense, as t#roug#out class #istor%, t#e underside o/ culture is )lood, torture, deat#
and #orror4
T#e /irst &oint to )e made a)out t#e conce&tion o/ &eriodiGation in dominance, t#ere/ore, is t#at e-en i/ all t#e constituti-e /eatures o/ &ostmodernism were identical and
continuous wit# t#ose o/ an older modernism H a &osition ; /eel to )e demonstra)l% erroneous )ut w#ic# onl% an e-en lengt#ier anal%sis o/ modernism &ro&er could dis&el H
t#e two &#enomena would still remain utterl% distinct in t#eir meaning and social /unction, owing to t#e -er% di//erent &ositioning o/ POstmociernism in t#e economic s%stem
o/ late ca&ital, and )e%ond t#at, to t#e
E/ormation o/ t#e -er% s&#ere o/ culture in contem&orar% societ%4
Fredric Ja#eson &ostmodernism
Fredric %a#eson &ostmodernism <=
<<
More on t#is &oint at t#e conclusion o/ t#e &resent essa%4 ; must now )rie/l% address a di//erent !ind o/ o)Iection to &eriodiGation, a di//erent !ind o/ concern a)out its
&ossi)le o)literation o/ #eterogeneit%, w#ic# one /inds most o/ten on t#e Le/t4 And it is certain t#at t#ere is a strange Kuasi-Sartrean iron% H a Fwinner loses0 logic H w#ic# tends
to surround an% e//ort to descri)e a Fs%stem0, a totaliGing d%namic, as t#ese are detected in t#e mo-ement o/ contem&orar% societ%4 .#at #a&&ens is t#at t#e more &ower/ul t#e -ision
o/ some increasingl% total s%stem or logic H t#e $oucault o/ t#e &risons )oo! is t#e o)-ious e(am&le H t#e more &owerless t#e reader comes to /eel4 ;nso/ar as t#e t#eorist wins, t#ere/ore, )%
constructing an increasingl% closed and terri/%ing mac#ine, to t#at -er% degree #e loses, since t#e critical ca&acit% o/ #is wor! is t#ere)% &aral%sed, and t#e im&ulses o/ negation and re-olt, not
to s&ea! o/ t#ose o/ social trans/ormation, are increasingl% &ercei-ed as -ain and tri-ial in t#e /ace o/ t#e model itsel/4
; #a-e /elt, #owe-er, t#at it was onl% in t#e lig#t o/ some conce&tion o/ a dominant cultural logic or #egemonic norm t#at genuine di//erence could )e measured and assessed4 ; am -er% /ar /rom
/eeling t#at all cultural &roduction toda% is F&ostmodern0 in t#e )road sense ; will )e con/erring on t#is term4 T#e &ostmodern is, #owe-er, t#e /orce /ield in w#ic# -er% di//erent !inds o/ cultural
im&ulses H w#at Ra%mond .illiams #as use/ull% termed Fresidual0 and Femergent0 /orms o/ cultural &roduction H must ma!e t#eir wa%4 ;/ we do not ac#ie-e some general sense o/ a cultural
dominant, t#en we /all )ac! into a -iew o/ &resent #istor% as s#eer #eterogeneit%, random di//erence, a coe(istence o/ a #ost o/ distinct /orces w#ose e//ecti-it% is undecida)le4 T#is #as )een
at an% rate t#e &olitical s&irit in w#ic# t#e /ollowing anal%sis was de-ised6 to &roIect some conce&tion o/ a new s%stemic cultural norm and its re&roduction, in order to re/lect more adeKuatel%
on t#e most e//ecti-e /orms o/ an% radical cultural &olitics toda%4
V4 4
I T/e Deconstr,ction o? E20ression
G&easant -hoes1
.e will )egin wit# one o/ t#e canonical wor!s o/ #ig# modernism in -isual art, Jan 2og#0s well-!nown &ainting o/ t#e &easant s#oes, an e(am&le w#ic#, as %ou can imagine, #as not )een
innocentl% or randoml% c#osen4 ; want to &ro&ose two wa%s o/ reading t#is &ainting, )ot# o/ w#ic# in some /as#ion reconstruct t#e rece&tion o/ t#e wor! in a two-stage or dou)le-le-el &rocess4
; /irst want to suggest t#at i/ t#is co&iousl% re&roduced image is not to sin! to t#e le-el o/ s#eer decoration, it reKuires us to reconstruct some initial situation out o/ w#ic# t#e /inis#ed wor!
emerges4 8nless t#at situation H w#ic# #as -anis#ed into t#e &ast H is some#ow mentall% restored, t#e &ainting will n,Liain an inert o)Iect,
a rei/ied end-&roduct, and )e una)le to )e gras&ed as a s%m)olic act in its own rig#t, as &ra(is and as &roduction4
T#is last term suggests t#at one wa% o/ reconstructing t#e initial situation to w#ic# t#e wor! is some#ow a res&onse is )% stressing t#e raw materials, t#e initial content, w#ic# it con/ronts and
w#ic# it rewor!s, trans/orms, and a&&ro&riates4 ;n Jan 2og#, t#at content, t#ose initial raw materials, are, ; will Suggest, to )e gras&ed sim&l% as t#e w#ole o)Iect world o/ agricultural miser%,
o/ star! rural &o-ert%, and t#e w#ole rudimentar% #uman world o/ )ac!)rea!ing &easant toil, a world reduced to its most )rutal and menaced, &rimiti-e and marginaliGed state4
$ruit trees in t#is world are ancient and e(#austed stic!s coming out o/ &oor soilN t#e &eo&le o/ t#e -illage are worn down to t#eir s!ulls, caricatures o/ some ultimate grotesKue
t%&olog% o/ )asic #uman /eature t%&es4 How is it, t#en, t#at in Jan 2og# suc# t#ings as a&&le trees e(&lode into a #allucinator% sur/ace o/ colour, w#ile #is -illage stereot%&es are suddenl% and
garis#l% o-erlaid wit# #ues o/ red and greenD ; will )rie/l% suggest, in t#is /irst inter&retati-e o&inion, t#at t#e willed and -iolent trans/ormation o/ a dra) &easant o)Iect world into t#e
most glorious materialiGation o/ &ure colour in oil &aint is to )e seen as a 8to&ian gesture6 as an act o/ com&ensation w#ic# ends u& &roducing a w#ole new 8to&ian realm o/ t#e senses, or
at least o/ t#at su&reme sense H sig#t, t#e -isual, t#e e%e H w#ic# it now reconstitutes /or us as a semi-autonomous s&ace in its own rig#t H &art o/ some new di-ision o/ la)our in t#e )od% o/
ca&ital, some new /ragmentation o/ t#e emergent sensorium w#ic# re&licates t#e s&ecialiGations and di-isions o/ ca&italist li/e at t#e same time t#at it see!s in &recisel% suc#
/ragmentation a des&erate 8to&ian com&ensation /or t#em4
T#ere is, to )e sure, a second reading o/ Jan 2og# w#ic# can #ardl% )e ignored w#en we gaGe at t#is &articular &ainting, and t#at is Heidegger0s central anal%sis in <er
0rsprun% des Lunstwerkes5 w#ic# is organiGed around t#e idea t#at t#e wor! o/ art emerges wit#in t#e ga& )etween Eart# and .orld, or w#at ; would &re/er to translate as t#e
meaningless materialit% o/ t#e )od% and nature and t#e meaning-endowment o/ #istor% and o/ t#e social4 .e will return to t#at &articular ga& or ri/t later onN su//ice it #ere to
recall some o/ t#e /amous &#rases, w#ic# model t#e &rocess w#ere)% t#ese #ence/ort# illustrious &easant s#oes slowl% re-create a)out t#emsel-es t#e w#ole missing o)Iect
world w#ic# was once t#eir li-ed conte(t4 F;n t#em,0 sa%s lO;eidegger, Ft#ere -i)rates t#e silent call o/ t#e eart#, its Kuiet gi/t o/ ri&ening corn and its enigmatic sel/-re/usal in
t#e /allow desolation o/ t#e wintr% /ield40 FT#is eKui&ment,0 #e goes on, F)elongs to t#e earth and it is &rotected in t#e world o/ t#e Peasant woman 444 Jan 2og#0s &ainting is t#e
disclosure o/ w#at t#e eKui&ment, t#e Pair o/ &easant s#oes, is in trut#4 444 T#is entit% emerges into t#e unconcealment o/ its )eing0, )% wa% o/ t#e mediation o/ t#e wor! o/ art,
w#ic# draws t#e w#ole a)sent .orld and eart# into re-elation around itsel/, along wit# t#e #ea-% tread o/ t#e Peasant woman, t#e loneliness o/ t#e /ield &at#, t#e #ut in t#e
clearing, t#e worn and )ro!en instruments o/ la)our in t#e /urrows and at t#e #eart#4 Heidegger0s account needs to )e com&leted )% insistence on t#e renewed materialit% o/
t#e wor!,
t#e trans/ormation o/ one /orm o/ materialit% H t#e eart# itsel/ and its &at#s and
<@ Fredric Ja#eson &ostmodernism
&#%sical o)Iects Hinto t#at ot#er materialit% o/ oil &aint a//irmed and /oregrounded in its own rig#t and /or its own -isual &leasuresN )ut #as none t#e less a satis/%ing &lausi)ilit%4
G<iamond <ust -hoes1
At an% rate, )ot# o/ t#ese readings ma% )e descri)ed as hermeneutical5 in t#e sense in w#ic# t#e wor!, in its inert, o)Iectal /orm, is ta!en as a clue or a s%m&tom /or some -aster realit% w#ic#
re&laces it as its ultimate trut#4 ow we need to loo! at some s#oes o/ a di//erent !ind, and it is &leasant to )e a)le to draw /or suc# an image on t#e recent wor! o/ t#e central /igure in
contem&orar% -isual art4 And% .ar#ol0s FDiamond Dust S#oes0 e-identl% no longer s&ea!s to us wit# an% o/ t#e immediac% o/ Jan 2og#0s /ootgear6 indeed, ; am tem&ted to sa% t#at it does not
reall% s&ea! to us at all4 ot#ing in t#is &ainting organiGes e-en a minimal &lace /or t#e -iewer, w#o con/ronts it at t#e turning o/ a museum corridor or galler% wit# all t#e
contingenc% o/ some ine(&lica)le natural o)Iect4 On t#e le-el o/ t#e content, we #a-e to do wit# w#at are now /ar more clearl% /etis#es, )ot# in t#e $reudian and in t#e
Mar(ian sense @Derrida remar!s, somew#ere, a)out t#e Heideggerian &aar Kauernschuhe5 t#at t#e Jan 2og# /ootgear are a #eterose(ual &air, w#ic# allows neit#er /or &er-ersion
nor /or /etis#iGationA4 Here, #owe-er, we #a-e a random collection o/ dead o)Iects, #anging toget#er on t#e can-as li!e so man% turni&s, as s#own o/ t#eir earlier li/e-world as t#e &ile o/ s#oes
le/t o-er /rom Ausc#witG, or t#e remainders and to!ens o/ some incom&re#ensi)le and tragic /ire in a &ac!ed dance #all4 T#ere is t#ere/ore in .ar#ol no wa% to com&lete t#e
#ermeneutic gesture, and to restore to t#ese oddments t#at w#ole larger li-ed conte(t o/ t#e dance #all or t#e )all, t#e world o/ Ietset /as#ion or o/ glamour magaGines4 Yet t#is is e-en more
&arado(ical in t#e lig#t o/ )iogra&#ical in/ormation4 .ar#ol )egan #is artistic career as a commercial illustrator /or s#oe /as#ions and a designer o/ dis&la% windows in w#ic# -arious &um&s and
sli&&ers /igured &rominentl%4 ;ndeed, one is tem&ted to raise #ere H /ar too &rematurel% H one o/ t#e central issues a)out &ostmodernism itsel/ and its &ossi)le &olitical dimensions6 And%
.ar#ol0s wor! in /act turns centrall% around commodi/ication, and t#e great )ill)oard images o/ t#e Coca-Cola )ottle or t#e Cam&)ell0s Sou& Can, w#ic# e(&licitl% /oreground t#e
commodit% /etis#ism o/ a transition to late ca&ital, ou%ht to )e &ower/ul and critical &olitical statements4 ;/ t#e% are not t#at, t#en one would surel% want to !now w#%, and one would want to
)egin to wonder a little more seriousl% a)out t#e &ossi)ilities o/ &olitical or critical art in t#e &ostmodern &eriod o/ late ca&ital4
1ut t#ere are some ot#er signi/icant di//erences )etween t#e #ig#-modernist and t#e &ostmodernist moment, )etween t#e s#oes o/ Jan 2og# and t#e s#oes o/ And% .ar#ol, on
w#ic# we must now -er% )rie/l% dwell4 T#e /irst and most e-ident is t#e emergence o/ a new !ind o/ /latness or de&t#lessness, a new !ind o/ su&er/iciKlit% in t#e most literal
sense H&er#a&s t#e su&reme /ormal tcature o/ all t#e
<B
Oostmodernisms to w#ic# we will #a-e occasion to return in a num)er o/ ot#er
conte(ts4
T#en we must surel% come to terms wit# t#e role o/ &#otogra&#% and t#e &#otogra&#ic:negati-e in contem&orar% art o/ t#is !ind6 and it is t#is indeed w#ic# con/ers its deat#l% Kualit% on t#e
.ar#ol image, w#ose glaced B-ra% elegance morti/ies t#e rei/ied e%e o/ t#e -iewer in a wa% t#at would seem to #a-e not#ing to do wit# deat# or t#e deat# o)session or t#e deat# an(iet% on t#e
le-el o/ content4 ;t is indeed as t#oug# we #ad #ere to do wit# t#e in-ersion o/ Jan 2og#0s 8to&ian gesture6 in t#e earlier wor!, a stric!en world is )% some ietGsc#ean /iat and act o/ t#e will
trans/ormed into t#e stridenc% o/ 8to&ian colour4 Here, on t#e contrar%, it is as t#oug# t#e e(ternal and coloured sur/ace o/ t#ings H de)ased and contaminated in ad-ance )% t#eir assimilation to
gloss% ad-ertising images H #as )een stri&&ed awa% to re-eal t#e deat#l% )lac!-and-w#ite su)stratum o/ t#e &#otogra&#ic negati-e w#ic# su)tends t#em4 Alt#oug# t#is !ind o/ deat# o/
t#e world o/ a&&earance )ecomes t#ematiGed in certain o/ .ar#ol0s &ieces H most nota)l%, t#e tra//ic accidents or t#e electric c#air series H t#is is not, ; t#in!, a matter o/ content
an% longer )ut o/ some more /undamental mutation )ot# in t#e o)Iect world itsel/ H now )ecome a set o/ te(ts or simulacra H and in t#e dis&osition o/ t#e su)Iect4
,he Wanin% of Affect
All o/ w#ic# )rings me to t#e t#ird /eature ; #ad in mind to de-elo& #ere )rie/l%, namel% w#at ; will call t#e waning o/ a//ect in &ostmodern culture4 O/ course, it would )e inaccurate to
suggest t#at all a//ect, all /eeling or emotion, all su)Iecti-it%, #as -anis#ed /rom t#e newer image4 ;ndeed, t#ere is a !ind o/ return o/ t#e re&ressed in FDiamond Dust S#oes0, a
strange com&ensator% decorati-e e(#ilaration, e(&licitl% designated )% t#e title itsel/ alt#oug# &er#a&s more di//icult to o)ser-e in t#e re&roduction4 T#is is t#e glitter o/ gold dust, t#e
s&angling o/ gilt sand, w#ic# seals t#e sur/ace o/ t#e &ainting and %et continues to glint at us4 T#in!, #owe-er, o/ Rim)aud0s magical /lowers Ft#at loo! )ac! at %ou0, or o/ t#e august
&remonitor% e%e-/las#es o/ Ril!e0s arc#aic 2ree! torso w#ic# warn t#e )ourgeois su)Iect to c#ange #is li/e6 not#ing o/ t#at sort #ere, in t#e gratuitous /ri-olit% o/ t#is /inal decorati-e
o-erla%4
T#e waning o/ a//ect is, #owe-er, &er#a&s )est initiall% a&&roac#ed )% wa% o/ t#e #uman /igure, and it is o)-ious t#at w#at we #a-e said a)out t#e commodi/ication o/ o)Iects #olds as
strongl% /or .ar#ol0s #uman su)Iects, stars H li!e Maril%n Monroe H w#o are t#emsel-es commodi/ied and trans/ormed into t#eir own images4
And #ere too a certain )rutal return to t#e older &eriod o/ #ig# modernism o//ers a dramatic s#ort#and &ara)le o/ t#e trans/ormation in Kuestion4 Ed-ard Munc#0s
Painting FT#e Scream0 is o/ course a canonical e(&ression o/ t#e great modernist t#ematic> o/ alienation, anomie, solitude and social /ragmentation and isolation, a Jirtuall% &rogrammatic
em)lem o/ w#at used to )e called t#e age o/ an(iet%4 ;t will Cre )e read not merel% as an em)odiment o/ t#e e(&ression o/ t#at !ind o/ a//ect,
&us tmode rn isn 8 =1
=9 Fredric Ja#eson
)ut e-en more as a -irtual deconstruction o/ t#e -er% aest#etic o/ e(&ression itsel/, w#ic# seems to #a-e dominated muc# o/ w#at we call #ig# modernism, )ut to #a-e -anis#ed awa% H
/or )ot# &ractical and t#eoretical reasons H in t#e world o/ t#e &ostmodern4 T#e -er% conce&t o/ e(&ression &resu&&oses indeed some se&aration wit#in t#e su)Iect, and along wit# t#at a w#ole
meta&#%sics o/ t#e inside and t#e outside, o/ t#e wordless &ain wit#in t#e monad and t#e moment in w#ic#, o/ten cart#articall%, t#at Femotion0 is t#en &roIected out and e(ternaliGed, as gesture
or cr%, as des&erate communication and t#e outward dramatiGation o/ inward /eeling4 And t#is is &er#a&s t#e moment to sa% somet#ing a)out contem&orar% t#eor%, w#ic# #as among ot#er t#ings
)een committed to t#e mission o/ criticiGing and discrediting t#is -er% #ermeneutic model o/ t#e inside and t#e outside and o/ stigmatiGing suc# models as ideological and meta&#%sical4 1ut
w#at is toda% called contem&orar% t#eor% H or, )etter still, t#eoretical discourse H is also, ; would want to argue, itsel/ -er% &recisel% a &ostmodernist &#enomenon4 ;t would t#ere/ore )e
inconsistent to de/end t#e trut# o/ its t#eoretical insig#ts in a situation in w#ic# t#e -er% conce&t o/ Ftrut#0 itsel/ is &art o/ t#e meta&#%sical )aggage w#ic# &oststructuralism see!s to a)andon4
.#at we can at least suggest is t#at t#e &oststructuralist critiKue o/ t#e #ermeneutic, o/ w#at ; will s#ortl% call t#e de&t# model, is use/ul /or us as a -er% signi/icant s%m&tom o/ t#e -er%
&ostmodernist culture w#ic# is our su)Iect #ere4
O-er#astil%, we can sa% t#at )esides t#e #ermeneutic model o/ inside and outside w#ic# Munc#0s &ainting de-elo&s, t#ere are at least /our ot#er /undamental de&t# models w#ic#
#a-e generall% )een re&udiated in contem&orar% t#eor%6 t#e dialectical one o/ essence and a&&earance @along wit# a w#ole range o/ conce&ts o/ ideolog% or /alse
consciousness w#ic# tend to accom&an% itAN t#e $reudian model o/ latent and mani/est, or o/ re&ression @w#ic# is o/ course t#e target o/ Mic#el $oucault0s &rogrammatic and
s%m&tomatic &am&#let 6a Volont; de sa.oir?B t#e e(istential model o/ aut#enticit% and inaut#enticit%, w#ose #eroic or tragic t#ematics are closel% related to t#at o/ t#e great o&&osition
)etween alienation and disalienation, itsel/ eKuall% a casualt% o/ t#e &oststructural or &ostmodern &eriodN and /inall%, latest in time, t#e great semiotic o&&osition )etween signi/ier and signi/ied,
w#ic# was itsel/ ra&idl% unra-elled and deconstructed during its )rie/ #e%da% in t#e *+?9s and *+<9s4 .#at re&laces t#ese -arious de&t# models is /or t#e most &art a conce&tion o/ &ractices,
discourses and te(tual &la%, w#ose new s%ntagmatic structures we will e(amine later on6 su//ice it merel% to o)ser-e t#at #ere too de&t# is re&laced )% sur/ace, or )% multi&le sur/aces @w#at is
o/ten called interte(tualit% is in t#at sense no longer a matter o/ de&t#A4
or is t#is de&t#lessness merel% meta&#orical6 it can )e e(&erienced &#%sicall% and literall% )% an%one w#o, mounting w#at used to )e Ra%mond C#andler0s 1eacon Hill /rom t#e great
C#icano mar!ets on 1roadwa% and =t# Street in downtown Los Angeles, suddenl% con/ronts t#e great /ree-standing wall o/ t#e Croc!er 1an! Center @S!idmore, Owings and MerrillA H a sur/ace
w#ic# seems to )e unsu&&orted )% an% -olume, or w#ose &utati-e -olume @rectangtllar, tra&eGoidalDA is ocularl% Kuite undecida)le4 T#is great s#eet 8t windows, wit# its
gra-it%-de/%ing two-dimensionalit%, momentaril% trans/orms t#e solid ground on w#ic# we clim) into t#e contents o/ a Steteo&ticon, &aste)oard s#a&es &ro/iling t#emSel-es #ere and
t#ere around us4 $rom all sides, t#e -isual e//ect is t#e same6 as /ate/ul as t#e great monolit# in 'u)ric!0s "001 w#ic# con/ronts its -iewers li!e an enigmatic destin%, a call to e-olutionar%
mutation4 ;/ t#is ne(- multinational downtown @to w#ic# we will return later in anot#er conte(tA e//ecti-el% a)olis#ed t#e older ruined cit% /a)ric w#ic# it -iolentl% re&laced, cannot somet#ing
similar #e said a)out t#e wa% in w#ic# t#is strange new sur/ace, in its own &erem&tor% wa%, renders our older s%stems o/ &erce&tion o/ t#e cit% some#ow arc#aic and aimless, wit#out
o//ering anot#er in t#eir &laceD
:uphoria and -elf-annihilation
Returning now /or one last moment to Munc#0s &ainting, it seems e-ident t#at FT#e Scream0 su)tl% )ut ela)oratel% deconstructs its own aest#etic o/ e(&ression, all t#e w#ile remaining
im&risoned wit#in it4 ;ts gestural content alread% underscores its own /ailure, since t#e realm o/ t#e sonorous, t#e cr%, t#e raw -i)rations o/ t#e #uman t#roat, are incom&ati)le wit# its
medium @somet#ing underscored wit#in t#e wor! )% t#e #omunculus0s lac! o/ earsA4 Yet t#e a)sent scream returns more closel% towards t#at e-en more a)sent e(&erience o/
atrocious solitude and an(iet% w#ic# t#e scream was itsel/ to Fe(&ress04 Suc# loo&s inscri)e t#emsel-es on t#e &ainted sur/ace in t#e /orm o/ t#ose great concentric circles in w#ic# sonorous
-i)ration )ecomes ultimatel% -isi)le, as on t#e sur/ace o/ a s#eet o/ water H in an in/inite regress w#ic# /ans out /rom t#e su//erer to )ecome t#e -er% geogra&#% o/ a uni-erse in w#ic# &ain
itsel/ now s&ea!s and -i)rates t#roug# t#e material sunset and t#e landsca&e4 T#e -isi)le world now )ecomes t#e wall o/ t#e monad on w#ic# t#is scream running t#roug# nature0 @Munc#0s
wordsA is recorded and transcri)ed6 one t#in!s o/ t#at c#aracter o/ LautrLamont w#o, growing u& inside a sealed and silent mem)rane, on sig#t o/ t#e monstrousness o/ t#e deit%, ru&tures it
wit# #is own scream and t#ere)% reIoins t#e world o/ sound and su//ering4
All o/ w#ic# suggests some more general #istorical #%&ot#esis6 namel%, t#at conce&ts suc# as an(iet% and alienation @and t#e e(&eriences to w#ic# t#e% COrres&ond, as in FT#e Scream0A are
no longer a&&ro&riate in t#e world o/ t#e Postmodern T#e great .ar#ol /igures H Maril%n #ersel/, or Edie Sedgwic! H t#e notorious )urn-out and sel/-destruction cases o/ t#e euding *+?9s and
t#e great dominant e(&eriences o/ drugs and sc#iGo&#renia H t#ese would seem to #a-e little enoug# in common an% more, eit#er wit# t#e #%sterics and neurotics o/ $reud0s own da%,
or wit# t#ose canonical e(&eriences o/ radical isolation and solitude, anomie, &ri-ate re-olt, Jan 2og#-t%&e madness, w#ic# dominated t#e &eriod o/ #ig# modernism T#is s#i/t in t#e
d%namics o/ culture &at#olog% can )e c#aracteriGed as One in w#ic# t#e alienation o/ t#e su)Iect is dis&laced )% t#e /ragmentation o/ t#e su)Iect4
Suc# terms ine-ita)l% recall one o/ t#e more /as#iona)le t#emes in contem&orar% t#eor% H t#at o/ t#e Fdeat#0 o/ t#e su)Iect itsel/ t#e end o/ t#e autonomous
&us tmodernism
=2 Fredric Ja#eson
)ourgeois monad or ego or indi-idual H and t#e accom&an%ing stress, w#et#er as some new moral ideal or as em&irical descri&tion, on t#e decentrin% o/ t#at /ormerl% centred
su)Iect or &s%c#e4 @O/ t#e two &ossi)le /ormulations o/ t#is notion H t#e #istoricist one, t#at a once-e(isting centred su)Iect, in t#e &eriod o/ classical ca&italism and t#e
nuclear /amil%, #as toda% in t#e world o/ organiGational )ureaucrac% dissol-edN and t#e more radical &oststructuralist &osition /or w#ic# suc# a su)Iect ne-er e(isted in t#e
/irst &lace )ut constituted somet#ing li!e an ideological mirage H ; o)-iousl% incline towards t#e /ormerN t#e latter must in an% case ta!e into account somet#ing li!e a Frealit%
o/ t#e a&&earance04A
.e must add t#at t#e &ro)lem o/ e(&ression is itsel/ closel% lin!ed to some conce&tion o/ t#e su)Iect as a monad-li!e container, wit#in w#ic# t#ings are /elt w#ic# are t#en
e(&ressed )% &roIection outwards4 .#at we must now stress, #owe-er, is t#e degree to w#ic# t#e #ig#-modernist conce&tion o/ a uniKue style5 along wit# t#e accom&an%ing
collecti-e ideals o/ an artistic or &olitical -anguard or a.ant-%arde5 t#emsel-es stand or /all along wit# t#at older notion @or e(&erienceA o/ t#e so-called centred su)Iect4
Here too Munc#0s &ainting stands as a com&le( re/le(ion on t#is com&licated situation6 it s#ows us t#at e(&ression reKuires t#e categor% o/ t#e indi-idual monad, )ut it also
s#ows us t#e #ea-% &rice to )e &aid /or t#at &recondition, dramatiGing t#e un#a&&% &arado( t#at w#en %ou constitute %our indi-idual su)Iecti-it% as a sel/-su//icient /ield and
a closed realm in its own rig#t, %ou t#ere)% also s#ut %oursel/ o// /rom e-er%t#ing else and condemn %oursel/ to t#e windless solitude o/ t#e monad, )uried ali-e and
condemned to a &rison-cell wit#out egress4
Postmodernism will &resuma)l% signal t#e end o/ t#is dilemma, w#ic# it re&laces wit# a new one4 T#e end o/ t#e )ourgeois ego or monad no dou)t )rings wit# it t#e end o/
t#e &s%c#o&at#ologies o/ t#at ego as well H w#at ; #a-e generall% #ere )een calling t#e waning o/ a//ect4 1ut it means t#e end o/ muc# more H t#e end, /or e(am&le, o/ st%le, in
t#e sense o/ t#e uniKue and t#e &ersonal, t#e end o/ t#e distincti-e indi-idual )rus#stro!e @as s%m)oliGed )% t#e emergent &rimac% o/ mec#anical re&roductionA4 As /or
e(&ression and /eelings or emotions, t#e li)eration, in contem&orar% societ%, /rom t#e older anomie o/ t#e centred su)Iect ma% also mean, not merel% a li)eration /rom an(iet%,
)ut a li)eration /rom e-er% ot#er !ind o/ /eeling as well, since t#ere is no longer a sel/ &resent to do t#e /eeling4 T#is is not to sa% t#at t#e cultural &roducts o/ t#e &ostmodern
era are utterl% de-oid o/ /eeling, )ut rat#er t#at suc# /eelings H w#ic# it ma% )e )etter and more accurate to call Fintensities0 H are now /ree-/loating and im&ersonal, and tend to
)e dominated )% a &eculiar !ind o/ eu&#oria to w#ic# ; will want to return at t#e end o/ t#is essa%4
T#e waning o/ a//ect, #owe-er, mig#t also #a-e )een c#aracteriGed, in t#e narrower conte(t o/ literar% criticism, as t#e waning o/ t#e great #ig#-modernist t#ematics o/
time and tem&oralit%, t#e elegiac m%steries o/ dur;e and o/ memor% @somet#ing to )e understood /ull% as a categor% o/ literar% criticism associated as muc# wit# #ig#
modernism as wit# t#e wor!s t#emsel-esA4 .e #a-e o/ten )een told, #owe-er, t#at we now in#a)it t#e s%nc#ronic rat#er t#an t#e diOclironic, and03 t#in! it is at least
em&iricall% argua)le t#at our dail% li/e, our r O4%0c#ic e(&erience, our
cultural languages, are toda% dominated )% categories o/ s&ace rat#er t#an )% categories o/ time, as in t#e &receding &eriod o/ #ig# modernism &ro&er4
2 T/e Post#odern and t/e Past
&astiche :clipses &arody
T#e disa&&earance o/ t#e indi-idual su)Iect, along wit# its /ormal conseKuence, t#e increasing una-aila)ilit% o/ t#e &ersonal style5 engender t#e well-nig# uni-ersal &ractice
toda% o/ w#at ma% )e called &astic#e4 T#is conce&t, w#ic# we owe to T#omas Mann @in <oktor $austus?5 w#o owed it in turn to Adorno0s great wor! on t#e two &at#s o/
ad-anced musical e(&erimentation @Sc#oen)erg0s inno-ati-e &lani/ication, Stra-ins!%0s irrational eclecticismA, is to )e s#ar&l% distinguis#ed /rom t#e more readil% recei-ed
idea o/ &arod%4
T#is last /ound, to )e sure, a /ertile area in t#e idios%ncrasies o/ t#e moderns and t#eir Finimita)le0 st%les6 t#e $aul!nerian long sentence wit# its )reat#less gerundi-es,
Lawrentian nature imager% &unctuated )% test% colloKuialism, .allace Ste-ens0s in-eterate #%&ostasis o/ non-su)stanti-e &arts o/ s&eec# @Ft#e intricate e-asions o/ as0A, t#e
/ate/ul, )ut /inall% &redicta)le, swoo&s in Ma#ler /rom #ig# orc#estral &at#os into -illage accordion sentiment, Heidegger0s meditati-e-solemn &ractice o/ t#e /alse et%molog%
as a mode o/ F&roo/04 444 All t#ese stri!e one as some#ow Fc#aracteristic0, inso/ar as t#e% ostentatiousl% de-iate /rom a norm w#ic# t#en reasserts itsel/, in a not necessaril%
un/riendl% wa%, )% a s%stematic mimicr% o/ t#eir deli)erate eccentricities4
Yet, in t#e dialectical lea& /rom Kuantit% to Kualit%, t#e e(&losion o/ modern literature into a #ost o/ distinct &ri-ate st%les and mannerisms #as )een /ollowed )% a linguistic
/ragmentation o/ social li/e itsel/ to t#e &oint w#ere t#e norm itsel/ is ecli&sed6 reduced to a neutral and rei/ied media s&eec# @/ar enoug# /rom t#e 8to&ian as&irations o/ t#e
in-entors o/ Es&eranto or 1asic Englis#A, w#ic# itsel/ t#en )ecomes )ut one more idiolect among man%4 Modernist st%les t#ere)% )ecome Postmodernist codes6 and t#at t#e
stu&endous &roli/eration o/ social codes toda% i/ltoOro/essional and disci&linar% Iargons, )ut also into t#e )adges o/ a//irmation o/ et#nic, gender, race, religious, and class-
/raction ad#esion, is also a &olitical P#enomenon, t#e &ro)lem o/ micro&olitics su//icientl% demonstrates4 ;/ t#e ideas o/ a ruling class were once t#e dominant @or #egemonicA
ideolog% o/ )ourgeois societ%, t#e ad-anced ca&italist countries toda% are now a /ield o/ st%listic and discursi-e #eterogeneit% wit#out a norm4 $aceless masters continue to in/lect t#e
economic Strategies w#ic# constrain our e(istences, )ut no longer need to im&ose t#eir s&eec# @Or are #ence/ort# una)le toAN and t#e &ostliterac% o/ t#e late ca&italist world re/lects #Ot--onl%
t#e a)sence o/ an% great collecti-e &roIect, )ut also t#e una-aila)ilit% o/ t#e older national language itsel/4
;n t#is situation, &arod% /inds itsel/ wit#out a -ocationN it #as li-ed, and t#at Strange new t#ing &astic#e slowl% comes to ta!e its &lace4 Pastic#e is, li!e &arod%,
=: Fredric Ja#eson &ostmodernism =$
t#e imitation o/ a &eculiar mas!, s&eec# in a dead language6 )ut it is a neutral &ractice o/ suc# mimicr%, wit#out an% o/ &arod%0s ulterior moti-es, am&utated o/ t#e satiric
im&ulse, de-oid o/ laug#ter and o/ an% con-iction t#at alongside t#e a)normal tongue %ou #a-e momentaril% )orrowed, some #ealt#% linguistic normalit% still e(ists4
Pastic#e is t#us )lan! &arod%, a statue wit# )lind e%e)alls6 it is to &arod% w#at t#at ot#er interesting and #istoricall% original modern t#ing, t#e &ractice o/ a !ind o/ )lan!
iron%, is to w#at .a%ne 1oot# calls t#e Fsta)le ironies o/ eig#teent# centur%4
;t would t#ere/ore )egin to seem t#at Adorno0s &ro&#etic diagnosis #as )een realiGed, al)eit in a negati-e wa%6 not Sc#oen)erg @t#e sterilit% o/ w#ose ac#ie-ed s%stem #e
alread% glim&sedA )ut Stra-ins!% is t#e true &recursor o/ t#e &ostmodern cultural &roduction4 $or wit# t#e colla&se o/ t#e #ig#-modernist ideolog% o/ st%le
H w#at is as uniKue and unmista!a)le as %our own /inger&rints, as incom&ara)le as %our own )od% @t#e -er% source, /or an earl% Roland 1art#es, o/ st%listic in-ention and
inno-ationA Ht#e &roducers o/ culture #a-e now#ere to turn )ut to t#e &ast6
t#e imitation o/ dead st%les, s&eec# t#roug# all t#e mas!s and -oices stored u& in t#e imaginar% museum o/ a now glo)al culture4
G7istoricism1 :ffaces 7istory
T#is situation e-identl% determines w#at t#e arc#itecture #istorians call F#istoricism0, namel% t#e random canni)aliGation o/ all t#e st%les o/ t#e &ast, t#e &la% o/ random
st%listic allusion, and in general w#at Henri Le/e)-re #as called t#e increasing &rimac% o/ t#e Fneo04 T#is omni&resence o/ &astic#e is, #owe-er, not incom&ati)le wit# a
certain #umour @nor is it innocent o/ all &assionA or at least wit# addiction H wit# a w#ole #istoricall% original consumers0 a&&etite /or a world trans/ormed into s#eer images o/
itsel/ and /or &seudo-e-ents and Fs&ectacles0 @t#e term o/ t#e SituationistsA4 /t is /or suc# o)Iects t#at we ma% reser-e Plato0s conce&tion o/ t#e Fsimulacrum0 H t#e identical
co&% /or w#ic# no original #as e-er e(isted4 A&&ro&riatel% enoug#, t#e culture o/ t#e simulacrum comes to life in a societ% w#ere e(c#ange--alue #as )een generaliGed to t#e
&oint at w#ic# t#e -er% memor% o/ use--alue is e//aced, a societ% o/ w#ic# 2u% De)ord #as o)ser-ed, in an e(traordinar% &#rase, t#at in it Ft#e image #as )ecome t#e /inal
/orm o/ commodit% rei/ication0 @ ,he -ociety of the -pectacle?.
T#e new s&atial logic o/ t#e simulacrum can now )e e(&ected to #a-e a momentous e//ect on w#at used to )e #istorical time4
T#e &ast is t#ere)% itsel/ modi/ied6 w#at was once, in t#e #istorical no-el as Lu!Tcs de/ines it, t#e organic genealog% o/ t#e )ourgeois collecti-e &roIect H w#at is still, /or
t#e redem&ti-e #istoriogra&#% o/ an E4 P4 T#om&son or o/ American Foral #istor%0, /or t#e resurrection o/ t#e dead o/ anon%mous and silenced generations, t#e retros&ecti-e
dimension indis&ensa)le to an% -ital reorientation o/ our collecti-e /uture H #as meanw#ile itsel/ )ecome a -ast collection o/ images, a multitudinous &#otogra&#ic
simulacrum4 2u% De)ord0s &ower/ul slogan is now e-en rriOre a&t /or t#e F&re#istor%0 o/ a societ% )ere/t o/ all #istoricit%, w#ose own &utaO 4 c &ast is little
more t#an a set o/ dust% s&ectacles4 ;n /ait#/ul con/ormit% to &oststructuralist linguistic t#eor%, t#e &ast as Fre/erent0 /inds itsel/ graduall% )rac!eted, and t#en e//aced
altoget#er, lea-ing us wit# not#ing )ut te(ts4
,he Hostal%ia (ode
Yet it s#ould not )e t#oug#t t#at t#is &rocess is accom&anied )% indi//erence6 on t#e contrar%, t#e remar!a)le current intensi/ication o/ an addiction to t#e &#otogra&#ic image
is itsel/ a tangi)le s%m&tom o/ an omni&resent, omni-orous and well-nig# li)idinal #istoricism4 T#e arc#itects use t#is @e(ceedingl% &ol%semousA word /or t#e com&lacent
eclecticism o/ &ostmodern arc#itecture, w#ic# randoml% and wit#out &rinci&le )ut wit# gusto canni)aliGes all t#e arc#itectural st%les o/ t#e &ast and com)ines t#em in
o-erstimulating ensem)les4 ostalgia does not stri!e one as an altoget#er satis/actor% word /or suc# /ascination @&articularl% w#en one t#in!s o/ t#e &ain o/ a &ro&erl%
modernist nostalgia wit# a &ast )e%ond all )ut aest#etic retrie-alA, %et it directs our attention to w#at is a culturall% /ar more generaliGed mani/estation o/ t#e &rocess in
commercial art and taste, namel% t#e so-called Fnostalgia /ilm0 @or w#at t#e $renc# call Fla mode rLtro0A4
T#ese restructure t#e w#ole issue o/ &astic#e and &roIect it onto a collecti-e and social le-el, w#ere t#e des&erate attem&t to a&&ro&riate a missing &ast is now re/racted
t#roug# t#e iron law o/ /as#ion c#ange and t#e emergent ideolog% o/ t#e Fgeneration04 American /raffiti @*+<,A set out to reca&ture, as so man% /ilms #a-e attem&ted since, t#e
#ence/ort# mesmeriGing lost realit% o/ t#e Eisen#ower era6 and one tends to /eel t#at /or Americans at least, t#e *+>9s remain t#e &ri-ileged lost o)Iect o/ desire H not merel%
t#e sta)ilit% and &ros&erit% o/ a pa= Americana5 )ut also t#e /irst nai-e innocence o/ t#e countercultural im&ulses o/ earl% roc!-and-roll and %out# gangs @Co&&ola0s 4umble $ish
will t#en )e t#e contem&orar% dirge t#at laments t#eir &assing, itsel/, #owe-er, still contradictoril% /ilmed in genuine Fnostalgia /ilm0 st%leA4 .it# t#is initial )rea!t#roug#,
ot#er generational &eriods o&en u& /or aest#etic coloniGation6 as witness t#e st%listic recu&eration o/ t#e American and t#e ;talian *+,9s, in Polans!i0s )hinatown and
1ertolucci0s E' )onform ista res&ecti-el%4 .#at is more interesting, and more &ro)lematical, are t#e ultimate attem&ts, t#roug# t#is new discourse, to la% siege eit#er to our
own &resent and immediate &ast, or to a more distant #istor% t#at esca&es indi-idual e(istential memor%4
$aced wit# t#ese ultimate o)Iects H our social, #istorical and e(istential &resent, and t#e &ast as Fre/erent0 H t#e incom&ati)ilit% o/ a &ostmodernist Fnostalgia0 art language
wit# genuine #istoricit% )ecomes dramaticall% a&&arent4 T#e contradiction &ro&els t#is model, #owe-er, into com&le( and interesting new /ormal in-enti-eness6 it )eing
understood t#at t#e nostalgia /ilm was ne-er a matter o/ some old-/as#ioned Fre&resentation0 o/ #istorical content, )ut a&&roac#ed t#e F&ast0 t#roug# st%listic connotation,
con-e%ing F&astness0 )% t#e gloss% Kualities o/ t#e image, and F*+,9s-ness0 or O*+>Os-ness0 )% t#e attri)utes o/ /as#ion @t#erein /ollowing t#e &rescri&tion o/ t#e 1art#es o/
(ytholo%ies5 w#o saw connotation as
&ostmodernism ==
Fredric Ja#eson
=<
t#e &ur-e%ing of imaginar% and stereot%&ical idealities, FSmite0, /or e(am&le, as some Disne--EPCOT Fconce&t0 o/ C#inaA4
T#e insensi)le coloniGation o/ t#e &resent )% t#e nostalgia mode can )e o)ser-ed in Lawrence 'asdan0s elegant /ilm Kody 7eat5 a distant Fa//luent societ%0 rema!e o/
3ames M4 Cain0s ,he &ostman Always 4in%s ,wice5 set in a contem&orar% $lorida small town not /ar /rom Miami4 T#e word Frema!e0 is, #owe-er, anac#ronistic to t#e degree to
w#ic# our awareness o/ t#e &re-e(istence o/ ot#er -ersions, &re-ious /ilms o/ t#e no-el as well as t#e no-el itsel/, is now a constituti-e and essential &art o/ t#e /ilm0s
structure6 we are now, in ot#er words, in Finterte(tualit%0 as a deli)erate, )uilt-in /eature o/ t#e aest#etic e//ect, and as t#e o&erator o/ a new connotation o/ F&astness0 and
&seudo-#istorical de&t#, in w#ic# t#e #istor% o/ aest#etic st%les dis&laces Freal0 #istor%4
Yet /rom t#e outset a w#ole )atter% o/ aest#etic signs )egin to distance t#e o//iciall% contem&orar% image /rom us in time6 t#e Art Deco scri&ting o/ t#e credits, /or
e(am&le, ser-es at once to &rogramme t#e s&ectator /or t#e a&&ro&riate Fnostalgia0 mode o/ rece&tion @Art Deco Kuotation #as muc# t#e same /unction in contem&orar%
arc#itecture, as in Toronto0s remar!a)le Eaton CentreA4 Meanw#ile, a somew#at di//erent &la% o/ connotations is acti-ated )% com&le( @)ut &urel% /ormalA allusions to t#e
institutions o/ t#e star s%stem itsel/4 T#e &rotagonist, .illiam Hurt, is one o/ a new generation o/ /ilm Fstars0 w#ose status is mar!edl% distinct /rom t#at o/ t#e &receding
generation o/ male su&erstars, suc# as Ste-e McCueen or 3ac! ic#olson @or e-en, more distantl%, 1randoA, let alone o/ earlier moments in t#e e-olution o/ t#e institutions o/
t#e star4 T#e immediatel% &receding generation &roIected its -arious roles t#roug#, and )% wa% o/, well-!nown Fo//-screen0 &ersonalities, w#o o/ten connoted re)ellion and
non-con/ormism4 T#e latest generation o/ starring actors continues to assure t#e con-entional /unctions o/ stardom @most nota)l%, se(ualit%A )ut in t#e utter a)sence o/
F&ersonalit%0 in t#e older sense, and wit# somet#ing o/ t#e anon%mit% o/ c#aracter acting @w#ic# in actors li!e Hurt reac#es -irtuoso &ro&ortions, %et o/ a -er% di//erent !ind
/rom t#e -irtuosit% o/ t#e older 1rando or Oli-ierA4 T#is Fdeat# o/ t#e su)Iect0 in t#e institution o/ t#e star, #owe-er, o&ens u& t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a &la% o/ #istorical allusions to
muc# older roles Hin t#is case to t#ose associated wit# Clar! 2a)le Hso t#at t#e -er% st%le o/ t#e acting can now also ser-e as a Fconnotator0 o/ t#e &ast4
$inall%, t#e setting #as )een strategicall% /ramed, wit# great ingenuit%, to esc#ew most o/ t#e signals t#at normall% con-e% t#e contem&oraneit% o/ t#e 8nited States in its
multinational era6 t#e small-town setting allows t#e camera to elude t#e #ig#-rise landsca&e o/ t#e *+<9s and *+E9s @e-en t#oug# a !e% e&isode in t#e narrati-e in-ol-es t#e
/atal destruction o/ older )uildings )% land s&eculatorsAN w#ile t#e o)Iect world o/ t#e &resent-da% H arti/acts and a&&liances, e-en automo)iles, w#ose st%ling would at once
ser-e to date t#e image H is ela)oratel% edited out4 E-er%t#ing in t#e /ilm, t#ere/ore, cons&ires to )lur its o//icial contem&oraneit% and to ma!e it &ossi)le /or %ou to recei-e t#e
narrati-e as t#oug# it were set in some eternal T#irties, )e%ond real #istorical time4 T#e a&&roac# to t#e &resent )% a% o/ t#e art language o/ t#e simulacrum, or o/ t#e &astic#e
o/ t#e stereot%rail &ast, endows
&resent realit% and t#e o&enness o/ &resent #istor% wit# t#e s&ell and distance o/ a glosSY mirage4 1ut t#is mesmeriGing new aest#etic mode itsel/ emerged as an ela)orated
s%m&tom o/ t#e waning o/ our #istoricit%, o/ our li-ed &ossi)ilit% o/ e(&eriencing #istor% in some acti-e wa%6 it cannot t#ere/ore )e said to &roduce t#is strange occultation o/
t#e &resent )% its own /ormal &ower, )ut merel% to demonstrate, t#roug# t#ese inner contradictions, t#e enormit% o/ a situation in w#ic# we seem increasingl% inca&a)le o/
/as#ioning re&resentations o/ our own current e(&erience4
,he $ate of G4eal 7istory1
As /or Freal #istor%0 itsel/ H t#e traditional o)Iect, #owe-er it ma% )e de/ined, o/ w#at used to )e t#e #istorical no-el H it will )e more re-ealing now to turn )ac! to t#at older
/orm and medium and to read its &ostmodern /ate in t#e wor! o/ one o/ t#e /ew serious and inno-ati-e Le/t no-elists at wor! in t#e 8nited States toda%, w#ose )oo!s are
nouris#ed wit# #istor% in t#e more traditional sense, and seem, so /ar, to sta!e out successi-e generational moments in t#e Fe&ic0 o/ American #istor%4
E4 L4 Doctorow0s 4a%time gi-es itsel/ o//iciall% as a &anorama o/ t#e /irst two decades o/ t#e centur%N #is most recent no-el, 6oon 6ake5 addresses t#e T#irties and t#e 2reat
De&ression, w#ile ,he Kook of <aniel #olds u& )e/ore us, in &ain/ul Iu(ta&osition, t#e two great moments o/ t#e Old Le/t and t#e ew Le/t, o/ T#irties and $orties
Communism and t#e radicalism o/ t#e ; +?9s @e-en #is earl% western ma% )e said to /it into t#is sc#eme and to designate in a less articulated and /ormall% sel/-conscious wa%
t#e end o/ t#e /rontier o/ t#e late nineteent# centur%A4
,he Kook of <aniel is not t#e onl% one o/ t#ese t#ree maIor #istorical no-els to esta)lis# an e(&licit narrati-e lin! )etween t#e reader0s and t#e writer0s &resent and t#e older
#istorical realit% w#ic# is t#e su)Iect o/ t#e wor!N t#e astonis#ing last &age o/ Loon 6ake5 w#ic# ; will not disclose, also does t#is in a -er% di//erent wa%N w#ile it is a matter
o/ some interest to note t#at t#e /irst sentence o/ t#e /irst -ersion o/ 4a%time &ositions us e(&licitl% in our own &resent, in t#e no-elist0s #ouse in ew Roc#elle, ew Yor!,
w#ic# will t#en at once )ecome t#e scene o/ its own @imaginar%A &ast in t#e *+99s4 T#is detail #as )een su&&ressed /rom t#e &u)lis#ed te(t, s%m)olicall% cutting its moorings
and /reeing t#e no-el to /loat in some new world o/ &ast #istorical time w#ose relations#i& to us is &ro)lematical indeed4 T#e aut#enticit% o/ t#e gesture, #owe-er, ma% )e
measured )% t#e e-ident e(istential /act o/ li/e t#at t#ere no longer does seem to )e an% organic relations#i& )etween t#e American #istor% we learn /rom t#e sc#ool)oo!s and
t#e li-ed e(&erience o/ t#e current multinational, #ig#-rise, stag/lated cit% o/ t#e news&a&ers and o/ our own dail% li/e4
A crisis in #istoricit%, #owe-er, inscri)es itsel/ s%m&tomaticall% in se-eral ot#er curious /ormal /eatures wit#in t#is te(t4 ;ts o//icial su)Iect is t#e transition /rom a &re-
.orld-.ar ; radical and wor!ing-class &olitics @t#e great stri!esA to t#e tec#nological in-ention and new commodit% &roduction o/ t#e *+59s @t#e rise o/ Holl%wood and t#e
image as commodit%A6 t#e inter&olated -ersion o/ 'leist0s
J4
=@ Fredric Ja#eson &ostmodernism
(ichael Lohlhaas5 t#e Strange tragic e&isode o/ t#e 1lac! &rotagonist0s re-olt, ma% )e t#oug#t to )e a moment related to t#is &rocess4 M% &oint, #owe-er, is not some
#%&ot#esis as to t#e t#ematic co#erence o/ t#is decentred narrati-eN )ut rat#er Iust t#e o&&osite, namel% t#e wa% in w#ic# t#e !ind o/ reading t#is no-el im&oses ma!es it
-irtuall% im&ossi)le /or us to reac# and to t#ematiGe t#ose o//icial Fsu)Iects0 w#ic# /loat a)o-e t#e te(t )ut cannot )e integrated into our reading o/ t#e sentences4 ;n t#at
sense, not onl% does t#e no-el resist inter&retation, it is organiGed s%stematicall% and /ormall% to s#ort-circuit an older t%&e o/ social and #istorical inter&retation w#ic# it
&er&etuall% #olds out and wit#draws4 .#en we remem)er t#at t#e t#eoretical critiKue and re&udiation o/ inter&retation as suc# is a /undamental com&onent o/
&oststructuralist t#eor%, it is di//icult not to conclude t#at Doctorow #as some#ow deli)eratel% )uilt t#is -er% tension, t#is -er% contradiction, into t#e /low o/ #is sentences4
As is well !nown, t#e )oo! is crowded wit# real #istorical /igures H /rom Tedd% Roose-elt to Emma 2oldman, /rom Harr% '4 T#aw and Sand/ord .#ite to
34 Pier&ont Morgan and Henr% $ord, not to s&ea! o/ t#e more central role o/ Houdini H w#o interact wit# a /icti-e /amil%, sim&l% designated as $at#er, Mot#er, Older 1rot#er,
and so /ort#4 All #istorical no-els, )eginning wit# Scott #imsel/, no dou)t in one wa% or anot#er in-ol-e a mo)iliGation o/ &re-ious #istorical !nowledge, generall% acKuired
t#roug# t#e sc#ool)oo! #istor% manuals de-ised /or w#ate-er legitimiGing &ur&ose )% t#is or t#at national tradition H t#erea/ter instituting a narrati-e dialectic )etween w#at
we alread% F!now0 a)out T#e Pretender, sa%, and w#at #e is t#en seen to )e concretel% in t#e &ages o/ t#e no-el4 1ut Doctorow0s &rocedure seems muc# more e(treme t#an
t#isN and ; would argue t#at t#e designation o/ )ot# t%&es o/ c#aracters H #istorical names or ca&italiGed /amil% roles H o&erates &ower/ull% and s%stematicall% to rei/% all t#ese
c#aracters and to ma!e it im&ossi)le /or us to recei-e t#eir re&resentation wit#out t#e &rior interce&tion o/ alread% acKuired !nowledge or do(a H somet#ing w#ic# lends t#e
te(t an e(traordinar% sense o/ d;9Q .u and a &eculiar /amiliarit% one is tem&ted to associate wit# $reud0s Freturn o/ t#e re&ressed0 in FT#e 8ncann%0, rat#er t#an wit# an% solid
#istoriogra&#ic /ormation on t#e reader0s &art4
6oss of the 4adical &ast
Meanw#ile, t#e sentences in w#ic# all t#is is #a&&ening #a-e t#eir own s&eci/icit%, w#ic# will allow us a little more concretel% to distinguis# t#e moderns0 ela)oration o/ a
&ersonal st%le /rom t#is new !ind o/ linguistic inno-ation, w#ic# is no longer &ersonal at all )ut #as its /amil% !ins#i& rat#er wit# w#at 1art#es long ago called Ow#ite
writing04 ;n t#is &articular no-el, Doctorow #as im&osed u&on #imsel/ a rigorous &rinci&le o/ selection in w#ic# onl% sim&le declarati-e sentences @&redominantl% mo)iliGed
)% t#e -er) Oto )e0A are recei-ed4 T#e e//ect is, #owe-er, not reall% one o/ t#e condescending sim&li/ication and s%m)olic OIre/ulness o/
c#ildren0s literature, )ut rat#er somet#ing more distur)ing, t#e sense o/ some &ro/ound su)terranean -iolence done to American Englis# w#ic# cannot, #owe-er, )e detected
em&iricall% in an% o/ t#e &er/ectl% grammatical sentences wit# w#ic# t#is wor! is /ormed4 Yet ot#er more -isi)le tec#nical Finno-ations0 ma% su&&l% a clue to w#at is
#a&&ening in t#e language o/ 4a%time: it is, /or e(am&le, well !nown t#at t#e source o/ man% o/ t#e c#aracteristic e//ects o/ Camus0s no-el 61:tran%cr can )e traced )ac! to
t#at aut#or0s wil/ul decision to su)stitute, t#roug#out, t#e $renc# tense o/ t#e pass; compose /or t#e ot#er &ast tenses more normall% em&lo%ed in narration in t#at language4 ;
will suggest t#at it is as if somet#ing o/ t#at sort were at wor! #ere @wit#out committing m%sel/ /urt#er to w#at is o)-iousl% an outrageous lea&A6 it is, ; sa%, as thou%h Doctorow
#ad set out s%stematicall% to &roduce t#e e//ect or t#e eKui-alent, in #is language, o/ a -er)al &ast tense we do not &ossess in Englis#, namel% t#e $renc# &reterite @or pass;
simple?5 w#ose F&er/ecti-e0 mo-ement, as Emile 1en-eniste taug#t us, ser-es to se&arate e-ents /rom t#e &resent o/ enunciation and to trans/orm t#e stream o/ time and action
into so man% /inis#ed, com&lete, and isolated &unctual e-ent-o)Iects w#ic# /ind t#emsel-es sundered /rom an% &resent situation @e-en t#at o/ t#e act o/ stor%telling or
enunciationA4
E4 L4 Doctorow is t#e e&ic &oet o/ t#e disa&&earance o/ t#e American radical &ast, o/ t#e su&&ression o/ older traditions and moments o/ t#e American radical tradition6 no
one wit# Le/t s%m&at#ies can read t#ese s&lendid no-els wit#out a &oignant distress w#ic# is an aut#entic wa% o/ con/ronting our own current &olitical dilemmas in t#e
&resent4 .#at is culturall% interesting, #owe-er, is t#at #e #as #ad to con-e% t#is great t#eme /ormall% @since t#e waning o/ t#e content is -er% &recisel% #is su)IectA, and,
more t#an t#at, #as #ad to ela)orate #is wor! )% wa% o/ t#at -er% cultural logic o/ t#e &ostmodern w#ic# is itsel/ t#e mar! and s%m&tom o/ #is dilemma4 6oon 6ake muc# more
o)-iousl% de&lo%s t#e strategies o/ t#e &astic#e @most nota)l% in its rein-ention o/ Dos PassosAN )ut 4a%time remains t#e most &eculiar and stunning monument to t#e aest#etic
situation engendered )% t#e disa&&earance o/ t#e #istorical re/erent4 T#is #istorical no-el can no longer set out to re&resent t#e #istorical &astN it can onl% Fre&resent0 our ideas
and stereot%&es a)out t#at &ast @w#ic# t#ere)% at once )ecomes F&o& #istor%0A4 Cultural &roduction is t#ere)% dri-en )ac! inside a mental s&ace w#ic# is no longer t#at o/ t#e
old monadic su)Iect, )ut rat#er t#at o/ some degraded collecti-e Fo)Iecti-e s&irit06 it can no longer gaGe directl% on some &utati-e real world, at some reconstruction o/ a &ast
#istor% w#ic# was once itsel/ a &resentN rat#er, as in Plato0s ca-e, it must trace our mental images o/ t#at &ast u&on its con/ining walls4 ;/ t#ere is an% realism le/t #ere,
t#ere/ore, it is a Frealism0 w#ic# is meant to deri-e /rom t#e s#oc! o/ gras&ing t#at Con/inement, and o/ slowl% )ecoming aware o/ a new and original #istorical situation in
w#ic# we are condemned to see! Histor% )% wa% o/ our own &o& images and simulacra o/ t#at #istor%, w#ic# itsel/ remains /ore-er out o/ reac#4
V4 4 4*
@9 Fredric Ja#eson &ostmodernism
$ Post#odernis# and t/e )ity
ow, )e/ore ; tr% to o//er a somew#at more &ositi-e conclusion, ; want to s!etc# t#e anal%sis o/ a /ull-)lown &ostmodern )uilding H a wor! w#ic# is in man% wa%s
unc#aracteristic o/ t#at &ostmodern arc#itecture w#ose &rinci&al names are Ro)ert Jenturi, C#arles Moore, Mic#ael 2ra-es, and more recentl% $ran! 2e#r%, )ut w#ic# to m%
mind o//ers some -er% stri!ing lessons a)out t#e originalit% o/ &ostmodernist s&ace4 Let me am&li/% t#e /igure w#ic# #as run t#roug# t#e &receding remar!s, and ma!e it e-en
more e(&licit6 ; am &ro&osing t#e motion t#at we are #ere in t#e &resence o/ somet#ing li!e a mutation in )uilt s&ace itsel/4 M% im&lication is t#at we oursel-es, t#e #uman
su)Iects w#o #a&&en into t#is new s&ace, #a-e not !e&t &ace wit# t#at e-olutionN t#ere #as )een a mutation in t#e o)Iect, unaccom&anied as %et )% an% eKui-alent mutation in
t#e su)IectN we do not %et &ossess t#e &erce&tual eKui&ment to matc# t#is new #%&ers&ace, as ; will call it, in &art )ecause our &erce&tual #a)its were /ormed in t#at older !ind
o/ s&ace ; #a-e called t#e s&ace o/ #ig# modernism4 T#e newer arc#itecture t#ere/ore H li!e man% o/ t#e ot#er cultural &roducts ; #a-e e-o!ed in t#e &receding remar!s H
stands as somet#ing li!e an im&erati-e to grow new organs, to e(&and our sensorium and our )od% to some new, as %et unimagina)le, &er#a&s ultimatel% im&ossi)le,
dimensions4
,he Kona.entura 7otel
T#e )uilding w#ose /eatures ; will -er% ra&idl% enumerate in t#e ne(t /ew moments is t#e 1ona-entura Hotel, )uilt in t#e new Los Angeles downtown )% t#e arc#itect and
de-elo&er 3o#n Portman, w#ose ot#er wor!s include t#e -arious H%att Regencies, t#e Peac#tree Center in Atlanta, and t#e Renaissance Center in Detroit4 ; #a-e mentioned
t#e &o&ulist as&ect o/ t#e r#etorical de/ence o/ &ostmodernism against t#e elite @and 8to&ianA austerities o/ t#e great arc#itectural modernisms6 it is generall% a//irmed, in
ot#er words, t#at t#ese newer )uildings are &o&ular wor!s on t#e one #andN and t#at t#e% res&ect t#e -ernacular o/ t#e American cit% /a)ric on t#e ot#er H t#at is to sa%, t#at
t#e% no longer attem&t, as did t#e masterwor!s and monuments o/ #ig# modernism, to insert a di//erent, a distinct, an ele-ated, a new 8to&ian language into t#e tawdr% and
commercial sign-s%stem o/ t#e surrounding cit%, )ut rat#er, on t#e contrar%, see! to s&ea! t#at -er% language, using its le(icon and s%nta( as t#at #as )een em)lematicall%
Flearned /rom Las Jegas04
On t#e /irst o/ t#ese counts, Portman0s 1ona-entura /ull% con/irms t#e claim6 it is a &o&ular )uilding, -isited wit# ent#usiasm )% locals and tourists ali!e @alt#oug#
Portman0s ot#er )uildings are e-en more success/ul in t#is res&ectA4 T#e &o&ulist insertion into t#e cit% /a)ric is, #owe-er, anot#er matter, and it is wit# t#is t#at we will )egin4
T#ere are t#ree entrances to t#e 1ona-entura, one /rom $igueroa, and t#e ot#er two )% wa% o/ ele-ated gardens on t#e ot#er side o/ t#e #otel, w#ic# is )uilt into t#e remaining
slo&e o/ t#e /ormer 1eacon Hill4 one oO riicse is an%t#ing
li!e t#e old #otel marKuee, or t#e monumental &ortecoc#Zre wit# w#ic# t#e sum&tuous )uildings o/ %ester%ear were wont to stage %our &assage /rom cit% street to t#e older
interior4 T#e entr%wa%s o/ t#e 1ona-entura are as it were lateral and rat#er )ac!doot a//airs6 t#e gardens in t#e )ac! admit %ou to t#e si(t# /loor o/ t#e towers, and e-en t#ere
%ou must wal! down one /lig#t to /ind t#e ele-ator )% w#ic# %ou gain access to t#e lo))%4 Meanw#ile, w#at one is still tem&ted to t#in! o/ as t#e /ront entr%, on $igueroa,
admits %ou, )aggage and all, onto t#e second-store% s#o&&ing )alcon%, /rom w#ic# %ou must ta!e an escalator down to t#e main registration des!4 More a)out t#ese ele-ators
and escalators in a moment4 .#at ; /irst want to suggest a)out t#ese curiousl% unmar!ed wa%s-in is t#at t#e% seem to #a-e )een im&osed )% some new categor% o/ closure
go-erning t#e inner s&ace o/ t#e #otel itsel/ @and t#is o-er and a)o-e t#e material constraints under w#ic# Portman #ad to wor!A4 ; )elie-e t#at, wit# a certain num)er o/ ot#er
c#aracteristic &ostmodern )uildings, suc# as t#e 1eau)ourg in Paris, or t#e Eaton Centre in Toronto, t#e 1ona-entura as&ires to )eing a total s&ace, a com&lete world, a !ind
o/ miniature cit% @and ; would want to add t#at to t#is new total s&ace corres&onds a new collecti-e &ractice, a new mode in w#ic# indi-iduals mo-e and congregate,
somet#ing li!e t#e &ractice o/ a new and #istoricall% original !ind o/ #%&er-crowdA4 ;n t#is sense, t#en, ideall% t#e mini-cit% o/ Portman0s 1ona-entura oug#t not to #a-e
entrances at all, since t#e entr%wa% is alwa%s t#e seam t#at lin!s t#e )uilding to t#e rest o/ t#e cit% t#at surrounds it6 /or it does not wis# to )e a &art o/ t#e cit%, )ut rat#er its
eKui-alent and its re&lacement or su)stitute4 T#at is, #owe-er, o)-iousl% not &ossi)le or &ractical, w#ence t#e deli)erate down&la%ing and reduction o/ t#e entrance /unction
to its )are minimum4 1ut t#is disIunction /rom t#e surrounding cit% is -er% di//erent /rom t#at o/ t#e great monuments o/ t#e ;nternational St%le6
t#ere, t#e act o/ disIunction was -iolent, -isi)le, and #ad a -er% real s%m)olic signi/icance H as in Le Cor)usier0s great pilotis w#ose gesture radicall% se&arates t#e new
8to&ian s&ace o/ t#e modern /rom t#e degraded and /allen cit% /a)ric w#ic# it t#ere)% e(&licitl% re&udiates @alt#oug# t#e gam)le o/ t#e modern was t#at t#is new 8to&ian
s&ace, in t#e -irulence o/ its o-um, would /an out and trans/orm t#at e-entuall% )% t#e -er% &ower o/ its new s&atial languageA4 T#e 1ona-entura, #owe-er, is content to Flet
t#e /allen cit% /a)ric continue to )e in its )eing0 @to &arod% HeideggerAN no /urt#er e//ects, no larger &roto&olitical 8to&ian trans/ormation, is eit#er e(&ected or desired4
T#is diagnosis is to m% mind con/irmed )% t#e great re/lecti-e glass s!in o/ t#e 1ona-entura, w#ose /unction ; will now inter&ret rat#er di//erentl% t#an ; did a moment
ago w#en ; saw t#e &#enomenon o/ re/le(ion generall% as de-elo&ing a t#ematics o/ re&roducti-e tec#nolog% @t#e two readings are, #owe-er, not incom&ati)leA4 ow one
would want rat#er to stress t#e wa% in w#ic# t#e glass s!in re&els t#e cit% outsideN a re&ulsion /or w#ic# we #a-e analogies in t#ose re/lector Sunglasses w#ic# ma!e it
im&ossi)le /or %our interlocutor to see %our own e%es and t#ere)% ac#ie-e a certain aggressi-it% towards and &ower o-er t#e Ot#er4 ;n a similar wa%, t#e glass s!in ac#ie-es a
&eculiar and &laceless dissociation o/ t#e 1ona-entura /rom its neig#)our#ood6 it is not e-en an e(terior, inasmuc# as w#en %ou see! to
@2 Fredric Ja#eson
&ostoioh1ruiisni
loo! at t#e #otel0s outer walls %ou cannot see t#e #otel itsel/, )ut onl% t#e distorted images o/ e-er%t#ing t#at surrounds it4
ow ; want to sa% a /ew words a)out escalators and ele-ators6 gi-en t#eir -er% real &leasures in Portman, &articularl% t#ese last, w#ic# t#e artist #as termed Fgigantic
!inetic scul&tures0 and w#ic# certainl% account /or muc# o/ t#e s&ectacle and t#e e(citement o/ t#e #otel interior, &articularl% in t#e H%atts, w#ere li!e great 3a&anese lanterns
or gondolas t#e% ceaselessl% rise and /all H gi-en suc# a deli)erate mar!ing and /oregrounding in t#eir own rig#t, ; )elie-e one #as to see suc# F&eo&le mo-ers0 @Portman0s
own term, ada&ted /rom Disne%A as somet#ing a little more t#an mere /unctions and engineering com&onents4 .e !now in an% case t#at recent arc#itectural t#eor% #as )egun
to )orrow /rom narrati-e anal%sis in ot#er /ields, and to attem&t to see our &#%sical traIectories t#roug# suc# )uildings as -irtual narrati-es or stories, as d%namic &at#s and
narrati-e &aradigms w#ic# we as -isitors are as!ed to /ul/il and to com&lete wit# our own )odies and mo-ements4 ;n t#e 1ona-entura, #owe-er, we /ind a dialectical
#eig#tening o/ t#is &rocess6 it seems to me t#at t#e escalators and ele-ators #ere #ence/ort# re&lace mo-ement )ut also and a)o-e all designate t#emsel-es as new re/le(i-e
signs and em)lems o/ mo-ement &ro&er @somet#ing w#ic# will )ecome e-ident w#en we come to t#e w#ole Kuestion o/ w#at remains o/ older /orms o/ mo-ement in t#is
)uilding, most nota)l% wal!ing itsel/A4 Here t#e narrati-e stroll #as )een underscored, s%m)oliGed, rei/ied and re&laced )% a trans&ortation mac#ine w#ic# )ecomes t#e
allegorical signi/ier o/ t#at older &romenade we are no longer allowed to conduct on our own6 and t#is is a dialectical intensi/ication o/ t#e autore/erentialit% o/ all modern
culture, w#ic# tends to turn u&on itsel/ and designate its own cultural &roduction as its content4
; am more at a loss w#en it comes to con-e%ing t#e t#ing itsel/, t#e e(&erience o/ s&ace %ou undergo w#en %ou ste& o// suc# allegorical de-ices into t#e lo))% or atrium,
wit# its great central column, surrounded )% a miniature la!e, t#e w#ole &ositioned )etween t#e /our s%mmetrical residential towers wit# t#eir ele-ators, and surrounded )%
rising )alconies ca&&ed )% a !ind o/ green#ouse roo/ at t#e si(t# le-el4 ; am tem&ted to sa% t#at suc# s&ace ma!es it im&ossi)le /or us to use t#e language o/ -olume or -olumes
an% longer, since t#ese last are im&ossi)le to seiGe4 Hanging streamers indeed su//use t#is em&t% s&ace in suc# a wa% as to distract s%stematicall% and deli)eratel% /rom
w#ate-er /orm it mig#t )e su&&osed to #a-eN w#ile a constant )us%ness gi-es t#e /eeling t#at em&tiness is #ere a)solutel% &ac!ed, t#at it is an element wit#in w#ic# %ou %oursel/ are
immersed, wit#out an% o/ t#at distance t#at /ormerl% ena)led t#e &erce&tion o/ &ers&ecti-e or -olume4 You are in t#is #%&ers&ace u& to %our e%es and %our )od%N and i/ it seemed to %ou
)e/ore t#at t#at su&&ression o/ de&t# ; s&o!e o/ in &ostmodern &ainting or literature would necessaril% )e di//icult to ac#ie-e in arc#itecture itsel/, &er#a&s %ou ma% now )e
willing to see t#is )ewildering immersion as t#e /ormal eKui-alent in t#e ne(- medium4
Yet escalator and ele-ator are also in t#is conte(t dialectical o&&ositesN and we ma% suggest t#at t#e glorious mo-ement o/ t#e ele-ator gondola- O also a dialectical
com&ensation /or t#is /illed s&ace o/ t#e atrium H it gi-es us t#O 3Oance at a radicall%
E,
di//erent, )ut com&lementar%, s&atial e(&erience, t#at o/ ra&idl% s#ooting ti& t#roug# t#e ceiling and outside, along one o/ t#e /our s%mmetrical towers, .it# t#e re/erent, Los Angeles itsel/,
s&read out )reat#ta!ingl% and e-en alarmingl% )e/ore us4 1ut e-en t#is -ertical mo-ement is contained6 t#e ele( ator li/ts %ou to one o/ t#ose re-ol-ing coc!tail lounges, in w#ic# %ou, seated, are
again &assi-el% rotated a)out and o//ered a contem&lati-e s&ectacle o/ t#e cit% itsel/, now trans/ormed into its Own images )% t#e glass windows t#roug# w#ic# %ou -iew itC
Let me Kuic!l% conclude all t#is )% returning to t#e central s&ace o/ t#e lo))% itsel/ @wit# t#e &assing o)ser-ation t#at t#e #otel rooms are -isi)l% marginaliGed6 t#e corridors in t#e
residential sections are low-ceilinged and dar!, most de&ressingl% /unctional indeedN w#ile one understands t#at t#e rooms are in t#e worst o/ tasteA4 T#e descent is dramatic enoug#,
&lummeting )ac! down t#roug# t#e roo/ to s&las# down in t#e la!eN w#at #a&&ens w#en %ou get t#ere is somet#ing else, w#ic# ; can onl% tr% to c#aracteriGe as milling con/usion,
somet#ing li!e t#e -engeance t#is s&ace ta!es on t#ose w#o still see! to wal! t#roug# it4 2i-en t#e a)soltite s%mmetr% o/ t#e /our towers, it is Kuite im&ossi)le to get %our
)earings in t#is lo))%N recentl%, colour coding and directional signals #a-e )een added in a &iti/ul and re-ealing, rat#er des&erate attem&t to restore t#e coordinates o/ an older
s&ace4 ; will ta!e as t#e most dramatic &ractical result o/ t#is s&atial mutation t#e notorious dilemma o/ t#e s#o&!ee&ers on t#e -arious )alconies6 it #as )een o)-ious, since t#e -er%
o&ening o/ t#e #otel in *+<<, t#at no)od% could e-er /ind an% o/ t#ese stores, and e-en i/ %ou located t#e a&&ro&riate )outiKue, %ou would )e most unli!el% to )e as /ortunate a second timeN as a
conseKuence, t#e commercial tenants are in des&air and all t#e merc#andise is mar!ed down to )argain &rices4 .#en %ou recall t#at Portman is a )usinessman as well as an arc#itect, and a
millionaire de-elo&er, an artist who is at one and t#e same time a ca&italist in #is own rig#t, one cannot )ut /eel t#at #ere too somet#ing o/ a Freturn o/ t#e re&ressed0 is in-ol-ed4
So ; come /inall% to m% &rinci&al &oint #ere, t#at t#is latest mutation in s&ace H&ostmodern #%&ers&ace H #as /inall% succeeded in transcending t#e ca&acities o/ t#e indi-idual #uman )od%
to locate itsel/, to organiGe its immediate surroundings &erce&tuall%, and cogniti-el% to ma& its &osition in a ma&&a)le e(ternal world4 And ; #a-e alread% suggested t#at t#is alarming
disIunction &oint )etween t#e )od% and its )uilt en-ironment H w#ic# is to t#e initial )ewilderment o/ t#e older modernism as t#e -elocities o/ s&ace cra/t are to t#ose o/ t#e automo)ile H
can itsel/ stand as t#e s%m)ol and analogue o/ t#at e-en s#ar&er dilemma w#ic# is t#e inca&acitO o/ our minds, at least at &resent, to ma& t#e great glo)al multinational and decentred
communicational netOs or! in w#ic# we /ind oursel-es caug#t as mdi( idual su)Iects4
,he Hcu1 .Rlachinc
1ut as ; am an(ious t#at Portman0s s&ace not )e &ercei-ed as somet#ing eit#er e(ce&tional or seemingl% marginaliGed and leisure-s&ecialiGed on t#e order o/ Disne%land, i would li!e in
&assing to Iu(ta&ose t#is com&lacent and entertaining @alt#oug# )ewilderingA leisure-time s&ace wit# its analogue in a -er% di//erent area,
@: Fredric Ja#eson &ostmodernisn8 @$
namel% t#e s&ace o/ &ostmodern war/are, in &articular as Mic#ael Herr e-o!es it in #is great )oo! on t#e e(&erience o/ Jietnam, called <ispatches. T#e e(traordinar% linguistic inno-ations o/
t#is wor! ma% still )e considered &ostmodern, in t#e eclectic wa% in w#ic# its language im&ersonall% /uses a w#ole range o/ contem&orar% collecti-e idiolects, most nota)l% roc! language and
1lac! language6 )ut t#e /usion is dictated )% &ro)lems o/ content4 T#is /irst terri)le &ostmodernist war cannot )e told in an% o/ t#e traditional &aradigms o/ t#e war no-el or mo-ie H indeed t#at
)rea!down o/ all &re-ious narrati-e &aradigms is, along wit# t#e )rea!down o/ an% s#ared language t#roug# w#ic# a -eteran mig#t con-e% suc# e(&erience, among t#e &rinci&al
su)Iects o/ t#e )oo! and ma% )e said to o&en u& t#e &lace o/ a w#ole new re/le(i-it%4 1enIamin0s account o/ 1audelaire, and o/ t#e emergence o/ modernism /rom a new e(&erience o/ cit%
tec#nolog% w#ic# transcends all t#e older #a)its o/ )odil% &erce&tion, is )ot# singularl% rele-ant #ere, and singularl% antiKuated, in t#e lig#t o/ t#is new and -irtuall% unimagina)le
Kuantum lea& in tec#nological alienation6
He was a mo-ing-target-sur-i-or su)scri)er, a true c#ild o/ war, )ecause e(ce&t /or t#e rare times w#en %ou were &inned or stranded t#e s%stem was geared to !ee& %ou mo)ile, i/ t#at was
w#at %ou t#oug#t %ou wanted4 As a tec#niKue /or sta%ing ali-e it seemed to ma!e as muc# sense as an%t#ing, gi-en naturall% t#at %ou were t#ere to )egin wit# and wanted to see it closeN it
started out sound and straig#t )ut it /ormed a cone as it &rogressed, )ecause t#e more %ou mo-ed t#e more %ou saw, t#e more %ou saw t#e more )esides deat# arid mutilation %ou ris!ed, and t#e
more %ou ris!ed o/ t#at t#e more %ou would #a-e to let go o/ one da% as a Fsur-i-or04 Some o/ us mo-ed around t#e war li!e craG% &eo&le until we couldn0t see w#ic# wa% t#e run was ta!ing
us an%more, onl% t#e war all o-er its sur/ace wit# occasional, une(&ected &enetration4 As long as we could #a-e c#o&&ers li!e ta(is it too! real e(#austion or de&ression near s#oc! or a
doGen &i&es o/ o&ium to !ee& us e-en a&&arentl% Kuiet, we0d still )e running around inside our s!ins li!e somet#ing was a/ter us, #a #a, La Jida Loca4 ;n t#e mont#s a/ter ; got )ac! t#e
#undreds o/ #elico&ters ;0d /lown in )egan to draw toget#er until t#e%0d /ormed a collecti-e meta-c#o&&er, and in m% mind it was t#e se(iest t#ing goingN sa-er-destro%er, &ro-ider-waster,
rig#t #and-le/t #and, nim)le, /luent, cann% and #umanN #ot steel, grease, Iungle-saturated can-as we))ing, sweat cooling and warming u& again, cassette roc! and roll in one ear and door-
gun /ire in t#e ot#er, /uel, #eat, -italit% and deat#, deat# itsel/, #ardl% an intruder4 5
;n t#is new mac#ine, w#ic# does not, li!e t#e older modernist mac#iner% o/ t#e locomoti-e or t#e air&lane, re&resent motion, )ut w#ic# can onl% )e re&resented in motion5 somet#ing
o/ t#e m%ster% o/ t#e new &ostmodernist s&ace is concentrated4
< T/e A"o.ition o? )ritica. Distance
T#e conce&tion o/ &ostmodernism outlined #ere is a #istorical Ni#er t#an a merel% st%listic one4 ; cannot stress too greatl% t#e radical distinctio44 tOetween a -iew /or
w#ic# t#e &ostmodern is one @o&tionalA st%le among man% ot#ers a-aila)le, and one w#ic# see!s to gras& it as t#e cultural dominant o/ t#e logic o/ late ca&italism6 t#e two a&&roac#es in /act
generate two -er% di//erent wa%s o/ conce&tualiGing t#e &#enomenon as a w#ole, on t#e one #and moral Indgements @a)out w#ic# it is indi//erent w#et#er t#e% are &ositi-e or negati-eA, and on
t#e ot#er a genuinel% dialectical attem&t to t#in! our &resent o/ time in Histor%4
O/ some &ositi-e moral e-aluation o/ &ostmodernism little needs to )e said6 t#e com&lacent @%et deliriousA cam&-/ollowing cele)ration o/ t#is aest#etic new world @including its social and
economic dimension, greeted wit# eKual ent#usiasm under t#e slogan o/ F&ost-industrial societ%0A is surel% unacce&ta)le H alt#oug# it ma% )e somew#at less o)-ious t#e degree to w#ic# current
/antasies a)out t#e sal-ational nature o/ #ig# tec#nolog%, /rom c#i&s to ro)ots H /antasies entertained not onl% )% Le/t as well as Rig#t go-ernments in distress, )ut also )% man% intellectuals H
are essentiall% o/ a &iece wit# more -ulgar a&ologies /or &ostmodernism4
1ut in t#at case it is also logical to reIect moraliGing condemnations o/ t#e &ostmodern and o/ its essential tri-ialit%, w#en Iu(ta&osed against t#e 8to&ian O#ig# seriousness0 o/ t#e great
modernisms6 t#ese are also Iudgements one /inds )ot# on t#e Le/t and on t#e radical Rig#t4 And no dou)t t#e logic o/ t#e simulacrum, wit# its trans/ormation o/ older realities into tele-ision
images, does more t#an merel% re&licate t#e logic o/ late ca&italismN it rein/orces and intensi/ies it4 Meanw#ile, /or &olitical grou&s w#ic# see! acti-el% to inter-ene in #istor% and to modi/% its
ot#erwise &assi-e momentum @w#et#er wit# a -iew towards c#annelling it into a socialist trans/ormation o/ societ% or di-erting it into t#e regressi-e reesta)lis#ment o/ some sim&ler /antas%
&astA, t#ere cannot )ut )e muc# t#at is de&lora)le and re&re#ensi)le in a cultural /orm o/ image addiction w#ic#, )% trans/orming t#e &ast -isual mirages, stereot%&es or te(ts, e//ecti-el%
a)olis#es an% &ractical sense o/ t#e /uture and o/ t#e collecti-e &roIect, t#ere)% a)andoning t#e t#in!ing o/ /uture c#ange to /antasies o/ s#eer catastro&#e and ine(&lica)le catacl%sm H /rom
-isions o/ Fterrorism0 on t#e social le-el to t#ose o/ cancer on t#e &ersonal4 Yet i/ &ostmodernism is a #istorical &#enomenon, t#en t#e attem&t to conce&tualiGe it i?. terms o/ moral or moraliGing
Iudgements must /inall% )e identi/ied as a categor%-mista!e4 All o/ w#ic# )ecomes more o)-ious w#en we interrogate t#e &osition o/ t#e cultural critic and moralist6 t#is last, along wit# all t#e
rest o/ us, is now so dee&l% immersed in &ostmodernist s&ace, so dee&l% su//used and in/ected )% its new cultural categories, t#at t#e lu(ur% o/ t#e old-/as#ioned ideological critiKue, t#e
indignant moral denunciation o/ t#e ot#er, )ecomes una-aila)le4
T#e distinction ; am &ro&osing #ere !nows one canonical /orm in Hegel0s di//erentiation o/ t#e t#in!ing o/ indi-idual moralit% or moraliGing E(oralitdtD /rom t#at w#ole -er%
di//erent realm o/ collecti-e social -alues and &ractices E-ittlichkeitD. 1ut it /inds its de/initi-e /orm in Mar(0s demonstration o/ t#e materialist dialectic, most nota)l% in t#ose
classic &ages o/ t#e (anifesto w#ic# teac# t#e #ard lesson o/ So#e #ore genuinel% dialectical wa% to t#in! #istorical de-elo&ment and c#ange4 T#e to&ic o/ t#e lesson is, o/ course,
t#e #istorical de-elo&ment o/ ca&italism itsel/ and t#e de&lo%ment o/ a s&eci/ic )ourgeois culture4 ;n a well-!nown &assage, Mar(
@< Fredric %a#eson
&ower/ull% urges us to do t#e im&ossi)le, namel% to t#in! t#is de-elo&ment &ositi-el% and negati-el% all at onceN to ac#ie-e, in ot#er words, a t%&e o/ t#in!ing t#at would )e ca&a)le o/ gras&ing
t#e demonstra)l% )ale/ul /eatures o/ ca&italism along wit# its e(traordinar% and li)erating d%namism simultaneousl%, wit#in a single t#oug#t, and wit#out attenuating an% o/ t#e /orce o/ eit#er
Iudgement4 .e are, some#ow, to li/t our minds to a &oint at w#ic# it is &ossi)le to understand t#at ca&italism is at one and t#e same time t#e )est t#ing t#at #as e-er #a&&ened to t#e #uman race,
and t#e worst4 T#e la&se /rom t#is austere dialectical im&erati-e into t#e more com/orta)le stance o/ t#e ta!ing o/ moral &ositions is in-eterate and all too #uman6 still, t#e urgenc% o/ t#e su)Iect
demands t#at we ma!e at least some e//ort to t#in! t#e cultural e-olution o/ late ca&italism dialecticall%, as catastro&#e and &rogress all toget#er4
Suc# an e//ort suggests two immediate Kuestions, wit# w#ic# we will conclude t#ese re/le(ions4 Can we in /act identi/% some Fmoment o/ trut#0 wit#in t#e more e-ident Fmoments o/
/alse#ood0 o/ &ostmodern cultureD And, e-en i/ we can do so, is t#ere not somet#ing ultimatel% &aral%sing in t#e dialectical -iew o/ #istorical de-elo&ment &ro&osed a)o-eN does it not tend to
demo)iliGe us and to surrender us to &assi-it% and #el&lessness, )% s%stematicall% o)literating &ossi)ilities o/ action under t#e im&enetra)le /og o/ #istorical ine-ita)ilit%D ;t will )e a&&ro&riate
to discuss t#ese two @relatedA issues in terms o/ current &ossi)ilities /or some e//ecti-e contem&orar% cultural &olitics and /or t#e construction o/ a genuine &olitical culture4
To /ocus t#e &ro)lem in t#is wa% is o/ course immediatel% to raise t#e more genuine issue o/ t#e /ate o/ culture generall%, and o/ t#e /unction o/ culture s&eci/icall%, as one social le-el or
instance, in t#e &ostmodern era4 E-er%t#ing in t#e &re-ious discussion suggests t#at w#at we #a-e )een calling &ostmodernism is inse&ara)le /rom, and unt#in!a)le wit#out t#e #%&ot#esis o/,
some /undamental mutation o/ t#e s&#ere o/ culture in t#e world o/ late ca&italism, w#ic# includes a momentous modi/ication o/ its social /unction4 Older discussions o/ t#e s&ace, /unction or
s&#ere o/ culture @most nota)l% Her)ert Marcuse0s classic essa% on FT#e a//irmati-e c#aracter o/ culture0A #a-e insisted on w#at a di//erent language would call t#e Fsemi-autonom%0 o/ t#e
cultural realm6 its g#ostl%, %et 8to&ian, e(istence, /or good or ill, a)o-e t#e &ractical world o/ t#e e(istent, w#ose mirror image it t#rows )ac! in /orms w#ic# -ar% /rom t#e legitimations o/
/lattering resem)lance to t#e contestator% indictments o/ critical satire or 8to&ian &ain4
.#at we must now as! oursel-es is w#et#er it is not &recisel% t#is semiautonom%0 o/ t#e cultural s&#ere w#ic# #as )een destro%ed )% t#e logic o/ late ca&italism4 Yet to argue t#at culture is
toda% no longer endowed wit# t#e relati-e autonom% it once enIo%ed as one le-el among ot#ers in earlier moments o/ ca&italism @let alone in &re-ca&italist societiesA is not necessaril% to im&l%
its disa&&earance or e(tinction4 On t#e contrar%6 we must go on to a//irm t#at t#e dissolution o/ an autonomous s&#ere o/ culture is rat#er to )e imagined in terms o/ an e(&losion6 a &rodigious
e(&ansion o/ culture t#roug#out t#e social realm, to t#e &oint at w#ic# e-er%t#ing in our social li/e H /rom economic -alue and state &ower to &ractices and to t#e -er% structure o/ t#e &s%c#e
itsel/ Hcan )e said to #a-e )ecome Fcultural0 in
&ostmodernism E<
some original and as %et unt#eoriGed sense4 T#is &er#a&s startling &ro&osition is, #owe-er, su)stanti-el% Kuite consistent wit# t#e &re-ious diagnosis o/ a societ% o/ t#e image or t#e simulacrum,
and a trans/ormation o/ t#e Oreal0 into so man% &seudo-e-ents4
;t also suggests t#at some o/ our most c#eris#ed and time-#onoured radical conce&tions a)out t#e nature o/ cultural &olitics ma% t#ere)% /ind t#emsel-es outmoded4 Howe-er distinct t#ose
conce&tions ma% #a-e )een H w#ic# range /rom slogans o/ negati-it%, o&&osition, and su)-ersion to critiKue and re/le(i-it% H t#e% all s#ared a single, /undamentall% s&atial, &resu&&osition,
w#ic# ma% )e resumed in t#e eKuall% time-#onoured /ormula o/ Fcritical distance04 o t#eor% o/ cultural &olitics current on t#e Le/t toda% #as )een a)le to do wit#out one notion or anot#er o/ a
certain minimal aest#etic distance, o/ t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ t#e &ositioning o/ t#e cultural act outside t#e massi-e 1eing o/ ca&ital, w#ic# t#en ser-es as an Arc#imedean &oint /rom w#ic# to assault
t#is last4 .#at t#e )urden o/ our &receding demonstration suggests, #owe-er, is t#at distance in general @including Fcritical distance0 in &articularA #as -er% &recisel% )een a)olis#ed in t#e new
s&ace o/ &ostmodernism4 .e are su)merged in its #ence/ort# /illed and su//used -olumes to t#e &oint w#ere our now &ostmodern )odies are )ere/t o/ s&atial coordinates and &racticall% @let
alone t#eoreticall%A inca&a)le o/ distantiationN meanw#ile, it #as alread% )een o)ser-ed #ow t#e &rodigious new e(&ansion o/ multinational ca&ital ends u& &enetrating and coloniGing t#ose -er%
&re-ca&italist encla-es @ature and t#e 8nconsciousA w#ic# o//ered e(traterritorial and Arc#imedcan /oot#olds /or critical e//ecti-it%4 T#e s#ort#and language o/ Fcoo&tation0 is /or t#is reason
omni&resent on t#e Le/tN )ut o//ers a most inadeKuate t#eoretical )asis /or understanding a situation in w#ic# we all, in one wa% or anot#er, diml% /eel t#at not onl% &unctual and local
countercultural /orms o/ cultural resistance and guerrilla war/are, )ut also e-en o-ertl% &olitical inter-entions li!e t#ose o/ T#e Clas#, are all some#ow secretl% disarmed and rea)sor)ed )% a
s%stem o/ w#ic# t#e% t#emsel-es mig#t well )e considered a &art, since t#e% can ac#ie-e no distance /rom it4
.#at we must now a//irm is t#at it is &recisel% t#is w#ole e(traordinaril% demoraliGing and de&ressing original new glo)al s&ace w#ic# is t#e Omoment o/ trut#0 o/ &ostmodernism4 .#at #as
)een called t#e &ostmodernist Osu#limc0 is onl% t#e moment in w#ic# t#is content #as )ecome most e(&licit, #as mo-ed t#e closest to t#e sur/ace o/ consciousness, as a co#erent new t%&e o/
s&ace in its own rig#t He-en t#oug# a certain /igural concealment or disguise is still at wor! #ere, most nota)l% in t#e #ig#-tec#nological t#ematics in w#ic# t#e new s&atial content is still
dramatiGed and articulated4 Yet t#e earlier /eatures o/ t#e &ostniodern w#ic# were enumerated a)o-e can all now )e seen as t#emsel-es &artial @%et constituti-eA as&ects o/ t#e same general
s&atial o)Iect4
T#e argument /or a certain aut#enticit% in t#ese ot#erwise &atentl% ideological &roductions de&ends on t#e &rior &ro&osition t#at w#at we #a-e now )een calling &ostmodern @or
multinationalA s&ace is not merel% a cultural ideolog% or /antas%, )ut #as genuine #istorical @and socio-economicA realit% as a t#ird great original
EE Fredric %a#eson
e(&ansion o/ ca&italism around t#e glo)e @a/ter t#e earlier e(&ansions o/ t#e national mar!et and t#e older im&erialist s%stem, w#ic# eac# #ad t#eir own cultural s&eci/icit% and generated new
t%&es o/ s&ace a&&ro&riate to t#eir d%namicsA4 T#e distorted and unre/le(i-e attem&ts o/ newer cultural &roduction to e(&lore and to e(&ress t#is new s&ace must t#en also, in t#eir own /as#ion,
)e considered as so man% a&&roac#es to t#e re&resentation o/ @a newA realit% @to use a more antiKuated languageA4 As &arado(ical as t#e terms ma% seem, t#e% ma% t#us, /ollowing a classic
inter&retati-e o&tion, )e read as &eculiar new /orms o/ realism @or at least o/ t#e mimesis o/ realit%A, at t#e same time t#at t#e% can eKuall% well )e anal%sed as so man% attem&ts to distract and to
di-ert us /rom t#at realit% or to disguise its contradictions and resol-e t#em in t#e guise o/ -arious /ormal m%sti/ications4
As /or t#at realit% itsel/, #owe-er H t#e as %et unt#eoriGed original s&ace o/ some new Fworld s%stem0 o/ multinational or late ca&italism @a s&ace w#ose negati-e or )ale/ul as&ects are onl% too
o)-iousA, t#e dialectic reKuires us to #old eKuall% to a &ositi-e or F&rogressi-e0 e-aluation o/ its emergence, as Mar( did /or t#e newl% uni/ied s&ace o/ t#e national mar!ets, or as Lenin did /or
t#e older im&erialist glo)al networ!4 $or neit#er Mar( nor Lenin was socialism a matter o/ returning to small @and t#ere)% less re&ressi-e and com&re#ensi-eA s%stems o/ social organiGationN
rat#er, t#e dimensions attained )% ca&ital in t#eir own times were gras&ed as t#e &romise, t#e /ramewor!, and t#e &recondition /or t#e ac#ie-ement o/ some new and more com&re#ensi-e
socialism4 How muc# t#e more is t#is not t#e case wit# t#e e-en more glo)al and totaliGing s&ace o/ t#e new world s%stem, w#ic# demands t#e in-ention and ela)oration o/ an internationalism
o/ a radicall% new t%&eD T#e disastrous realignment o/ socialist re-olution wit# t#e older nationalisms @not onl% in Sout# East AsiaA, w#ose results #a-e necessaril% aroused muc# serious recent
Le/t re/le(ion, can )e adduced in su&&ort o/ t#is &osition4
,he Heed for (aps
1ut i/ all t#is is so, t#en at least one &ossi)le /orm o/ a new radical cultural &olitics )ecomes e-ident6 wit# a /inal aest#etic &ro-iso t#at must Kuic!l% )e noted4 Le/t cultural &roducers and
t#eorists H &articularl% t#ose /ormed )% )ourgeois cultural traditions issuing /rom Romanticism and -aloriGing s&ontaneous, instincti-e or unconscious /orms o/ Fgenius0 H )ut also /or -er%
o)-ious #istorical reasons suc# as S#dano-ism and t#e sorr% conseKuences o/ &olitical and &art% inter-entions in t#e arts H#a-e o/ten )% reaction allowed t#emsel-es to )e undul% intimidated )%
t#e re&udiation, in )ourgeois aest#etics and most nota)l% in #ig# modernism, o/ one o/ t#e age-old /unctions o/ art H namel% t#e &edagogical and t#e didactic4 T#e teac#ing /unction o/ art was,
#owe-er, alwa%s stressed in classical times @e-en t#oug# it t#ere mainl% too! t#e /orm o/ moral lessonsAN w#ile t#e &rodigious and still im&er/ectl% understood wor! o/ 1rec#t rea//irms, in a new
and /ormall% inno-ati-e and original wa%, /or t#e moment o/ modernism &ro&er, a com&le( new conce&tion o/ t#e relations#i& )etween culture and &edagog%4 T#e cultural model ; will &ro&ose
similarl% /oregrounds t#e cogniti-e and &edagogical dimensions o/ &olitical art and
&ostmodernism @B
culture, dimensions stressed in -er% di//erent wa%s )% both Lu!Tcs and 1rec#t @/or t#e distinct moments o/ realism and modernism, res&ecti-el%A4
.e cannot, #owe-er, return to aest#etic &ractices ela)orated on t#e )asis o/ #istorical situations and dilemmas w#ic# are no longer ours4 Meanw#ile, t#e conce&tion o/ s&ace t#at #as )een
de-elo&ed #ere suggests t#at a model o/ &olitical culture a&&ro&riate to our own situation will necessaril% #a-e to raise s&atial issues as its /undamental organiGing concern4 ; will t#ere/ore
&ro-isionall% de/ine t#e aest#etic o/ suc# new @and #%&ot#eticalA cultural /orm as an aest#etic o/ co%niti.e mappin%.
;n a classic wor!, ,he 'ma%e of the )ity5 'e-in L%nc# taug#t us t#at t#e alienated cit% is a)o-e all a s&ace in w#ic# &eo&le are una)le to ma& @in t#eir mindsA eit#er t#eir own &ositions or t#e
ur)an totalit% in w#ic# t#e% /ind t#emsel-es6 grids suc# as t#ose o/ 3erse% Cit%, in w#ic# none o/ t#e traditional mar!ers @monuments, nodes, natural )oundaries, )uilt &ers&ecti-esA o)tain, are
t#e most o)-ious e(am&les4 Disalienation in t#e traditional cit%, t#en, in-ol-es t#e &ractical reconKuest o/ a sense o/ &lace, and t#e construction or reconstruction o/ an articulated ensem)le
w#ic# can )e retained in memor% and w#ic# t#e indi-idual su)Iect can ma& and rema& along t#e moments o/ mo)ile, alternati-e traIectories4 L%nc#0s own wor! is limited )% t#e deli)erate
restriction o/ #is to&ic to t#e &ro)lems o/ t#e cit% /orm as suc#N %et it )ecomes e(traordinaril% suggesti-e w#en &roIected outwards onto some o/ t#e larger national and glo)al s&aces we #a-e
touc#ed on #ere4 or s#ould it )e too #astil% assumed t#at #is model H w#ile it clearl% raises -er% central issues o/ re&resentation as suc# H is in an% wa% easil% -itiated )% t#e con-entional
&oststructuralist critiKues o/ t#e Fideolog% o/ re&resentation0 or mimesis4 T#e cogniti-e ma& is not e(actl% mimetic, in t#at older senseN indeed t#e t#eoretical issues it &oses allow us to renew t#e
anal%sis o/ re&resentation on a #ig#er and muc# more com&le( le-el4
T#ere is, /or one t#ing, a most interesting con-ergence )etween t#e em&irical &ro)lems studied )% L%nc# in terms o/ cit% s&ace and t#e great Alt#usserian @and LacanianA rede/inition o/
ideolog% as Ft#e re&resentation o/ t#e su)Iect0s 'ma%inary relations#i& to #is or #er 4eal conditions o/ e(istence04 Surel% t#is is e(actl% w#at t#e cogniti-e ma& is called u&on to do, in t#e
narrower /ramewor! o/ dail% li/e in t#e &#%sical cit%6 to ena)le a situational re&resentation on t#e &art o/ t#e indi-idual su)Iect to t#at -aster and &ro&erl% unre&resenta)le totalit% w#ic# is t#e
ensem)le o/ t#e cit%0s structure as a w#ole4
Yet L%nc#0s wor! also suggests a /urt#er line o/ de-elo&ment inso/ar as cartogra&#% itsel/ constitutes its !e% mediator% instance4 A return to t#e #istor% o/ t#is science @w#ic# is also an artA
s#ows us t#at L%nc#0s model does not %et in /act reall% corres&ond to w#at will )ecome ma&-ma!ing4 Rat#er, L%nc#0s su)Iects are clearl% in-ol-ed in &re-cartogra&#ic o&erations w#ose results
traditionall% are descri)ed as itineraries rat#er t#an as ma&sN diagrams organiGed around t#e still su)Iect-centred or e(istential Iourne% o/ t#e tra-eller, along w#ic# -arious signi/icant !e%
/eatures are mar!ed H oases, mountain ranges, ri-ers, monuments and t#e li!e4 T#e most #ig#l% de-elo&ed /orm o/ suc# diagrams is t#e nautical itinerar%, t#e sea
+9 Fredric Ja#eso?.
c#art or purtulans5 w#ere coastal /eatures are noted /or t#e use o/ Mediterranean na-igators w#o rarel% -enture out into t#e o&en sea4
Yet t#e com&ass at once introduces a new dimension into sea c#arts, a dimension t#at will utterl% trans/orm t#e &ro)lematic o/ t#e itinerar% and allow us to &ose t#e &ro)lem o/ a genuine
cogniti-e ma&&ing in a /ar more com&le( wa%4 $or t#e new instruments H com&ass, se(tant and t#eodolite H do not merel% corres&ond to new geogra&#ic and na-igational &ro)lems @t#e di//icult
matter o/ determining longitude, &articularl% on t#e cur-ing sur/ace o/ t#e &lanet, as o&&osed to t#e sim&ler matter o/ latitude, w#ic# Euro&ean na-igators can still em&iricall% determine )%
ocular ins&ection o/ t#e A/rican coastAN t#e% also introduce a w#ole new coordinate H t#at o/ relations#i& to t#e totalit%, &articularl% as it is mediated )% t#e stars and )% new o&erations li!e t#at
o/ triangulation4 At t#is &oint, cogniti-e ma&&ing in t#e )roader sense comes to reKuire t#e coordination o/ e(istential data @t#e em&irical &osition o/ t#e su)IectA wit# unli-ed, a)stract
conce&tions o/ t#e geogra&#ic totalit%4
$inall%, wit# t#e /irst glo)e @*=+9A and t#e in-ention o/ t#e Mercator &roIection around t#e same &eriod, %et a t#ird dimension o/ cartogra&#% emerges, w#ic# at once in-ol-es w#at we would
toda% call t#e nature o/ re&resentational codes, t#e intrinsic structures o/ t#e -arious media, t#e inter-ention, into more nai-e mimetic conce&tions o/ ma&&ing, o/ t#e w#ole new /undamental
Kuestion o/ t#e languages o/ re&resentation itsel/6 and in &articular t#e unresol-a)le @well-nig# Heisen)ergianA dilemma o/ t#e trans/er o/ cur-ed s&ace to /lat c#artsN at w#ic# &oint it )ecomes
clear t#at t#ere can )e no true ma&s @at t#e same time in w#ic# it also )ecomes clear t#at t#ere can )e scienti/ic &rogress, or )etter still, a dialectical ad-ance, in t#e -arious #istorical moments o/
ma&-ma!ingA4
-ocial )arto%raphy and -ymbol
Transcoding all t#is now into t#e -er% di//erent &ro)lematic o/ t#e Alt#usserian de/inition o/ ideolog%, we would want to ma!e two &oints4 T#e /irst is t#at t#e Alt#usserian conce&t now allows
us to ret#in! t#ese s&ecialiGed geogra&#ical and cartogra&#ic issues in terms o/ social s&ace, in terms, /or e(am&le, o/ social class and national or international conte(t, in terms o/ t#e wa%s in
w#ic# we all necessaril% also cogniti-el% ma& our indi-idual social relations#i& to local, national and international class realities4 Yet to re/ormulate t#e &ro)lem in t#is wa% is also to come
star!l% u& against t#ose -er% di//iculties in ma&&ing w#ic# are &osed in #eig#tened and original wa%s )% t#at -er% glo)al s&ace o/ t#e &ostmodernist or multinational moment w#ic# #as )een
under discussion #ere4 T#ere are not merel% t#eoretical issues, )ut #a-e urgent &ractical &olitical conseKuences6 as is e-ident /rom t#e con-entional /eelings o/ $irst .orld su)Iects t#at
e(istentiall% @or Fem&iricall%0A t#e% reall% do in#a)it a F&ost-industrial societ%0, /rom w#ic# traditional &roduction #as disa&&eared and in w#ic# social classes o/ t#e classical t%&e no longer e(ist
H a con-iction w#ic# #as immediate e//ects on &olitical &ra(is4
T#e second o)ser-ation to )e &ro&osed is t#at a return to t#e Lacanian
&ostniodernism +*
under&innings o/ Alt#usser0s t#eor% can a//ord some use/ul and suggesti-e met#odological enric#ments4 Alt#usser0s /ormulation remo)iliGes an older and #ence/ort# classical Mar(ian
distinction )etween science and ideolog%, w#ic# is still not wit#out -alue /or us4 T#e e(istential H t#e &ositioning o/ t#e indi-idual su)Iect, t#e e(&erience o/ dail% li/e, t#e monadic F&oint o/
-iew0 on t#e world to w#ic# we are necessaril%, as )iological su)Iects, restricted H is in Alt#usser0s /ormula im&licitl% o&&osed to t#e realm o/ a)stract !nowledge, a realm w#ic#, as Lacan
reminds us, is ne-er &ositioned in or actualiGed )% an% concrete su)Iect #ut rat#er )% t#at structural -oid called Fle suIet su&&ose sa-oir0, Ft#e su)Iect su&&osed to !now0, a su)Iect-&lace o/
!nowledge6 w#at is a//irmed is not t#at we cannot !now t#e world and its totalit% in some a)stract or Fscienti/ic0 wa% H Mar(ian Fscience &ro-ides Iust suc# a wa% o/ !nowing and
conce&tualiGing t#e world a)stractl%, in t#e sense in w#ic#, e4g4 Mandel0s great )oo! o//ers a ric# and ela)orated know/ed%e o/ t#at glo)al world s%stem, o/ w#ic# it #as ne-er )een said #ere t#at
it was un!nowa)le, )ut merel% t#at it was unre&resenta)le, w#ic# is a -er% di//erent matter4 T#e Alt#usserian /ormula, in ot#er words, designates a ga&, a ri/t, )etween e(istential e(&erience and
scienti/ic !nowledge6 ideolog% #as t#en t#e /unction o/ some#ow in-enting a wa% o/ articulating t#ose two distinct dimensions wit# eac# ot#er4 .#at a #istoricist -iew o/ t#is Fde/inition0 would
want to add is t#at suc# coordination, t#e &roduction o/ /unctioning and li-ing ideologies, is distinct in di//erent #istorical situations, )ut a)o-e all, t#at t#ere ma% )e #istorical situations in
w#ic# it is not &ossi)le at all H and t#is would seem to )e our situation in t#e current crisis4
1ut t#e Lacanian s%stem is t#ree/old and not dualistic4 To t#e Mar(ianH Alt#usserian o&&osition o/ ideolog% and science corres&ond onl% two o/ Lacan Fs tri&artite /unctions, t#e ;maginar%
and t#e Real, res&ecti-el%4 Our digression on cartogra&#%, #owe-er, wit# its /inal rele-ation o/ a &ro&erl% re&resentational dialectic o/ t#e codes and ca&acities o/ indi-idual languages or media,
reminds us t#at w#at #as until now )een omitted was t#e dimension o/ t#e Lacanian S%m)olic itsel/4
An aest#etic o/ cogniti-e ma&&ing H a &edagogical &olitical culture w#ic# see!s to endow t#e indi-idual su)Iect wit# some new #eig#tened sense o/ its &lace in t#e glo)al s%stem H will
necessaril% #a-e to res&ect t#is now enormousl% com&le( re&resentational dialectic and to in-ent radicall% new /orms in order to do it Iustice4 T#is is not, t#en, clearl% a call /or a return to some
older !ind o/ mac#iner%, some older and more trans&arent national s&ace, or some more traditional and reassuring &ers&ecti-al or mimetic encla-e6 t#e new &olitical art H i/ it is indeed &ossi)le at
all
H will #a-e to #old to t#e trut# o/ &ostmodernism, t#at is to sa%, to its /undamental o)Iect H t#e world s&ace o/ multinational ca&ital H at t#e same time at w#ic# it ac#ie-es a )rea!t#roug# to some
as %et unimagina)le new mode o/ re&resenting t#is last, in w#ic# we ma% again )egin to gras& our &ositioning as indi-idual and collecti-e su)Iects and regain a ca&acit% to act and struggle
w#ic# is at &resent neutraliGed )% our s&atial as well as our social con/usion4 T#e &olitical /orm o/
B2 Fredric %a#eson
&ostmodernism, i/ t#ere e-er is an%, will #a-e as its -ocation t#e in-ention and &roIection o/ a glo)al cogniti-e ma&&ing, on a social as well as a s&atial scale4
Notes
*4 ;n FT#e &olitics @i/ t#eor%0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 ,5 @S&ring:Summer *+E=A4
54 Mic#ael Herr, <ispatches5 ew Yor!, *+<E, &&4 EH+4
PART T>O
"odernit( Com*lete and
Incom*lete
Introduction
;s t#e &ostmodern most satis/actoril% c#aracterised )% a c#ronological demandD S#ould we a)andon t#e cultural and #istorical &roIect originating in Enlig#tenment and identi/ied as Fmodernit%0N
and i/ so, s#ould we a)andon it in t#e name o/ F&rogress0 or ad-ancement, t#emsel-es terms clearl% identi/ied wit# t#e ideolog% o/ an enlig#tened Fmodernisation0D T#ese -i)rant Kuestions in
t#e de)ate were )roug#t s#ar&l% into /ocus in Ha)ermas0s &olemical essa%, gi-en initiall% in t#e /orm o/ an address u&on recei&t o/ t#e Adorno PriGe in *+E9, FModernit% H An ;ncom&lete
ProIect04 T#e occasion o/ t#e essa% aligns Ha)ermas wit# AdornoN %et t#e content o/ t#e lecture aligns #im wit# &recisel% t#at rationalist tradition in Enlig#tenment o/ w#ic# Adorno was
enormousl% sce&tical4 Here, as in #is later wor! o/ t#e *+E9s, Ha)ermas sees t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ sal-aging Enlig#tenment rationalit%4 T#e &roIect o/ modernit% )egun )% eig#teent#-centur%
&#iloso&#ers Fconsisted in t#eir e//orts to de-elo& o)Iecti-e science, uni-ersal moralit% and law, and autonomous art according to t#eir inner logic0, t#eir aim )eing, according to Ha)ermas #ere,
Ft#e rational organiGation o/ e-er%da% social li/e04 Ha)ermas acce&ts t#at errors #a-e )een made in t#e attem&t to attain suc# a rational societ%N )ut t#is s#ould not negate t#e &roIect o/ modernit%
as suc#4 Later, Ha)ermas will argue t#at t#e &ro)lem lies in t#e indi-iduation o/ t#e rational Su)Iect o/ consciousness, and /or a Ot#eor% o/ communicati-e action0 w#ic# will relocate t#e Su)Iect
as t#e agent o/ an intersu)Iecti-el% agreed reason, a reason w#ose )asis lies in communication or discourse and in t#e social consensus &roduced )% suc# discourse4 ;n t#e earl% *+E9s, #owe-er,
it was not so muc# t#e Kuestion o/ t#e Su)Iect o/ reason as reason itsel/ w#ic# )egan to come under &ressure4
Reason, as t#e )asis /or action, /aces t#e danger o/ )ecoming &urel% Finstrumental0, and #ence o/ degenerating into a &ursuit o/ rationalism /or its own sa!e, regardless o/ t#e e//ects &roduced
)% suc# a F&ractical reason04 1ut a reason &roduced in t#e name o/ a social &ractice is, o/ course, at t#e root o/ an% cultural &olitics4 .it#out it, t#e Fengaged0 intellectual o/ t#e Euro&ean
tradition, w#o culminates &er#a&s in Sartre, sim&l% could not e(ist4 ;t is @Nianni Jattimo w#o )egins to entertain t#is &ossi)ilit% in all seriousness /or t#e /irst time4 ;n ; +E, #e )egan to e(&lore,
in colla)oration wit# Pier Aldo Ro-ati, w#at t#e% called ii pensiero debole5 a wea! or Fdisengaged0 t#in!ing4 ;n t#is, reason0s raison d1Ntre is no longer to )e instrumentalN and Fwea! t#in!ing0,
&recisel% to t#e e(tent t#at it esc#ews Fengagement0, can )e more genuinel% Freasona)le04 A /ew %ears later, Jattimo in-estigates t#is more /ull% in 6a fine del/a modernitS5 a &assage /rom
+>
+?
&art ,wo: (odernity )omplete and 'ncomplete
w#ic# is included #ere4 Jattimo wor!s most o/ten in t#e /ield o/ #ermeneutic &#iloso&#%, and is t#us alread% /a-oura)l% dis&osed to t#e reduction o/ trut# to inter&retation alluded to earlier4
Ado&ting t#e 'u#nian notion o/ &aradigm s#i/ts, Jattimo #ere e(&lains Ft#e structure o/ artistic re-olutions0, and s&eci/icall% t#e structure o/ t#e s#i/t /rom modern to &ostmodern4 Modernit% #e
de/ines as Ft#at era in w#ic# )eing modern )ecomes a -alue, or rat#er, it )ecomes the /undamental -alue to w#ic# all ot#er -alues re/er0, and t#is F-alue0 is itsel/ de/ined in modernit% wit# Ft#e
new0, a new seen as a s%m&tom o/ secular &rogress4 ;t is &recisel% t#is co-ert sense o/ Ft#e new0 /rom w#ic# t#e &ostmodern will @Fwea!l%0A disengage itsel/6 Ft#e &ostmodern dis&la%s CCC an e//ort
to /ree itsel/ /rom t#e logic o/ o-ercoming, de-elo&ment, and inno-ation04 Suc# an art is itsel/ &role&tic o/ a &ostmodern social /ormation, %ielding a /ormation H a societ% H w#ic# is at )est
Fwea!l%0 articulated4 T#e consensual agreement as to w#at constitutes t#e F-alue0 o/ t#e Fnew0 @i4e4 t#e consensus called Fmodernit%0A is no longer so readil% a-aila)le4
A similar !ind o/ argument is ad-anced )% Da-id Coo!, w#ose FT#e Last Da%s o/ Li)eralism0, re&rinted #ere, is &art o/ a larger stud% written in colla)oration wit# Art#ur 'ro!er, ,he
&ostmodern -cene. Coo! locates in 'antian &#iloso&#% not onl% a &olitics o/ li)eralism )ut also an in)uilt o)solescence o/ suc# li)eralism4 T#e argument #inges on t#e s&ecial relation in 'ant
)etween &ower and Iudgement6
&ower is &redicated u&on Iudgement4 T#is 'antian &osition is o&en to two &ossi)le &olitical oiientations6 one leading to &olitical li)eralism @ostensi)l% /a-oured )% 'antA, t#e ot#er leading to t#e
e(ercise o/ &ower against t#e /oundation o/ t#e social itsel/4 Modern t#oug#t, argues Coo!, #as ta!en t#is second orientation, &roducing not onl% t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ t#e Fsocial contract0 )ut also a
corres&onding ideolog% o/ Fo)edience04 T#e conce&tual isolation o/ &ower ena)les &ower to disengage itsel/ /rom t#e &olitical and to insert itsel/ into t#e aest#etic, as a matter o/ Iudgement in
t#e realm o/ taste4 T#e result, argues Coo!, is t#e graduated sel/-liKuidation o/ an indi-idual w#o is de&ri-ed o/ a )od%, a will and an imagination, a sel/-liKuidation carried out Fin t#e name o/
good taste04
A more directl% &olitical line o/ argument is ado&ted )% 1auman, w#o #as &ondered dee&l% t#e great Adornian0 Kuestions regarding t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ Fenlig#tenment0, art and culture a/ter
Ausc#witG4 ;n t#e &iece included #ere, #e argues t#at t#e modern &eriod is c#aracterised )% t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a legislati-e !nowledge4 'nowledge, in modernit%, is su//icientl% sel/-assured to
/eel itsel/ ca&a)le o/ &rescri&ti-e legislation /or a culture4 ;n most o/ #is writing on t#e &ostmodern, 1auman #as seen suc# an attitude as t#e arrogance o/ a master/ul instrumental reason6 t#e
arrogance o/ a reason H or, indeed o/ a consciousness H w#ose entire aim is, in /act, t#e master%, domination and control o/ nature or o/ t#e unconscious4 Li!e Jattimo, #e does not &ut in &lace o/
t#is a !ind o/ Fcounter-arrogance0N rat#er, #e argues /or a more modest and circumscri)ed role /or t#e contem&orar% consciousness4 ;/ an instrumental reason can lead to t#e Feconom%0 o/
Ausc#witG, -ia t#e degradation o/ reason to rationalism, t#en it mig#t )e wiser to restrict t#e Flegislator04 ;nstead o/ legislation, t#e intellectual will now )e c#aracterised )% #er or #is
Finter&retati-e0 acti-it%4
'ntroduction +<
Modernit%, c#aracterised )% t#e &rogress o/ reason towards a social end, is now t#oroug#l% in Kuestion4 T#e great initiation o/ t#is de)ate in Ha)ermas is Ioined #ere )% a num)er o/ sce&tical
&ositions w#ic#, )roadl%, s#are t#e desire /or a #um)ler attitude to reason, an attitude w#ic# itsel/ causes enormous di//iculties, w#ic# are ta!en u& later in t#e &olitical discourse around
&ostmodernism4
5 w "odernit( H An
Incom*lete Pro-ect
J ren !a"er#as
;n *+E9, arc#itects were admitted to t#e 1iennial in Jenice, /ollowing &ainters and /ilmma!ers4 T#e note sounded at t#is /irst Arc#itecture 1iennial was one o/ disa&&ointment4 ; would descri)e
it )% sa%ing t#at t#ose w#o e(#i)ited in Jenice /ormed an a-ant-garde o/ re-ersed /ronts4 ; mean t#at t#e% sacri/iced t#e tradition o/ modernit% in order to ma!e room /or a new #istoricism4
8&on t#is occasion, a critic o/ t#e 2erman news&a&er $rankfurter All%emeine Peitun% ad-anced a t#esis w#ose signi/icance reac#es )e%ond t#is &articular e-entN it is a diagnosis o/ our times6
OPostmodernit% de/initel% &resents itsel/ as Antimodernit%40 T#is statement descri)es an emotional current o/ our times w#ic# #as &enetrated all s&#eres o/ intellectual li/e4 ;t #as &laced on t#e
agenda t#eories o/ &ost-enlig#tenment, &ostmodernit%, e-en o/ &ost-#istor%4
$rom #istor% we !now t#e &#rase FT#e Ancients and t#e Moderns04 Let me )egin )% de/ining t#ese conce&ts4 T#e term Fmodern0 #as a long #istor%, one w#ic# #as )een in-estigated )% Hans
Ro)ert 3auss4 T#e word Fmodern0 in its Latin /orm Omodernus0 was used /or t#e /irst time in t#e late /i/t# centur% in order to distinguis# t#e &resent, w#ic# #ad )ecome o//iciall% C#ristian, /rom
t#e Roman and &agan &ast4 .it# -ar%ing content, t#e term Fmodern0 again and again e(&resses t#e consciousness o/ an e&oc# t#at relates itsel/ to t#e &ast o/ antiKuit%, in order to -iew itsel/ as
t#e result o/ a transition /rom t#e old to t#e new4
Some writers restrict t#is conce&t o/ Fmodernit%0 to t#e Renaissance, )ut t#is is #istoricall% too narrow4 Peo&le considered t#emsel-es modern during t#e &eriod o/ C#arles t#e 2reat in t#e
twel/t# centur%, as well as in $rance o/ t#e late se-enteent# centur% at t#e time o/ t#e /amous FCuerelle des Anciens et des Modernes04 T#at is to sa%, t#e term Fmod5rn0 a&&eared and rea&&eared
e(actl% during t#ose &eriods in Euro&e w#en t#e consciousness o/ a new e&oc# /ormed itsel/ t#roug# a renewed relations#i& to t#e ancients H w#ene-er, moreo-er, antiKuit% was considered a
model to )e reco-ered t#roug# some !ind o/ imitation4
T#e s&ell w#ic# t#e classics o/ t#e ancient world cast u&on t#e s&irit o/ later times
$rom Hew /ern8au )riti>ue5 55 @.inter *+E*A, ,H*>4
+E
(odernity H An 'ncomplete &ro9ect ++
was /irst dissol-ed wit# t#e ideals o/ t#e $renc# Enlig#tenment4 S&eci/icall%, t#e idea o/ )eing Fmodern0 )% loo!ing )ac! to t#e ancients c#anged wit# t#e )elie/, ins&ired )% modern science, in
t#e in/inite &rogress o/ !nowledge and in t#e in/inite ad-ance towards social and moral )etterment4 Anot#er /orm o/ modernist consciousness was /ormed in t#e wa!e o/ t#is c#ange4 T#e
romantic modernist soug#t to o&&ose t#e antiKue ideals o/ t#e classicistsN #e loo!ed /or a new #istorical e&oc# and /ound it in t#e idealiGed Middle Ages4 Howe-er, t#is new ideal age,
esta)lis#ed earl% in t#e nineteent# centur%, did not remain a /i(ed ideal4 ;n t#e course o/ t#e nineteent# centur%, t#ere emerged out o/ t#is romantic s&irit t#at radicaliGed consciousness o/
modernit% w#ic# /reed itsel/ /rom all s&eci/ic #istorical ties4 T#is most recent modernism sim&l% ma!es an a)stract o&&osition )etween tradition and t#e &resentN and we are, in a wa%, still t#e
contem&oraries o/ t#at !ind o/ aest#etic modernit% w#ic# /irst a&&eared in t#e midst o/ t#e nineteent# centur%4 Since t#en, t#e distinguis#ing mar! o/ wor!s w#ic# count as modern is Ft#e new0
w#ic# will )e o-ercome and made o)solete t#roug# t#e no-elt% o/ t#e ne(t st%le4 1ut w#ile t#at w#ic# is merel% Fst%lis#0 will soon )ecome outmoded, t#at w#ic# is modern &reser-es a secret tie
to t#e classical4 O/ course, w#ate-er can sur-i-e time #as alwa%s )een considered to )e a classic4 1ut t#e em&#aticall% modern document no longer )orrows t#is &ower o/ )eing a classic /rom
t#e aut#orit% o/ a &ast e&oc#N instead, a modern wor! )ecomes a classic )ecause it #as once )een aut#enticall% modern4 Our sense o/ modernit% creates its own sel/-enclosed canons o/ )eing
classic4 ;n t#is sense we s&ea!, e4g4, in -iew o/ t#e #istor% o/ modern art, o/ classical modernit%4 T#e relation )etween Fmodern0 and Fclassical0 #as de/initel% lost a /i(ed #istorical re/erence4
T/e Disci0.ine o? Aest/etic Modernity
T#e s&irit and disci&line o/ aest#etic modernit% assumed clear contours in t#e wor! o/ 1audelaire4 Modernit% t#en un/olded in -arious a-ant-garde mo-ements and /inall% reac#ed its clima( in
t#e Ca/L Joltaire o/ t#e dadaists and in surrealism4 Aest#etic modernit% is c#aracteriGed )% attitudes w#ic# /ind a common /ocus in a c#anged consciousness o/ time4 T#is time consciousness
e(&resses itsel/ t#roug# meta&#ors o/ t#e -anguard and t#e a-ant-garde4 T#e a-ant-garde understands itsel/ as in-ading un!nown territor%, e(&osing itsel/ to t#e dangers o/ sudden, s#oc!ing
encounters, conKuering an as %et unoccu&ied /uture4 T#e a-ant-garde must /ind a direction in a landsca&e into w#ic# no one seems to #a-e %et -entured4
1ut t#ese /orward gro&ings, t#is antici&ation o/ an unde/ined /uture and t#e cult o/ t#e new, mean in /act t#e e(altation o/ t#e &resent4 T#e new time consciousness, w#ic# enters &#iloso&#%
in t#e writings o/ 1ergson, does more t#an e(&ress t#e e(&erience o/ mo)ilit% in societ%, o/ acceleration in #istor%, o/ discontinuit% in e-er%da% li/e4 T#e new -alue &laced on t#e transitor%, t#e
elusi-e and t#e e&#emeral, t#e -er% cele)ration o/ d%namism, discloses a longing /or an unde/lled, immaculate and sta)le &resent4
*99 Jren !a"er#as
T#is e(&lains t#e rat#er a)stract language in w#ic# t#e modernist tem&er #as s&o!en o/ t#e F&ast04 ;ndi-idual e&oc#s lose t#eir distinct /orces4 Historical memor% is re&laced )% t#e #eroic
a//init% o/ t#e &resent wit# t#e e(tremes o/ #istor% H a sense o/ time w#erein decadence immediatel% recogniGes itsel/ in t#e )ar)aric, t#e wild and t#e &rimiti-e4 .e o)ser-e t#e anarc#istic
intention o/ )lowing u& t#e continuum o/ #istor%, and we can account /or it in terms o/ t#e su)-ersi-e /orce o/ t#is new aest#etic consciousness4 Modernit% re-olts against t#e normaliGing
/unctions o/ traditionN modernit% li-es on t#e e(&erience o/ re)elling against all t#at is normati-e4 T#is re-olt is one wa% to neutraliGe t#e standards o/ )ot# moralit% and utilit%4 T#is aest#etic
consciousness continuousl% stages a dialectical &la% )etween secrec% and &u)lic scandalN it is addicted to a /ascination wit# t#at #orror w#ic# accom&anies t#e act o/ &ro/aning, and %et is alwa%s
in /lig#t /rom t#e tri-ial results o/ &ro/anation4
On t#e ot#er #and, t#e time consciousness articulated in a-ant-garde art is not sim&l% a#istoricalN it is directed against w#at mig#t )e called a /alse normati-it% in #istor%4 T#e modern, a-ant-
garde s&irit #as soug#t to use t#e &ast in a di//erent wa%N it dis&oses t#ose &asts w#ic# #a-e )een made a-aila)le )% t#e o)Iecti/%ing sc#olars#i& o/ #istoricism, )ut it o&&oses at t#e same time a
neutraliGed #istor% w#ic# is loc!ed u& in t#e museum o/ #istoricism4
Drawing u&on t#e s&irit o/ surrealism, .alter 1enIamin constructs t#e relations#i& o/ modernit% to #istor% in w#at ; would call a &ost-#istoricist attitude4 He reminds us o/ t#e sel/-
understanding o/ t#e $renc# Re-olution6 FT#e Re-olution cited ancient Rome, Iust as /as#ion cites an antiKuated dress4 $as#ion #as a scent /or w#at is current, w#ene-er t#is mo-es wit#in t#e
t#ic!et o/ w#at was once40 T#is is 1enIamin0s conce&t o/ t#e 3et8t8eit5 o/ t#e &resent as a moment o/ re-elationN a time in w#ic# s&linters o/ a messianic &resence are enmes#ed4 ;n t#is sense, /or
Ro)es&ierre, t#e antiKue Rome was a &ast laden wit# momentar% re-elations4 2
ow, t#is s&irit o/ aest#etic modernit% #as recentl% )egun to age4 ;t #as )een recited once more in t#e *+?9sN a/ter t#e *+<9s, #owe-er, we must admit to oursel-es t#at t#is modernism
arouses a muc# /ainter res&onse toda% t#an it did /i/teen %ears ago4 Octa-io PaG, a /ellow-tra-eller o/ modernit%, noted alread% in t#e middle o/ t#e *+?9s t#at Ft#e a-ant-garde o/ *+?< re&eats
t#e deeds and gestures o/ t#ose o/ *+*<4 .e are e(&eriencing t#e end o/ t#e idea o/ modern art40 T#e wor! o/ Peter 1urger #as since taug#t us to s&ea! o/ F&ost-a-ant-garde0 artN t#is term is
c#osen to indicate t#e /ailure o/ t#e surrealist re)ellion4 1ut w#at is t#e meaning o/ t#is /ailureD Does it signal a /arewell to modernit%D T#in!ing more generall%, does t#e e(istence o/ a &ost-
a-ant-garde mean t#ere is a transition to t#at )roader &#enomenon called &ostmodernit%D
T#is is in /act #ow Daniel 1ell, t#e most )rilliant o/ t#e American neoconser-ati-es, inter&rets matters4 ;n #is )oo! ,he )ultural )ontradictions of )apitalism5 1ell argues t#at t#e crises o/
t#e de-elo&ed societies o/ t#e .est are to )e traced )ac! to a s&lit )etween culture and societ%4 Modernist culture #as come to &enetrate t#e -alues o/ e-er%da% li/eN t#e li/e-world is in/ected )%
modernism4 1ecause o/ t#e /orces o/ modernism, t#e &rinci&le o/ unlimited sel/-realiGation, t#e
(odernity H An 'ncomplete &ro9ect I9I
demand /or aut#entic sel/-e(&erience and t#e su)Iecti-ism o/ a #%&erstimulated sensiti-it% #a-e come to )e dominant4 T#is tem&erament unleas#es #edonistic moti-es irreconcila)le wit# t#e
disci&line o/ &ro/essional li/e in societ%, 1ell sa%s4 Moreo-er, modernist culture is altoget#er incom&ati)le wit# t#e moral )asis o/ a &ur&osi-e, rational conduct o/ li/e4 ;n t#is manner, 1ell
&laces t#e )urden o/ res&onsi)ilit% /or t#e dissolution o/ t#e Protestant et#ic @a &#enomenon w#ic# #ad alread% distur)ed Ma( .e)erA on t#e Fad-ersar% culture04 Culture in its modern /orm stirs
u& #atred against t#e con-entions and -irtues o/ e-er%da% li/e, w#ic# #as )ecome rationaliGed under t#e &ressures o/ economic and administrati-e im&erati-es4
; would call %our attention to a com&le( wrin!le in t#is -iew4 T#e im&ulse o/ modernit%, we are told on t#e ot#er #and, is e(#austedN an%one w#o considers #imsel/ a-ant-garde can read #is
own deat# warrant4 Alt#oug# t#e a-ant-garde is still considered to )e e(&anding, it is su&&osedl% no longer creati-e4 Modernism is dominant )ut dead4 $or t#e neoconser-ati-e t#e Kuestion t#en
arises6 #ow can norms arise in societ% w#ic# will limit li)ertinism, reesta)lis# t#e et#ic o/ disci&line and wor!D .#at new norms will &ut a )ra!e on t#e le-elling caused )% t#e social wel/are
state so t#at t#e -irtues o/ indi-idual com&etition /or ac#ie-ement can again dominateD 1ell sees a religious re-i-al to )e t#e onl% solution4 Religious /ait# tied to a /ait# in tradition will &ro-ide
indi-iduals wit# clearl% de/ined identities and e(istential securit%4
),.t,ra. Modernity and Societa. Moderni7ation
One can certainl% not conIure u& )% magic t#e com&elling )elie/s w#ic# command aut#orit%4 Anal%ses li!e 1ell0s, t#ere/ore, onl% result in an attitude w#ic# is s&reading in 2erman% no less t#an
in t#e States6 an intellectual and &olitical con/rontation wit# t#e carriers o/ cultural modernit%4 ; cite Peter Stein/els, an o)ser-er o/ t#e new st%le w#ic# t#e neoconser-ati-es #a-e im&osed u&on
t#e intellectual scene in t#e *+<9s6
T#e struggle ta!es t#e /orm o/ e(&osing e-er% mani/estation o/ w#at could )e considered an o&&ositionist mentalit% and tracing its Flogic0 so as to lin! it to -arious /orms o/ e(tremism6
drawing t#e connection )etween modernism and ni#ilism
)etween go-ernment regulation and totalitarianism, )etween criticism o/ arms e(&enditures and su)ser-ience to communism, )etween .omen0s li)eration or #omose(ual rig#ts and t#e
destruction o/ t#e /amil% 444 )etween t#e Le/t generall% and
:
terrorism, anti-semitism, and /ascism
T#e ad hominem a&&roac# and t#e )itterness o/ t#ese intellectual accusations #a-e also )een trum&eted loudl% in 2erman%4 T#e% s#ould not )e e(&lained so muc# in terms o/ t#e &s%c#olog% o/
neoconser-ati-e writersN rat #er, t#e% are rooted in t#e anal%tical wea!nesses o/ neoconser-ati-e doctrine itsel/4
192 Jren !a"er#as
eoconser-atism s#i/ts onto cultural modernism t#e uncom/orta)le )urdens o/ a more or less success/ul ca&italist moderniGation o/ t#e econom% and societ%4 T#e neoconser-ati-e doctrine
)lurs t#e relations#i& )etween t#e welcomed &rocess o/ societal moderniGation on t#e one #and, and t#e lamented cultural de-elo&ment on t#e ot#er4 T#e neoconser-ati-e does not unco-er t#e
economic and social causes /or t#e altered attitudes towards wor!, consum&tion, ac#ie-ement and leisure4 ConseKuentl%, #e attri)utes all o/ t#e /ollowing H #edonism, t#e lac! o/ social
identi/ication, t#e lac! o/ o)edience, narcissism, t#e wit#drawal /rom status and ac#ie-ement com&etition H to t#e domain o/ Fculture04 ;n /act, #owe-er, culture is inter-ening in t#e creation o/
all t#ese &ro)lems in onl% a -er% indirect and mediated /as#ion4
;n t#e neoconser-ati-e -iew, t#ose intellectuals w#o still /eel t#emsel-es committed to t#e &roIect o/ modernit% are t#en &resented as ta!ing t#e &lace o/ t#ose unanal%Ged causes4 T#e mood
w#ic# /eeds neoconser-atism toda% in no wa% originates /rom discontent a)out t#e antinomian conseKuences o/ a culture )rea!ing /rom t#e museums into t#e stream o/ ordinar% li/e4 T#is
discontent #as not )een called into li/e )% modernist intellectuals4 ;t is rooted in dee&-seated reactions against t#e &rocess o/ societal moderniGation4 8nder t#e &ressures o/ t#e d%namics o/
economic growt# and t#e organiGational accom&lis#ments o/ t#e state, t#is social moderniGation &enetrates dee&er and dee&er into &re-ious /orms o/ #uman e(istence4 ; would descri)e t#is
su)ordination o/ t#e li/e-worlds under t#e s%stem0s im&erati-es as a matter o/ distur)ing t#e communicati-e in/rastructure o/ e-er%da% li/e4
T#us, /or e(am&le, neo&o&ulist &rotests onl% e(&ress in &ointed /as#ion a wides&read /ear regarding t#e destruction o/ t#e ur)an and natural en-ironment and o/ /orms o/ #uman socia)ilit%4
T#ere is a certain iron% a)out t#ese &rotests in terms o/ neoconser-atism4 T#e tas!s o/ &assing on a cultural tradition, o/ social integration and o/ socialiGation reKuire ad#erence to w#at ; call
communicati-e rationalit%4 1ut t#e occasions /or &rotest and discontent originate &recisel% w#en s&#eres o/ communicati-e action, centered on t#e re&roduction and transmission o/ -alues and
norms, are &enetrated )% a /orm o/ moderniGation guided )% standards o/ economic and administrati-e rationalit% H in ot#er words, )% standards o/ rationaliGation Kuite di//erent /rom t#ose o/
communicati-e rationalit% on w#ic# t#ose s&#eres de&end4 1ut neoconser-ati-e doctrines turn our attention &recisel% awa% /rom suc# societal &rocesses6 t#e% &roIect t#e causes, w#ic# t#e% do
not )ring to lig#t, onto t#e &lane o/ a su)-ersi-e culture and its ad-ocates4
To )e sure, cultural modernit% generates its own a&orias as well4 ;nde&endentl% /rom t#e conseKuences o/ societal moderniGation and wit#in t#e &ers&ecti-e o/ cultural de-elo&ment itsel/,
t#ere originate moti-es /or dou)ting t#e &roIect o/ modernit%4 Ha-ing dealt wit# a /ee)le !ind o/ criticism o/ modernit% H t#at o/ neconser-atism H let me now mo-e our discussion o/ modernit%
and its discontents into a di//erent domain t#at touc#es on t#ese a&orias o/ cultural modernit% H issues t#at o/ten ser-e onl% as a &retense /or t#ose &ositions w#ic# eit#er call /or a
(odernity H An 'ncomplete &ro9ect 198
&ostmodernit%, recommend a return to some /orm o/ &remodernit%, or t#row modernit% radicall% o-er)oard4
T/e Pro%ect o? En.i/ten#ent
T#e idea o/ modernit% is intimatel% tied to t#e de-elo&ment o/ Euro&ean art, )ut w#at ; call Ft#e &roIect o/ modernit%0 comes into /ocus onl% w#en we dis&ense wit# t#e usual concentration u&on
art4 Let me start a di//erent anal%sis )% recalling an idea /rom Ma( .e)er4 He c#aracteriGed cultural modernit% as t#e se&aration o/ t#e su)stanti-e reason e(&ressed in religion and meta&#%sics
into t#ree autonomous s&#eres4 T#e% are6 science, moralit% and art4 T#ese came to )e di//erentiated )ecause t#e uni/ied world--iews o/ religion and meta&#%sics /ell a&art4 Since t#e eig#teent#
centur%, t#e &ro)lems in#erited /rom t#ese older world--iews could )e arranged so as to /all under s&eci/ic as&ects o/ -alidit%6 trut#, normati-e rig#tness, aut#enticit% and )eaut%4 T#e% could
t#en )e #andled as Kuestions o/ !nowledge, or o/ Iustice and moralit%, or o/ taste4 Scienti/ic discourse, t#eories o/ moralit%, Iuris&rudence, and t#e &roduction and criticism o/ art could in turn )e
institutionaliGed4 Eac# domain o/ culture could )e made to corres&ond to cultural &ro/essions in w#ic# &ro)lems could )e dealt wit# as t#e concern o/ s&ecial e(&erts4 T#is &ro/essionaliGed
treatment o/ t#e cultural tradition )rings to t#e /ore t#e intrinsic structures o/ eac# o/ t#e t#ree dimensions o/ culture4 T#ere a&&ear t#e structures o/ cogniti-e-instrumental, o/ moral-&ractical and
o/ aest#etic-e(&ressi-e rationalit%, eac# o/ t#ese under t#e control o/ s&ecialists w#o seem more ade&t at )eing logical in t#ese &articular wa%s t#an ot#er &eo&le are4 As a result, t#e distance
grows )etween t#e culture o/ t#e e(&erts and t#at o/ t#e larger &u)lic4 .#at accrues to culture t#roug# s&ecialiGed treatment and re/lection does not immediatel% and necessaril% )ecome t#e
&ro&ert% o/ e-er%da% &ra(is4 .it# cultural rationaliGation o/ t#is sort, t#e t#reat increases t#at t#e li/e-world, w#ose traditional su)stance #as alread% )een de-alued, will )ecome more and more
im&o-eris#ed4
T#e &roIect o/ modernit% /ormulated in t#e eig#teent# centur% )% t#e &#iloso&#ers o/ t#e Enlig#tenment consisted in t#eir e//orts to de-elo& o)Iecti-e science, uni-ersal moralit% and law,
and autonomous art according to t#eir inner logic4 At t#e same time, t#is &roIect intended to release t#e cogniti-e &otentials o/ eac# o/ t#ese domains /rom t#eir esoteric /orms4 T#e
Enlig#tenment &#iloso&#ers wanted to utiliGe t#is accumulation o/ s&ecialiGed culture /or t#e enric#ment o/ e-er%da% li/e
H t#at is to sa%, /or t#e rational organiGation o/ e-er%da% social li/e4
Enlig#tenment t#in!ers o/ t#e cast o/ mind o/ Condorcet still #ad t#e e(tra-agant e(&ectation t#at t#e arts and sciences would &romote not onl% t#e control o/ natural /orces )ut also t#e
understanding o/ t#e world and o/ t#e sel/, moral &rogress, t#e Iustice o/ institutions and e-en t#e #a&&iness o/ #uman )eings4 T#e twentiet# centur% #as s#attered t#is o&timism4 T#e
di//erentiation o/ science, moralit% and art #as come to mean t#e automon% o/ t#e segments treated )% t#e s&ecialist and t#eir
19: %,ren !a"er#as
se&aration /rom t#e #ermeneutics o/ e-er%da% communication4 T#is s&litting o// is t#e &ro)lem t#at #as gi-en rise to e//orts to Fnegate0 t#e culture o/ e(&ertise4 1ut t#e &ro)lem won0t go awa%6
s#ould we tr% to #old on to t#e intentions o/ t#e Enlig#tenment, /ee)le as t#e% ma% )e, or s#ould we declare t#e entire &roIect o/ modernit% a lost causeD ; now want to return to t#e &ro)lem o/
artistic culture, #a-ing e(&lained w#%, #istoricall%, aest#etic modernit% is onl% a &art o/ cultural modernit% in general4
T/e Fa.se Prora#s o? t/e Neation o? ),.t,re
2reatl% o-ersim&li/%ing, ; would sa% t#at in t#e #istor% o/ modern art one can detect a trend towards e-er greater autonom% in t#e de/inition and &ractice o/ art4 T#e categor% o/ F)eaut%0 and t#e
domain o/ )eauti/ul o)Iects were /irst constituted in t#e Renaissance4 ;n t#e course o/ t#e eig#teent# centur%, literature, t#e /ine arts and music were institutionaliGed as acti-ities inde&endent
/rom sacred and courtl% li/e4 $inall%, around t#e middle o/ t#e nineteent# centur% an aest#eticist conce&tion o/ art emerged, w#ic# encouraged t#e artist to &roduce #is wor! according to t#e
distinct consciousness o/ art /or art0s sa!e4 T#e autonom% o/ t#e aest#etic s&#ere could t#en )ecome a deli)erate &roIect6 t#e talented artist could lend aut#entic e(&ression to t#ose e(&eriences
#e #ad in encountering #is own decentered su)Iecti-it%, detac#ed /rom t#e constraints o/ routiniGed cognition and e-er%da% action4
;n t#e mid-nineteent# centur%, in &ainting and literature, a mo-ement )egan w#ic# Octa-io PaG /inds e&itomiGed alread% in t#e art criticism o/ 1audelaire4 Color, lines, sounds and mo-ement
ceased to ser-e &rimaril% t#e cause o/ re&resentationN t#e media o/ e(&ression and t#e tec#niKues o/ &roduction t#emsel-es )ecame t#e aest#etic o)Iect4 T#eodor .4 Adorno could t#ere/ore
)egin #is Aesthetic ,heory wit# t#e /ollowing sentence6 F;t is now ta!en /or granted t#at not#ing w#ic# concerns art can )e ta!en /or granted an% more6 neit#er art itsel/, nor art in its relations#i&
to t#e w#ole, nor e-en t#e rig#t o/ art to e(ist40 And t#is is w#at surrealism t#en denied6 das :=isten8recht der Lunst a/s Lunst. To )e sure, surrealism would not #a-e c#allenged t#e rig#t o/ art
to e(ist, i/ modern art #ad no longer ad-anced a &romise o/ #a&&iness concerning its own relations#i& Fto t#e w#ole0 o/ li/e4 $or Sc#iller, suc# a &romise was deli-ered )% aest#etic intuition, )ut
not /ul/illed )% it4 Sc#iller0s 6etters on the Aesthetic :ducation of (an s&ea!s to us o/ a uto&ia reac#ing )e%ond art itsel/4 1ut )% t#e time o/ 1audelaire, w#o re&eated t#is promesse de bonheur
-ia art, t#e uto&ia o/ reconciliation wit# societ% #ad gone sour4 A relation o/ o&&osites #ad come into )eingN art #ad )ecome a critical mirror, s#owing t#e irreconcila)le nature o/ t#e aest#etic
and t#e social worlds4 T#is modernist trans/ormation was all t#e more &ain/ull% realiGed, t#e more art alienated itsel/ /rom li/e and wit#drew into t#e untouc#a)leness o/ com&lete autonom%4 Out
o/ suc# emotional currents /inall% gat#ered t#ose e(&losi-e energies
ernlty H An 'ncomplete &ro9e
(oo ct *9>
w#ic# unloaded in t#e surrealist attem&t to )low u& t#e autar!ical s&#ere o/ art and to /orce a reconciliation o/ art and li/e4
1ut all t#ose attem&ts to le-el art and li/e, /iction and &ra(is, a&&earance and realit% to one &laneN t#e attem&ts to remo-e t#e distinction )etween conscious staging and s&ontaneous
e(citementN t#e attem&ts to declare e-er%t#ing to )e art and e-er%one to )e an artist, to retract all criteria and to eKuate aest#etic Iudgment wit# t#e e(&ression o/ su)Iecti-e e(&eriences H all t#ese
underta!ings #a-e &ro-ed t#emsel-es to )e sort o/ nonsense e(&eriments4 T#ese e(&eriments #a-e ser-ed to )ring )ac! to li/e, and to illuminate all t#e more glaringl%, e(actl% t#ose structures o/
art w#ic# t#e% were meant to dissol-e4 T#e% ga-e a new legitimac%, as ends in t#emsel-es, to a&&earance as t#e medium o/ /iction, to t#e transcendence o/ t#e artwor! o-er societ%, to t#e
concentrated and &lanned c#aracter o/ artistic &roduction as well as to t#e s&ecial cogniti-e status o/ Iudgments o/ taste4 T#e radical attem&t to negate art #as ended u& ironicall% )% gi-ing due
e(actl% to t#ese categories t#roug# w#ic# Enlig#tenment aest#etics #ad circumscri)ed its o)Iect domain4 T#e surrealists waged t#e most e(treme war/are, )ut two mista!es in &articular
destro%ed t#eir re-olt4 $irst, w#en t#e containers o/ an autonomousl% de-elo&ed cultural s&#ere are s#attered, t#e contents get dis&ersed4 ot#ing remains /rom a desu)limated meaning or a
destructured /ormN an emanci&ator% e//ect does not /ollow4
T#eir second mista!e #as more im&ortant conseKuences4 ;n e-er%da% communication, cogniti-e meanings, moral e(&ectations, su)Iecti-e e(&ressions and e-aluations must relate to one
anot#er4 Communication &rocesses need a cultural tradition co-ering all s&#eres H cogniti-e, moral-&ractical and e(&ressi-e4 A rationaliGed e-er%da% li/e, t#ere/ore, could #ardl% )e sa-ed /rom
cultural im&o-eris#ment t#roug# )rea!ing o&en a single cultural s&#ere H art H and so &ro-iding access to Iust one o/ t#e s&ecialiGed !nowledge com&le(es4 T#e surrealist re-olt would #a-e
re&laced onl% one a)straction4
;n t#e s&#eres o/ t#eoretical !nowledge and moralit%, t#ere are &arallels to t#is /ailed attem&t o/ w#at we mig#t call t#e /alse negation o/ culture, onl% t#e% are less &ronounced4 Since t#e da%s
o/ t#e Young Hegelians, t#ere #as )een tal! a)out t#e negation o/ &#iloso&#%4 Since Mar(, t#e Kuestion o/ t#e relations#i& o/ t#eor% and &ractice #as )een &osed4 Howe-er, Mar(ist intellectuals
Ioined a social mo-ementN and onl% at its &eri&#eries were t#ere sectarian attem&ts to carr% out a &rogram o/ t#e negation o/ &#iloso&#% similar to t#e surrealist &rogram to negate art4 A &arallel
to t#e surrealist mista!es )ecomes -isi)le in t#ese &rograms w#en one o)ser-es t#e conseKuences o/ dogmatism and o/ moral rigorism4
A rei/ied e-er%da% &ra(is can )e cured onl% )% creating unconstrained interaction o/ t#e cogniti-e wit# t#e moral-&ractical and t#e aest#etic-e(&ressi-e elements4 Rei/ication cannot )e
o-ercome )% /orcing Iust one o/ t#ose #ig#l% st%liGed cultural s&#eres to o&en u& and )ecome more accessi)le4 ;nstead, we see under certain circumstances a relations#i& emerge )etween
terroristic acti-ities and t#e o-ere(tension o/ an% one o/ t#ese s&#eres into ot#er domains6 e(am&les would )e tendencies to aest#eticiGe &olitics, or to re&lace &olitics )% moral rigorism or to
19< Jren !a"er#as
su)mit it to t#e dogmatism o/ a doctrine4 T#ese &#enomena s#ould not lead us, #owe-er, into denouncing t#e intentions o/ t#e sur-i-ing Enlig#tenment tradition as intentions rooted in a
Fterroristic reason04 O T#ose w#o lum& toget#er t#e -er% &roIect o/ modernit% wit# t#e state o/ consciousness and t#e s&ectacular action o/ t#e indi-idual terrorist are no less s#ort-sig#ted t#an
t#ose w#o would claim t#at t#e incom&ara)l% more &ersistent and e(tensi-e )ureaucratic terror &racticed in t#e dar!, in t#e cellars o/ t#e militar% and secret &olice, and in cam&s and institutions,
is t#e raison d1Ntre o/ t#e modern state, onl% )ecause t#is !ind o/ administrati-e terror ma!es use o/ t#e coerci-e means o/ modern )ureaucracies4
A.ternati(es
; t#in! t#at instead o/ gi-ing u& modernit% and its &roIect as a lost cause, we s#ould learn /rom t#e mista!es o/ t#ose e(tra-agant &rograms w#ic# #a-e tried to negate modernit%4 Per#a&s t#e
t%&es o/ rece&tion o/ art ma% o//er an e(am&le w#ic# at least indicates t#e direction o/ a wa% out4
1ourgeois art #ad two e(&ectations at once /rom its audiences4 On t#e one #and, t#e la%man w#o enIo%ed art s#ould educate #imsel/ to )ecome an e(&ert4 On t#e ot#er #and, #e s#ould also
)e#a-e as a com&etent consumer w#o uses art and relates aest#etic e(&eriences to #is own li/e &ro)lems4 T#is second, and seemingl% #armless, manner o/ e(&eriencing art #as lost its radical
im&lications e(actl% )ecause it #ad a con/used relation to t#e attitude o/ )eing e(&ert and &ro/essional4
To )e sure, artistic &roduction would dr% u&, i/ it were not carried out in t#e /orm o/ s&ecialiGed treatment o/ autonomous &ro)lems and i/ it were to cease to )e t#e concern o/ e(&erts w#o
do not &a% so muc# attention to e(oteric Kuestions4 1ot# artists and critics acce&t t#ere)% t#e /act t#at suc# &ro)lems /all under t#e s&ell o/ w#at ; earlier called t#e Finner logic0 o/ a cultural
domain4 1ut t#is s#ar& delineation, t#is e(clusi-e concentration on one as&ect o/ -alidit% alone and t#e e(clusion o/ as&ects o/ trut# and Iustice, )rea! down as soon as aest#etic e(&erience is
drawn into an indi-idual li/e #istor% and is a)sor)ed into ordinar% li/e4 T#e rece&tion o/ art )% t#e la%man, or )% t#e Fe-er%da% e(&ert0, goes in a rat#er di//erent direction t#an t#e rece&tion o/ art
)% t#e &ro/essional critic4
Al)rec#t .ellmer #as drawn m% attention to one wa% t#at an aest#etic e(&erience w#ic# is not /ramed around t#e e(&erts0 critical Iudgments o/ taste can #a-e its signi/icance altered6 as soon
as suc# an e(&erience is used to illuminate a li/e#istorical situation and is related to li/e &ro)lems, it enters into a language game w#ic# is no longer t#at o/ t#e aest#etic critic4 T#e aest#etic
e(&erience t#en not onl% renews t#e inter&retation o/ our needs in w#ose lig#t we &ercei-e t#e world4 ;t &ermeates as well our cogniti-e signi/ication and our normati-e e(&ectations and c#anges
t#e manner in w#ic# all t#ese moments re/er to one anot#er4 Let me gi-e an e(am&le o/ t#is &rocess4
T#is manner o/ recei-ing and relating to art is suggested in t#e /irst -olume o/ t#e wor! ,he Aesthetics of 4esistance )% t#e 2erman-Swedis# writer Peter .eiss4 .eiss
(odernity H An 'ncomplete &ro9ect *9<
descri)es t#e &rocess o/ rea&&ro&riating art )% &resenting a grou& o/ &oliticall% moti-ated, !nowledge-#ungr% wor!ers in *+,< in 1erlin4
?
T#ese were %oung &eo&le w#o, t#roug# an e-ening
#ig#-sc#ool education, acKuired t#e intellectual means to /at#om t#e general and social #istor% o/ Euro&ean art4 Out o/ t#e resilient edi/ice o/ t#is o)Iecti-e mind, em)odied in wor!s o/ art w#ic#
t#e% saw again and again in museums in 1erlin, t#e% started remo-ing t#eir own c#i&s o/ stone, w#ic# t#e% gat#ered toget#er and reassem)led in t#e conte(t o/ t#eir own milieu4 T#is milieu was
/ar remo-ed /rom t#at o/ traditional education as well as /rom t#e t#en e(isting regime4 T#ese %oung wor!ers went )ac! and /ort# )etween t#e edi/ice o/ Euro&ean art and t#eir own milieu until
t#e% were a)le to illuminate )ot#4
;n e(am&les li!e t#is w#ic# illustrate t#e rea&&ro&riation o/ t#e e(&ert0s culture /rom t#e stand&oint o/ t#e li/e-world, we can discern an element w#ic# does Iustice to t#e intentions o/ t#e
#o&eless surrealist re-olts, &er#a&s e-en more to 1rec#t0s and 1enIamin0s interests in #ow art wor!s, w#ic# #a-ing lost t#eir aura, could %et )e recei-ed in illuminating wa%s4 ;n sum, t#e &roIect
o/ modernit% #as not %et )een /ul/illed4 And t#e rece&tion o/ art is onl% one o/ at least t#ree o/ its as&ects4 T#e &roIect aims at a di//erentiated relin!ing o/ modern culture wit# an e-er%da% &ra(is
t#at still de&ends on -ital #eritages, )ut would )e im&o-eris#ed t#roug# mere traditionalism4 T#is new connection, #owe-er, can onl% )e esta)lis#ed under t#e condition t#at societal
moderniGation will also )e steered in a di//erent direction4 T#e li/e-world #as to )ecome a)le to de-elo& institutions out o/ itsel/ w#ic# set limits to t#e internal d%namics and im&erati-es o/ an
almost autonomous economic s%stem and its administrati-e com&lements4
;/ ; am not mista!en, t#e c#ances /or t#is toda% are not -er% good4 More or less in t#e entire .estern world a climate #as de-elo&ed t#at /urt#ers ca&italist moderniGation &rocesses as well as
trends critical o/ cultural modernism4 T#e disillusionment wit# t#e -er% /ailures o/ t#ose &rograms t#at called /or t#e negation o/ art and &#iloso&#% #as come to ser-e as a &retense /or
conser-ati-e &ositions4 Let me )rie/l% distinguis# t#e antimodernism o/ t#e F%oung conser-ati-es0 /rom t#e &remodernism o/ t#e Fold conser-ati-es0 and /rom t#e &ostmodernism o/ t#e
neoconser-ati-es4
T#e F%oung conser-ati-es0 reca&itulate t#e )asic e(&erience o/ aest#etic modernit%4 T#e% claim as t#eir own t#e re-elations o/ a decentered su)Iecti-it%, emanci&ated /rom t#e im&erati-es o/
wor! and use/ulness, and wit# t#is e(&erience t#e% ste& outside t#e modern world4 On t#e )asis o/ modernistic attitudes t#e% Iusti/% an irreconcila)le antimodernism4 T#e% remo-e into t#e
s&#ere o/ t#e /arawa% and t#e arc#aic t#e s&ontaneous &owers o/ imagination, sel/-e(&erience and emotion4 To instrumental reason t#e% Iu(ta&ose in Manic#ean /as#ion a &rinci&le onl%
accessi)le t#roug# e-ocation, )e it t#e will to &ower or so-ereignt%, 1eing or t#e Dion%siac /orce o/ t#e &oetical4 ;n $rance t#is line leads /rom 2eorges 1ataille -ia Mic#el $oucault to 3acKues
Derrida4
T#e Fold conser-ati-es0 do not allow t#emsel-es to )e contaminated )% cultural modernism4 T#e% o)ser-e t#e decline o/ su)stanti-e reason, t#e di//erentiation o/ science, moralit% and art,
t#e modern world--iew and its merel% &rocedural
19@ %,ren I-ia"er#as
rationalit%, wit# sadness and recommend a wit#drawal to a &osition anterior to modernit%4 eo-Aristotelianism, in &articular, enIo%s a certain success toda%4 ;n -iew o/ t#e &ro)lematic o/
ecolog%, it allows itsel/ to call /or a cosmological et#ic4 @As )elonging to t#is sc#ool, w#ic# originates wit# Leo Strauss, one can count t#e interesting wor!s o/ Hans 3onas and Ro)ert
S&aemann4A
$inall%, t#e neoconser-ati-es welcome t#e de-elo&ment o/ modern science, as long as t#is onl% goes )e%ond its s&#ere to carr% /orward tec#nical &rogress, ca&italist growt# and rational
administration4 Moreo-er, t#e% recommend a &olitics o/ de/using t#e e(&losi-e content o/ cultural modernit%4 According to one t#esis, science, w#en &ro&erl% understood, #as )ecome
irre-oca)l% meaningless /or t#e orientation o/ t#e li/e-world4 A /urt#er t#esis is t#at &olitics must )e !e&t as /ar aloo/ as &ossi)le /rom t#e demands o/ moral-&ractical Iusti/ication4 And a
t#ird t#esis asserts t#e &ure immanence o/ art, dis&utes t#at it #as a uto&ian content, and &oints to its illusor% c#aracter in order to limit t#e aest#etic e(&erience to &ri-ac%4 @One could name #ere
t#e earl% .ittgenstein, Carl Sc#mitt o/ t#e middle &eriod, and 2ott/ried 1enn o/ t#e late &eriod4A 1ut wit# t#e decisi-e con/inement o/ science, moralit% and art to autonomous s&#eres se&arated
/rom t#e li/e-world and administered )% e(&erts, w#at remains /rom t#e &roIect o/ modernit% is onl% w#at we would #a-e i/ we were to gi-e u& t#e &roIect o/ modernit% altoget#er4 As a
re&lacement one &oints to traditions w#ic#, #owe-er, are #eld to )e immune to demands o/ @normati-eA Iusti/ication and -alidation4
T#is t%&olog% is li!e an% ot#er, o/ course, a sim&li/ication, )ut it ma% not &ro-e totall% useless /or t#e anal%sis o/ contem&orar% intellectual and &olitical con/rontations4 ; /ear t#at t#e ideas
o/ antimodernit%, toget#er wit# an additional touc# o/ &remodernit%, are )ecoming &o&ular in t#e circles o/ alternati-e culture4 .#en one o)ser-es t#e trans/ormations o/ consciousness wit#in
&olitical &arties in 2erman%, a new ideological s#i/t E,enden8wendeD )ecomes -isi)le4 And t#is is t#e alliance o/ &ostmodernists wit# &remodernists4 ;t seems to me t#at t#ere is no &art% in
&articular t#at mono&oliGes t#e a)use o/ intellectuals and t#e &osition o/ neoconser-atism4 ; t#ere/ore #a-e good reason to )e t#an!/ul /or t#e li)eral s&irit in w#ic# t#e cit% o/ $ran!/urt o//ers
me a &riGe )earing t#e name o/ T#eodor Adorno, a most signi/icant son o/ t#is cit%, w#o as &#iloso&#er and writer #as stam&ed t#e image o/ t#e intellectual in our countr% in incom&ara)le
/as#ion, w#o, e-en more, #as )ecome t#e -er% image o/ emulation /or t#e intellectual4
Notes
*4 3auss is a &rominent 2erman literar% #istorian and critic in-ol-ed in t#e Faest#etics o/ rece&tion0, a t%&e o/ criticism related to reader-res&onse criticism in t#is countr%4
$or a discussion o/ Fmodern0 see 3auss, Asthetische Hormen und %eschichtliche 4efle=ion in der Muerelle des Anciens et des (odernes5 Munic#, *+?=4 $or a re/erence in Englis#
see 3auss, FHistor% o/ art and &ragmatic #istor%0, in ,oward an Aesthetic of 4eception5 transl4 Timot#% 1a#ti, 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E5, &&4 =?HE4
(odernity H An 'ncomplete &ro9ect
54 See 1enIamin, FT#eses on t#e &#iloso&#% o/ #istor%0, in 'lluminations5 transl4 Harr% So#n, Sc#oc!en, ew Yor!, *+?+, &4 5?*4
,4 $or PaG on t#e a-ant-garde see in &articular )hildren of the (ire: (odern poetry from
4omanticism to the a.ant-%arde5 Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+<=,
&&4 *=EH?=4 $or 1urger see ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press,
Minnea&olis, $all *+E,4
=4 Peter Stein/els, ,he Heoconser.ati.es5 Simon \ Sc#uster, ew Yor!, *+<+, &4 +!.
!. T#e &#rase Fto aest#eticiGe &olitics0 ec#oes 1enIamin0s /amous /ormulation o/ t#e /alse social &rogram o/ t#e /ascists in FT#e wor! o/ art in t#e age o/ mec#anical re&roduction04
Ha)ermas0s criticism #ere o/ Enlig#tenment critics seems directed less at Adorno and Ma( Hor!#eimer t#an at t#e contem&orar% nou.eau= philosophes @1ernard-Henri Le-%, etc4A and
t#eir 2erman and American counter&arts4
+. T#e re/erence is to t#e no-el <ie Asthetik des Widerstands @*+<>HEA )% t#e aut#or &er#a&s )est !nown #ere /or #is *+?> &la% (arat/-ade. T#e wor! o/ art Frea&&ro&riated0 )% t#e
wor!ers is t#e Pergamon altar, em)lem o/ &ower, classicism and rationalit%4
. w &he /tructure of
Artistic Re0olutions
&ianni 'atti#o
HC C C1
II
All t#is seems to me to signal t#e emergence in contem&orar% e&istemolog% o/ an aest#etic model o/ #istoricit% o&&osed to t#e notion o/ a &rocess o/ cumulati-e
de-elo&mentN /urt#ermore, it leads also t#e t#e ac!nowledgement o/ a &articular Fres&onsi)ilit%0 /or t#e aest#etic itsel/4 T#is res&onsi)ilit% )elongs not so muc#, nor onl%, to aest#etics
as a &#iloso&#ical disci&line, )ut rat#er to t#e aest#etic as a domain o/ e(&erience and as a dimension o/ e(istence t#at assumes e(em&lar% -alue as a model /or t#in!ing a)out
#istoricit% in general4
T#e aest#eticiGation o/ t#e #istor% o/ science H i/ it ma%, wit# all due caution, )e re/erred to in t#is wa% H w#ic# ta!es &lace in 'u#n0s wor! is not a strange or e(ce&tional
e-ent4 ;t corres&onds in /act to a muc# wider &#enomenon, o/ w#ic# it is at once a s%m&tom and a decisi-e instance6 namel%, it corres&onds to w#at ma% )e called t#e
centralit% o/ t#e aest#etic @aest#etic e(&erience, art and ot#er related &#enomenaA in modernit%4 T#is a&&arent centralit% o/ t#e aest#etic could not &ossi)l% )e due solel% to t#e
&reIudiced &oint o/ -iew o/ &#iloso&#ers and #istorians o/ art4 Sc#elling0s notion o/ art as t#e organ o/ &#iloso&#%, /or instance, is )ut one o/ t#e more e(treme e(&ressions o/
a t#ematic w#ic# is /ound t#roug#out modernit% and w#ic# c#aracteriGes t#e latter4 ietGsc#e, in ma!ing t#e e(&ression FT#e will to &ower as art0 t#e &roIected title o/ a
section o/ #is /inal t#eoretical wor! @w#ic# #e ne-er /inis#ed, and w#ic# was &u)lis#ed in /ragmentar% /orm as <er Wille 8ur (acht?5 summariGes in &er#a&s t#e clearest and
most dem%t#i/ied terms t#is &ro/ound current o/ t#e modern s&irit4 1eginning wit# ietGsc#e, it )ecomes &ossi)le to recogniGe t#eoreticall% t#e meaning o/ aest#etics in
modernit%4 T#is centralit% a//irms itsel/ /irst o/ all at a &ractical le-el, in t#e &rocess o/ t#e social &romotion o/ t#e artist and #is &roducts starting wit# t#e Renaissance, a
&rocess
$rom Jattimo, 24, ,he :nd of (odernity5 Polit% Press, O(/ord, *+EE, &&4 +>H*9<4
**9
,he -tructure of Artistic 4e.olutions iii
w#ic# graduall% con/ers on t#e artist a certain dignit% and su&eriorit%, along wit# )ot# ci-il and Kuasi-religious /unctions4 ;n a &arallel /as#ion, t#is same centralit% /irst
emerges at a t#eoretical le-el in t#e wor!s o/ Jico and t#e Romantics, w#ic# consider t#e origin o/ ci-iliGation and culture to )e Faest#etic04 $inall%, wit# t#e ad-ent o/
modern mass societ%, we see t#is same centralit% in t#e e-er greater im&ortance w#ic# aest#etic models o/ )e#a-iour @suc# as t#e -arious t%&es o/ Fstars0A and t#e
organiGation o/ social consensus @since t#e strengt# o/ t#e mass media is a)o-e all an aest#etic and r#etorical !ind o/ strengt#A continue to acKuire4 T#is &rocess is an
e(tremel% /ar-ranging oneN %et &er#a&s onl% in ietGsc#e do we /ind an awareness o/ t#e aut#entic meaning o/ t#e /unction o/ anticipation t#at t#e aest#etic &ossesses in
relation to t#e glo)al de-elo&ment o/ modern ci-iliGation4 ;n t#e notes at t#e )eginning o/ t#e &art o/ <er Wille 8ur (acht entitled FT#e will to &ower as art0 @sections <+=H<A,
w#ic# were )% a stro!e o/ good /ortune &laced t#ere )% t#e /irst editors o/ t#e te(t, ietGsc#e e(&licitl% &oints out t#e /oundation o/ t#is /unction o/ antici&ation and o/
modelling w#ic# art assumes in regard to a world w#ic# e-er more o&enl% a&&ears as t#e world o/ t#e will to &ower4 Once denied an% /ait# in t#e /rund and in t#e course o/
e-ents as a de-elo&ment toward an ultimate &oint, t#e world a&&ears as a wor! o/ art w#ic# ma!es itsel/6 Gem sich selbst %ebQrendes Lunstwerk15 an e(&ression t#at ietGsc#e
ta!es /rom $4 .4 Sc#legel4 T#e artist is a Vorstufe or a &lace in w#ic# t#e will to &ower can ma!e itsel/ !nown and )e set in motion on a small scale @section 7*!?B and, wit#
t#e re-elation o/ t#e tec#nological organiGation o/ t#e world @it mig#t )e added, wit#out )etra%ing ietGsc#e0s t#oug#tA, t#is will to &ower can un-eil itsel/ as t#e -er% essence
o/ t#e world4 T#e relation wit# tec#nolog% #as assumed a central im&ortance in t#e arts in t#e twentiet# centur%, not onl% in terms o/ t#e s&eci/ic tec#niKues o/ t#e di//erent
arts, w#ic# can )e seen e-er%w#ere at close range, )ut also in terms o/ tec#nolog% as a more general socio-#istorical /act in-ol-ing t#e tec#nological organiGation o/
&roduction and social li/e @#ere ; re/er t#e reader to t#e wor! o/ Hans Sedlma%r, e-en i/ ; do not agree wit# #is own e-aluation o/ t#e issueA4
5
T#is in turn dis&la%s in a
concrete manner t#e /unction H as &relude, antici&ation, and model H t#at ietGsc#e assigns to art and to artists in relation to t#e world as will to &ower4 T#e long struggle o/
t#e aest#etics and &oetics o/ modernit% against t#e Aristotelian de/inition o/ art as imitation attains #ere its /ull meaning, w#ic# can onl% )e called an ontological one
@Fimitation0 can )e understood to mean eit#er o/ nature or o/ classical models, alt#oug# t#e latter are still legitimated )% t#eir su&&osed &ro(imit% to nature and its &er/ect
&ro&ortionsA4 Hans 1lumen)erg,
,
and Edgar Silsel )e/ore #im @in #is reconstruction o/ t#e origins o/ t#e notion o/ genius in Humanism and in t#e RenaissanceA, #a-e s#own
to &recisel% w#at degree technicity is to )e /ound at t#e )asis o/ t#e conce&t o/ t#e artist as a creati-e genius4 T#e determination o/ t#e will to &ower as art in ietGsc#e
e(&resses t#is idea and draws out all t#e conseKuences im&licit in t#e nineteent#-centur% destruction o/ t#e dee& roots t#at /or 'ant still lin! Fgenius0 to nature4
=
;n t#e wor! o/
'ant, t#e rooting o/ genius in nature corres&onds to t#e rooting o/ scienti/ic !nowledge in an Fo)Iecti-it%0 o/ t#e world o/ nature t#at im&edes t#e identi/ication o/ t#e scientist
wit# t#e artist4 $rom
**5 &ianni 'atti#o
t#e &oint o/ -iew at w#ic# ietGsc#e arri-es, t#oug#, all t#ese roots a&&ear instead to )e torn u&6 nor, /or #im, can a genius legitimate #is own creations sim&l% )ecause #e is
ins&ired )% nature, an% more t#an a scientist can ma!e &rogress in t#e !nowledge o/ t#e true )% disco-ering Fsomet#ing alread% e(tant )ut not %et !nown, li!e America was
)e/ore Colum)us04 O ;n t#eoretical consciousness and in modern social &ractice, art constantl% reasserts itsel/ as a Fdense0 site4 T#is is t#e case in regard )ot# to t#e social
/igure o/ t#e artist and to t#e s&ecial dignit% @1enIamin s Faura0A assigned to artistic wor!s /rom a &oint o/ -iew H suc# as ietGsc#e0s H w#ic# sees t#e notion o/ t#e will to
&ower as t#e )asis /or a true ontolog% o/ modernit%4 Art t#us assumes t#e sense o/ an antici&ation o/ t#e essence o/ modernit% H o/ its aut#entic nature, t#at is, and o/ t#e wa%
in w#ic# its essence arises in t#e modern era H &rior to its )eing com&letel% dis&la%ed in t#e tec#nological organiGation o/ toda%0s world4 T#e t#eoretical and &ractical
centralit% attri)uted, more or less e(&licitl%, to art since t#e Renaissance reac#es an e(treme degree in t#e emergence o/ aest#etic models as well in t#e -ersion o/ t#e #istor%
o/ science &ro&osed )% 'u#n4 T#is centralit% is not to )e understood as a sign o/ a general aest#eticiGing tendenc% in t#e culture o/ t#e last /ew centuriesN rat#er, it is an
antici&ation o/ and a &relude to t#e emergence o/ t#e will to &ower as t#e essence o/ 1eing in modernit%4 ;/, #owe-er, ietGsc#e su&&lies t#e most radical and t#eoreticall%
e(&licit &oint o/ -iew @at least in terms o/ t#e #%&ot#esis t#at we are e(&loring #ereA /or understanding t#e meaning o/ t#e centralit% o/ art in modern consciousness, it is at t#e
same time undenia)le t#at #e #imsel/ does not &ossess a &er/ectl% clear awareness o/ t#e t%&icall% modern nature o/ t#is &#enomenon4 $or ietGsc#e, t#e a&&earance o/ t#e
will to &ower as t#e essence o/ 1eing or @w#at amounts to t#e same t#ingA as t#e deat# o/ 2od is a #istorical e-ent, and not t#e disco-er% o/ a Ftrue0 meta&#%sical structure4 ;t
is t#ere/ore, to some e(tent, lin!ed to modernit%4 Yet it would )e di//icult to argue t#at /or ietGsc#e t#e conce&t o/ t#e Fmodern0 is t%&icall% de/ined in relation to t#ese
e-ents4 ;t is more li!el% t#at #e o//ers an e(treme e(am&le o/ t#e consciousness o/ modernit% in t#e su)Iecti-e meaning o/ t#e geniti-e, not in t#e o)Iecti-e one6 t#e numerous
te(ts in w#ic# ietGsc#e discusses modernit% as a &#enomenon o/ decadence cannot )e easil% reconciled to t#ose in w#ic# #e instead s&ea!s o/ t#e necessit% o/ /ul/illing
ni#ilism @and t#ere/ore decadenceA t#roug# a &assage /rom t#e reacti-e stage o/ ni#ilism to t#e acti-e and a//irmati-e stage4 E-en t#e central /unction o/ art, as t#e &rinci&le o/
a /e%enbewe%un% against t#e -arious /orms o/ reacti-e ni#ilism @religion, moralit%, and &#iloso&#%6 c/4 section <+= o/ <er Wille 8ur (acht?5 is not t#oug#t o/ )% ietGsc#e in
terms o/ a s&eci/ic relation to modernit%, )ut rat#er in /ar more general terms4 T#is di//erence )etween our &oint o/ -iew toda%, w#ic# is nonet#eless lin!ed to ietGsc#e0s and
ietGsc#e0s own is /ar more t#eoreticall% c#arged t#an it would a&&ear to )e at /irst glance4 ;/ t#is di//erence means t#at in ietGsc#e0s wor! we /ind t#e culmination o/ t#e
consciousness o/ modernit% onl% in t#e su)Iecti-e meaning o/ t#e geniti-e, t#en t#is also means t#at we can ne-er sim&l% reuse #is arguments, )ut must instead situate
oursel-es H or recogniGe t#at we /ind oursel-es H in terms o/ a di//erent
,he -tructure of Artistic 4e.olutions i *,
dis&lacement4 T#is Fdis&lacement0 not onl% distances us /rom ietGsc#e, )ut also &laces us in a &osition distinct /rom #is as regards t#e signi/icance o/ t#e centralit% o/ art in
modernit%4
Passing o-er a /ew &assages and a more detailed anal%sis o/ t#e di//erence )etween t#e su)Iecti-e and o)Iecti-e meanings o/ t#e geniti-e in t#e &#rase FietGsc#e,
&#iloso&#er o/ modernit%0, w#ile at t#e same time !ee&ing t#is di//erence /irml% in mind, it is necessar% to recogniGe t#at t#e &articular connection )etween t#e centralit% o/
art and modernit% ma% a&&ear more clearl% to us t#an it does to ietGsc#e, t#an!s to t#e lig#t cast on it )% a conce&t t#at ietGsc#e ne-er t#ematiGes @&er#a&s )ecause it is
still too close to #imA4 T#is conce&t is t#e -alue o/ t#e new, or t#e new as -alue4 Here we need to introduce e(&licitl% a de/inition o/ modernit%, w#ic#, e-en i/ not /ormulated
in e(actl% t#e terms t#at we aim to use in t#e &resent wor!, can still )e considered widel% &resent in t#e wor! o/ man% t#eoreticians o/ t#e modern, /rom .e)er to 2e#len,
1lumen)erg, and 'osellec!4
?
T#is de/inition, w#ic# certainl% re/lects a ietGsc#ean t#ematics as well, goes as /ollows6 modernit% is t#at era in w#ic# )eing modern )ecomes
a -alue, or rat#er, it )ecomes the /undamental -alue to w#ic# all ot#er -alues re/er4 T#is /ormula ma% )e corro)orated i/ we see t#at it coincides wit# t#e ot#er, and more
widel% disseminated, de/inition o/ t#e modern in terms o/ seculariGation4 SeculariGation, as t#e modern, is a term t#at descri)es not onl% w#at #a&&ens in a certain era and
w#at nature it assumes, )ut also t#e F-alue0 t#at dominates and guides consciousness in t#e era in Kuestion, &rimaril% as /ait# in &rogress H w#ic# is )ot# a seculariGed /ait#
and a /ait# in seculariGation4 1ut /ait# in &rogress, understood as a !ind o/ /ait# in t#e #istorical &rocess t#at is e-er more de-oid o/ &ro-idential and meta-#istorical elements,
is &urel% and sim&l% identi/ied wit# /ait# in t#e -alue o/ t#e new4 Against t#is )ac!ground we must see, /irst o/ all, t#e grandiosit% in-ested in t#e conce&t o/ genius, and,
secondaril%, t#e centralit% t#at art and artists acKuire in modern culture4 Modernit% is &rimaril% t#e era in w#ic# t#e increased circulation o/ goods @SimmelA
E
and ideas, and
increased social mo)ilit% @2e#lenA
+
, )ring into /ocus t#e -alue o/ t#e new and &redis&ose t#e conditions /or t#e identi/ication o/ -alue @t#e -alue o/ 1eing itsel/A wit# t#e new4
A good deal o/ twentiet#-centur% &#iloso&#% descri)es t#e /uture in a wa% dee&l% tinged wit# t#e grandiose4 Suc# descri&tions range /rom t#e earl% Heidegger0s de/inition o/
e(istence as &roIect and transcendence to Sartre0s notion o/ transcendence, to Ernst 1loc#0s uto&ianism @w#ic# is em)lematic o/ all Hegelian:Mar(ist &#iloso&#%A, and to t#e
-arious et#ics w#ic# seem e-er more insistentl% to locate t#e -alue o/ an action in t#e /act o/ its ma!ing &ossi)le ot#er c#oices and ot#er actions, t#us o&ening u& a /uture4
T#is same grandiose -ision is t#e /ait#/ul mirror o/ an era t#at in general ma% legitimatel% )e called F/uturistic0, to )orrow an e(&ression /rom an essa% )% 'r%Gsto/ Pomian to
w#ic# ; will re/er again later4 19 T#e same ma% naturall% )e said o/ t#e twentiet#centur% artistic a-ant-garde mo-ements, w#ose radicall% anti-#istoricist ins&iration is most
aut#enticall% e(&ressed )% $uturism and Dadaism4 1ot# in &#iloso&#% and in a-ant-garde &oetics, t#e &at#os o/ t#e /uture is still accom&anied )% an a&&eal
**= &ianni 'atti#o
to t#e aut#entic, according to a model o/ t#oug#t c#aracteristic o/ all modern F/uturism06 t#e tension towards t#e /uture is seen as a tension aimed towards a renewal and return
to a condition o/ originar% aut#enticit%4
A -isi)le lin! )etween modernit%, seculariGation and t#e -alue o/ t#e new can t#ere/ore )e disco-ered w#en t#e /ollowing &oints are )roug#t into /ocus4 @aA Modernit% is
c#aracteriGed as t#e era o/ <iesseiti%keit5 namel% t#e a)andonment o/ t#e sacred -ision o/ e(istence and t#e a//irmation o/ t#e realm o/ &ro/ane -alue instead, t#at is, o/
seculariGation4 @)A T#e !e% &oint o/ seculariGation, at t#e conce&tual le-el, is /ait# in &rogress @or t#e ideolog% o/ &rogressA, w#ic# ta!es s#a&e t#roug# a resum&tion o/ t#e
3udeo-C#ristian -ision o/ #istor%, /rom w#ic# all re/erences to transcendence are F&rogressi-el%0 eliminated4 O T#is occurs )ecause &rogress de&icts itsel/ e-er more
insistentl% as a -alue in and o/ itsel/, in order to esca&e /rom t#e ris! o/ t#eoriGing t#e end o/ #istor% @w#ic# is a ris! w#en t#ere is no longer a )elie/ in t#e a/terli/e as de/ined
)% C#ristianit%A4 Progress is Iust t#at &rocess w#ic# leads toward a state o/ t#ings in w#ic# /urt#er &rogress is &ossi)le, and not#ing else4 @cA T#is e(treme seculariGation o/ t#e
&ro-idential -ision o/ #istor% is sim&l% t#e eKui-alent o/ a//irming t#e new as t#e /undamental -alue4
;n t#is &rocess o/ seculariGation and t#e a//irmation o/ t#e -alue o/ t#e new H a &rocess w#ic#, #istoricall% s&ea!ing, is not at all as linear as it a&&ears w#en its t#eoreticall%
essential traits are retros&ecti-el% reassem)led H art /unctions as an antici&ation or em)lem4 T#is is t#e same as sa%ing t#at, w#ile /or muc# o/ t#e modern age t#e disco-eries
made )% Fmec#anical #eads0 #a-e still )een limited and directed H at t#e le-el o/ science and tec#nolog% H )% t#e -alue o/ Ftrut#0 or )% t#e -alue o/ Fuse/ulness /or li/e0, /or art
t#ese limitations and /orms o/ meta&#%sical /ounding #a-e long since )een a)andoned4 T#us /rom t#e )eginning o/ t#e modern era or t#erea)outs, art @alt#oug# t#ere are o/
course di//erences in t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#e indi-idual artsA #as /ound itsel/ in t#e same ungrounded condition t#at science and tec#nolog% onl% toda% e(&licitl% recogniGe
t#emsel-es to )e in4
;n #is *+?< essa% on FDie Sa!ularisierung des $ortsc#ritts0, Arnold 2e#len descri)es t#is &rocess in rat#er di//erent terms, w#ic# )% and large, #owe-er, /it in wit# t#e
argument t#at we #a-e &ut /orward #ere4 He sees t#e seculariGation o/ &rogress to )e articulated in di//erent wa%s, de&ending u&on w#et#er it occurs in t#e /ield o/ science
and tec#nolog% @more &recisel%, w#at #e calls t#e o&erati-e connection H Pusammenarbeit H o/ Fe(act sciences, tec#nological de-elo&ment and industrial a&&licationA, 12 or in t#e
/ield o/ culture as constituted )% t#e arts, literature, and t#e schbne Wissenschaften in general4 ;n t#e /ormer, &rogress re&resents a !ind o/ /atalism, /or it )ecomes Froutine06 in
science, tec#nolog% and industr% w#at is new sim&l% signi/ies sur-i-al o/ t#ese domains o/ acti-it% @as economics reasons solel% in terms o/ t#e rate o/ de-elo&ment, not in
terms o/ t#e satis/action o/ -ital )asic needsA4 T#e trans/ormation o/ &rogress into a routine in t#ese /ields, 2e#len argues, disc#arges all t#e &at#os o/ t#e new onto t#e ot#er
/ield, t#at is, t#at o/ t#e arts and literature4 Here, t#oug#, in a wa% and /or reasons t#at 2e#len0s te(t does not seem to e(&lain clearl%, t#e -alue o/ t#e new and t#e &at#os o/
de-elo&ment undergo a still more radical seculariGation t#an t#at w#ic# occurs
,he -tructure of Artistic 4e.olutions **>
in t#e &assage /rom /ait# in t#e #istor% o/ redem&tion to t#e &ro/ane ideolog% o/ &rogress4 $or di//erent reasons, )ot# in t#e )ecoming Froutine0 o/ scienti/ic^ tec#nological:industrial
&rogress and in t#e dis&lacement o/ t#e &at#os o/ t#e new towards t#e territor% o/ art, t#ere occurs a true dissolution o/ &rogress itsel/4 T#is dissolution is lin!ed on t#e one
#and to t#e -er% &rocess o/ seculariGation itsel/4 2e#len writes t#at seculariGation6
consists in general in t#is H t#at t#e s&eci/ic laws o/ t#e new world su//ocate /ait#, or rat#er, not /ait# as muc# as its trium&#alistic certitude ldie sie%es be%luckte /ewissheitD.
At t#e same time, t#e o-erall &roIect /ollowing an o)Iecti-e im&ulse o/ t#ings /ans out Efdchert aufD in di-ergent &rocesses t#at de-elo& t#eir own internal legalit% e-er
/urt#er, and slowl% &rogress @since in t#e meantime we want to !ee& on )elie-ing in itA is dis&laced towards t#e &eri&#er% o/ /acts and consciousness, and t#ere is totall%
em&tied out4 18
SeculariGation itsel/, in s#ort, contains a tendenc% toward dissolution w#ic# is accentuated wit# t#e &assage o/ t#e &at#os o/ t#e new toward t#e /ield o/ art4 T#is is in itsel/ a
&eri&#eral /ield, according to 2e#len, in w#ic# t#e need /or t#e new Hand its &rogressi-el% )ecoming inessential H is intensi/ied4 i: SeculariGation, as t#e esta)lis#ment o/ laws
&ro&er to eac# o/ man% di//erent /ields and domains o/ e(&erience, t#us a&&ears as a menace to t#e notion o/ &rogress inasmuc# as it can e-entuall% t#wart t#at -er% notion4
T#is can )e seen in t#e wor! o/ 1loc#, /or instance, w#o wants to remain /ait#/ul to a -ision o/ t#e &rogressi-e and emanci&ator% mo-ement o/ #istor%, )ut w#o e(amines
wit# concern t#e Fdi//erentiations in t#e conce&t o/ &rogress0
*>
and see!s to /ind in t#em a unitar% design, in s&ite o/ t#e multi&licit% o/ #istorical time @w#ic# is lin!ed to t#e
nature o/ class con/lictA4 T#e disco-er% o/ t#is same design is also t#e o)Iecti-e o/ 1enIamin0s critiKue in #is FT#eses on t#e &#iloso&#% o/ #istor%04
I..
2e#len is t#e /irst to use t#e term post-hi stoire in regard to late modernit%4 He claims to ta!e t#is /rom t#e mat#ematician Antoine Augustin Cournot, w#o, #owe-er, ne-er seems to
#a-e em&lo%ed e(actl% t#is termN 2e#len &ro)a)l% )orrows it /rom Hendri! de Man instead4 1< T#e e=treme seculari8ation w#ic# 2e#len descri)es o//ers us t#e o&&ortunit% to go
one ste& /urt#er and to tr% to answer t#e Kuestion @alread% a&&arent in m% earlier allusion to ietGsc#eA t#at as!s /or t#e di//erence )etween a consciousness o/ modernit% in
t#e su)Iecti-e meaning o/ t#e geniti-e, on t#e one #and, and in t#e o)Iecti-e meaning o/ t#e geniti-e, on t#e ot#er4 T#e de/inition o/ modernit% as t#e era in w#ic# )eing
modern is t#e )ase--alue is not a de/inition w#ic# modernit% could gi-e o/ itsel/4 T#e essence o/ t#e modern )ecomes trul% -isi)le onl% /rom t#e moment in w#ic# H in a wa%
t#at needs to )e e(amined more care/ull% H t#e mec#anism o/ modernit% distances itsel/ /rom us4 2e#len, in
**? &ianni 'atti#o
s&ea!ing o/ t#e dissolution and em&t%ing-out o/ t#e notion o/ &rogress )ot# in t#e domain o/ science:tec#nolog%:industr% and o/ t#e arts, su&&lies a clue to understanding t#is
distancing o/ modernit%4 T#e /act @noted )% 2e#lenA t#at t#e /inal condition soug#t )% t#e radicall% F/uture-oriented0 uto&ias, li!e t#e great re-olutionar% ideologies
t#emsel-es, re-eals noticea)le traits o/ a#istoricit%, can &er#a&s )e &laced toget#er wit# t#is same tendenc% to dissolution4 F.#ere we e//ecti-el% tr% to ma!e t#e new man,
our relations#i& wit# #istor% also c#anges4
T#e $renc# re-olutionaries called *<+, t#e %ear One o/ a new era40 i= 2e#len detects t#is trait o/ a#istoricit% in a t%&ical eig#teent#-centur% uto&ia, Se)astien Mercier0s 61an
""0 @&u)lis#ed in *<<9A4 ;n t#e /uture world descri)ed )% Mercier, w#ic# is go-erned )% Rousseauian so)riet% and -irtue, all /orms o/ credit #a-e )een a)olis#ed, e-er%one
&a%s /or e-er%t#ing in cas#, and classical languages are no longer studied, since t#e% are not needed in order /or men to )e -irtuous4 1@ T#e su&&ression o/ all credit and
classical languages em)lematicall% em)odies a reduction o/ e(istence to t#e na!ed &resent, t#at is, t#e elimination o/ an% #istorical dimension4
Progress seems to s#ow a tendenc% to dissol-e itsel/, and wit# it t#e -alue o/ t#e new as well, not onl% in t#e e//ecti-e &rocess o/ seculariGation, )ut e-en in t#e most
e(tremel% /uturistic uto&ias4 T#is dissolution is t#e e-ent t#at ena)les us to distance oursel-es /rom t#e mec#anism o/ modernit%, muc# more t#an 2e#len e-er ac!nowledges4
'rG%sGto/ Pomian0s essa% on FT#e crisis o/ t#e /uture0, alt#oug# it does not re/er directl% to 2e#len0s wor!, ta!es u& t#e line o/ re/lection de-elo&ed )% t#e latter4 Pomian
adds some use/ul ideas /or t#e &resent discourse, /or #e t#ematiGes more o&enl% t#e crisis o/ t#e -alue o/ t#e new w#ic# seems to c#aracteriGe t#e &resent-da% situation @it
mig#t )e added t#at it is on t#is )asis t#at it is de/ined as post-histoire5 in a more &recise sense o/ t#e term t#an 2e#len0sA4 ;n #is discussion o/ t#e c#aracteriGation o/ modernit%
as a F/uturistic0 era, Pomian ma!es e(&licit t#e ne(us )etween t#e emergence o/ t#e -alue o/ t#e new and t#e constitution o/ t#e modern state4 .e #a-e alread% seen t#at
Mercier0s uto&ia calls /or t#e end o/ all credit arrangements6 Pomian writes t#at Ft#e /uture is, literall%, inIected into t#e -er% te(ture o/ t#e &resent in t#e /orm o/ &a&er
mone%4444 T#e #istor% o/ more t#an two t#ousand %ears o/ monetariGation o/ t#e econom% is also t#e #istor% o/ a growing de&endence o/ t#e &resent on t#e /uture0 @*95A4 E-en
i/ t#is de&endence alread% e(ists in &rinci&le in e-er% agricultural societ% in w#ic# t#ere is an inter-al )etween &lanting and #ar-est-time, it )ecomes a decisi-e dimension
onl% in modern societ%4 FOnl% large-scale commerce, in t#e /orm t#at /irst a&&ears in t#e twel/t# centur% in ;talian, $lemis# and Hanseatic cities, toget#er wit# t#e
concomitant de-elo&ment o/ credit and maritime insurance, granted t#e /uture t#e role o/ a constituti-e dimension0 @*9,A4 T#e -alue assigned to t#e re&roducti-e role o/ t#e
/amil% as a seculariGed /orm o/ eternit%, and t#e conseKuent recognition o/ c#ild#ood and %out# as conditions &ossessed o/ s&eci/ic -alues w#ic# are entirel% /uture-related,
are connected to t#is )asic mec#anism o/ t#e modern /orm o/ societ%4 More clearl% t#an 2e#len, Pomian recogniGes t#e crisis o/ t#e -alue o/ t#e /uture in contem&orar%
culture t#at runs &arallel to t#e crisis H wit# its tendencies to dissolution H t#at
,he -tructure of Artistic 4e.olutions 1=
&lagues t#e -er% institutions t#at conditioned t#e emergence o/ t#at -alue, in &articular t#e modern state4 T#e institutions w#ic# em)od% t#e /uturistic orientation o/ t#e
modern world Fa&&ear to )e &lagued )% serious mal/unctions0 @**5A, ranging /rom in/lation @w#ic# desta)iliGes t#e &urc#asing &ower o/ mone%A to t#e com&le(it% and
uncontrolled growt# o/ t#e state a&&aratus, etc4 ;/ we lea-e aside Pomian and matters o/ macrosociolog%, and turn instead to t#e /ield o/ t#e arts, #ere too we are struc! )% t#e
dissolution o/ t#e -alue o/ t#e new4 T#is is t#e meaning o/ t#e &ostmodern, to t#e degree in w#ic# it cannot )e reduced to a mere /act o/ cultural /as#ion4 $rom arc#itecture to
t#e no-el to &oetr% to t#e /igurati-e arts, t#e &ostmodern dis&la%s, as its most common and most im&osing trait, an e//ort to /ree itsel/ /rom t#e logic o/ o-ercoming,
de-elo&ment, and inno-ation4 $rom t#is &oint o/ -iew, t#e &ostmodern corres&onds to Heidegger0s attem&t to &re&are a &ost-meta&#%sical !ind o/ t#oug#t w#ic# would not
)e an 0berwindun% )ut rat#er a Verwindun% o/ meta&#%sics4 T#is latter term, des&ite all its am)iguities, deser-es to )e &laced alongside t#ose o/ FseculariGation0 and
@ietGsc#eanA Fni#ilism0 in an% consideration o/ modernit% t#at is &#iloso&#ical and not merel% historisch. Seen in t#e lig#t not onl% o/ ietGsc#e0s F.ille Gur Mac#t als
'unst0, )ut also es&eciall% o/ Heidegger0s &ost-meta&#%sical ontolog%, t#e &ostmodern e(&erience o/ art a&&ears as t#e wa% in w#ic# art occurs in t#e era o/ t#e end o/
meta&#%sics4 T#is #olds good not onl% /or w#at we toda% call F&ostmodern0 /igurati-e art, literature, and arc#itecture, )ut also /or t#e dissoluti-e tendencies alread% a&&arent
in t#e great earl%-twentiet#-centur% a-ant-garde mo-ements, suc# as, /or instance, 3o%ce0s transition /rom 0lysses to $inne%ans Wake5 w#ic# ;#a) Hassan correctl% sees as a !e% e-ent
/or t#e de/inition o/ t#e &ostmodern4 1B
I'
Postmodern art a&&ears as t#e most ad-anced &oint at w#ic# t#e &rocess o/ seculariGation descri)ed )% 2e#len #as arri-ed4 ;t is also a &re&arator% &#ase /or t#e conditions in w#ic# t#e
consciousness o/ modernit% ma% )ecome suc#, e-en in t#e o)Iecti-e meaning o/ t#e geniti-e4 ;n t#e &#antasmagoric @as Adorno calls itA &la% o/ a societ% )uilt around t#e
mar!et&lace and tec#nological mass media, t#e arts #a-e e(&erienced wit#out an% /urt#er meta&#%sical mas! @suc# as t#e searc# /or a su&&osedl% aut#entic /oundation o/
e(istenceA t#e e(&erience o/ t#e -alue o/ t#e new as suc#4 T#is e(&erience occurs in a &urer and more -isi)le wa% t#an it does /or science and tec#nolog%, w#ic# are still to a
degree tied to trut#--alue or use--alue4 $or t#e arts, t#e -alue o/ t#e new, once it #as )een radicall% un-eiled, loses all &ossi)ilit% o/ /oundation or -alue4 T#e crisis o/ t#e /uture
w#ic# &ermeates all late-modern culture and social li/e /inds in t#e e(&erience o/ art a &ri-ileged locus o/ e(&ression4 Suc# a crisis, o)-iousl%, im&lies a radical c#ange in our
wa% o/ e(&eriencing #istor% and time, as is somew#at o)scurel% antici&ated )% ietGsc#e in #is Fdoctrine0 o/ t#e eternal return o/ t#e Same4 ;t is not &er#a&s an insigni/icant
coincidence t#at certain Fe&oc#-ma!ing0 wor!s o/ t#e twentiet# centur% H /rom
**E &ianni 'atti#o
Proust0s 4emembrance of ,hin%s &ast to Musil0s ,he (an without Mualities to 3o%ce0s 0lysses and $inne%ans Wake H concentrate, e-en at t#e le-el o/ content itsel/, on t#e &ro)lem o/ time
and on wa%s o/ e(&eriencing tem&oralit% outside its su&&osedl% natural linearit%4 29 T#is suggests a &ositi-e direction /or 2e#len0s posthistoire5 not Iust a &urel% dissoluti-e
one, w#ile at t#e same time a-oiding all S&englerian nostalgia /or Fdecline04 ;/ in t#is wa% t#e -er% notion o/ artistic re-olution, caug#t u& in t#is game o/ ungrounding, loses
some o/ its meaning, at t#e same time it &er#a&s su&&lies a means o/ esta)lis#ing a dialogue )etween &#iloso&#ical t#oug#t and &oetr%, in -iew o/ t#at w#ic# in contem&orar%
&#iloso&#% continuall% reasserts itsel/ as t#e &ossi)le H t#oug# &ro)lematical Ho-ercoming o/ meta&#%sics4
Notes
*4 On t#is &oint, c/4 Mario Perniola, 61al8ena8ione artist8ca5 Mursia, Milan, *+<*4
54 See es&eciall% Sedlma%r0s Art in )risis5 the 6ost )enter5 *+=E, transl4 1rian 1atters#aw, H4 Regner% Co4, C#icago, *+>EN and ,he 4e.olution of (odern Art5 1*!!.
#. C/4 Hans 1lumen)erg, Wirklichkeiten in denen wir leben5 Reclam, Stuttgart, *+E*, es&eciall% t#e essa% Fac#a#mung der atur0N and, more generall%, <ie 6e%itimQt der Heu8eit5 Su#r!am&,
$ran!/urt, *+??4
=4 On t#is &oint, see t#e /irst &art o/ H4-24 2adamer, ,ruth and (ethod5 transl4 2arrett 1arden and 3o#n Cummings, 5nd edn, *+<>N re&r4 Crossroads, ew Yor!, *+E=4
!. 'ant, Anthropolo%y from a &ra%matic &oint of View5 transl4 2regor, &ara4 ><4
?4 See Ma( .e)er, ,he -ociolo%y of 4eli%ion5 transl4 E&#raim $isc#o//, 1eacon, 1oston,
MA, *+?=4 $or Arnold 2e#len, see #is (an in the A%e of ,echnolo%y @*+><A, transl4
Patricia Li&scom), Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+E9N and #is *+?< essa% on
FDie Sa!ularisierung des $ortsc#ritts0, in -ol4 J;; o/ #is collected wor!s, entitled
:inhlicke5 ed4 '4 S4 Re#)erg, 'lostermann, $ran!/urt, *+<E4 $or R4 'osellec!, see es&4
Ver%an%ene Pukunft. Pur -emantik %eschicht/icher Peiten5 Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt, *+<+4
<4 T#e )est o-erall #istor% o/ t#e conce&t o/ seculariGation is H4 Lu))e0s -dkularisierun%. /eschichte eines ideenpolitischen Ke%r8ffs5 Al)er, $rei)urg, *+?>4
E4 C/4 2eorg Simmel0s essa% on F$as#ion0 @*E+>A, in 2n 'ndi.iduality and -ocial $orms5 ed4 Donald 4 Le-ine, C#icago 8ni-ersit% Press, C#icago, *+<*, &&4 5+=H,5,4
*. C/4 a)o-e all 2e#len0s essa% on FDie Sb!ularisierung des $ortsc#ritts04
*94 '4 Pomian, FT#e crisis o/ t#e /uture0, &u)lis#ed in ;talian @FLa crisi dell0a--enire0A in 6e frontiere del tempo5 ed4 R4 Romano, ;l Saggiatore, Milan, *+E*4
**4 T#e classic argument concerning modern #istoricism as t#e seculariGation o/ t#e t#eolog% o/ 3udeo-C#ristian #istor% is /ound in L`wit#0s (eanin% in 7istory5 *+=+N re&r4 C#icago
8ni-ersit% Press, *+><4
*54 2e#len, FDie Sa!ularisierung des $ortsc#ritts0, &4 =*94
*,4 'bid.5 &4 =9+4
*=4 'bid.5 &4 =**4
1!. Ernst 1loc#, FDi//erenGierungen im 1egri// $ortsc#ritt0, in ,ubin%er :inleitun% in die &hilosophic5 Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt, *+?=, -ol4 ;, &&4 *?9H5954 On 1loc#0s notion o/
,he -tructure of Artistic 4e.olutions **+
#istor%, s&eci/icall% in regard to a F&luralit%0 o/ #istorical times, c/4 R4 1odel, (ulti.ersum. ,empo e storia in :rnst Kloch5 1i)lio&olis, a&les, *+<+4
*?4 2e#len, FDie Sb!ularisierung des $ortsc#ritts0, note /or &&4 =?EH<94
*<4 'bid.5 &4 =9E4
*E4 'bid.5 &4 =9+4
*+4 C/4 ;#a) Hassan, &aracriticisms5 ;llinois 8ni-ersit% Press, 8r)ana, *+<>4
594 See Al)erto Asor Rosa0s essa%, FTem&o e nuo-o nell0a-anguardia o--ero6 l0in/inita mani&olaGione del tem&o0, in 6e frontiere del tempo5 ed4 Romano4
< w &he Last 1a(s of
Li2eralism
Da(id )oo*
Aest/etic Li"era.is#
As late ca&italism mo-es /rom t#e commodit% relation )ased on wage:la)our e(&loitation to t#e simulated econom% o/ e(cess, it &la%s out t#e logic o/ li)eralism4 T#e turn to
FIustice and -alues0, nominall% identi/ied wit# conser-atism, )ecomes t#e rall%ing &oint /or a societ% t#at #as accom&lis#ed )% de/inition t#e main tenets o/ li)eralism,
/reedom and eKualit%4 ;n t#e last da%s o/ li)eralism, we are &resented wit# a culturall% re/ined model o/ )e#a-iour t#at #as le/t )e#ind t#e crudit% o/ 1ent#am0s Kui& t#at
F&us#&in is as good as &oetr%04 T#e Flast men0 o/ ietGsc#e0s #erd are content in acti-el% see!ing t#e role o/ a &assi-e s&ectator in t#e democratic &rocess as ietGsc#e
&redicted4 T#e% #a-e all )ecome critics w#ose main tas! is to sit in Iudgement4
;t is our t#esis t#at 3mmanuel 'ant, in #is last da%s, re-erses t#e /ield o/ li)eralism creating t#e to&olog% o/ t#e &ostmodern societ% o/ t#e s&ectacle under t#e sign o/ t#e aest#etic4
All o/ t#is ma% )e /ound in t#e )riti>ue of 3ud%ement5
1
t#e de/initi-e te(t o/ t#e dead &ower o/ aest#etic li)eralism6
" no longer critical t#eor%0s F.#at is Enlig#tenment0, )ut rat#er FT#e End o/ All t#ings0 as instrumental reason )ecomes a culture te(tN
" no longer L%otard0s nostalgia /or a su)lime transcendent, )ut rat#er t#e nauseous allegor%N
" no longer DeleuGe0s #armon% o/ t#e /aculties, )ut rat#er t#e ni#ilism o/ t#e will-not-to-willN
" no longer Arendt0s citiGen, )ut rat#er t#e disem)odied e%e o/ t#e -o%eurN
" no longer Marcuse0s &la%, )ut rat#er s&ectator s&ortsN
$rom 'ro!er, A4 and Coo!, D4, ,he &ostmodern -cene5 Macmillan Education, 1asingsto!e:ew .orld Pers&ecti-es, Cue)ec:St Martin0s Press, ew Yor!, *+EE, &&4 *>+H?<4
*59
,he 6ast <ays of 6iberalism 121
" no longer li)eralism, )ut rat#er aest#etic li)eralism and t#e societ% o/ t#e s&ectacle4
.e )egin )% mo-ing to t#e site o/ aest#etic li)eralism H t#e imagination4
As Heidegger &oints out in #is stud% o/ 'ant0s meta&#%sics, t#e )riti>ue of 3ud%ement esta)lis#es t#e central role o/ t#e transcendental imagination4
5
T#is, in turn,
reesta)lis#es li)eral t#eor% as t#e unit% o/ wills under t#e conce&t o/ an end w#ic# #as a su)Iecti-e claim to uni-ersalit% )ased on t#e transcendental imagination4 T#e
imagination /ounds t#e indi-idual and t#e state on t#e )asis o/ t#e aest#etic in/orming t#e Iudgement o/ t#e F!ingdom o/ ends04 T#us t#e )riti>ue stands as t#e /ounding te(t o/
aest#etic li)eralism4
T#e im&ortance attac#ed to t#e aest#etic imagination sends one )ac! to t#e origins o/ t#e aest#etic in t#e Fsensi)ilit%0 o/ t#e natural world4 $or 'ant, t#is sensi)ilit%
e(&resses itsel/ in t#e desires w#ic# s#are wit# t#e imagination t#e structure o/ calling to Fli/e0 w#at is not t#ere4 T#e senses are determined )% t#e Fnatural0 causalit% o/
/ul/illing desires4 T#is is sometimes &ortra%ed as amoral, /or e(am&le, t#e eating o/ /ood /or sur-i-al, or at ot#er times as immoral, as greed, )ut in t#e long run as &art o/ t#e
antagonism t#at leads to t#e moral end o/ &er&etual &eace4 T#e will w#ic# is determined )% t#ese natural causes is claimed )% 'ant to )e /ree a priori as a transcendental
moral agent w#ose c#ie/ c#aracteristic is its disinterestedness4 O
T#is gi-es rise to t#e /amiliar Ho))esian -iew o/ &olitics6 an antagonistic desiring indi-idual needing, to Kuote t#e si(t# &ro&osition o/ t#e 'dea for a 0ni.ersal 7istory5 Fa
master to )rea! #is sel/-will and /orce #im to o)e% a uni-ersall% -alid will is t#e categorical im&erati-e, or t#e &rinci&le o/ &olitical rig#t, w#ic# esta)lis#es t#e /orm o/ t#e
state as an aut#oritati-e agent to administer Iustice uni-ersall%0
=
lea-ing t#e end o/ t#e state under t#e sign o/ cosmo&olitan &ur&ose4
T#ree o)ser-ations ma% )e drawn4 $irst, economics )ecomes t#e realm o/ t#e un/ettered will in t#e com&etition o/ all against all4 ;t is an amoral acti-it% w#ic# a&&ears in
t#e catalogue o/ tec#nical s!ills under &ractical reason4 As an un/ettered will economics is t#e site re/lecting 'ant0s &ossessi-e indi-idualism wit# t#e &ri-ileged &osition o/
t#e in/inite a&&ro&riator, %et, wit# a long run moral aim, t#e underl%ing calculus o/ &leasure:&ain, or sensi)ilit%, contri)utes to t#e ;dea o/ &er&etual &eace4
Second, t#e state under t#e ;dea o/ &er&etual &eace is gi-en no &ractical end, onl% /orm, in accord wit# t#e moral law, %et, as a sensi)le entit% it #as an end4 Determining
t#e &articular end /rom t#e general is t#e /unction o/ Iudgement in 'ant0s s%stem4 T#is returns one again to t#e sensi)le realm as a Kuestion o/ &leasure and &ain, )ut now
)e%ond economics as culture4
T#ird, Iudgement wor!s )% )rea!ing t#e sel/-will4 T#is is /undamentall% a &ower relation &redicated on a will-not-to-will w#ic# includes all indi-iduals as sensi)le entities,
)ut e(cludes t#e su&ersensi)le Master4 T#us, t#e 'antian will #as im&licit in it a ni#ilism w#ic# ietGsc#e later identi/ies as t#e will-to-will4
122 Da(id )oo*
A&ood Taste;
T#e &ro)lem o/ li)eral t#eor% rests on #ow one arri-es at aest#etic Iudgements in re/erence to t#e calculus o/ t#e senses, and #ow one arri-es at t#e teleological Iudgement o/
ends4 'ant )egins wit# t#e &ro&osition o/ &leasure and &ain, w#ic# #e #as earlier reIected as a transcendental &rinci&le o/ reason4 He is )ound )% t#is reIection, %et t#e
sensi)le as &rinci&le will )e gi-en a /orm o/ uni-ersalit% #a-ing a s&ace not unli!e t#at o/ t#e su&ersensi)le ;deas, w#ic# are not !nown-in-t#emsel-es, )ut are necessar%4
.#at must )e o-ercome is t#e su)Iecti-eness o/ &leasure and &ain, t#at is t#eir interested as&ect, so t#at one is gi-en o-er to t#e &arado(ical notion o/ disinterested
interestedness4 A similar s#i/t occurs in teleological Iudgements wit# res&ect to t#e idea o/ &ur&osi-eless &ur&osi-eness4
;n eac# case t#e starting-&oint is /rom Ftaste0, w#ic# was central to t#e eig#teent#-centur% -iew o/ culture4 .#ile taste rests on t#e &leasura)le as it is e(&erienced sensuall%, it is
a&&re#ended in a se&arate e(ercise o/ Iudgement4 T#is Iudgement )ecomes an aest#etic Iudgement in its &ure /orm as a su)Iecti-e Iudgement, and not an o)Iecti-e
determinate Iudgement, as t#ere is no corres&onding conce&t4 Yet t#e uni-ersal as&ect o/ t#e Iudgement is asserted )% 'ant0s arguing t#at t#e &ers&ecti-e outside o/ t#e sel/
em&lo%ed )% t#e Iudge is, in &rinci&le, common to all rational indi-iduals4 T#us taste #as its roots in t#e realm o/ common sense, and as Fgood taste0 de/ines #ig#er culture
and a #ig#er /acult%4 T#us it s#ares )ot# as&ects o/ disinterestedness and &ur&osi-eness in 'ant0s sc#ema4
A num)er o/ conclusions can )e drawn /rom t#is4 ;n ,ruth and (ethod
!
2adamer sees in common sense t#e lin! to t#e sensus communis o/ t#e Roman antiKuit%, and t#e
medie-al &eriod4 Politics and moralit% are )roug#t toget#er to /orm a communit% on t#e )asis o/ t#e Fmoral /eeling0 o/ taste4 1% s#i/ting t#e /oundation o/ &olitics to t#e
sensual realm /rom t#e strictl% rational ca&acit% o/ t#e understanding, 'ant0s argument &resents a more &lausi)le -ersion o/ #ow indi-iduals under li)eral m%t#olog% lea-e t#e
state o/ nature4 Howe-er, t#e cost is to mo-e t#e central &rinci&le o/ t#e &olitical towards t#e aest#etic /rom t#e understanding4 2adamer0s resistance to t#is sends #is t#oug#t
)ac! to Aristotle, alt#oug# t#is is itsel/ a dead-end, /or Aristotle0s citiGen would #ardl% /ind li/e in t#e modern world &ossi)le4
T#e aest#etic is /urt#er em&#asiGed )% 'ant0s use o/ Fgood taste04 T#is continues t#e ru&ture o/ &olitics /rom reason, and e(tends t#e ru&ture towards t#e moral4 'ant
maintained t#e relation o/ t#e aest#etic to t#e moral )% arguing in t#e )riti>ue t#at t#e relation was )% analog%, )ut 'ant is o&ening u& t#e wa% /or t#e s&lit o/ morals /rom a
&olitics t#at rests on aest#etics4 T#e sc#ema is &la%ed out toda%4
Ne,rotic Li"era.is#
'ant would /ind t#is sc#ism unacce&ta)le, %et a similar situation is &resent in ta!ing t#e argument /rom moral /eeling4 $ollowing Heidegger0s anal%sis in ,he Kasic
,he 6ast <ays of 6iberalism 128
&roblems of &henomenolo%y
+
t#e moral /eeling in 'ant is descri)ed as arising /rom t#e sensi)ilit% o/ t#e indi-idual to onesel/ as a &erson4 ;t is t#e wa% t#e sel/ re-eals itsel/ to itsel/
t#roug# t#e /eeling o/ t#e sel/4 T#us it is at once e(istential, and aest#etic4 Heidegger distinguis#es t#is /eeling in 'ant0s em&irical ego, /rom t#e t#in!ing and !nowing ego4 T#is /eeling,
w#en )roug#t in line, or in con/ormit% wit# t#e moral law, esta)lis#es t#e &erson as a &erson, and t#e unit% o/ t#e t#in!ing, moral and aest#etic egos4 T#is, Heidegger notes, is
called Fres&ect0 in 'ant0s sc#ema, w#ic# is at t#e )asis o/ t#e 'antian t#eor% o/ &ersonalit%6 t#at is t#e res&ect /or t#e indi-idual as a sel/-determining end4 $rom t#e &ers&ecti-e
o/ Heidegger0s ontolog% t#e anal%sis remains on t#e ontical le-el, )ut a le-el suited to t#e &olitical uses /or res&ect4 $or e(am&le, in t#e /roundwork of the (etaphysics of (orals5 t#e conce&t
o/ dut% reKuires acting out o/ re-erence, or res&ect /or t#e laws4
<
A res&ect, 'ant adds, t#at comes /rom a rational conce&t, and #ence is sel/-&roduced, and not a /ear induced /rom
t#e outside4 'ant #ere is not Ho))es, )ut #e is not /ar o//4 ;ndeed, 'ant and Ho))es are mirror-images )ecause /ear is internaliGed wit# t#e &roduction o/ t#e su)Iect, t#ere)%
re-creating t#e antagonism o/ t#e Funsocial social0 world Ha /orm o/ inner c#ec!4
T#e s#i/ting o/ t#e &arado( o/ /ear:res&ect to t#e le-el o/ &ure &ractical reason ma% sol-e t#e &ro)lem /or t#e &er/ectl% rational indi-idual )% ma!ing #im or #er neurotic,
)ut willing4 1ut more /undamentall% it dri-es t#e argument )ac! to t#e &ro)lem o/ t#e un!nowa)ilit% o/ eit#er t#e end or t#e means o/ re-erence4 T#is is analogous to t#e
&ro)lem o/ w#% indi-iduals Ioined toget#er, and w#% t#e% o)e% t#e law re/erred to earlier as t#e &ro)lem o/ common sense4 $or 'ant, common sense allows indi-iduals to
Iudge disinterestedl% t#eir interest, #ence allowing t#em to sensi)l% /orm &olitical collecti-ities4 ;t also allows indi-iduals to Iudge t#e &leasing and dis&leasing as&ect o/
wor!s o/ art w#en taste )ecomes Fgood taste04 ;n ot#er words, indi-iduals can ma!e Iudgements on o)Iects as )eauti/ul or su)lime4 T#ese Iudgements are &aradigmatic o/ w#at it means to
)e ci-iliGed in t#e 'antian sc#ema, t#ere)% esta)lis#ing t#e &olitical role o/ law4
T/e )iti7en as 'oye,r
.#ile t#e distinctions drawn in eig#teent#-centur% aest#etics )etween t#e )eauti/ul and su)lime are o/ten ar)itrar%, )eaut% ma% re/er to t#e site w#ere indi-iduals encounter t#emsel-es as an
end eit#er in nature, or in t#e social world4 To &#rase it di//erentl%, t#e )eauti/ul o)Iect tells us somet#ing o/ t#e essence o/ indi-iduals4 T#e su)lime, on t#e ot#er #and, treats o/
t#e incom&re#ensi)le, o/ t#e transcendental to #umans, #ence t#e a)ilit% to instill /ear4 ;t is more t#e area o/ t#e e(istential4 'ant was most com/orta)le wit# t#e )eauti/ul or
t#e su)lime in t#e natural world4 ;n &olitics t#ese ideas a&&ear most /orci)l% in t#e initial &ro&osition o/ t#e 'dea for a 0ni.ersal 7istory with a )osmopolitan &urpose w#en natural
ca&acities Fsooner or later VwillY )e de-elo&ed com&letel% and in con/ormit% wit# t#eir end0 in accordance wit# t#e Fteleological t#eor% o/ nature 444F4 O Here t#e design
12: Da(id )oo*
o/ nature is outside o/ indi-iduals gi-ing rise to t#e Ftwo will0 &ro)lem4 ;n &ursuing enlig#tenment, t#e indi-idual is gi-en t#e tas! o/ Femerging /rom #is sel/-induced
immaturit%0
+
t#roug# /reedom and t#e e(ercise o/ t#e will4 Howe-er, t#e design is onl% &ercei-ed /rom t#e &osition o/ t#e s&ectator )% o)ser-ing t#e )eaut% and terror o/
2od0s wor!s, or )% o)ser-ing #uman wor!s re/lecting 2od0s will4 $rom t#e &osition o/ t#e s&ectator, t#e indi-idual assumes t#e role o/ t#e &assi-e indi-idual willing-not-to-
will4
Hanna# Arendt0s inter&retation o/ 'ant rests on t#e role o/ t#e s&ectator in witnessing t#e &u)lic e-ent o/ &olitics4 S#e re/erences 'ant0s attitude to t#e $renc# Re-olution,
w#ere meaning is attri)uted to t#e e-ent &recisel% )ecause o/ F#is disinterestedness, #is non-&artici&ation, #is non-in-ol-ement04 19 'ant0s a-ersion to re-olution on a priori
grounds -anis#es once t#e e-ent )ecomes t#at o/ a natural &#enomenon to )e o)ser-ed4 T#e causal c#ain o/ t#e natural world, in t#is case t#e necessit% o/ re-olution, is
res&ected along wit# t#e /reedom o/ t#e &en now &laced sa/el% in t#e intelligi)le realm4 .e are -er% close at t#is &oint to t#e Fdead &ower at t#e #eart o/ li)eralism w#ere t#e
e-ents are assigned meaning, and controlled solel% )% t#e Iudge0s e%e4
T/e Ideo.oy o? &eni,s
;n t#e ideological sc#ema related #ere, t#e F&assi-it%0 o/ t#e citiGen as -o%eur is contrasted to t#e Facti-it%0 in t#e realm o/ /ree )eaut% created )% t#e Fgenius04 'ant0s genius
is no &roduct o/ #istor%, )eing a gi/t o/ nature, )ut as a &art o/ nature genius ma% e(&ress t#e design o/ nature4 T#is e(&ression o/ design )% t#e genius, as Hans Saner &oints
out in Lant1s &olitical &hilosophy5 Fas a w#ole lies in time 4 O T#e artistic -ision o/ t#e creati-e imagination )% e(isting in time directl% c#allenges t#e claims o/ t#e su&ersensi)le
ideas to t#e regulation o/ #uman conduct4 $urt#er, t#e descri&tion o/ genius in terms o/ t#e unregulated, or unlaw/ul, F&la%0 o/ t#e /aculties contrasts s#ar&l% wit# t#e rule o/ t#e
moral &ersonalit%4 T#e creati-e genius also c#allenges t#e disinterested stance o/ t#e Iudging s&ectator in t#e -er% creation o/ t#e o)Iect or end /or w#ic# Iudgements are to )e
/ormed4 T#e unlaw/ul law/ulness o/ &la% di//ers, t#en, /rom ot#er 'antian &arado(es to t#e e(tent t#at t#e claims o/ uni-ersalit% attac#ed to t#e sensi)le realm are made !nown
t#roug# t#e Iudgement o/ t#e wor! o/ art4 T#is element o/ /inalit% is lac!ing in t#e ;deas t#emsel-es4 $inalit% onl% e(ists in t#e realm o/ &ower4
T#e &olitical im&lications o/ t#e creati-e genius, and t#e conce&t o/ &la% #a-e, t#en, /ull im&act in re/ormulating t#e ideolog% at t#e )asis o/ aest#etics in &ostmodern
t#oug#t4 T#is can )e seen in Marcuse0s use o/ &la% in a $reudianMar(ian sense, and 2adamer0s use in a #ermeneutical senseN eac# tearing a&art 'ant, %et remaining wit# #im4
2enius acts to F-aloriGe0 )ot# t#e le/t and rig#t under t#e ni#ilism o/ artistic codes4
,he 6ast <ays of 6iberalism 12$
T/e Aest/etic )ontract
'ant was caug#t in t#e s&ider0s we) o/ t#e realm o/ aest#etics and t#e role o/ t#e creati-e imagination in &olitics4 T#e /oundation and end o/ go-ernment e(&ressed t#roug#
t#e image o/ t#e state o/ nature is more /undamentall% a m%t# t#an an idea o/ reason4 ;t is t#e &roduct o/ t#e creati-e imagination w#ic# su&&lies not onl% t#e )eginning and
end, )ut t#e /ear u&on w#ic# t#e will is )roug#t to o)edience4 T#is /ear or re-erence /alls under t#e categor% o/ t#e su)lime4 T#e su)lime creates /ear, )ut /ear at a distance
w#ic# c#ec!s t#e will )% )ringing it under t#e transcendental aut#orit% o/ t#e ;dea o/ ature4 A similar awe is &resent in t#e Ho))esian so-ereign, and )% delegation in t#e
Iudges o/ t#e state4 T#is t%&e o/ /ear remains &assi-e as long as t#e citiGen is &assi-e in internaliGing t#e #ig#er aut#orit%4 Once acti-e t#e /ear gi-es wa% to -iolence and
re)ellion w#ic# directl% t#reatens t#e state and t#e indi-idual, and #ence is not countenanced )% 'ant4 To e(&ress t#is in a di//erent /as#ion, t#e su)lime rests on t#e
e(istential and, in &articular, on t#e /ear o/ deat# or ni#ilation4 T#e imagination, in ma!ing &resent w#at is not, is &recisel% t#e -e#icle /or communicating t#is /ear4
T#us 'antian li)eral &olitics rests on two )asic m%t#s4 T#e /irst, e(&ressed in t#e analog% o/ )eaut%, is t#e moral good will w#ic# creates t#e idea o/ t#e #armon% o/ all
)ased on t#e indi-idual as an end4 T#is is t#e ideological )asis o/ t#e social contract4 T#e second, e(&ressed in t#e analog% o/ t#e su)lime, t#reatens t#e indi-idual and societ% wit#
anni#ilation4 T#is is t#e ideological )asis o/ o)edience4 1ot# m%t#s are &resent and rel% on t#e conce&t o/ Iudgement4 T#oug# 'ant /a-ours t#e m%t# o/ t#e good, modern
t#oug#t #as used )ot# ideologies in t#e control o/ t#e d%ing social )% t#e coerci-e culture created )% t#is aest#etic4
Na,seo,s A..eories
T#e last da%s o/ li)eralism are mirrored in 'ant0s de&iction o/ t#e FLast Da% o/ 3udgement04 T#e last Iudgement, in its a&ocal%&tic /orm, re&resents /inal Iustice as well as t#e
end o/ time4 'ant treats o/ t#is ;dea in t#e s#ort article entitled FT#e end o/ all t#ings0, written in *<+=4 T#e end o/ time corres&onds /or 'ant to t#e end o/ t#e sensi)le world
w#ic# we !now /rom 'ant0s earlier critiKue re&resents t#e )ounds o/ !nowledge4 T#us t#e end o/ all time, as t#e cessation o/ time, cannot )e t#oug#t o/ e(ce&t as a
su&ersensi)le ;dea wit#in time4 'ant reiterates t#at t#e indi-idual0s end, in a su&ersensi)le sense, is t#e moral end o/ &ure &ractical reason w#ic# )% its -er% nature is ne-er
o)tained in time t#oug# it regulates e(istence in time4 1ecause we cannot !now o/ eternit%, and #ence !now o/ t#e Last 3udgement, 'ant carries t#e Iudgement into t#e sensi)le world
as an e-er%da% e-ent in t#e long run &rogress o/ moralit% towards &er&etual &eace4 Hence t#e necessit% in t#e &olitical realm o/ t#e Iudge to t#e long run moral &rogress4
12< Da(id )oo*
1ut to t#e e(tent t#at t#e indi-idual is a sensi)le creature w#o li-es in time, t#e t#oug#t o/ anni#ilation or deat# occurs to #er or #im4
;n &oint o/ /act, men, not wit#out reason, /eel t#e )urden o/ t#eir e(istence e-en t#oug# t#e% t#emsel-es are t#e cause o/ itC T#e reason /or t#is seems to me to lie in t#e /act t#at in t#e
&rogress o/ t#e #uman race t#e culti-ation o/ talents, art, and taste @wit# t#eir conseKuence, lu(ur%A naturall% &recedes t#e de-elo&ment o/ moralit% 12
T#ese are two conclusions4 T#e /irst is to see in t#e &rogress o/ culture t#e &rogress o/ t#e indi-idual as a )asis /or t#e moral state4 T#is is t#e )asis o/ &ostmodern li)eralism0s
claim to t#e moral and Iust, )ut it is su)lated )% t#e second element o/ t#is ideolog%4 T#e second conclusion is to see in t#e desires and t#eir satis/action t#e &rocess o/
ni#ilation at t#e root o/ sensi)ilit%4 ;ndi-iduals as creatures in time li-e t#roug# successi-e ni#ilations, and as mem)ers o/ t#e #uman communit% reac# t#eir own ni#ilation4 .e enter #ere
t#e sel/-liKuidation in t#e ni#ilism o/ 'ant0s aest#etic li)eralism4
At t#is &ointN we meet 'ant0s reluctance to t#in! t#roug# t#is ni#ilation w#ic# #e calls a F&urel% negati-e Vconce&tY04 'ant admits t#at FT#e t#oug#t is su)lime in its terror CCC
it is e-en reKuired to )e interwo-en in a wondrous wa% wit# common #uman reason, )ecause t#is notion o/ eternit% is encountered in all reasoning &eo&les in all times 444F Yet
/aced wit# t#e im&lications o/ t#is ni#ilism, #e retreats4 T#is is #ow #e e(&resses it in FT#e end o/ all t#ings06 FT#ere is somet#ing a&&alling in t#is t#oug#t )ecause it leads, as it
were, to t#e )rin! o/ an a)%ss, and /or #im w#o sin!s into it, no return is &ossi)le40
'ant identi/ies #ow t#e ni#ilism at t#e core o/ aest#etic li)eralism gi-es rise to a -ision o/ t#e &ostmodern world t#at #as li-ed out t#e Flogic0 o/ t#e )riti>ue. Part o/ t#is
/uture is s!etc#ed in 'ant0s /ootnote commenting on t#e im&lications o/ t#e negati-e4 T#is #e descri)es as gi-ing rise to Finimical, &artl% nauseous allegories04 T#ese are t#e
Fallegor%0 o/ Fli/e0 as an inn w#ere we are soon to )e re&laced )% a new tra-eller, a &enitentiar%, a lunatic as%lum and as a &ri-%4 Ta!ing t#ese Fallegories0 in turn, t#e inn is a
s%m)ol o/ mortalit%, t#e &enitentiar% o/ t#e Iudged indi-idual, t#e lunatic as%lum o/ t#e use o/ unreason or t#e imagination, and t#e &ri-% o/ t#e )od%4 Eac# is a logical
im&lication o/ t#e ideolog% at t#e #eart o/ t#e Fgood will04 Eac# is denied )% 'ant under t#e #eading o/ t#e F&er-erse end o/ all t#ings04 Eac# de&icts an as&ect o/ e(istence
/orced )ac! into t#e Fo)scurit%0 w#ere t#e transcendental imagination #ad /ound it4 Eac# &laces e(istence outside t#e good taste o/ societ% in t#e writings o/ aut#ors li!e t#e
MarKuis de Sade or in t#e -ision o/ &oets li!e 1la!e4 Eac# illustrates t#e aest#etic code o/ &ost-li)eral &olitics in t#e &ostmodern condition4
'ant #as enucleated t#e /undamental a)straction in#erent in t#e li)eral conce&t o/ &ower4 1eing &redicated on Iudgement, &ower is a)le to remo-e itsel/ /rom t#e li-ing
/orce o/ t#e societ% to assunOe t#e masKue o/ t#e s&ectator4 Remo-ed /rom t#e )od%, &ower is set against t#e )od%N remo-ed /rom t#e will, it is directed against t#e willN remo-ed /rom t#e
imagination, it is #ostile to t#e imagination4 T#e citiGen
,he 6ast <ays of 6iberalism 12=
is caug#t u& wit#in t#is a)sence, /or in /ollowing common sense t#e indi-idual sel/-liKuidates H all in t#e name o/ good taste6 not an unreasona)le descri&tion o/ t#e last da%s
o/ li)eralism4
Notes
*4 ;mmanuel 'ant, ,he )riti>ue of 3ud%ement5 transl4 34 C4 Meredit#, O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, London, *+>54
54 Martin Heidegger, Lant and the &roblem of (etaphysics5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+?54
,4 ;mmanuel 'ant, Lant1s &olitical Writin%s5 ed4 H4 Reiss, Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+<<, &4 =?4
=4 'bid.5 &4 =>4
-. Hans-2eorg 2adamer, ,ruth and (ethod5 T#e Sea)ur% Press, ew Yor!, *+<>4 $or a -er% interesting stud% o/ 2adamer, Arendt and 'ant, see Ronald 1einer, &olitical
3ud%ement5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E,4
?4 Martin Heidegger, ,he Kasic &roblems of &henomenolo%y5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+E5, &&4 *,*H54
<4 ;mmanuel 'ant, /roundwork for the (etaphysics of (orals5 Har&er Torc#, ew Yor!,
*+?=, &4 ?E4
E4 Reiss, Lant1s &olitical Writin%s5 &4 =54
+4 'bid.5 &4 >=4
*94 Hanna# Arendt, 6ectures on Lant1s &olitical &hilosophy5 ed4 Ronald 1einer, 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E5, &4 >=4
**4 Hans Saner, Lant1s &olitical &hilosophy5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+<E, &4 5+E4
*54 ;mmanuael 'ant, On 7istory5 1o))s-Merrill, ;ndiana&olis, ;, *+?,, &&4 <=HE?4
Ew &he 3all of the
Legislator
+y#,nt -a, #an
$rom at least t#e se-enteent# centur% and well into t#e twentiet#, t#e writing elite o/ .estern Euro&e and its /oot#olds on ot#er continents considered its own wa% o/ li/e as a
radical )rea! in uni-ersal #istor%4 Jirtuall% unc#allenged /ait# in t#e su&eriorit% o/ its own mode o-er all alternati-e /orms o/ li/e H contem&oraneous or &ast H allowed it to
ta!e itsel/ as t#e re/erence &oint /or t#e inter&retation o/ t#e telos o/ #istor%4 T#is was a no-elt% in t#e e(&erience o/ o)Iecti-e timeN /or most o/ t#e #istor% o/ C#ristian
Euro&e, time-rec!oning was organiGed around a /i(ed &oint in t#e slowl% receding &ast4 ow, w#ile rendering t#e t#us /ar local, C#ristian calendar, well nig# uni-ersal,
Euro&e set t#e re/erence &oint o/ o)Iecti-e time in motion, attac#ing it /irml% to its own t#rust towards coloniGing t#e /uture in t#e same wa% as it #ad coloniGed t#e
surrounding s&ace4
T#e sel/-con/idence o/ t#e enlig#tened elite o/ Euro&e was &roIected on adIacent categories o/ man!ind, in measures strictl% &ro&ortional to t#e &ercei-ed closeness o/
!ins#i&4 T#us t#e grou& distinguis#ed )% an enlig#tened wa% o/ li/e was seen as decidedl% su&erior in relation to t#eir own ignorant and su&erstitious wor!ing classes or
-illagers4 Toget#er, educated and uneducated Euro&eans constituted a race w#ic# #ad alread% situated itsel/ on t#e side o/ #istor% t#at ot#er races were
H at )est H onl% struggling to reac#4 Rat#er t#an deri-ing its own sel/-con/idence /rom its )elie/ in &rogress, t#e educated elite /orged t#e idea o/ &rogress /rom t#e untarnis#ed
e(&erience o/ its own su&eriorit%4 Rat#er t#an drawing its missionar%, &rosel%tiGing Geal /rom an uncritical )elie/ in t#e in/inite &er/ecti)ilit% o/ man, t#e educated elite coined
t#e idea o/ t#e &lia)ilit% o/ #uman nature, its ca&acit% /or )eing moulded and im&ro-ed )% societ%, out o/ t#e e(&erience o/ its own role in t#e disci&lining, training,
educating, #ealing, &unis#ing and re/orming aimed at categories ot#er t#an itsel/4 Collecti-e e(&erience o/ a categor% cast in a Fgardener0 role in relation to all ot#er
categories, was recast as a t#eor% o/ #istor%4
As i/ /ollowing Mar(0s met#odological &rece&t a)out using t#e anatom% o/ man as t#e !e% to t#e anatom% o/ a&e, t#e educated elite used its own mode o/ li/e, or
$rom 1auman, S4, 6e%islators and 'nterpreters5 1asil 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E<, &&4 **9H5?4
12@
,he $all of the 6e%islator 12B
t#e mode o/ li/e o/ t#at &art o/ t#e world o-er w#ic# it &resided @or t#oug#t it &residedA, as t#e )enc#mar! against w#ic# to measure and classi/% ot#er /orms o/ li/e H &ast or
&resent H as retarded, underde-elo&ed, immature, incom&lete or de/ormed, maimed, distorted and ot#erwise in/erior stages or -ersions o/ itsel/4 ;ts own /orm o/ li/e, e-er more o/ten
called Fmodernit%0, came to denote t#e restless, constantl% mo-ing &ointer o/ #istor%N /rom its -antage &oint, all t#e ot#er !nown or guessed /orms a&&eared as &ast stages, sideNs#oots
or culs-de-sac4 T#e man% com&eting conce&tualiGations o/ modernit%, in-aria)l% associated wit# a t#eor% o/ #istor%, agreed on one &oint6 t#e% all too! t#e /orm o/ li/e
de-elo&ed in &arts o/ t#e .estern world as t#e Fgi-en0, Funmar!ed0 unit o/ t#e )inar% o&&osition w#ic# relati-iGed t#e rest o/ t#e world and t#e rest o/ #istorical times as t#e
&ro)lematic, Fmar!ed0 side, understanda)le onl% in terms o/ its distinction /rom t#e .estern &attern o/ de-elo&ment, ta!en as normal4 T#e distinction was seen /irst and
/oremost as a set o/ a)sences H as a lac! o/ t#e attri)utes deemed indis&ensa)le /or t#e identit% o/ most ad-anced age4
One suc# conce&tualiGation is t#e -ision o/ #istor% as t#e unsto&&a)le marc# o/ les 6umiTresB a di//icult, )ut e-entuall% -ictorious struggle o/ Reason against emotions or
animal instincts, science against religion and magic, trut# against &reIudice, correct !nowledge against su&erstition, re/lection against uncritical e(istence, rationalit% against
a//ecti-it% and t#e rule o/ custom4 .it#in suc# a conce&tualiGation, t#e modern age de/ined itsel/ as, a)o-e all, t#e !ingdom o/ Reason and rationalit%N t#e ot#er /orms o/ li/e
were seen, accordingl%, as wanting in )ot# res&ects4 T#is was t#e /irst and most )asic o/ t#e conce&tualiGations &ro-iding modernit% wit# its sel/-de/inition4 ;t was also t#e most
&ersistent and clearl% t#e most /a-oured )% t#ose w#ose Io) it was to conce&tualiGe4 ;t &osited, a/ter all, t#e conce&tualiGers t#emsel-es as in c#arge o/ t#e le-ers o/ #istor% and
&resented t#em, strategicall%, as t#e most im&ortant and &ower/ul agents o/ c#ange4 T#is conce&tualiGation, as we remem)er, was alread% im&licit in t#e t#in!ing o/ les philosophesB
it /ound its /ull e(&ression in t#e writings o/ Condorcet and ot#er ideologistsN it was codi/ied )% Comte and since t#en ta!en as a canon and o)ligator% /ramewor! o/ t#e .#ig
-ersion o/ #istor%N it reac#ed its culminating &oint and /ullest ela)oration in .e)er0s -ision o/ #istor% as &rogressi-e rationaliGation, and o/ modern societ% as a radical )rea!
w#ic# disclosed its own &ast as, a)o-e all, t#e long dominion o/ irrational conduct4
To Mar(, as Mars#all 1erman recentl% reminded us in #is )eauti/ul and &ro/ound anal%sis o/ modernit%, ours was t#e age in w#ic# Fe-er%t#ing solid melts into air,
e-er%t#ing sacred is &ro/aned0N an age o/ t#e )reat#ta!ing &ace o/ de-elo&ment, o/ t#e multi&lication o/ material wealt#, o/ t#e e-er increasing master% o/ #uman!ind o-er its natural
en-ironment, o/ t#e uni-ersal emanci&ation /rom all, real or imaginar%, restrictions w#ic# constrained and #am&ered #uman creati-e &otential /or an intermina)l% long &art o/
#istor%4 T#is, to Mar(, was t#e e//ect o/ t#e sudden eru&tion o/ t#e material means o/ master% o-er nature, toget#er wit# t#e a)ilit% and t#e will to use t#emN t#at, in its turn, was t#e
outcome o/ a new organiGation o/ t#e &roducti-e e//ort o/ #umanit% H one in w#ic# t#e &roducti-e acti-ities o/ indi-iduals
189 +y#,nt -a,#an
#ad )een r#%t#miciGed, routiniGed, co-ordinated, su)Iected to a &ur&ose/ul design, su&er-ised and &ut to t#e tas! o/ o&erating t#e tools, t#e &ower o/ w#ic# was no longer
restricted )% t#e limited ca&acit% @and so t#e #oriGonA o/ t#eir &ett% owners4 To Mar(, t#e modern age would e-entuall% discard t#e /ew remaining limits to &ractical master%
o-er natureN t#e means o/ &roduction, #e insisted, were alread% Fsocial0 in t#eir c#aracter, and t#e &ri-ate c#aracter o/ owners#i&, #owe-er grand in scale %et s#ort o/ uni-ersal, will
)e t#e last Fsolidit%0 to melt into air4 FHuman /reedom0 @identi/ied wit# /reedom /rom necessit%, identi/ied in its turn wit# atureA would t#en )e com&lete4
ot all conce&tualiGations, o/ course, sang suc# unKuali/ied &raise o/ modernit%4 Towards t#e end o/ t#e nineteent# centur%, in &articular, t#e modern age a&&eared to
man% a mi(ed )lessing4 T#e great ac#ie-ement o/ #umanit%, no dou)t, )ut at a &riceN a #ea-% &rice, &er#a&s4 ;t )ecame increasingl% clear to t#e educated elite t#at t#e antici&ated
!ingdom o/ Reason #ad )een slow to materialiGe4 More im&ortantl%, it was somew#at less clear t#at it e-er would4 T#e !ingdom o/ Reason was alwa%s at )ottom t#e rule o/ its
s&o!esmen4 Suc# a rule was now a remote and receding &ro)a)ilit%4 Humanities /ailed to #umaniGe, t#at is, t#e designs o/ social order and t#e strategies /or t#eir
im&lementation were &roduced and administered )% categories ot#er t#an t#e #umaniGers t#emsel-es, and t#e unit% )etween t#e growing &ower o/ t#e Fci-iliGed0 &art o/
man!ind and t#e growing centralit% o/ its ci-iliGers #ad )een )ro!en4 Conce&tualiGation #ad acKuired a dramatic tingeN t#e images o/ #istorical &rogress )ecame more and
more reminiscent o/ a 2ree! traged%, w#ere not#ing is e-er ac#ie-ed wit#out a sacri/ice, and t#e sacri/ice ma% )e as &ain/ul as t#e ac#ie-ement is enIo%a)le4
T#e $austian man o/ ietGsc#e and #is /ollowers was car-ed in t#e image o/ t#e modern age, &roud o/ its &ower and its su&eriorit%, considering all ot#er #uman /orms as
in/erior to itsel/4 1ut t#e $austian man could no longer H unli!e #is &#iloso&#ic or entre&reneurial &redecessors H casuall% re/er #is own sel/-con/idence to t#e ine(ora)le and
omni&otent &owers o/ s&iritual or material &rogressN #e #ad to carr% modernit%, t#is greatest ac#ie-ement o/ t#e #uman race, on #is own s#oulders4 T#e $austian man was a romantic, not a
classicist or &ositi-ist4 He was t#e ma!er o/ #istor%, not its &roductN #e #ad to ma!e #istor% against all odds, /orcing it to su)mit to #is will and not necessaril% counting on its
willingness to surrender4 Histor% remained w#at it was to its .#ig courtiers6 t#e trium&# o/ t#e daring, t#e courageous, t#e insig#t/ul, t#e &ro/ound, t#e clear-#eaded o-er t#e
sla-is#, cowardl%, su&erstitious, muddled and ignorant4 1ut t#e trium&# was not now guaranteed H &articularl% not )% /orces ot#er t#an t#e wil/ul e//ort o/ &ros&ecti-e -ictors4
T#is struggle will )e costl%, as all struggles are4 ;n all conKuests, t#ere are -ictims as well as -ictors4 T#e $austian man must reconcile #imsel/ to t#e need /or marc#ing o-er t#e )odies o/ t#e
wea!4 And #e is a $austian man )ecause #e does4
Anot#er dramatic -ision o/ modernit% #as )een ins&ired )% $reud4 T#is one de&icts modernit% as a time w#en t#e Frealit% &rinci&le0 attains domination o-er t#e F&leasure &rinci&le0, and
w#en &eo&le, as a result, trade o// &art o/ t#eir /reedom
,he $all of the 6e%islator 181
@and #a&&inessA /or a degree o/ securit%, grounded in a #%gienicall% sa/e, clean and &eace/ul en-ironment4 T#e trade-o// ma% )e &ro/ita)le, )ut it comes a)out as a &roduct o/
t#e su&&ression o/ Fnatural0 dri-es and t#e im&osition o/ &atterns o/ )e#a-iour w#ic# ill /it #uman &redis&ositions and o//er onl% o)liKue outlets /or instincts and &assions4
Su&&ression is &ain/ul, it lea-es &s%c#ological wounds w#ic# are di//icult to #eal4 T#e &rice o/ modernit% is t#e #ig# incidence o/ &s%c#otic and neurotic ailmentsN ci-iliGation
)reeds its own discontents and sets t#e indi-idual in a &ermanent H &otential or o-ert H con/lict wit# societ%4
S#ortl% a/ter )i.ili8ation and its <iscontents a&&eared, sending wa-es o/ s#oc! and admiration /ar and wide, %oung or)ert Elias decided to su)Iect $reud0s #%&ot#eses,
&resented as t#e% were in intuiti-e and idealHt%&ical /orm, to t#e test o/ #istorical researc#4 Elias0s decision resulted in t#e remar!a)le )i.ili8in% &rocess5 w#ic# o&ened new
#oriGons /or socio-#istorical stud% )% reac#ing a #ereto/ore une(&lored and neglected !ind o/ #istorical source and )ringing Fdail% li/e0 into t#e /ocus o/ #istorical
in-estigation4 Elias demonstrated t#at t#e Fsu&&ression o/ instincts0 w#ic# $reud deduced /rom t#e nature o/ mature modernit% was in /act a #istorical &rocess w#ic# could )e &inned
down to s&eci/ic time, &lace and sociocultural /igurations4 One o/ t#e man% )rilliant o)ser-ations o/ Elias0s stud% was t#e idea t#at t#e success/ul culmination o/ t#e &rocess
consists o/ t#e #istorical e&isode o/ su&&ression )eing /orgotten, &seudo-rational legitimations )eing su&&lied /or newl% introduced &atterns and t#e w#ole #istorical /orm o/
li/e )eing FnaturaliGed04 A radical inter&retation o/ Elias0s stud% would see it as a direct attac! u&on .e)er0s .#iggis# -ision o/ modernit% as an era o/ rationalit%4 T#e &owers w#ic#
)roug#t a)out modern societ% and &reside o-er its re&roduction #a-e )een denied t#e sanction o/ Reason4 T#e essentiall% &rogressi-e c#aracter o/ t#eir accom&lis#ment #as not,
#owe-er, )een &ut in Kuestion4
A com&le( #ateHlo-e attitude towards modernit% saturates Simmel0s -ision o/ ur)an societ%, closel% related to t#e somew#at later inter&retation 1enIamin ga-e to
1audelaire0s seminal insig#ts4 T#e com)ined image is one o/ traged% H o/ twisted dialectics o/ ine(trica)le contradictions6 t#e a)solute mani/esting itsel/ onl% in t#e
&articularit% o/ indi-iduals and t#eir encountersN t#e &ermanent #iding )e#ind /leeting e&isodes, t#e normal )e#ind t#e uniKue4 A)o-e all, t#e drama o/ modernit% deri-es /rom t#e
Ftraged% o/ culture0, t#e #uman ina)ilit% to assimilate cultural &roducts, o-er-a)undant )ecause o/ t#e un)ound creati-it% o/ t#e #uman s&irit4 Once set in motion, cultural &rocesses
acKuire t#eir own momentum, de-elo& t#eir own logic, and s&awn new multi&le realities con/ronting indi-iduals as an outside, o)Iecti-e world, too &ower/ul and distant to )e
Fresu)Iecti-iGed04 T#e ric#ness o/ o)Iecti-e culture results t#ere/ore in t#e cultural &o-ert% o/ indi-idual #uman )eings, w#o now act according to a &rinci&le omnia habentes5
nihil possidentes @as 2unt#er S4 Stent in-erted t#e /amous &rinci&le o/ St $rancisA40 A /rantic searc# /or o)Iects to )e a&&ro&riated -ainl% see!s to re&lace t#e re&ossession o/
lost meanings4 Simmel )ewails t#e ad-ent o/ F&artial intellectuals0 @a term later coined )% $oucaultA and t#e &assing o/ a time w#en t#e erudite &rinciples of &olitical :conomy
were t#e common &ro&ert% o/ all enlig#tened contem&oraries and e(tensi-el% re-iewed )%
$82 +y#,nt -a,#an
suc# Fnon-s&ecialists0 as Dic!ens or Rus!in4 T#is is a -ision o/ modernit% as seen t#roug# t#e e%es o/ a ca&ital cit% intellectual, dreaming o/ a continuation o/ t#e role
)eKueat#ed )% les philosophes under conditions w#ic# render it all )ut im&ossi)leN conditions )roug#t a)out )% not#ing else )ut t#e tremendous success o/ t#e &#iloso&#ers0
legac%4
T#e a)o-e is a -er% s!etc#%, sim&li/ied and in no wa% com&lete list o/ t#e -isions o/ modernit% w#ic# summoned enoug# /ollowing and made enoug# im&act on t#e &u)lic
consciousness to )e recogniGed as traditional or classic4 T#e% di//er /rom eac# ot#erN sometimes t#e% stand in s#ar& o&&osition to eac# ot#er4 $or man% decades t#e
di//erences and o&&ositions o-ers#adowed an% common /eatures and dominated social scienti/ic de)ate4 Onl% Kuite recentl%, owing to a new cogniti-e &ers&ecti-e, #a-e t#e
di//erences )egun to loo! considera)l% less im&ortant H as no more t#an /amil% Kuarrels4 .#at t#e new &ers&ecti-e made salient, on t#e ot#er #and, was e(actl% t#at close !ins#i& )ond
)etween t#e a&&arentl% antagonistic -iews, w#ic# at t#e &resent stage o/ t#e de)ate would tend to o-ers#adow t#e di//erences4
T#e /amil% )ond seems to #a-e )een constituted )% at least t#ree s#ared c#aracteristics4
$irst, all listed -isions and most o/ t#eir contem&orar% alternati-es or -ariants assumed, w#et#er e(&licitl% or im&licitl%, t#e irre-ersi)le c#aracter o/ t#e c#anges modernit%
signi/ied or )roug#t in its wa!e4 T#e% mig#t #a-e )een ent#usiastic, caustic or downrig#t critical regarding t#e )alance )etween good and e-il wit#in t#e /orm o/ li/e
associated wit# modern societ%, )ut t#e% #ardl% e-er Kuestioned t#e Fsu&eriorit%0 o/ modernit% in t#e sense o/ su)ordinating, marginaliGing, e-icting or anni#ilating its &re-
modern alternati-es4 one o/ t#e -isions entailed @at least not organicall%A dou)ts as to t#e e-entual ascendanc% o/ modernit%N most assumed t#e ine-ita)ilit% o/ suc#
ascendanc%4 @Alt#oug# t#is was not necessaril% in t#e deterministic senseN it was not in t#e sense t#at t#e ad-ent o/ modernit% was #istoricall% inesca&a)le, )ut in t#e sense t#at H
once it #as emerged in one &art o/ t#e world H its domination, or &er#a&s uni-ersaliGation, would )e unsto&&a)le4A Seeing modernit% as t#e #ig#est &oint o/ de-elo&ment
encouraged t#e inter&retation o/ &receding social /orms as descri)ing or measuring t#eir distance /rom modernit%, as mani/est in t#e idea o/ de-elo&ing countries4
Secondl%, all t#e listed -isions concei-ed o/ modernit% in &rocessual terms6 as an essentiall% un/inis#ed &roIect4 Modernit% was o&en-ended, and ine-ita)l% soN indeed, t#e
o&en-endedness was seen as t#e &aramount, &er#a&s de/ining, attri)ute o/ modernit%4 Against t#e intrinsic mo)ilit% o/ modernit%, t#e &re-modern /orms a&&eared stagnant,
organiGed around t#e mec#anism o/ eKuili)ration and sta)ilit%, almost de-oid o/ #istor%4 T#is o&tical e//ect resulted /rom c#oosing modernit% as t#e -antage &oint /rom w#ic# to
contem&late /eatures o/ alternati-e societiesN and c#oosing to consider modernit% as t#e #istoricall%, or logicall%, later /orm4 T#is c#oice enclosed and o)Iecti/ied ot#er social
/orms, and &rom&ted t#em to )e &ercei-ed as /inis#ed, com&lete o)Iects H a &erce&tion w#ic# #ad )een articulated as t#eir intrinsic timelessness4 To return to t#e -isions o/ modernit%6
t#e% all tried to ca&ture t#e &rocess o/ ongoing trans/ormations in statu nascendiB t#e% were, in
,he $all of the 6e%islator 188
a sense, mid-career re&orts, conscious o/ descri)ing a mo-ement wit# a destination not %et /ull% !nown, one t#at could onl% )e antici&ated4 ;n t#e -ision o/ modernit%, onl%
t#e starting-&oint was more or less /irml% /i(ed4 T#e rest, &recisel% )ecause o/ its underdetermined c#aracter, a&&eared as a /ield o/ design, action and struggle4
T#irdl%, all -isions were Finside0 -iews o/ modernit%4 Modernit% was a &#enomenon wit# a ric# &re-#istor% )ut wit# not#ing -isi)le )e%ond it, not#ing w#ic# could relati-iGe
or o)Iecti-iGe t#e &#enomenon itsel/, enclose it as a /inis#ed e&isode o/ H )% t#e same to!en H con/ined, limited signi/icance4 As suc#, t#e wa% t#is Finsider0 e(&erience o/ modernit% #ad
)een articulated su&&lied t#e /rame o/ re/erence /or t#e &erce&tion o/ non-modern /orms o/ li/e4 At t#e same time, #owe-er, no outside -antage &oint was a-aila)le as a /rame
o/ re/erence /or t#e &erce&tion o/ modernit% itsel/4 ;n a sense, modernit% was H in t#ose -isions H sel/-re/erential and sel/--alidating4
;t is &recisel% t#is last circumstance w#ic# #as recentl% c#angedN its c#ange could not )ut a//ect t#e rest o/ t#e /amil% resem)lances w#ic# united t#e traditional, or classic,
-isions o/ modernit%4 To &ut it correctl%, t#e c#ange )roug#t to t#e sur/ace t#e -er% &resence o/ t#e /amil% traits, and t#eir limiting role, now seen as res&onsi)le /or t#e #istorical
relati-it% o/ t#e classic -isions4 .#at #as #a&&ened in recent %ears could )e articulated as t#e a&&earance o/ a -antage &oint w#ic# allows t#e -iew o/ modernit% itsel/ as an
enclosed o)Iect, an essentiall% com&lete &roduct, an e&isode o/ #istor%, wit# an end as muc# as a )eginning4
Suc# a -antage &oint #as )een su&&lied )% t#e &ostmodernist de)ate4 On t#e /ace o/ it, t#is de)ate is Iust anot#er name /or t#e discourse organiGed around a /amil% o/ notions, o/ w#ic# t#e
most &o&ular and widel% commented u&on are t#e conce&ts o/ &ost-industrial or &ost-ca&italist societies4 .#ate-er t#e connections and similarities, t#e di//erences, #owe-er,
are /ormida)le4 T#e idea o/ &ost-industrial societ% does not necessaril% constitute a )rea! wit# t#e wa% in w#ic# modernit% was traditionall% concei-ed4 More o/ten t#an not, t#is
idea re/ers sim&l% to internal trans/ormations wit#in t#e .estern t%&e o/ ci-iliGation, allegedl% reconstituting its continuing su&eriorit% in a no-el /as#ion and on a c#anging
socio-economic )asis4 $ar /rom undermining suc# a su&eriorit%, t#e trans/ormations &ointed out as s%m&tomatic o/ t#e &ost-industrial or &ost-ca&italist stage rein/orce t#e
image o/ t#e .estern socio-cultural s%stem as a &innacle o/ de-elo&ment or a most ad-anced /orm o/ #uman societ% w#ic# ot#er /orms eit#er a&&roac# or are )ound to recogniGe as
su&erior4 T#e &ost-industrial discourse em&#asiGes also t#e continuit% o/ de-elo&mentN t#e &ost-industrial is seen as a natural &roduct o/ industrial de-elo&ment, as a ne(t &#ase
/ollowing t#e success o/ t#e &receding one H and, in a sense, /ul/illing t#e &romise and t#e &otential contained in its own &ast4
;t is, on t#e ot#er #and, t#e &ostmodernist discourse t#at loo!s )ac! at its immediate &ast as a closed e&isode, as a mo-ement in a direction unli!el% to )e /ollowed, as &er#a&s e-en an
a)erration, t#e &ursuit o/ a /alse trac!, a #istorical error now to )e recti/ied4 ;n doing so, t#e &ostmodernist de)ate does not necessaril% o&&ose itsel/ to t#e /actual &ro&ositions
construed wit#in t#e &ost-industrial discourseN t#e /reKuent con/usion notwit#standing, t#e two de)ates do not s#are
A8: +y#,nt -a,#an
t#eir res&ecti-e su)Iect-matters4 T#e &ost-industrial discourse is a)out t#e c#anges in t#e socio-economic s%stem o/ a societ% w#ic# recogniGes itsel/ as Fmodern0 in t#e sense
s&elled out a)o-e6 t#e c#anges discussed do not im&l% t#at societ% needs to sto& identi/%ing itsel/ in suc# a wa%4 T#e &ostmodernist discourse, on t#e ot#er #and, is a)out t#e
credi)ilit% o/ Fmodernit%0 itsel/ as a sel/-designation o/ .estern ci-iliGation, w#et#er industrial or &ost-industrial, ca&italist or &ost-ca&italist4 ;t im&lies t#at t#e sel/-ascri)ed
attri)utes contained in t#e idea o/ modernit% do not #old toda%, &er#a&s did not #old %esterda% eit#er4 T#e &ostmodernist de)ate is a)out t#e sel/-consciousness o/ .estern
societ%, and t#e grounds @or t#e a)sence o/ groundsA /or suc# consciousness4
T#e conce&t o/ &ostmodernism was coined /irstN introduced as a designation o/ t#e re)ellion against /unctionalist, scienti/icall% grounded, rational arc#itecture, it was soon
ta!en o-er and e(tended to assimilate t#e &ro/ound c#anges o/ direction -isi)le all o-er t#e territor% o/ .estern art4 ;t &roclaimed t#e end o/ t#e e(&loration o/ t#e ultimate
trut# o/ t#e #uman world or #uman e(&erience, t#e end o/ t#e &olitical or missionar% am)itions o/ art, t#e end o/ dominant st%le, o/ artistic canons, o/ interest in t#e aest#etic
grounds o/ artistic sel/-con/idence and o)Iecti-e )oundaries o/ art4 T#e a)sence o/ grounds, t#e /utilit% o/ all attem&ts to draw t#e limits o/ artistic &#enomena in an o)Iecti-e
/as#ion, t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ legislating t#e rules o/ a true art as distinct /rom non-art or )ad art, were t#e ideas w#ic# gestated /irst wit#in t#e discourse o/ artistic culture
@muc# as two #undred %ears earlier t#e conKuest o/ t#e cultural /ield &receded t#e e(&ansion o/ les soci;t;s de pensde on to t#e area o/ &olitical and social &#iloso&#%A4 Onl%
later did t#e notion o/ &ostmodernism, originall% con/ined to t#e #istor% o/ arts, )egin to e(&and4 ;t #ad o&ened t#e e%es o/ intellectual o)ser-ers to t#ose /eatures s#ared )%
t#e trans/ormations in contem&orar% arts and t#e /ascinating s#i/ts o/ attention, anti-traditionalist re)ellion, and stri!ingl% #eretical new &aradigms com&eting /or domination
in &#iloso&#% and t#e &#iloso&#icall% in/ormed social sciences4 E%es were o&ened to t#e similarit% )etween t#e erosion o/ Fo)Iecti-e grounds0 in art and t#e sudden
&o&ularit% o/ &ost-.ittgensteinian and &ost-2adamerian #ermeneutics in social sciences, or t#e -itriolic attac!s o/ t#e Fnew &ragmatists0 against CartesianH Loc!eanH
'antian tradition in modern &#iloso&#%4 ;t )ecame increasingl% &lausi)le t#at t#ese a&&arentl% dis&arate &#enomena were mani/estations o/ t#e same &rocess4
;t was t#is &rocess, or rat#er t#e conditions under w#ic# it was ta!ing &lace, t#at #as )een called #ere &ostmodernit% @as distinct /rom &ostmodernism, w#ic# re/ers to t#e
collection o/ wor!s o/ art or intellectual &roducts created under t#e conditions, or wit#in t#e &eriod, o/ &ostmodernit%A4 8nli!e t#e notion o/ a &ost-industrial societ%, t#e
conce&t o/ &ostmodernit% re/ers to a distinct Kualit% o/ intellectual climate, to a distinctl% new meta-cultural stance, to a distinct sel/-awareness o/ t#e era4 One o/ t#e )asic, i/
not the )asic, elements o/ t#is sel/-awareness is t#e realiGation t#at modernit% is o-erN t#at modernit% is a closed c#a&ter o/ #istor%, w#ic# can now )e contem&lated in its entiret%,
wit# retros&ecti-e !nowledge o/ its &ractical accom&lis#ments as muc# as its t#eoretical #o&es4
,he $all of the 6e%islator 18$
T#an!s to t#is element o/ t#e new sel/-awareness called &ostmodernit%, modernit%, ser-ing t#us /ar as t#e Mar(ian Fanatom% o/ man0, #as )een /or t#e /irst time relegated to t#e &osition o/
Ft#e a&e0, w#ic# discloses t#e unsus&ected, or undul% neglected as&ects o/ its anatom% w#en e(amined wit# t#e c= post facto wisdom o/ &ostmodernit%4 T#is wisdom rearranges our
!nowledge o/ modernit% and redistri)utes t#e im&ortance assigned to its -arious c#aracteristics4 ;t also )rings into relie/ suc# as&ects o/ modernit% as went unnoticed w#en
loo!ed u&on /rom t#e inside o/ t#e modern era sim&l% )ecause o/ t#eir t#en uncontested status and conseKuent ta!en-/or-grantednessN w#ic#, #owe-er, suddenl% )urst into
-ision &recisel% )ecause t#eir a)sence in t#e later, &ostmodern, &eriod ma!es t#em &ro)lematic4 Suc# as&ects, /irst and /oremost, are t#ose w#ic# )ear relation to modernit%0s
sel/-con/idenceN its con-iction o/ its own su&eriorit% o-er alternati-e /orms o/ li/e, seen as #istoricall% or logicall% F&rimiti-e0N and its )elie/ t#at its &ragmatic ad-antage o-er
&re-modern societies and cultures, /ar /rom )eing a #istoric coincidence, can )e s#own to #a-e o)Iecti-e, a)solute /oundations and uni-ersal -alidit%4
;ndeed, t#is is e(actl% t#e !ind o/ )elie/ w#ic# t#e consciousness o/ t#e &ostmodern era is most cons&icuousl% lac!ingN all t#e more stri!ing is t#e solid &resence o/ suc# a )elie/
in t#e sel/-consciousness o/ modernit%4 $rom t#e &ostmodern &ers&ecti-e t#e e&isode o/ modernit% a&&ears to #a-e )een, more t#an an%t#ing else, t#e era o/ certaint%4
;t is so )ecause t#e most &oignant o/ t#e &ostmodern e(&eriences is t#e lack o/ sel/-con/idence4 ;t is &er#a&s de)ata)le w#et#er t#e &#iloso&#ers o/ t#e modern era e-er articulated to
e-er%)od%0s satis/action t#e /oundations o/ t#e o)Iecti-e su&eriorit% o/ .estern rationalit%, logic, moralit%, aest#etics, cultural &rece&ts, rules o/ ci-iliGed li/e, etc4 T#e /act is,
#owe-er, t#at t#e% ne-er sto&&ed loo!ing /or suc# an articulation and #ardl% e-er ceased to )elie-e t#at t#e searc# would )ring
H must )ring H success4 T#e &ostmodern &eriod is distinguis#ed )% a)andoning t#e searc# itsel/, #a-ing con-inced itsel/ o/ its /utilit%4 ;nstead, it tries to reconcile itsel/ to a li/e
under conditions o/ &ermanent and incura)le uncertaint%N a li/e in t#e &resence o/ an unlimited Kuantit% o/ com&eting /orms o/ li/e, una)le to &ro-e t#eir claims to )e grounded in an%t#ing
more solid and )inding t#an t#eir own #istoricall% s#a&ed con-entions4
Modernit%, )% com&arison, seems ne-er to #a-e entertained similar dou)ts as to t#e uni-ersal grounding o/ its status4 T#e #ierarc#% o/ -alues im&osed u&on t#e world
administered )% t#e nort#-western ti& o/ t#e Euro&ean &eninsula was so /irm, and su&&orted )% &owers so enormousl% o-erw#elming, t#at /or a cou&le o/ centuries it remained t#e )aseline
o/ t#e world -ision, rat#er t#an an o-ertl% de)ated &ro)lem4 Seldom )roug#t to t#e le-el o/ consciousness, it remained t#e all-&ower/ul Fta!en-/or-granted0 o/ t#e era4 ;t was
e-ident to e-er%)od% e(ce&t t#e )lind and t#e ignorant t#at t#e .est was su&erior to t#e East, w#ite to )lac!, ci-iliGed to crude, cultured to uneducated, sane to insane, #ealt#% to sic!,
man to woman, normal to criminal, more to less, ric#es to austerit%, #ig# &roducti-it% to low &roducti-it%, #ig# culture to low culture4 All t#ese Fe-idences0 are now gone4 ot a single one
18< +y#,nt -a,#an
remains unc#allenged4 .#at is more, we can see now t#at t#e% did not #old in se&aration /rom eac# ot#erN t#e% made sense toget#er, as mani/estations o/ t#e same &ower com&le(,
t#e same &ower structure o/ t#e world, w#ic# retained credi)ilit% as long as t#e structure remained intact, )ut were unli!el% to sur-i-e its demise4
T#e structure #as )een, moreo-er, increasingl% sa&&ed )% t#e resistance and t#e struggle o/ categories cast @&racticall% )% t#e &ower structure, t#eoreticall% )% t#e associated -alue
#ierarc#%A as in/erior4 ;t is t#e measure o/ t#e e//ecti-eness o/ suc# resistance t#at no &ower toda% /eels a)le to claim an o)Iecti-e su&eriorit% /or t#e /orm o/ li/e it re&resentsN t#e
most it can do is to demand, /ollowing Ronald Reagan0s e(am&le, t#e rig#t to Fde/end our wa% o/ li/e04 All a)solute su&eriorities met a /ate similar to t#e one &erce&ti-el% o)ser-ed )%
;an Miles and 3o#n ;r-ine regarding t#e .est o-er East domination6 as /ar as t#e o)Iections o/ t#e Funderde-elo&ed0 &art o/ t#e world go, Fwit# increasing glo)al insta)ilit%, t#is claim
ma% )ecome more t#an a moral &lea6 it ma% )e en/orcea)le t#roug# &olitical or economic action04
5
;ndeed it ma%, i/ it #as not )een alread%, and in -iew o/ t#is &ossi)ilit% t#e
&#iloso&#ical &ursuit o/ t#e a)solute /oundations o/ .estern su&eriorit% must sound increasingl% #ollow6 t#e /act w#ic# was to )e e(&lained #as disa&&eared4
How di//erent t#is situation a&&ears w#en com&ared wit# t#e intellectual and moral com/ort o/ uncontested domination, w#ic#, as Ric#ard L4 Ru)enstein recentl%
o)ser-ed, made t#e sel/-consciousness o/ t#e modern era, /rom Cal-in to Darwin, so con/ident in &ro/essing its moral e-aluations masKuerading as statements o/ o)Iecti-e
trut#6
Darwin0s -ision resem)les a 1i)lical t#eolog% o/ #istor%6 t#e &lig#t o/ t#ose w#o su//er must )e -iewed /rom t#e larger &ers&ecti-e o/ t#e 2reat Plan4 ;n t#e 1i)le, 2od is t#e Aut#or o/ t#e
PlanN in Darwin it is Fature04 ;n )ot#, #istor% deri-es its meaning /rom t#e /ate o/ t#e /ortunate /ew4 O/ greatest im&ortance is t#e /act t#at )ot# Cal-inism and Darwinism &ro-ide a cosmic
Iusti/ication /or t#e /elicit% o/ t#e /ew and t#e miser% o/ t#e man%4
,
.it# t#e man% no longer acce&ting o)edientl% t#eir miser%, e-en t#e /elicitous /ew do not seem to #a-e muc# demand /or cosmic Iusti/ication o/ t#eir /elicit%4 Practical and e//ecti-e means o/
de/ending t#eir /elicit% against rising t#reats seem to &ossess more urgenc% and &romise more )ene/it4
T#e Fs#rin!ing0 o/ Euro&e, and t#e #um)ling o/ t#e -alues wit# w#ic# it grew used to identi/%ing itsel/, is not, o/ course, a &#enomenon reduci)le solel% to c#anges in t#e world0s
)alance o/ &ower4 T#e c#anges are real enoug# @and large enoug# at least to &ro)lematiGe t#e &re-iousl% ta!en-/or-granted Euro&ean su&eriorit%A, )ut )% t#emsel-es t#e% would not
generate a crisis o/ con/idence in t#e Fa)solute /oundations0, i/ it were not /or t#e dwindling con/idence o/ t#ose w#o once t#eoriGed Euro&ean su&eriorit%4 T#ose w#o once
scanned t#e world as t#e /ield to )e culti-ated )% Euro&e, armed as it was wit# Reason, tend to s&ea! toda% o/ t#e
,he $all of the 6e%islator 18=
F/ailed0 or F%et un/ul/illed0 &roIect o/ modernit%4 @Modernit%, once t#e F)ac!ground0 one does not re/lect u&on, #as suddenl% )een &ercei-ed as a &roIect now t#at its attri)utes
#a-e )egun to disa&&ear one )% one4A ;n t#e same wa% as t#e intellectual climates w#ic# &receded it, t#e contem&orar% crisis o/ con/idence is an intellectual constructionN it
re/lects, as )e/ore, t#e collecti-e e(&erience o/ t#ose w#o articulate t#e sel/-identities o/ t#eir times and societiesN t#e onl% categor% o/ &eo&le w#ic# descri)es and de/ines
itsel/, and w#ic# cannot descri)e or de/ine itsel/ in an% ot#er /as#ion )ut t#roug# descri)ing and de/ining societies o/ w#ic# it is a &art4
T#e &essimistic and de/ensi-e mood o/ t#e intellectuals, w#ic# &resents itsel/ as t#e crisis o/ Euro&ean ci-iliGation, )ecomes understanda)le i/ seen against t#e di//iculties
t#e intellectuals encounter w#ene-er attem&ting to /ul/il t#eir traditional roleN to wit, t#e role w#ic#, wit# t#e ad-ent o/ t#e modern era, t#e% were trained
H and trained t#emsel-es H to &er/orm4 T#e contem&orar% world is ill /itted /or intellectuals as legislatorsN w#at a&&ears to our consciousness as t#e crisis o/ ci-iliGation, or t#e
/ailure o/ a certain #istorical &roIect, is a genuine crisis o/ a &articular role, and t#e corres&onding e(&erience o/ t#e collecti-e redundanc% o/ t#e categor% w#ic# s&ecialiGed
in &la%ing t#is role4
One as&ect o/ t#is crisis is t#e a)sence o/ sites /rom w#ic# aut#oritati-e statements o/ t#e !ind t#e /unction o/ intellectual legislators in-ol-es could )e made4 T#e e(ternal
limitations o/ Euro&ean @or .esternA &ower /orm onl% a &art o/ t#e stor%4 Anot#er &art, argua)l% more conseKuential still, comes /rom t#e growing inde&endence o/ societal
&owers, wit#in .estern societies t#emsel-es, /rom t#e ser-ices intellectuals were a)le, eager and #o&ing to su&&l%4 T#is &rocess #as )een well ca&tured )% Mic#el de
Certeau6
T#e old &owers cle-erl% managed t#eir Faut#orit%0 and t#us com&ensated /or t#e inadeKuac% o/ t#eir tec#nical and administrati-e a&&aratusN t#e% were s%stems o/ clienteles, allegiances,
Flegitimacies0 etc4 T#e% soug#t, #owe-er, to ma!e t#emsel-es more inde&endent o/ t#e /luctuations o/ t#ese /idelities t#roug# rationaliGation, t#e control and organiGation o/ s&ace4 As t#e
result o/ t#is la)our, t#e &owers in our de-elo&ed societies #a-e at t#eir dis&osal rat#er su)tl% and closel%-!nit &rocedures /or t#e control o/ all social networ!sN t#ese are t#e administrati-e
and F&ano&tic0 s%stems o/ t#e &olice, t#e sc#ools, #ealt# ser-ices, securit% etc4 1ut t#e% are slowl% losing all credi)ilit%4 T#e% #a-e more &ower and less aut#orit%4
=
T#e &oint is t#at t#e state is not necessaril% wea!er /rom t#is demise o/ aut#orit%N it sim&l% #as /ound )etter, more e//icient wa%s o/ re&roducing and rein/orcing its &owerN aut#orit%
#as )ecome redundant, and t#e categor% s&ecialiGing in ser-icing t#e re&roduction o/ aut#orit% #as )ecome su&er/luous4 .#oe-er insists on continuing to su&&l% suc# ser-ices Iust
)ecause #e or s#e is well Kuali/ied and e//icient in &roducing t#em, must &ercei-e t#e situation as critical4
T#e new tec#nolog% o/ &ower and control also needs e(&erts, o/ courseN )ut t#e traditional intellectualsHlegislators would #ardl% recogniGe t#is new demand as geared to
t#eir s!ills and am)itions4 A witt% )ut &ro/ound descri&tion o/ new &ower
18@ +y#,nt -a,#an
routines is contained in a recent stud% )% Stanle% Co#en6
Orwell0s terri)le image o/ totalitarianism was t#e )oot eternall% tram&ling a #uman /ace4 M% -ision o/ social control is muc# more mundane and assuring4 ;t is t#e eternal case con/erence,
diagnostic and allocation )oard or &re-sentence in-estigation unit4 Serious-loo!ing P#Ds are sitting around a ta)le4 Eac# is stud%ing t#e same com&uteriGed records, &s%c#ological &ro/iles,
case #istories, neat /iles &unc#ed out on t#e word &rocessor4 T#e atmos&#ere is calm4 E-er%one &resent !nows t#at no amount o/ criticism o/ indi-idual treatment met#ods, no em&irical
researc#, no dodo-)ird -erdicts can slow t#e wor! down4 T#e re-erse is true4 T#e more negati-e t#e results, t#e more manic and )aroKue t#e enter&rise o/ selection )ecomes6 more
&s%c#ological tests, more in-estigation units, more &re-sentence re&orts, more &ost-sentence allocation centres, more contract /orms, more case summaries, more re/erral notations, more
&rediction de-ices4
>
T#ere is #ardl% an% wa% le/t leading /rom t#is sel/-&ro&elling, sel/-&er&etuating, sel/-di-isi-e, autonomous and sel/-su//icient mec#anism o/ e(&ert !nowledge, )ac! to t#e
!ind o/ generaliGed e(&ertise entailed )% t#e traditional role o/ t#e legislators4 $rom t#e -antage &oint o/ memor% @or t#e Fun/ul/illed &roIect o/ modernit%0A realities o/
modern &ower routines ma% )e seen, as t#e% indeed are, as a )ureaucratic dis&lacement o/ t#e educated e(&erts, as an act o/ e(&ro&riation H intellectuals #a-ing )een de&ri-ed o/
t#e /unctions and entitlements t#e% grew to see as t#eir own4
T#ere is also anot#er /actor e(acer)ating t#e intellectual lac! o/ sel/-con/idence4 T#e #o&e t#at t#e modern, t#at is, t#e rationall% administered, #ig#l% and increasingl%
&roducti-e, science-)ased world would e-entuall% generate &atterns o/ social organiGation /it to )e uni-ersaliGed is /ading, as t#e disenc#antments accumulate6 none o/ t#e
&atterns so /ar &roduced inside t#e modern world is li!el% e-er to res&ond to t#e e(&ectations )orn o/ intellectual &ractice4 To &ut it a di//erent wa%, no &attern so /ar &roduced, or
li!el% to )e &roduced as t#ings go at t#e moment, &romises to render t#e social world #os&ita)le to intellectuals in t#eir traditional role4 T#is realiGation /inds its outlet in t#e
wides&read /eeling, admira)l% ca&tured )% Agnes Heller and #er colleagues /rom t#e &ost-Lu!Tcsian sc#ool, t#at t#e modern world /aces a situation wit#out good c#oices4
T#e c#oice is, indeed, )etween t#e Fdictators#i& o-er needs0 in t#e So-iet-t%&e s%stem, and t#e consumer societ% o/ t#e .est H one t#at #as ta!en all t#e lids o// #uman
desires, and #as le/t no s&ace /or t#e limiting role o/ -alues, )reeding instead an incessantl% growing -olume o/ dissatis/action &arallel to t#e unsto&&a)l% swelling -olume o/
commodities4 ;n t#e s%stem o/ t#e /irst t%&e, t#e intellectuals #a-e )een, so to s&ea!, liKuidated as a class, t#at is, t#e% #a-e )een collecti-el% e(&ro&riated o/ t#eir s#ared
/unction o/ generating and &romoting t#e -alues t#e state and its su)Iects are e(&ected to im&lement and o)ser-e4 Jalues are now articulated )% t#e state itsel/, )ut a)o-e all
t#e% are @in &ractice, i/ not in t#eor%A )%-&assed as t#e means o/ societal re&roduction and all )ut re&laced )% tec#niKues o/ coercion, mani&ulation and &ano&tic control4 ;n a
s%stem o/ t#e second t%&e, t#e &ractical e//ects on t#e &osition o/ t#e intellectuals are -irtuall% t#e same, once all t#e o)-ious di//erences )etween
,he $all of the 6e%islator 18B
t#e two s%stems are granted6 -alues #a-e )een turned into attri)utes o/ commodities, and ot#erwise rendered irrele-ant4 ;t is t#ere/ore t#e mec#anism o/ t#e mar!et w#ic#
now ta!es u&on itsel/ t#e role o/ t#e Iudge, t#e o&inion-ma!er, t#e -eri/ier o/ -alues4 ;ntellectuals #a-e )een e(&ro&riated again4 T#e% #a-e )een dis&laced e-en
in t#e area w#ic# /or se-eral centuries seemed to remain uncontesta)l% t#eir own mono&olistic domain o/ aut#orit% H in t#e area o/ culture in general, F#ig#
culture0 in &articular4 ;n Da-id Carrier0s realistic assessment, Faest#etic Iudgments directl% im&l% economic Iudgments4 To &ersuade us t#at a wor! Vo/ artY is good, and
so con-ince t#e art world Vi4e4 t#e sellers and )u%ers o/ artY t#at it is -alua)le, are two descri&tions o/ one and t#e same action4 Trut# o/ criticism is relati-e to w#at
art-world &eo&le )elie-e CCC t#eor% )ecoming true w#en enoug# o/ t#ese &eo&le )elie-e it40
?
T#e &ower o/ adIudication &assing awa% /rom t#eir #ands, t#e intellectuals
cannot )ut e(&erience t#e world as one wit#out -alues Fwort#% o/ t#e name04 T#e% would, on t#e w#ole, agree wit# t#e som)re &remonition o/ 2eorg Simmel,
Iotted down on t#e e-e o/ t#e $irst .orld .ar6 Funli!e men in all t#ese earlier e&oc#s, we #a-e )een /or some time now li-ing wit#out an% s#ared ideal, e-en
&er#a&s wit#out an% ideals at all04
<
;n suc# a mood, it ta!es a lot o/ courage to &ersist in &resenting t#e -alues o/ one0s c#oice as a)solutel% )inding4 Some would
undou)tedl% do Iust t#at, )racing t#emsel-es /or t#e no)le, %et not e-identl% e//ecti-e, role o/ t#e -oice cr%ing in t#e wilderness4 Man% ot#ers would consider
&ragmatic modest% a more reasona)le c#oice4
T#is #as )een a -er% &reliminar% list o/ #%&ot#eses w#ic# ma% &ossi)l% account /or t#e crisis o/ t#e traditional legislator0s role @t#e crisis w#ic# seems to
stand )e#ind t#e current &ostmodernist discourseA4 Social realit% #iding )e#ind t#e notion o/ &ostmodernism, and, more im&ortantl%, t#e generic name o/
&ostmodernit%, reKuires o/ course a muc# more t#oroug# anal%sis4
Anal%sis o/ &ostmodernit%, #owe-er conscientious, must )ear t#e same Funtil /urt#er notice0, incom&lete c#aracter, as t#e traditional t#eories o/ modernit%
once didN constructed /rom wit#in modernit%, t#e% &ercei-ed t#e latter as a %et un/inis#ed, and #ence organicall% o&en-ended, &rocess4 Anal%sis o/
&ostmodernit% cannot )e an%t#ing more t#an a mid-career re&ort4 ;ts &ro&ositions must )e tentati-e, &articularl% in -iew o/ t#e /act t#at t#e onl% solid and
indu)ita)le accom&lis#ment o/ t#e &ostmodernist de)ate #as )een t#us /ar t#e &roclamation o/ t#e end o/ modernismN as to t#e rest, it is /ar /rom clear w#ic#
among t#e man% to&ics o/ t#e discourse signal lasting and irre-ersi)le tendencies, and w#ic# will soon /ind t#eir &lace among t#e &assing /ads o/ a centur%
notorious /or its lo-e o/ /as#ions4 T#is uncertaint% e(tends to t#e issue most crucial to our to&ic6 t#e c#anging social location, and #ence t#e role, o/ t#e
intellectuals4 T#ere are man% signs t#at t#e traditional role @&er/ormed or as&ired toA, &ortra%ed )% t#e meta&#or o/ Flegislators0, is )eing graduall% re&laced )%
t#e role )est ca&tured )% t#e meta&#or o/ Finter&reters04 ;s t#is, #owe-er, an irre-oca)le trans/ormation, or a momentar% loss o/ ner-eD
;n t#e centur% or so immediatel% &receding t#e ad-ent o/ modernit%, Euro&e went t#roug# a similar &eriod o/ uncertaint%, and t#e &roto-&ragmatism o/
Mercenne or
L
1:9
+y#,nt -a,#an
2assendi was its res&onse4 T#at &eriod did not last long4 Soon t#e &#iloso&#ers Ioined /orces in e(orciGing t#e g#ost o/ relati-ism t#at t#e &roto-&ragmatists tried to
accommodate4 T#e e(orcism #as gone on e-er since, ne-er /ull% success/ul4 Descartes0s ma'm %enie #as alwa%s )een wit# us, in one disguise or anot#er, #is &resence
con/irmed )% e-er renewed des&erate attem&ts to anni#ilate t#e t#reat o/ relati-ism, as i/ no suc# attem&ts #ad e-er )een underta!en in t#e &ast4 Modernit% was li-ed in a
#aunted #ouse4 Modernit% was an age o/ certaint%, )ut it #ad its inner demonsN its was t#e securit% o/ a )esieged /ortress, con/idence o/ a commander o/ a so /ar, t#an! 2od,
stronger arm%4 8nli!e t#e medie-al certaint% o/ t#e sc#oolmen, t#e certaint% o/ modern &#iloso&#ers constantl% entailed t#e &oignant awareness o/ t#e problem o/ relati-ism4
;t #ad to )e an em)attled, militant certaint%4 A momentar% loss o/ -igilance could cost dearl%4 ;t did, occasionall%4
;s t#e time we li-e in anot#er suc# occasionD Or does it di//er /rom t#e &re-ious onesD ;s t#e current crisis o/ certaint% t#e e//ect o/ a tem&orar% loss o/ -igilanceD ;s it a t%&ical
interim &eriod w#ic# /ollows, and &recedes, successi-e /orms o/ societal organiGationD Or is it t#e /irst sig#ting o/ t#e s#a&e o/ t#ings to comeD
one o/ t#ese t#ree &ossi)ilities can )e acce&ted, or reIected, wit# con/idence4 At t#is stage, t#e )est one can do is tr% to ta!e stoc! o/ &ossi)le scenarios and t#eir sociall% grounded
&ro)a)ilities4
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 C/4 2unt#er S4 Stent, ,he )omin% of the /olden A%e: A .iew of the end of pro%ress5 ational Histor% Press, ew Yor!, *+?+4
54 ;an Miles and 3o#n ;r-ine, ,he &o.erty of &ro%ress: )han%in% ways of life in industrial societies5 Pergamon Press, *+E5, &4 54
,4 Ric#ard L4 Ru)enstein, FT#e elect and t#e &reterite0, in (odernisation: ,he 7umanist response to its promise and problems5 ed4 Ric#ard L4 Ru)enstein, Paragon House,
.as#ington, DC, *+E5, &4 *E,4
=4 Mic#el de Certeau, ,he &ractice of :.eryday 6ife5 *+E=, &4 *<+4
!. Stanle% Co#en, Visions of -ocial )ontrol: )rime5 punishment and classification5 Polit% Press, O(/ord, *+E>, &4 *E>4
?4 Da-id Carrier, FArt and its mar!et0, in Ric#ard HertG, ,heories of )ontemporary Art5 Prentice Hall, Englewood Cli//s, 3, *+E>, &&4 595, 59=4
<4 2eorg Simmel, FT#e con/lict in modern culture0, in ,he )onflict in (odern )ulture and 2ther :ssays5 transl4 '4 Peter EtG!orn, Teac#ers College Press, ew Yor!, *+?E, &4 1$C
PART THREE
Aesthetic and )ultural &ractices
Introduction
;n recent %ears, tal! a)out t#e arts #as )ecome e(&licitl% more interdisci&linar% and eclectic4 T#e most dedicated site /or suc# tal! is, o/ course, t#e academic
institutions, t#e uni-ersities and t#e museums4 Yet t#is is itsel/ countered somew#at )% t#e H o/ten co-ert H a&&earance, wit#in F&o&ular0 or mass-mediatic
/orms, o/ so-called F#ig#0 cultural matters6 /or instance, t#e cinema-going audience /or Co&&ola0s Apocalypse How would certainl% not all #a-e )een aware o/
Conrad0s 7eart of <arkness @a te(t read almost e(clusi-el% t#ese da%s wit#in t#e /ramewor! o/ a uni-ersit% s%lla)usA, w#ic# t#e /ilm e(tensi-el% and randoml%
&lundered /or muc# o/ its s%m)olic su)stance4 T#is dislocation and re-engagement )etween F#ig# art0 and F&o&ular culture0 is o/ central im&ortance to aest#etic
and cultural &ractices wit#in t#e &ostmodern4
T#e great sel/-conscious moment o/ e(&erimentalism in all t#e arts is /ound )etween t#e late nineteent# centur% and t#e earl% twentiet# centur%N %et t#e great
identi/ication o/ t#is moment as a moment o/ cultural Fmodernism0 comes signi/icantl% later4 Artists, in t#eir di-erse /ields at t#e turn o/ t#e centur%, were
doing w#at t#e% #ad alwa%s done in t#ose /ields6 wor!ing wit#in traditions and loo!ing /or wa%s to e(tend t#em4 O/ten @t#oug# clearl% not alwa%sA suc#
&ursuits went on entirel% inde&endentl% o/ eac# ot#er4 Later, #owe-er, instead o/ t#e de-elo&ment o/ a discourse called Ft#e #istor% o/ dance0 and a se&arate
one called Ft#e #istor% o/ literature0 and a /urt#er one designated as Ft#e #istor% o/ music0, and so on, we witness t#e de-elo&ment o/ a discourse w#ic#
e-entuall% )ecame !nown in t#e *+<9s as FCultural Studies04 T#is new uni-ersit% discourse is eclectic, and /eels itsel/ ca&a)le o/ addressing t#e se&arate
aest#etic and cultural /ields toget#er4 T#e )asis /or t#e esta)lis#ment o/ Cultural Studies lies in an earlier moment in twentiet#-centur% intellectual li/e w#en
com&arati-e and #istorical wor! in -arious /ields )egan to relate t#e di-erse aest#etic e(&eriments o/ t#e earl% twentiet# centur% to eac# ot#er, t#ere)%
)eginning t#e identi/ication o/ a cultural &ractice !nown as Fmodernism0, a term w#ic#, &rior to t#is moment, #ad a t#eological rat#er t#an an aest#etic
signi/icance4
T#e identi/ication o/ modernism in t#is wa% goes #and in #and wit# t#e identi/ication o/ a means /or its anal%sis6 semiotics4 ;t is semiotics w#ic#, )%
translating all cultural &ractices into signi/%ing &ractices and )% considering all aest#etic e-ents as Fsigns0, inaugurates t#e &ossi)ilit%, eagerl% em)raced, o/
Cultural Studies as a F/oundational &#iloso&#%04 8nder t#is t#ere lies a would-)e Fdemocratising0 im&etus6 to comment on dance, /or instance, one no longer
needs a
1:8
1:: &art ,hree: Aesthetic and )ultural &ractices
s&ecialised !nowledge o/ c#oreogra&#%, /or t#e dance is a &ractice o/ signs, o&en to decoding and deci&#ering according to some )asic semiotic &rocedures4 T#e intellectual,
&re-iousl% loc!ed in an esoteric and elitist engagement wit# t#e te(ts o/ #ig# culture, is now, in t#is /ramewor!, Iust as com&etent to comment u&on a war in t#e Sout#
Atlantic in t#e *+E9s as s#e or #e is to comment u&on Milton0s *?== te(t Areopa%itica5 /or e-er%t#ing is eKuall% a war o-er meanings, a war carried out )% t#e -arious
strategies o/ signi/%ing &ractices4
T#e &osition ; #a-e Iust descri)ed is modernist t#roug# and t#roug#4 T#e semiotic discourse not onl% &roduces its &ro&er o)Iect o/ anal%sis H t#e entit% called Fmodernism0,
w#ic# descri)es t#e artistic e(&eriments o/ t#e &eriod *E>9H*+,+ in Euro&eN it also &roduces and legitimises itsel/ in e=actly the same .ein as an Fe(&erimental0 mode o/
anal%sis, scorn/ul o/ great di-isions )etween #ig# and &o&ular art /orms, arrogant in its enc%clo&aedic &retensions @Iust as 0lysses H to ta!e a random e(am&le H was am)itious
in its m%t#o&oeic intentA, and assured o/ its master% o-er a world-#istor% w#ic# #as )een reduced to t#e merest grammar o/ e-ents4 Accordingl%, t#is modernism is a sel/-
ser-ing act o/ mere sel/-legitimation4
.#at #as t#e &ostmodern to sa% to t#isD Made aware, at least institutionall%, o/ t#e grand successes o/ modernist aest#etic e(&eriment, t#e )elated artist /aces a #uge
1loomian an(iet% o/ in/luence4 A/ter $inne%ans Wake5 w#at mig#t one do wit# t#e no-elDN a/ter MallarmL, w#at is to )ecome o/ &oetr%DN a/ter Stra-ins!% or t#e Second
Jiennese Sc#ool, #ow can music continue to de-elo&DN a/ter Diag#ile- and iIins!%, w#at #a&&ens to t#e danceDN and so on4 Clearl%, t#e wealt# o/ artistic wor! in all t#ese
and ot#er /ields is testimon% to t#e /act t#at artists #a-e indeed /ound some wa% o/ continuing t#eir wor!4 1roadl%, it seems a&&arent t#at two main traIectories )ecome
a-aila)le4 On t#e one #and, /aced wit# t#e #uge successes o/ /ormal Fmodernist0 e(&erimentation, t#e artist mig#t re.ert /rom e(&eriment4 T#is wa% lies a resurgence o/
content, w#ic# #as ada&ted itsel/ to t#e -arious demands o/ t#e twentiet# centur% /rom socialist realism t#roug# to t#e new /igurati-e art o/ Cam&)ell or Conro%, Rego or
1allag#, and so on4 On t#e ot#er #and, one mig#t indeed continue to e=tend t#e e(&erimentalism o/ t#e earl% twentiet# centur%, mo-ing into se-ere /orms o/ a)straction, sa%,
and culminating in t#e &ro)lematic status o/ wor! )% artists as di-erse as 1eu%s or .ar#ol, to ta!e random e(am&les4
.#at is s#ared among artists o/ t#e contem&orar% moment is a s&eci/ic set o/ critical &ro)lems regarding representation. T#e essa%s included #ere )% Crim&, Crowt#er,
1audrillard and Eco are all /ocused on t#e crisis in re&resentation w#ic# a//ects and sometimes e//ects contem&orar% aest#etic and cultural &ractices4 ; #a-e Fencom&assed0
t#ese essa%s wit# two &ieces, one )% 1anes and one )% %man, w#ic# s#are a sus&icion regarding t#e e(clusi-it% o/ certain aest#etic &ractices in dance and music4 T#e
general &ro)lem o/ modernism as at once elitist and contaminated )% &o&ular /orms is )eing addressed -igorousl% )% some contem&orar% artists, as t#ese articles s#ow4 T#e
crisis in re&resentation w#ic# is so central to &ostmodernism is not onl% a crisis in t#e &erce&tion o/ artN it is also a crisis in its &roduction4
;#a) Hassan0s &iece ta)ulates t#e di//erences )etween t#e modern and t#e &ostmodern4 .#ile t#is is admittedl% e&istemologicall% use/ul, it is itsel/ somew#at
'ntroduction 1:$
s%m&tomatic o/ a modernist tendenc% in criticism6 t#e tendenc% to master )% gi-ing aest#etic /orm @in t#is case t#e /orm o/ a dialectical o&&ositionA to di-erse and random
materials4 T#ere is, clearl%, no sim&le e-asion o/ t#e modern in t#e &ostmodern, as Hassan0s &rocedure o/ ta)ulation and s%nt#esis s#owsN )ut t#is itsel/ is a crucial &art o/ t#e
&ostmodern tendenc% in cultural and aest#etic &ractices4 T#e modern is not so muc# a-oided as reconsidered, reconstellated4
B w &oward a Conce*t of
Postmodernism
I/a" !assan
T#e strains o/ silence in literature, /rom Sade to 1ec!ett, con-e% com&le(ities o/ language, culture, and consciousness as t#ese contest t#emsel-es and one anot#er4 Suc# eerie
music ma% %ield an e(&erience, an intuition, o/ &ostmodernism )ut no conce&t or de/inition o/ it4 Per#a&s ; can mo-e #ere toward suc# a conce&t )% &utting /ort# certain
Kueries4 ; )egin wit# t#e most o)-ious6 can we reall% &ercei-e a &#enomenon, in .estern societies generall% and in t#eir literatures &articularl%, t#at needs to )e distinguis#ed
/rom modernism, needs to )e namedD ;/ so, will t#e &ro-isional ru)ric F&ostmodernism0 ser-eD Can we t#en H or e-en s#ould we at t#is time H construct o/ t#is &#enomenon
some &ro)ati-e sc#eme, )ot# c#ronological and t%&ological, t#at ma% account /or its -arious trends and counter-trends, its artistic, e&istemic, and social c#aracterD And #ow
would t#is &#enomenon Hlet us call it &ostmodernism H relate itsel/ to suc# earlier modes o/ c#ange as turn-o/-t#e-centur% a-ant-gardes or t#e #ig# modernism o/ t#e twentiesD
$inall%, w#at di//iculties would in#ere in an% suc# act o/ de/inition, suc# a tentati-e #euristic sc#emeD
; am not certain t#at ; can w#oll% satis/% m% own Kuestions, t#oug# ; can assa% some answers t#at ma% #el& to /ocus t#e larger &ro)lem4 Histor%, ; ta!e itD mo-es in
measures )ot# continuous and discontinuous4 T#us t#e &re-alence o/ &ostmodernism toda%, i/ indeed it &re-ails, does not suggest t#at ideas or institutions o/ t#e &ast cease to
s#a&e t#e &resent4 Rat#er, traditions de-elo&, and e-en t%&es su//er a seac#ange4 Certainl%, t#e &ower/ul cultural assum&tions generated )%, sa%, Darwin, Mar(, 1audelaire,
ietGsc#e, CeGanne, De)uss%, $reud, and Einstein still &er-ade t#e .estern mind4 Certainl% t#ose assum&tions #a-e )een reconcei-ed, not once )ut man% times H else #istor%
would re&eat itsel/, /ore-er t#e same4 ;n t#is &ers&ecti-e &ostmodernism ma% a&&ear as a signi/icant re-ision, i/ not an original ;pist;mN5 o/ twentiet#-centur% .estern
societies4
Some names, &iled #ere &ell-mell, ma% ser-e to adum)rate &ostmodernism, or at
$rom Hassan, ;4, ,he &ostmodern ,urn5 O#io State 8ni-ersit% Press, Colum)us, *+E<, PP4 E=H+?4
1:<
,oward a )oncept of &ostmodernisrn 1:=
least suggest its range o/ assum&tions6 3acKues Derrida, 3ean-$rancois L%otard @&#iloso&#%A, Mic#el $oucault, Ha%den .#ite @#istor%A, 3acKues Lacan, 2illes DeleuGe, R4 D4
Laing, orman 94 1rown @&s%c#oanal%sisA, Her)ert Marcuse, 3ean 1audrillard, 3urgen Ha)ermas @&olitical &#iloso&#%A, T#omas 'u#n, Paul $e%era)end @&#iloso&#% o/
scienceA, Roland 1art#es, 3ulia 'riste-a, .ol/gang lser, t#e FYale Critics0 @literar% t#eor%A, Merce Cunning#am, Alwin i!olais, Meredit# Mon! @danceA, 3o#n Cage,
'arl#einG Stoc!#ausen, Pierre 1ouleG @musicA, Ro)ert Rausc#en)erg, 3ean Tinguel%, 3ose&# 1eu%s @artA, Ro)ert Jenturi, C#arles Ienc!s, 1rent 1olin @arc#itectureA, and
-arious aut#ors /rom Samuel 1ec!ett, EugZiie ;onesco, 3orge Luis 1orges, Ma( 1ense, and Jladimir a)o!o- to Harold Pinter, 14 S4 3o#nson, Ra%ner He&&enstall, C#ristine
1roo!e-Rose, Helmut Heissen)Xttel, 3urgen 1ec!er, Peter Hand!e, T#omas 1ern#ardt, Ernst Iandl, 2a)riel 2arcia MTrKueG, 3ulio CortTGar, Alain Ro))e-2rillet, Mic#el
1utor, Maurice Roc#e, P#ili&&e Sollers, and in America, 3o#n 1art#, .illiam 1urroug#s, T#omas P%nc#on, Donald 1art#elme, .alter A)is#, 3o#n As#)er%, Da-id Antin,
Sam S#e&ard, and Ro)ert .ilson4 ;ndu)ita)l%, t#ese names are /ar too #eterogeneous to /orm a mo-ement, &aradigm, or sc#ool4 Still, t#e% ma% e-o!e a num)er o/ related
cultural tendencies, a constellation o/ -alues, a re&ertoire o/ &rocedures and attitudes4 T#ese we call postmodernism.
.#ence t#is termD ;ts origin remains uncertain, t#oug# we !now t#at $ederico de Onis used t#e word postmodernismo in #is Antolo%ia de 'a poesia espanola e hispanoamericana
@*EE5H*+,5A, &u)lis#ed in Madrid in *+,=N and Dudle% $itts &ic!ed it u& again in #is Antholo%y of )ontemporary 6atin-American &oetry o/ *+=54 1ot# meant t#us to indicate a
minor reaction to modernism alread% latent wit#in it, re-erting to t#e earl% twentiet# centur%4 T#e term also a&&eared in Arnold To%n)ee0s A -tudy of 7istory as earl% as D4 C4
Somer-ell0s /irst--olume a)ridgement in *+=<4 $or To%n)ee, Post-Modernism designated a new #istorical c%cle in .estern ci-iliGation, starting around 1J7!5 w#ic# we now
scarcel% )egin to discern4 Somew#at later, during t#e /i/ties, C#arles Olson o/ten s&o!e o/ &ostmodernism wit# more swee& t#an la&idar% de/inition4
1ut &ro&#ets and &oets enIo% an am&le sense o/ time, w#ic# /ew literar% sc#olars seem to a//ord4 ;n *+>+ and *+?9, ;r-ing Howe and Harr% Le-in wrote o/ &ostmodernism
rat#er disconsolatel% as a /alling o// /rom t#e great modernist mo-ement4
5
;t remained /or Leslie $iedler and m%sel/, among ot#ers, to em&lo% t#e term during t#e si(ties wit#
&remature a&&ro)ation, and e-en wit# a touc# o/ )ra-ado4
,
$iedler #ad it in mind to c#allenge t#e elitism o/ t#e #ig#-modernist tradition in t#e name o/ &o&ular culture4 ; wanted to
e(&lore t#e im&ulse o/ sel/O unma!ing w#ic# is &art o/ t#e literar% tradition o/ silence4 Po& and silence, or mass culture and deconstructing, or Su&erman and 2odot H or as ; s#all later argue,
immanence and indeterminac% H ma% all )e as&ects o/ t#e &ostmodern uni-erse4 1ut all t#is must wait u&on more &atient anal%sis, longer #istor%04
Yet t#e #istor% o/ literar% terms ser-es onl% to con/irm t#e irrational genius o/ language4 .e come closer to t#e Kuestion o/ &ostmodernism itsel/ )% ac!nowledging t#e
&s%c#o&olitics, i/ not t#e &s%c#o&at#olog%, o/ academic li/e4 Let us admit it:
1:@ I/a" !assan
t#ere is a will to &ower in nomenclature, as well as in &eo&le or te(ts4 A new term o&ens /or its &ro&onents a s&ace in language4 A critical conce&t or s%stem is a F&oor0 &oem o/ t#e intellectual
imagination4 T#e )attle o/ t#e )oo!s is also an ontic )attle against deat#4 T#at ma% )e w#% Ma( Planc! )elie-ed t#at one ne-er manages to con-ince one0s o&&onents H not e-en in
t#eoretical &#%sics H one sim&l% tries to outli-e t#em4 .illiam 3ames descri)ed t#e &rocess in less mor)id terms6 no-elties are /irst re&udiated as nonsense, t#en declared o)-ious, t#en
a&&ro&riated )% /ormer ad-ersaries as t#eir own disco-eries4
; do not mean to ta!e m% stand wit# t#e &ostmoderns against t#e @ancientA moderns4 ;n an age o/ /rantic intellectual /as#ions, -alues can )e too rec!lessl% -oided, and tomorrow can Kuic!l%
&reem&t toda% or %ester%ear4 or is it merel% a matter o/ /as#ionsN /or t#e sense o/ su&er-ention ma% e(&ress some cultural urgenc% t#at &arta!es less o/ #o&e t#an /ear4 T#is muc# we recall6
Lionel Trilling entitled one o/ #is most t#oug#t/ul wor!s Keyond )ulture A1*+!?B 'ennet# 1oulding argued t#at F&ostci-iliGation0 is an essential &art o/ ,he (eanin% of the "0th )entury
@*+?=AN and 2eorge Steiner could #a-e su)titled #is essa% 'n Kluebeard1s )astle @*+<*A Fotes toward t#e de/inition o/ &ostculture04 1e/ore t#em, Roderic! Seiden)erg &u)lis#ed #is
&ost-7istoric (an e(actl% in mid-centur%N and most recentl%, ; #a-e m%sel/ s&eculated, in ,he 4i%ht &romethean $ire @*+E9A, a)out t#e ad-ent o/ a &ost#umanist era4 As Daniel 1ell &ut it: F;t
used to )e t#at t#e great literar% modi/ier was t#e word beyond.... 1ut we seem to #a-e e(#austed t#e )e%ond, and toda% t#e sociological modi/ier is post.1

M% &oint #ere is dou)le6 in t#e Kuestion o/ &ostmodernism, t#ere is a will and counter-will to intellectual &ower, an im&erial desire o/ t#e mind, )ut t#is will and desire are t#emsel-es caug#t
in a #istorical moment o/ su&er-ention, i/ not e(actl% o/ o)solescence4 T#e rece&tion or denial o/ &ostmodernism t#us remains contingent on t#e &s%c#o&olitics o/ academic li/e H including t#e
-arious dis&ositions o/ &eo&le and &ower in our uni-ersities, o/ critical /actions and &ersonal /rictions, o/ )oundaries t#at ar)itraril% include or e(clude H no less t#an on t#e im&erati-es
o/ t#e culture at large4 T#is muc#, re/le(i-it% seems to demand /rom us at t#e start4
1ut re/lection demands also t#at we address a num)er o/ conce&tual &ro)lems t#at )ot# conceal and constitute &ostmodernism itsel/4 ; s#all tr% to isolate ten o/ t#ese, commencing wit# t#e
sim&ler, mo-ing toward t#e more intracta)le4
*4 T#e word &ostmodernism sounds not onl% aw!ward, uncout#N it e-o!es w#at it wis#es to sur&ass or su&&ress, modernism itsel/4 T#e term t#us contains its enem% wit#in, as t#e terms
romanticism and classicism, )aroKue and rococo, do not4 Moreo-er, it denotes tem&oral linearit% and connotes )elatedness, e-en decadence, to w#ic# no &ostmodernist would admit4 1ut
w#at )etter name #a-e we to gi-e t#is curious ageD T#e Atomic, or S&ace, or Tele-ision, AgeD T#ese tec#nological tags lac! t#eoretical de/inition4 Or s#all we call it t#e Age o/
;ndetermanence @indeterminac% I immanenceA as ; #a-e #al/-anticall% &ro&osedD O Or )etter still, s#all we sim&l% li-e and let ot#ers li-e to call us w#at t#e% ma%D
,oward a )oncept of &ostmodernism 1:B
54 Li!e ot#er categorical terms H sa% &oststructuralism, or modernism, or romanticism /or t#at matter H &ostmodernism su//ers /rom a certain semantic insta)ilit%6 t#at is, no clear consensus
a)out its meaning e(ists among sc#olars4 T#e general di//icult% is com&ounded in t#is case )% two /actors6 @aA t#e relati-e %out#, indeed )ras# adolescence, o/ t#e term &ostmodernism and
@)A its semantic !ins#i& to more current terms, t#emsel-es eKuall% unsta)le4 T#us some critics mean )% &ostmodernism w#at ot#ers call a-ant-gardism or e-en neo-a-ant-gardism,
w#ile still ot#ers would call t#e same &#enomenon sim&l% modernism4 T#is can ma!e /or ins&ired de)ates4 <
,4 A related di//icult% concerns t#e historical insta)ilit% o/ man% literar% conce&ts, t#eir o&enness to c#ange4 .#o, in t#is e&oc# o/ /ierce mis&risions, would dare to claim t#at romanticism is
a&&re#ended )% Coleridge, Pater, Lo-eIo%, A)rams, Pec!#am, and 1loom in Kuite t#e same wa%D T#ere is alread% some e-idence t#at &ostmodernism, and modernism e-en more, are
)eginning to sli& and slide in time, t#reatening to ma!e an% diacritical distinction )etween t#em des&erate4 O 1ut &er#a&s t#e &#enomenon, a!in to Hu))le0s Fred s#i/t0 in astronom%, ma%
someda% ser-e to measure t#e #istorical -elocit% o/ literar% conce&ts4
=4 Modernism and &ostmodernism are not se&arated )% an ;ron Curtain or a C#inese .allN /or #istor% is a &alim&sest, and culture is &ermea)le to time &ast, time &resent, and time /uture4 .e
are all, ; sus&ect, a little Jictorian, Modern, and Postmodern, at once4 And an aut#or ma%, in #is or #er own li/etime, easil% write )ot# a modernist and &ostmodernist wor!4 @Contrast 3o%ce0s
&ortrait of the Artist as a Uoun% (an wit# #is $inne%ans Wake.? More generall%, on a certain le-el o/ narrati-e a)straction, modernism itsel/ ma% )e rig#tl% assimilated to romanticism,
romanticism related to t#e Enlig#tenment, t#e latter to t#e Renaissance, and so )ac!, i/ not to t#e Oldu-ai 2orge, t#en certainl% to ancient 2reece4
!. T#is means t#at a F&eriod0, as ; #a-e alread% intimated, must )e &ercei-ed in terms o/ both continuit% and discontinuit%, t#e two &ers&ecti-es )eing com&lementar% and &artial4 T#e
A&ollonian -iew, rang% and a)stract, discerns onl% #istorical conIunctionsN t#e Dion%sian /eeling, sensuous t#oug# nearl% &ur)lind, touc#es onl% t#e disIuncti-e moment4 T#us
&ostmodernism, )% in-o!ing two di-inities at once, engages a dou)le -iew4 Sameness and di//erence, unit% and ru&ture, /iliation and re-olt, all must )e #onored i/ we are to attend to #istor%,
a&&re#end @&ercei-e, understandA c#ange )ot# as a s&atial, mental structure and as a tem&oral, &#%sical &rocess, )ot# as &attern and as uniKue e-ent4
?4 T#us a F&eriod0 is generall% not a &eriod at allN it is rat#er )ot# a diac#ronic and s%nc#ronic construct4 Postmodernism, again li!e modernism or romanticism, is no e(ce&tionN it reKuires
both #istorical and t#eoretical de/inition4 .e would not seriousl% claim an inaugural Fdate0 /or it as Jirginia .ool/ &ertl% did /or modernism,
1$9 t/a" !assan
t#roug# we ma% sometimes woe/ull% imagine t#at &ostmodernism )egan Fin or a)out Se&tem)er *+,+04 T#us we continuall% disco-er Fantecedents0 o/ &ost-modernism H in Sterne, Sade, 1la!e,
LautrLamont, Rim)aud, 3arr%, TGara, Ho/mannst#al, 2ertrude Stein, t#e later 3o%ce, t#e later Pound, Duc#am&, Artaud, Roussel, 1ataille, 1roc#, Cueneau, and 'a/!a4 .#at t#is
reall% indicates is t#at we #a-e created in our mind a model o/ &ostmodernism, a &articular t%&olog% o/ culture and imagination, and #a-e &roceeded to Fredisco-er0 t#e a//inities o/ -arious
aut#ors and di//erent moments wit# t#at model4 .e #a-e, t#at is, rein-ented our ancestors
H and alwa%s s#all4 ConseKuentl%, Folder0 aut#ors can )e &ostmodern H 'a/!a, 1ec!ett, 1orges, a)o!o-, 2om)rowicG H w#ile F%ounger0 aut#ors need not )e so
H St%ron, 8&di!e, Ca&ote, ;r-ing, Doctorow, 2ardner4
<4 As we #a-e seen, an% de/inition o/ &ostmodernism calls u&on a /our/old -ision o/ com&lementarities, em)racing continuit% and discontinuit%, diac#ron% and s%nc#ron%4 1ut a de/inition o/
t#e conce&t also reKuires a dialectical -ision, /or de/ining traits are o/ten antit#etical, and to ignore t#is tendenc% o/ #istorical realit% is to la&se into single -ision and ewton0s slee&4 De/ining
traits are dialectical and also &luralN to elect a single trait as an a)solute criterion o/ &ostmodern grace is to ma!e o/ all ot#er writers &reterites4
E
T#us we can not sim&l% rest H as ; #a-e sometimes
done H on t#e assum&tion t#at &ostmodernism is anti/ormal, anarc#ic, or decreati-eN /or t#oug# it is indeed all t#ese, and des&ite its /anatic will to unma!ing, it also contains t#e need to disco-er
a Funitar% sensi)ilit%0 @SontagA, to Fcross t#e )order and close t#e ga&0 @$iedlerA, and to attain, as ; #a-e suggested, an immanence o/ discourse, an e(&anded noetic inter-ention, a Fneo-gnostic
immediac% o/ mind04
+
E4 All t#is leads to t#e &rior &ro)lem o/ &eriodiGation itsel/, w#ic# is also t#at o/ literar% #istor% concei-ed as a &articular a&&re#ension o/ c#ange4 ;ndeed, t#e conce&t o/ &ostmodernism
im&lies some t#eor% o/ inno-ation, reno-ation, no-ation, or sim&l% c#ange4 1ut w#ic# oneD HeracliteanD JiconianD DarwinianD Mar(istD $reudianD 'u#nianD DerrideanD EclecticD iO Or is a
Ft#eor% o/ c#ange0 itsel/ an o(%moron )est suited to ideologues intolerant o/ t#e am)iguities o/ timeD S#ould &ostmodernism, t#en, )e le/t H at least /or t#e moment H unconce&tualiGed, a !ind o/
literar%-#istorical Fdi//erence0 or Ftrace0D O
+4 Postmodernism can e(&and into a still larger &ro)lem6 is it onl% an artistic tendenc% or also a social &#enomenon, &er#a&s e-en a mutation in .estern #umanismD ;/ so, #ow are t#e
-arious as&ects o/ t#is &#enomenon H &s%c#ological, &#iloso&#ical, economic, &olitical H Ioined or disIoinedD ;n s#ort, can we understand &ostmodernism in literature wit#out some attem&t
to &ercei-e t#e lineaments o/ a &ostmodern societ%, a To%n)eean &ostmodernit%, or /uture $oucauldian episteme5 o/ w#ic# t#e literar% tendenc% ; #a-e )een discussing is )ut a single, elitist
strainD *5
,oward a )oncept of &ostmodernism 1$1
*94 $inall%, t#oug# not least -e(ing, is &ostmodernism an #onori/ic term, used insidiousl% to -aloriGe writers, #owe-er dis&arate, w#om we ot#erwise esteem, to #ail trends, #owe-er
discordant, w#ic# we some#ow a&&ro-eD Or is itD on t#e contrar%, a term o/ o&&ro)rium and o)IurgationD ;n s#ort, is &ostmodernism a descri&ti-e as well as e-aluati-e or normati-e categor% o/
literar% t#oug#tD Or does it )elong, as C#arles Altieri notes, to t#at categor% o/ Fessentiall% contested conce&ts0 in &#iloso&#% t#at ne-er w#oll% e(#aust t#eir constituti-e con/usionsD *,
o dou)t, ot#er conce&tual &ro)lems lur! in t#e matter o/ &ostmodernism4 Suc# &ro)lems, #owe-er, cannot /inall% in#i)it t#e intellectual imagination, t#e desire to a&&re#end our #istorical
&resence in noetic constructs t#at re-eal our )eing to oursel-es4 ; mo-e, t#ere/ore, to &ro&ose a &ro-isional sc#eme t#at t#e literature o/ silence, /rom Sade to 1ec!ett, seems to en-isage, and do
so )% distinguis#ing, tentati-el%, )etween t#ree modes o/ artistic c#ange in t#e last #undred %ears4 ; call t#ese a-ant-garde, modern, and &ostmodern, t#oug# ; realiGe t#at all t#ree #a-e
cons&ired toget#er to create t#at Ftradition o/ t#e new0 t#at since 1audelaire, )roug#t Finto )eing an art w#ose #istor%, regardless o/ t#e credos o/ its &ractitioners, #as consisted o/ lea&s /rom
-anguard to -anguard, and &olitical mass mo-ements w#ose aim #as )een t#e total reno-ation not onl% o/ social institutions )ut o/ man #imsel/4 *=
1% a-ant-garde, ; mean t#ose mo-ements t#at agitated t#e earlier &art o/ our centur%, including FPata&#%sics, Cu)ism, $uturism, Dadaism, Surrealism, Su&rematism, Constructi-ism,
MerGism, de StiIl4 Anarc#ic, t#ese assaulted t#e )ourgeoisie wit# t#eir art, t#eir mani/estoes, t#eir antics4 1ut t#eir acti-ism could also turn inward, )ecoming suicidal H as #a&&ened later to some
&ostmodernists li!e Rudol/ Sc#wartG!ogler4 Once /ull o/ )rio and )ra-ura, t#ese mo-ements #a-e all )ut -anis#ed now, lea-ing onl% t#eir stor%, at once /ugacious and e(em&lar%4 Modernism,
#owe-er, &ro-ed more sta)le, aloo/, #ieratic, li!e t#e $renc# S%m)olism /rom w#ic# it deri-edN e-en its e(&eriments now seen Ol%m&ian4 Enacted )% suc# Findi-idual talents0 as Jaler%, Proust,
and 2ide, t#e earl% 3o%ce, Yeats, and Lawrence, Ril!e, Mann, and Musil, t#e earl% Pound, Eliot, and $aul!ner, it commanded #ig# aut#orit%, leading Delmore Sc#wartG to c#ant in -henandoah:
FLet us consider w#ere t#e great men are:.#o will o)sess t#e c#ild w#en #e can read44404 1ut i/ muc# o/ modernism a&&ears #ieratic, #%&otactical, and /ormalist, &ostmodernism
stri!es us )% contrast as &la%/ul, &aratactical, and deconstructionist4 ;n t#is it recalls t#e irre-erent s&irit o/ t#e a-ant-garde, and so carries sometimes t#e la)el o/ neo-a-ant-garde4 Yet
&ostmodernism remains Fcooler0, in McLu#an0s sense, t#an older -anguards H cooler, less cliKuis#, and /ar less a-ersi-e to t#e &o&, electronic societ% o/ w#ic# it is a &art, and so #os&ita)le to
!itsc#4
Can we distinguis# &ostmodernism /urt#erD Per#a&s certain sc#ematic di//erences /rom modernism will &ro-ide a start4
1$2 I/a" !assan
Modernism
Romanticism:S%m)olism
Postmodernism
FPata&#%sics: Dadaism
$orm @conIuncti-e, closedA
Pur&ose
Design
Hierarc#%
Master%: Logos
Art O)Iect:$inis#ed .or!
Distance
Creation^ TotaliGation
S%nt#esis
Presence
Centering
2enre:1oundar%
Semantics
Paradigm
H%&ota(is
Meta&#or
Selection
Root:De&t#
;nter&retation:Reading
Signi/ied
6isible @Readerl%A
arrati-e:2rande 7istoire
Master Code
S%m&tom
T%&e
2enital:P#allic
Paranoia
Origin:Cause
2od t#e $at#er
Meta&#%sics
Determinac%
Transcendence
Anti/orm @disIuncti-e, o&enA
Pla%
C#ance
Anarc#%
E(#austion:Silence
Process^ Per/ormance:Ha&&ening
Partici&ation
Decreation: Deconstruction
Antit#esis
A)sence
Dis&ersal
Te(t:;nterte(t
R#etoric
S%ntagm
Parata(is
Meton%m%
Com)ination
R#iGome:Sur/ace
Against ;nter&retation:Misreading
Signi/ier
-criptible @.riterl%A
Anti-narrati-e:Petite 7istoire
;diolect
Desire
Mutant
Pol%mor&#ous:Androg%nous
Sc#iGo&#renia
Di//erence-Di//erance:Trace
T#e Hol% 2#ost
;ron%
;ndeterminac%
;mmanence
T#e &receding ta)le draws on ideas in man% /ields H r#etoric, linguistics, literar% t#eor%, &#iloso&#%, ant#ro&olog%, &s%c#oanal%sis, &olitical science, e-en t#eolog%
H and draws on man% aut#ors H Euro&ean and American H aligned wit# di-erse mo-ements, grou&s, and -iews4 Yet t#e dic#otomies t#is ta)le re&resents remain insecure, eKui-ocal4 $or
di//erences s#i/t, de/er, e-en colla&seN conce&ts in an% one -ertical column are not all eKui-alentN and in-ersions and e(ce&tions, in )ot# modernism and &ostmodernism, a)ound4 Still, ; would
su)mit t#at ru)rics in t#e rig#t column &oint to t#e &ostmodern tendenc%, t#e tendenc% o/ indetermanence, and so ma% )ring us closer to its #istorical and t#eoretical de/inition4
T#e time #as come, #owe-er, to e(&lain a little t#at neologism6 Findetermanence04 ; #a-e used t#at term to designate two central, constituti-e tendencies in
,oward a )oncept of &ostmodernism 1$8
&ostmodernism6 one o/ indeterminac%, t#e ot#er o/ immanence4 T#e two tendencies are not dialecticalN /or t#e% are not e(actl% antit#eticalN nor do t#e% lead to a s%nt#esis4 Eac#
contains its own contradictions, and alludes to elements o/ t#e ot#er4 T#eir inter&la% suggests t#e action o/ a F&ol%lectic0, &er-ading &ostmodernism4 Since ; #a-e discussed t#is to&ic at
some lengt# earlier, ; can ad-ert to it #ere )rie/l%4 *>
1% indeterminac%, or )etter still, indeterminacies5 ; mean a com&le( re/erent t#at t#ese di-erse conce&ts #el& to delineate6 am)iguit%, discontinuit%, #eterodo(%, &luralism, randomness,
re-olt, &er-ersion, de/ormation4 T#e latter alone su)sumes a doGen current terms o/ unma!ing6 decreation, disintegration, deconstruction, decenterment, dis&lacement, di//erence, discontinuit%,
disIunction, disa&&earance, decom&osition, de-de/inition, dem%sti/ication, detotaliGation, delegitimiGation H let alone more tec#nical terms re/erring to t#e r#etoric o/ iron%, ru&ture, silence4
T#roug# all t#ese signs mo-es a -ast will to unma!ing, a//ecting t#e )od% &olitic, t#e )od% cogniti-e, t#e erotic )od%, t#e indi-idual &s%c#e H t#e entire realm o/ discourse in t#e .est4
;n literature alone our ideas o/ aut#or, audience, reading, writing, )oo!, genre, critical t#eor%, and o/ literature itsel/, #a-e all suddenl% )ecome Kuestiona)le4 And in criticismD Roland 1art#es
s&ea!s o/ literature as Floss0, F&er-ersion0, Fdissolution0N .ol/gang ;ser /ormulates a t#eor% o/ reading )ased on te(tual F)lan!s0N Paul de Man concei-es r#etoric H t#at is, literature H as a /orce
t#at Fradicall% sus&ends logic and o&ens u& -ertiginous &ossi)ilities o/ re/erential a)erration0N and 2eo//re% Hartman a//irms t#at Fcontem&orar% criticism aims at t#e #ermeneutics o/
indeterminac%04 1<
Suc# uncertain di//ractions ma!e /or -ast dis&ersals4 T#us ; call t#e second maIor tendenc% o/ &ostmodernism immanences5 a term t#at ; em&lo% wit#out religious ec#o to designate t#e
ca&acit% o/ mind to generaliGe itsel/ in s%m)ols, inter-ene more and more into nature, act u&on itsel/ t#roug# its own a)stractions and so )ecome, increasingl%, im-mediatel%, its own
en-ironment4 T#is noetic tendenc% ma% )e e-o!ed /urt#er )% suc# sundr% conce&ts as di//usion, dissemination, &ulsion, inter&la%, communication, interde&endence, w#ic# all deri-e /rom
t#e emergence o/ #uman )eings as language animals, 7omo pictor or 7omo si%nificans5 gnostic creatures constituting t#emsel-es, and determinedl% t#eir uni-erse, )% s%m)ols o/ t#eir own
ma!ing4 ;s Ft#is not t#e sign t#at t#e w#ole o/ t#is con/iguration is a)out to to&&le, and t#at man is in t#e &rocess o/ &eris#ing as t#e )eing o/ language continues to s#ine e-er )rig#ter u&on our
#oriGonD0 $oucault /amousl% as!s4 *< Meanw#ile, t#e &u)lic world dissol-es as /act and /iction )lend, #istor% )ecomes derealiGed )% media into a #a&&ening, science ta!es its own models as t#e
onl% accessi)le realit%, c%)ernetics con/ronts us wit# t#e enigma o/ arti/icial intelligence, and tec#nologies &roIect our &erce&tions to t#e edge o/ t#e receding uni-erse or into t#e g#ostl%
interstices o/ matter4 *E E-er%w#ere H e-en dee& in Lacan0s Flettered unconscious0, more dense t#an a )lac! #ole in s&ace H e-er%w#ere we encounter t#at immanence called Language, wit# all its
literar% am)iguities, e&istemic conundrums, and &olitical distractions4 1B
o dou)t t#ese tendencies ma% seem less ri/e in England, sa%, t#an in America
1$: I/a" !assan ,ot.a rd a )oncept of &ost5nodernibni 1$$
or $rance, w#ere t#e term &ostmodernism, re-ersing t#e recent direction o/ &oststructuralist /low, #as now come into use4 59 1ut t#e /act in most de-elo&ed societies remains6 as an artistic,
&#iloso&#ical, and social &#enomenon, &ostmodernism -eers toward o&en, &la%/ul, o&tati-e, &ro-isional @o&en in time as well as in structure or s&aceA, disIuncti-e, or indeterminate /orms, a
discourse o/ ironies and /ragments, a Fw#ite ideolog%0 o/ a)sences and /ractures, a desire o/ di//ractions, an in-ocation o/ com&le(, articulate silences4 Postmodernism -eers toward all t#ese %et
im&lies a di//erent, i/ not antit#etical, mo-ement toward &er-asi-e &rocedures, u)iKuitous interactions, immanent codes, media, languages4 T#us our eart# seems caug#t in t#e &rocess o/
&lanetiGation, trans#umaniGation, e-en as it )rea!s u& into sects, tri)es, /actions o/ e-er% !ind4 T#us, too, terrorism and totalitarianism, sc#ism and ecumenicism, summon one anot#er, and
aut#orities decreate t#emsel-es e-en as societies searc# /or new grounds o/ aut#orit%4 One ma% well wonder6 is some decisi-e #istorical mutation H in-ol-ing art and science, #ig# and low
culture, t#e male and /emale &rinci&les, &arts and w#oles, in-ol-ing t#e One and t#e Man%, as &re-Socratics used to sa% H acti-e in our midstD Or does t#e dismem)erment o/ Or&#eus &ro-e no
more t#an t#e mind0s need to ma!e )ut one more construction o/ li/e0s muta)ilities and #uman mortalit%D
And w#at construction lies )e%ond, )e#ind, wit#in, t#at constructionD
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 $or t#e )est #istor% o/ t#e term postmodernism see Mic#ael '`#ler, ]PostmodernismusR6
Em )egri//sgesc#ic#tlic#er 8)er)lic!0, *+<<, EH*E4 T#at same issue contains ot#er e(cellent discussions and )i)liogra&#ies on t#e termN see &articularl% 2er#ard Ho//mann, Al/red
Hornung, and Rudiger 'unow, ]FModernR, ]&ostmodernR, and ]contem&orar%R as criteria /or t#e anal%sis o/ 59t# centur% literature04
54 ;r-ing Howe, FMass societ% and &ostmodern /iction0, 1*!*5 =59H,?, re&rinted in #is <ecline of the Hew5 ew Yor!, *+<9, &&4 *+9H59<N and Harr% Le-in, F.#at was modernismD0,
(assachusetts 4e.iew5 *, = @*+?9A, re&rinted in 4ef ractions5 ew Yor!, *+??, &&4 "71I*!.
,4 Leslie $iedler, FT#e new mutants0, *+?>, re&rinted in #is )ollected :ssays5 -ol4 5, ew Yor!, *+<*, &&4 ,<+H=99N and ;#a) Hassan, F$rontiers o/ criticism6 Meta&#ors o/ silence0, Vir%inia
Muarterly5 =?, * @*+<9A4 ;n earlier essa%s ; #ad also used t#e term Fanti-literature0 and Ft#e literature o/ silence0 in a &ro(imate senseN see, /or instance, ;#a) Hassan, FT#e literature o/
silence0, :ncounter5 5E, * @*+?<A4
. Daniel 1ell, ,he )omin% of &ost-'ndustrial -ociety15 1*7#5 &4 !#.
!. See ;4 Hassan, ,he &ostmodern ,urn5 *+E<, &&4 =?HE,4
?4 Matei Calinescu, /or instance, tends to assimilate F&ostmodern0 to Fneo-a-antOgarde0 and sometimes to Fa-ant-garde0, in $aces of (odernity: A.ant-%arde5 decadence5 kitsch5 *+<<, t#oug#
later #e discriminates )etween t#ese terms t#oug#0 Fall%, in FA-ant-garde,
9OoOa-antgarde, and &ost-modernism0, un&u)lis#ed manuscri&t4 Mi!los SGa)olcsi would identi/% modern0 wit# Fa-ant-garde0 and call F&ostmodern0 t#e Oneo-a-ant-gardc0 in FA-ant-garde,
neo-a-ant-garde, modernism6 Cuestions and suggestions0, Heu1 literary 7istory5 ,, * @*+<*AN w#ile Paul de Man would call Fmodern0 t#e inno-ati-e element, t#e &er&etual Fmoment o/
crisis0 in t#e literature o/ e-er% &eriod, in FLiterar% #istorO and literar% modernit%0, in Klindness and 'nsi%ht5 ew Yor!, *+<*, c#4 EN in a similar scm4 .illiam J4 S&anos em&lo%s t#e term
F&ostmodernism0 to indicate Fnot /undarnentalls a c#ronological e-ent, )ut rat#er a &ermanent mode o/ #uman understanding0, -i FDe-structiOn and t#e Kuestion o/ &ostmodern literature6
$owards a de/inition0, &ar 4apport5 5, 5 @*+<+A, *9<4 And e-en 3o#n 1art#, as inward as an% writer wit# &ostmodernism, now argues t#at &ostmodernism is a s%nt#esis %et to come, and
w#at we #ad assumed to )e &ostmodernism all along was onl% late modernism, in FT#e literature o/ re&lenis#ment6 Postmodernist /iction0, *+E9, ?>H<*4
<4 ;n m% own earlier and later essa%s on t#e su)Iect ; can discern suc# a slig#t s#i/t4 See FPOSTmodern;SM0, Hew 6iterary 7istory5 #5 *@*+<*A, !I#05 F3o%ce, 1ec!ett, and t#e Post-modern
imagination0, ,nMuarterly5 ,= A1*7!?5 and FCulture, indeterminac%, and immanence0, in ,he &ostmodern ,urn5 &&4 =?HE,4
E4 T#oug# some critics #a-e argued t#at &ostmodernism is &rimaril% Ftem&oral0 and ot#ers t#at it is mainl% Fs&atial0, it is in t#e &articular relation )etween t#ese single categories t#at
&ostmodernism &ro)a)l% re-eals itsel/4 See t#e two seemingl% contradictor% -iews o/ .illiam J4 S&anos, FT#e detecti-e at t#e )oundar%0, in :=istentialism 5, ed4 .illiam
J4 S&anos @ew Yor!, *+<?A, &&4 *?,HE+N and 3urgen Pe&er, FPostmodernismus6
8nitar% sensi)ilit%0, *+<<, +!IJ*.
*. Susan Sontag, FOne culture and t#e new sensi)ilit%0, in A%ainst 'nterpretation5 *+?<, &&4 5+,H,9=N Leslie $iedler, FCross t#e )order H close t#at ga&0, in )ollected :ssays5 -ol4 5, ew
Yor!, *+<*, &&4 =?*HE>N and l#a) Hassan, FT#e new gnosticism0, &aracriticisms: -e.en speculations of the times5 8r)ana, ;L, 1*7!5 c#4 ?4
*94 $or some -iews o/ t#is, see ;#a) Hassan and Sall% Hassan, eds, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation:
4ecent trends and reconceptions in Western culture5 *+E,4
**4 At sta!e #ere is t#e idea o/ literar% &eriodicit%, c#allenged )% current $renc# t#oug#t4 $or ot#er -iews o/ literac% and #istorical c#ange, including F#ierarc#ic organiYation0 O/ time, see
Leonard Me%er, (usic5 the Arts5 and 'deas5 C#icago, *+?<, &&4 +*, *9O Calinescu, $aces of (odernity5 &&4 *=< i/N Ral&# Co#en, F;nno-ation and -ariation6
Literar% c#ange and 2eorgic &oetr%0, in Ral&# Co#en and Murra% 'rieger, 6iterature and 7istory5 Los Angeles, *+<=N and m% &aracniticisms5 c#4 <4 A #arder Kuestion is one 2eo//re%
Hartman as!s6 F.it# so muc# #istorical !nowledge, #ow can we a-oid #istoricism, or t#e staging o/ #istor% as a drama in w#ic# e&i&#anic ra&tures are re&laced )% e&istemic ru&turesD0 Or,
again, #ow can we F/ormulate a t#eor% o/ reading t#at would )e #istorical rat#er t#an #istoricist0D Sa-ing the ,e=t: 68tcrature/<)irida/ philosophy5 1altimore, MD, *+E*, &4 ((4
*54 .riters as di//erent as Mars#all McLu#an and Leslie $iedler #a-e e(&lored t#e media and &o& as&ects o/ &ostmodernism /or two decades, t#oug# t#eir e//orts are now out o/ /as#ion in
some critical circles4 T#e di//erence )etween &osttnodernisrn, as a contem&orar% artistic tendenc%, and &ostrnodernit%, as a cultural &#enomenon, &er#a&s e-en an era o/ #istor%, is discussed
)% Ric#ard $4 Palmer in FPostmodernit% and #ermeneutics0, *+<<, ,?,H+,4
*,4 C#arles Altieri, FPostmodernism6 A Kuestion o/ de/inition0, &ar 4apport5 5, @*+<+A, +94
1$< ./a" !assan
T#is leads Altieri to conclude6 FT#e )est one can do w#o )elie-es #imsel/ &ost-modern is to articulate s&aces o/ mind in w#ic# t#e con/usions can not &aral%Ge )ecause one
enIo%s t#e energies and glim&ses o/ our condition w#ic# t#e% &roduce0, &4 ++4
*=4 Harold Rosen)erg, ,he ,radition of the Heu15 ew Yor!, *+?*, &4 +4
1!. See ;4 Hassan, ,he &ostmodern ,urn5 &&4 ?>H<54 Also, m% F;nno-ation:reno-ation6
Toward a cultural t#eor% o/ c#ange0, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation5 c#4 *4
*?4 See, /or instance, Roland 1art#es and Maurice adeau, Sun 'a litt; nature5 Paris, *+E9, &&4 <, *?, *+/4, =*N .ol/gang ;ser, ,he Act of 4eadin%5 1altimore, MD, *+<E, passimB Paul de Man,
Alle%ories of 4eadin%5 ew Ha-en, CT, *+<+, &4 *9N and 2eo//re% H4 Hartman, )riticism in the Wilderness5 ew Ha-en, CT, *+E9, &4 =*4
*<4 Mic#el $oucault, ,he 2rder of ,hin%s5 ew Yor!, *+<9, &4 ,E?4
*E4 F3ust as Pascal soug#t to t#row dice wit# 2od CCC so do t#e decisions t#eorists, and t#e new intellectual tec#nolog%, see! t#eir own tableau entier H t#e com&ass o/ rationalit% itsel/,0 Daniel
1ell remar!s in FTec#nolog%, nature, and societ%0, in ,echnolo%y and the $rontiers of Lnowled%e5 2arden Cit%, Y, 1*7!5 &4 >,4 See also t#e more acute anal%sis of1l1informati>ue1
)%3ean-$rancois L%otard, 6a )ondition postmoderne5 *+<+, passim.
*+4 T#is tendenc% also ma!es /or t#e a)stract, conce&tual, and irrealist c#aracter o/ so muc# &ostmodern art4 See SuGi 2a)li!, &ro%ress in Art5 ew Yor!, *+<<, w#ose argument was &re/igured
)% Ortega % 2asset, ,he <ehumani8ation of Art5 Princeton, 3, *+?E4 ote also t#at Ortega &resaged t#e gnostic or noetic tendenc% to w#ic# ; re/er #ere in 1*"!: FMan #umaniGes t#e
world, inIects it, im&regnates it wit# #is own ideal su)stance and is /inall% entitled to imagine t#at one da% or anot#er, in t#e /ar de&t#s o/ time, t#is terri)le outer world will )ecome so
saturated wit# man t#at our descendants will )e a)le to tra-el t#roug# it as toda% we mentall% tra-el t#roug# our own inmost sel-es H #e /inall% imagines t#at t#e world, wit#out ceasing to
)e li!e t#e world, will one da% )e c#anged into somet#ing li!e a materialiGed soul, and, as in S#a!es&eare0s ,empest5 t#e winds will )low at t#e )idding o/ Ariel, t#e s&irit o/ ideas0, &4 *E=4
594 T#oug# &ostmodernism and &oststructuralism can not )e identi/ied, t#e% clearl% re-eal man% a//inities4 T#us in t#e course o/ one )rie/ essa%, 3ulia 'riste-a comments on )ot# immanence
and indeterminac% in terms o/ #er own6 F&ostmodernism is t#at literature w#ic# writes itsel/ wit# t#e more or less conscious intention o/ e(&anding t#e signi/ia)le, and t#us #uman, realm0,
and again6 FAt t#is degree o/ singularit%, we are /aced wit# ideolects, &roli/erating uncontrolla)l%40 3ulia 'riste-a, FPostmodernismD0, in 4omanticism5 (odernism5 &ostmodernism5 ed4
Harr% R4 2ar-in, *+E9, &&4 *,<, *=*4
19 w 'ntroduction to
Ter0sic/ore in Snea*ers
Sa..y -aries
HC C C1
T#e as&irations o/ modern dance, anti-academic /rom t#e /irst, were simultaneousl% &rimiti-ist and modernist4 2ra-it%, dissonance, and a &otent #oriGontalit% o/ t#e )od% were means to descri)e
t#e stridenc% o/ modern li/e, as c#oreogra&#ers !e&t one e%e on t#e /uture w#ile casting t#e ot#er to t#e ritual dances o/ non-.estern culture4 T#oug# t#e% were es&eciall% conscious o/ t#eir
o&&ositional role to modern dance, t#e earl% &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers, &ossessed o/ an acute awareness o/ a #istorical crisis in dance as well as in t#e ot#er arts, recogniGed t#at t#e% were
)ot# )earers and critics o/ two se&arate dance traditions4 One was t#e uniKuel% twentiet#-centur% &#enomenon o/ modern danceN t#e ot#er was t#e )alletic, academic danse de l1;cole5 wit# its
strict canons o/ )eaut%, grace, #armon%, and t#e eKuall% &otent, regal -erticalit% o/ t#e )od% e(tending )ac! to t#e Renaissance courts o/ Euro&e4 Rainer, Simone $orti, Ste-e Pa(ton, and ot#er
&ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e si(ties were not united in terms o/ t#eir aest#etic4 Rat#er, t#e% were united )% t#eir radical a&&roac# to c#oreogra&#%, t#eir urge to reconcei-e t#e medium o/
dance4
1% t#e earl% *+<9s, a new st%le wit# its own aest#etic canons seems to #a-e emerged4 ;n *+<>, Mic#ael 'ir)% &u)lis#ed an issue o/ ,he <rama 4e.iew de-oted to &ostmodern dance, using t#e
term in &rint /or one o/ t#e /irst times in regard to dance and &ro&osing a de/inition o/ t#e new genre6
;n t#e t#eor% o/ &ost-modern dance, t#e c#oreogra&#er does not a&&l% -isual standards to t#e wor!4 T#e -iew is an interior one6 mo-ernellt is not &-c-selected /or its c#aracteristics )ut
results /rom certain decisions, goals4 &lans, sc#emes, rules, conce&ts, or &ro)lems4 .#ate-er actual mo-ement occurs during t#e &er/ormance is acce&ta)le as long as t#e limiting and
controlling &rinci&les are ad#ered to4 5
$rom 1anes, S4, ,erpsichore in -neakers: postmodern dance5 .esle%an 8ni-ersit% Press, .esle%an, CT, *+E<, &&4 (iiiH(-i, (i(H(((i-, (((-ii(((-lit4
IsJ
7lerpsichorA1 in -neakers
According to 'ir)%, &ostmodern dance reIects musicalit%, meaning, c#aracteriGation, mood, and atmos&#ereN it uses costume, lig#ting, and o)Iects in &urel% /unctional wa%s4 At &resent, 'ir)%0s
de/inition seems /ar too limited4 ;t re/ers to onl% one o/ se-eral stages H anal%tic &ostmodern dance H in t#e de-elo&ment o/ &ostmodern dance, w#ic# ; intend to trace #ere4
T#e term F&ostmodern0 means somet#ing di//erent in e-er% art /orm, as well as in culture in general4 ;n *+<>, t#e same %ear t#e &ostmodern dance issue o/ ,he <rama 4e.iew a&&eared, C#arles
3enc!s used t#e term to re/er to a new trend in arc#itecture t#at #ad also )egun to emerge in t#e earl% si(ties4 According to 3enc!s, &ostmodernism in arc#itecture is a dou)l%-coded aest#etic t#at
#as &o&ular a&&eal, on t#e one #and, and esoteric #istorical signi/icance /or t#e cognoscenti, on t#e ot#er4 ;n t#e dance world, &er#a&s onl% Tw%la T#ar& could #a-e /it suc# a de/inition at t#e
time, )ut #er wor! was not commonl% considered &ostmodern dance4 @Muc# Fnew dance0 o/ t#e eig#ties could also /it suc# a de/inition, )ut at t#is &oint it would )e re-isionist to call onl%
eig#ties dance &ostmodern4 ;t is, rat#er, as ; discuss )elow, &ostmodernist4A ;n t#e -isual-art world and t#eatre, a num)er o/ critics #a-e used t#e term to re/er to artwor!s t#at are co&ies o/ or
comments on ot#er artwor!s, c#allenging -alues o/ originalit%, aut#enticit%, and t#e master&iece and &ro-o!ing Derridean t#eories o/ simulacra4 T#is notion /its some &ostmodern dances, )ut
not all4
;n dance, t#e con/usion t#e term F&ostmodern0 creates is /urt#er com&licated )% t#e /act t#at #istorical modern dance was ne-er reall% modernist. O/ten it #as )een &recisel% in t#e arena o/
&ostmodern dance t#at issues o/ modernism in t#e ot#er arts #a-e arisen6 t#e ac!nowledgement o/ t#e medium0s materials, t#e re-ealing o/ dance0s essential Kualities as an art /orm, t#e
se&aration o/ /ormal elements, t#e a)straction o/ /orms, and t#e elimination o/ e(ternal re/erences as su)Iects4 T#us in man% res&ects it is &ostmodern dance t#at /unctions as modernist art4 T#at
is, &ostmodern dance came a/ter modern dance @#ence, &ost-A and, li!e t#e &ostmodernism o/ t#e ot#er arts, was anti-modern dance4 1ut since Fmodern0 in dance did not mean modernist, to )e
anti-modern dance was not at all to )e anti-modernist4 ;n /act, Kuite t#e o&&osite4 T#e anal%tic &ostmodern dance o/ t#e se-enties in &articular dis&la%ed t#ese modernist &reoccu&ations, and it
aligned itsel/ wit# t#at consummatel% modernist -isual art, minimalist scul&ture4
=
And %et, t#ere are also as&ects o/ &ostmodern dance t#at do /it wit# &ostmodernist notions @in t#e ot#er artsA o/
&astic#e, iron%, &la%/ulness, #istorical re/erence, t#e use o/ -ernacular materials, t#e continuit% o/ cultures, an interest in &rocess o-er &roduct, )rea!downs o/ )oundaries )etween art /orms and
)etween art and li/e, and new relations#i&s )etween artist and audience4 Some o/ t#e new directions o/ dance in t#e eig#ties are e-en more closel% allied to t#e concerns and tec#niKues,
es&eciall% t#at o/ &astic#e, o/ &ostmodernism in t#e ot#er arts4 1ut i/ we were to call si(ties and se-enties &ostmodern dance posttnodern and du) eig#ties new dance postmodernist5 t#e
con/usion would &ro)a)l% not )e wort# t#e scru&ulous accurac%4 $urt#er, as ; argue in t#e section on t#e eig#ties )elow, ; )elie-e t#e a-ant-garde dance o/ all t#ree decades is united and can )e
em)raced )O single term4 And
1$B
; continue to recommend t#e term F&ostmodern04 T#e use o/ t#e word, #owe-er deser-es %et anot#er ca-eat4 Alt#oug# in dance &ostmoderri )egan as a c#oreogra&#er0s term, it #as since )ecome
a critic0s term t#at most c#oreogra&#ers now /ind eit#er constricting or ine(act4 1% now, man% writers on dance -ise t#e term so loosel% it can mean an%t#ing or not#ing4 Howe-er, since t#e
term #as )een used widel% /or almost a decade, it seems to me t#at, rat#er t#an a-oid it, we s#ould de/ine it and use it discriminatel%4
T/e 1B<9s: -rea*a1ay Post#odern Dance
T#e earl% &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers saw as t#eir tas! t#e &urging and melioration o/ #istorical modern dance, w#ic# #ad made certain &romises in res&ect to t#e use o/ t#e )od% and t#e social
artistic /unction o/ dance t#at #ad not )een /ul/illed4 Rat#er t#an /reeing t#e )od% and ma!ing dance accessi)le e-en to t#e smallest c#ildren, rat#er t#an )ringing a)out social and s&iritual
c#ange, t#e institution o/ modern dance #ad de-elo&ed into an esoteric art /orm /or t#e intelligentsia, more remote /rom t#e masses t#an )allet4 T#e )odil% con/igurations modern dance drew on
#ad ossi/ied into -arious st%liGed -oca)ulariesN dances #ad )ecome )loated wit# dramatic, literar%, and emotional signi/icanceN dance com&anies were o/ten structured as #ierarc#iesN %oung
c#oreogra&#ers were rarel% acce&ted into an im&licit, closed guild o/ masters4 @1allet, /or o)-ious reasons, was not acce&ta)le as an alternati-e to modern dance4 So somet#ing new #ad to )e
created4A Alt#oug# Merce Cunning#am #ad made radical de&artures /rom classical modern dance, #is wor! remained wit#in certain tec#nical and conte(tual restraints H t#at is, #is -oca)ular%
remained a s&ecialiGed, tec#nical one, and #e &resented #is dances in t#eaters /or t#e most &art4 Cunning#am is a /igure w#o stands on t#e )order )etween modern and &ostmodern dance4 His
-ertical, -igorous mo-ement st%le and #is use o/ c#ance @w#ic# segments not onl% suc# elements as stage s&ace, timing, and )od% &arts, )ut also meaning in danceA seem to create a )odil%
image o/ a modern intellect4 ;n #is em&#asis on t#e /ormal elements o/ c#oreogra&#%, t#e se&aration o/ elements suc# as decor and music /rom t#e dancing, and t#e )od% as t#e sensuous
medium o/ t#e art /orm, Cunning#am0s &ractice is modernistN #is wor! and t#e t#eories o/ 3o#n Cage, #is colla)orator, /ormed an im&ortant )ase /rom w#ic# man% o/ t#e ideas and actions o/ t#e
&ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers s&rang, eit#er in o&&osition or in a s&irit o/ e(tension4 ;n a sense, Ctinning#am mo-ed awa% /rom modern dance )% s%nt#esiGing it wit# certain as&ects o/ )allet4
T#ose w#o came a/ter #im reIected s%nt#esis altoget#er4 O
1% )rea!ing t#e rules o/ #istorical modern dance, and e-en t#ose o/ t#e a-ant-garde o/ t#e /i/ties @including not onl% Cunning#am, )ut also suc# c#oreogra&#ers as Ann Hal&rin, 3ames .aring,
Merle Marsicano, Aileen Passlo//, and ot#ersA,
<
t#e Postmodern c#oreogra&#ers /ound new wa%s to /oreground t#e medium o/ dance rat#er t#an its meaning4
1$@ Sa..y -anes
1<9 Sa..y -anes ,erpsichore in -neakers *?*
HC C C1
T#e &ro)lem o/ de/ining dance /or t#e earl% &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers was related to t#e inKuiries into time, s&ace, and t#e )od%, )ut e(tended )e%ond t#em, em)racing t#e ot#er arts and
asserting &ro&ositions a)out t#e nature o/ dance4 2ames, s&orts, contests, t#e sim&le acts o/ wal!ing and running, t#e gestures in-ol-ed in &la%ing music and gi-ing a lecture, and e-en t#e
motion o/ /ilm and t#e mental action o/ language were &resented as dances4 ;n e//ect, t#e &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers &ro&osed t#at a dance was a dance not )ecause o/ its content )ut )ecause o/
its conte(t H i4e4, sim&l% )ecause it was /ramed as a dance4 T#is o&ening o/ t#e )orders o/ dance was a )rea! /rom t#e modern dance t#at was Kualitati-el% di//erent t#an issues o/ time, s&ace, and
t#e )od%4 To )e nude was more e(treme t#an to )e )are/oot, )ut it was still an action o/ t#e same sort4 To call a dance a dance )ecause o/ its /unctional relation to its conte=t @rat#er t#an )ecause
o/ its internal mo-ement Kualities, or content? was to s#i/t t#e terms o/ dance t#eor%, aligning it wit# t#e contem&orar% Finstitutional0 t#eor% o/ art4
T#e %ears *+?E to *+<, were a transitional &eriod in w#ic# at least t#ree more t#emes were de-elo&ed6 &olitics, audience engagement, and non-.estern in/luence4 Political t#emes o/
&artici&ation, democrac%, coo&eration, and ecolog%, alt#oug# o/ten im&licit in t#e earl% si(ties, were now made e(&licit4 As t#eater and dance )ecame more &olitical, t#e &olitical mo-ements o/
t#e late si(ties K anti-war, )lac! &ower, student, /eminist, and ga% grou&s H used t#eatrical means to stage t#eir )attles4 A num)er o/ c#oreogra&#ers mo)iliGed large grou&s in t#eir dances4
Rainer0s &ieces o/ t#is &eriod included WA45 a -ersion o/ ,rio A /or t#e 3udson $lag S#ow, and a street &rotest @all *+<9A4 Her )ontinuous &ro9ect H Altered <aily @*+<9A e(amined not onl% t#e
stages and modes o/ &er/ormance, )ut also issues o/ leaders#i& and control4 Pa(ton0s 0ntitled 6ecture5 Keautiful 6ecture5 Audience &erformances @all *+?EA, 'ntra.enous 6ecture @*+<9A,
)ollaboration with Wintersoldier @*+<*A, and Air @*+<,A were didactic wor!s t#at dealt more or less o-ertl% wit# issues o/ censors#i&, war, &ersonal inter-ention, and ci-ic res&onsi)ilit%4 T#e
2rand 8nion, a collecti-e /or im&ro-isation, /ormed in *+<9 and t#e /ollowing %ear ga-e a )ene/it &er/ormance /or t#e 1lac! Pant#ers4 A women0s im&ro-isation collecti-e, t#e atural Histor%
o/ t#e American Dancer, was /ormed in *+<*4 ;n *+<5, Pa(ton and ot#ers )egan Contact ;m&ro-isation, w#ic# #as e-ol-ed not onl% as an alternati-e tec#niKue, )ut also as an alternati-e social
networ!4 Contact ;m&ro-isation is concerned wit# &#%sical tec#niKues o/ /alling, wit# duet situations, and wit# &#%sical im&ro-isation, )ut its /orms #a-e social and &olitical connotations4 ;ts
&er/ormance seems to &roIect a li/est%le, a model /or a &ossi)le world, in w#ic# im&ro-isation stands /or /reedom and ada&tation, and su&&ort stands /or trust and coo&eration4
T#e in/luence o/ non-.estern /orms and mo-ement &#iloso&#ies, alt#oug# &resent /rom t#e )eginnings o/ &ostniodern dance t#roug# t#e in/luence o/ 3o#n Cage and Sen 1udd#ism, )ecame
more &ronounced in t#e late si(ties, as dancers /orsoo! regular dance classes /or training in suc# /orms as Tai @S#i C#uan and
Ai!ido and, in Rainer0s case, /ound new sources /or narrati-e in t#e e&ic m%t#ological dramas o/ ;ndia4 T#e American /ascination wit# t#e T#ird .orld, e(&ressed not onl% in &ostmodern dance
and in a resurgent )lac! dance mo-ement, )ut also in cultural /orms as di-erse as !ung-/n /ilms, Hindu religious cults, Maoist &olitical sects, and Oriental and A/rican /as#ions in clot#ing,
re/lected t#e c#anging &ower relations o/ A/rican and $ar Eastern nations and t#e im&act o/ t#e war in Jietnam4 T#ese &olitical crises s&ar!ed con/licts )etween Eastern and .estern -alues as
)asic as attitudes toward time and t#e )od%4 ew directions in &olitical c#ange suggested new models /or dance /orms H /or instance, t#e &ros&ect o/ millions o/ C#inese &eo&le rising earl% to
&ractice Tai C#i C#uan /or #ealt# and communal s&irit4 $or com&le( #istorical and &olitical reasons, t#e aest#etic and social /unctions o/ t#e )lac! dance mo-ement o/ t#e si(ties di-erged
s#ar&l%0 /rom t#e &redominantl% w#ite &ostmodern dance mo-ementN alt#oug# A/rican dance )ecame an im&ortant source /or )lac! c#oreogra&#ers in t#e si(ties and se-enties, se-eral
&ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers were drawn to Eastern /orms4 O
T/e 1B=9s: Ana.ytic Post#odern Dance
1% *+<,, a wide range o/ )asic Kuestions a)out dance #ad )een raised in t#e arena o/ &ostmodern c#oreogra&#%4 A new &#ase o/ consolidation and anal%sis )egan, )uilding on t#e issues t#at t#e
e(&eriments o/ t#e si(ties #ad uneart#ed4 A recogniGa)le st%le #ad emerged, one t#at was reducti-e, /actual, o)Iecti-e, and down-to-eart#4 ;t is t#is st%le to w#ic# 'ir)% re/ers4 E(&ressi-e
elements suc# as music, s&ecial lig#ting, costumes, &ro&s, et cetera, were stri&&ed awa% /rom t#e dancing4 Per/ormers wore /unctional clot#ing H sweat&ants and T-s#irts or casual e-er%da% dress
H and danced in silence in &lain, well-lit rooms4 Structural de-ices suc# as re&etition and re-ersal, mat#ematical s%stems, geometric /orms, and com&arison and contrast allowed /or t#e &erusal o/
&ure, o/ten sim&le mo-ement4 ;/ t#e dances o/ t#e /irst &#ase o/ &ostmodern dance were &rimaril% &olemical in t#eir t#eoretical t#rust H an assortment o/ all !inds o/ reIections o/ t#e t#en
&re-ailing, Constraining de/inition o/ dance H t#en t#e wor!s o/ anal%tic &ostmodern dance were &rogrammatic in t#eir t#eoretical t#rust4 T#at is, t#e anal%tic &ostmoderns were committed to t#e
goal o/ rede/ining dance in t#e wa!e o/ t#e &olemics o/ t#e si(ties4 And, /urt#er, t#e% #ad an idea o/ #ow suc# a de/inition s#ould )e &ursued, t#at is, in terms o/ em&#asiGing c#oreogra&#ic
structure and in terms o/ /oregrounding mo-ement per se. T#eir &rogram was to ma!e dance as suc# t#e locus o/ audience attention )% ma!ing dances in w#ic# all t#e audience was gi-en to see
was structure and mo-ement per -e5 i4e4, mo-ement O(0it#out o-ertl% e(&ressi-e or illnsionistic e//ects or re/erence4
HC C
T#e anal%tic dances called attention to t#e wor!ings o/ t#e )od% in an almost scienti/ic wa%4 One noted t#e wor!ings o/ t#e muscles in 1at%a Samir0s )od%, /or
1<2 Sa..y -anes ,erpsichore in -neakers
instance, as s#e tra-ersed #er aerial scul&tures4 One scrutiniGed t#e &articular con/iguration o/ a li/t or a #old in a Contact ;m&ro-isation encounter4 T#e anti-illusionist a&&roac# demanded close
-iewing and clari/ied t#e smallest unit o/ dance, s#i/ting t#e em&#asis /rom t#e &#rase to t#e ste& or gesture4 ;t com)ined low-!e% &resentation and &#%sical intelligence in a wa% t#at seemed to
de/ine a new -irtuosit%
H a #eroism o/ t#e ordinar%4 As ; #a-e noted, anal%tic &ostmodern dance was a st%le and a&&roac# t#at was consistent wit# t#e -alues o/ minimalist scul&ture4 ;t was also consistent wit# t#e
-alues o/ )earing t#e /acts and conser-ing means t#at were t#e legac% o/ a &ost-.atergate, &ost-oil-crisis societ%4 T#e energ% o/ &ostmodern dance was literall% reduced4 One o/ t#e most
o)-ious di-ergences /rom modern dance, )allet, and t#e )lac! dance mo-ement was t#e reIection o/ musicalit% and r#%t#mic organiGation4 1ut also, t#e anal%tic c#oreogra&#ers dis&ensed wit#
&rinci&les o/ dramatic &#rasing, contrast, and resolution4 T#e )odies o/ t#eir dancers were rela(ed )ut read%, wit#out t#e &ulled-u&, stretc#ed muscle tone o/ t#e )allet or classical modern
dancer4 *9 T#e anal%tic &ostmodern dances &ulled t#e s&ectator into t#e &rocess o/ c#oreogra&#%, eit#er )% direct &artici&ation or )% )aring de-ices4 And alt#oug# t#ese dances were not meant
to #a-e e(&ressi-e meaning H e4g4, t#e &s%c#ological or literar% signi/icance o/ #istorical modern dance H t#e% did, o/ course, mean somet#ing6 t#e disco-er% and understanding o/ t#eir /orms and
&rocesses was one as&ect o/ t#at meaning, and t#e stri-ing toward o)Iecti-it%, t#e down-to-eart# st%le, t#e casual or cool attitude, t#e sense t#at Fit is w#at it is0 did not e(cise meaning, )ut
rat#er, constituted a crucial as&ect o/ t#e dance0s im&ort4
HC C
T/e 1B=9s: Meta0/or and t/e Meta0/ysica.
Alt#oug# t#e anal%tic mode o/ &ostmodern dance dominated t#e earl% se-enties, anot#er strand de-elo&ed out o/ related sources4 T#e s&iritual as&ect o/ t#e same asceticism t#at led to t#e
clari/ication o/ sim&le mo-ements led in its wa% to de-otional e(&ression4 T#e a&&reciation o/ non-.estern dance led to an interest in t#e s&iritual, religious, #ealing, and social /unctions o/
dancing in ot#er cultures4 T#e disci&lines o/ martial-arts /orms led to new meta&#%sical attitudes4 E(&eriences o/ communal li-ing ga-e rise to dance /orms t#at e(&ressed or e-en caused social
)onds4 Dance )ecame a -e#icle /or s&iritual e(&ression4
HC C 4*
.#ere anal%tic &ostmodern dance is e(clusi-e o/ suc# elements, meta&#oric &ostmodern dance is inclusi-e o/ t#eatrical elements o/ all !inds, suc# as costume, lig#ting, music, &ro&s, c#aracter,
and mood4 ;n t#is wa%, and in its ma!ing o/ e(&ressi-e meta&#ors and re&resentations, t#is strand o/ a-ant-garde dance resem)les #istorical modern dance4 1ut it also di//ers /rom #istorical
modern dance in suc# im&ortant, )asic wa%s t#at it seems more use/ul to in Fode it as anot#er
1<8
categor% o/ &ostmodern dance t#an to consider it modern dance4 T#ese dances draw on &ostmodern &rocesses and tec#niKues4 T#e !e% &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ic tec#niKue is radical
Iu(ta&osition4 1ut also, t#ese dances o/ten use ordinar% mo-ements and o)IectsN t#e% &ro&ose new relations#i&s )etween &er/ormer and s&ectatorN articulate new e(&eriences o/ s&ace, time, and
t#e )od%N incor&orate language and /ilmN em&lo% structures o/ stillness and re&etition4 Meta&#oric &ostmodern dance also counts as &ostmodern )ecause it &artici&ates in t#e distri)ution s%stem
H t#e lo/ts, galleries, and ot#er -enues H t#at #as )ecome t#e arena /or &ostmodern dance4 T#at is, it &resents itsel/ as &ostmodern dance4
T/e 1B@9s: T/e Re"irt/ o? )ontent
Since *+<E or so, a-ant-garde dance #as ta!en a num)er o/ new directions4 Some o/ t#ese directions stand a&&arentl% in direct o&&osition to t#e -alues o/ anal%tic &ostmodern dance, ma!ing t#e
-er% use o/ t#e term F&ostmodern0 &ro)lematic /or current dancing4 Per#a&s we s#ould reser-e t#e term /or use onl% in re/erence to t#e anal%tic mode o/ t#e l+<9s, Iust as t#e strictest de/inition
o/ modern dance restricts us to t#e late l
+
59s t#roug# t#e l+>9s4 T#en t#e )rea!awa% c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e l
+
?9s could )e called t#e /orerunners o/ &ostmodern dance, Iust as ;sadora Duncan,
Loie $uller, and Rut# St Denis are sometimes called t#e /orerunners o/ modern dance4 And t#e new dance o/ t#e l
+
E9s could )e called &ostmodernist4 1ut as ; #a-e alread% made clear, ; want to
argue /or an inclusi-e use o/ t#e term F&ostmodern0, one t#at a&&lies to t#e )rea!awa% dances o/ t#e si(ties, t#e anal%tic and meta&#oric dances o/ t#e se-enties, and t#e new dances o/ t#e
eig#ties, )ecause all o/ t#ese currents are related, &rinci&all% )ecause t#e% set t#emsel-es a&art /rom mainstream t#eatrical dance in wa%s t#at are not sim&l% c#ronological4
T#e current generation o/ &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers @and t#e current wor! o/ t#e older generationA reo&ens some o/ t#e issues t#at concerned #istorical modern dance4 T#us it seems to
de&art /rom t#e concerns o/ its immediate &redecessors4 1ut it would )e a#istorical to call t#e current generation modern danceN we would intuiti-el% recoil, ; t#in!, /rom &lacing t#e modern
dance c#oreogra&#ers 3enni/er Muller and orman .al!er in t#e same cam& as &ostmoderns .end% Perron, 3o#anna 1o%ce, or 1ill T4 3ones4 T#e -iews and &ractices o/ t#e current generation
are not sim&l% a return to an older st%le or met#od4 T#e% )uild on and, in t#eir turn, de&art /rom t#e rede/initions and anal%ses, as well as t#e tec#niKues and anti-tec#niKues, o/ t#e &ostmodern
inKuir% into t#e nature and /unction o/ dance4 T#e s#i/t is an o)-ious reaction )% a new generation o/ c#oreogra&#ers to t#e concerns o/ t#eir eldersN )% t#e end o/ t#e l+<9s, t#e clarit% and
sim&licit% o/ anal%tic &ostmodern dance #ad ser-ed its &ur&ose and t#reatened to )ecome an e(ercise in em&t% /ormalism4 Dance #ad )ecome so s#orn o/ meaning @ot#er t#an re/le(i-eA t#at /or
a %ounger generation o/ c#oreogra&#ers and s&ectators it was )eginning to )e regarded as almost meaningless4 T#e res&onse was to loo! /or wa%s to reinstall meaning in dance4
Sa..y -anes ,erpsichore in -neakers *?>
1<:
T#e &ostmoder/l c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e *+?9s and *+<9s saw t#eir wor! as &art o/ a continuing de)ate a)out t#e nature and /unction o/ t#eatrical dance4 $rom t#e )rea!awa% %ears o/ t#e
earl% si(ties, es&eciall% during t#e time o/ t#e 3udson Dance T#eater, w#en e-er% rule was Kuestioned, to t#e consolidation o/ t#e anal%tic and meta&#oric streams o/ &ostmodern dance in t#e
late si(ties and se-enties, w#en earlier e(&eriments grew into recogniGa)le st%les, c#oreogra&#ers #a-e )een as!ing, F.#at is danceD0 and F.#ere, w#en, and #ow s#ould it )e &er/ormedD0 and
e-en F.#o s#ould &er/orm itD0 *5 .#ile t#e Fnew dance0 c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e eig#ties still ent#usiasticall% enter into t#at mediumistic de)ate, one o/ t#e most stri!ing /eatures t#at sets t#em
o// /rom t#eir &ostmodern /ore)ears @w#ic# sometimes e-en includes t#emsel-es at an earlier timeA is t#e Kuestion F.#at does it meanD0 $or reasons t#at #a-e to do wit# )ot# t#e #istor% o/ t#e
a-ant-garde and t#e tem&er o/ our times, t#e eig#ties are witnessing an urgent searc# to reo&en t#e Kuestion o/ content in all t#e arts, and dance is no e(ce&tion4 1ut )e%ond t#e Kuestion o/
em&#asis on /orm and /unction -ersus content, t#e two Fgenerations0 di-erge on suc# /undamental issues as tec#nical -irtuosit%, &ermanence o/ re&ertor%, elements o/ t#eatricalit%, t#e use o/
ot#er media, t#e relations#i& )etween dance and music, t#e in/luence o/ mass culture, and e-en on suc# seemingl% e(ternal /eatures as -enue4
A noticea)le s#i/t in t#e st%le o/ &ostmodern dance, w#ic# in retros&ect mar!ed t#e )eginning o/ new dance in t#e *+E9s, too! &lace in *+<+ wit# a num)er o/ !e% wor!s )% esta)lis#ed
&ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers4 $or Tris#a 1rown0s /lacial <ecoy5 Ro)ert Rausc#en)erg designed t#e elegant costumes and decor, adding la%ers o/ translucent nondance material to t#e liKuidit%
o/ t#e c#oreogra&#%4 Lucinda C#ilds0s <ance5 a colla)oration wit# com&oser P#ili& 2lass and -isual artist Sol Le.itt, )ot# e(tended C#ilds0s anal%tic rigor H Le.itt0s decor included a series o/
stringent geometric )ac!dro&s, eac# one lit in turn in a &rimar% color, alternating wit# /ilms o/ t#e dance t#at in-ited contrast and com&arison )etween t#e larger-t#an-li/e images o/ t#e
&er/ormers and t#eir li-e actions, and 2lass0s music was )uilt u&on re&etiti-e &#rasing H and simultaneousl% added an element o/ celestial e(&ressi-it%, as )ot# t#e /ilm and t#e music )uo%ed t#e
dancers wit# a sense o/ monumentalit% and #armon%4 Laura Dean, w#ose use o/ /ol! dance st%le and structure #ad /or some time de&ended on strictl% &atterned musical accom&animent,
&resented (usic5 in w#ic#, as a c#oreogra&#er and com&oser, dancer and &ianist, s#e made #ersel/ a #uman em)lem o/ t#e /usion o/ music and dancing4 Ste-e Pa(ton, w#o /or %ears #ad
wor!ed, in a down-to-eart# st%le, &rimaril% wit# eit#er Contact ;m&ro-isation /ormats and tec#niKues or in solo &er/ormance im&ro-ising wit# &ercussionist Da-id Moss, in t#e same %ear
&resented a colla)oration wit# Lisa elson, &A 4,5 in w#ic# )ot# too! on #umorous, -ague c#aracter roles to t#e recorded music o/ Ro)ert As#le%0s mantrali!e, c#anted, Midwestern inner
monologues, &ri.ate &arts. ;n $oot 4ules5 Douglas Dunn e(&lored t#e con-entions o/ t#e pas de deu= and c#anged )rig#tl% colored costumes wit# a -engeance4 ;n An Audience with the &ope5
or ,his is Where ' )ame 'n5 Da-id 2ordon introduced a uni/ied narrati-e conceit4
HC C C1
One !ind o/ meaning in dance #as alwa%s )een t#e s!ills and com&le(ities o/ s#eer -irtuosit%4 ;n t#e si(ties, t#e im&ulse o/ t#e &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers was to den% -irtuosit% and to
relinKuis# tec#nical &olis#, literall% to let go o/ )odil% constraints and in#i)itions, to act /reel%, and also, in a s&irit o/ democrac%, to re/use to di//erentiate t#e dancer0s )od% /rom an ordinar%
)od%4 T#e le-el o/ dance tec#niKue in )ot# )allet and modern dance #ad steadil% risen @and continues to riseA in t#e 8nited States since t#e *+,9s4 As in ot#er &eriods in Euro-American dance
#istor% w#en tec#niKue seemed all-im&ortant, t#e c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e *+?9s &rotested4 1ut unli!e, /or instance, t#e Romantic c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e l
E
,9s and *E=9s, t#eir res&onse was not to
em&#asiGe e(&ression o-er tec#niKueN rat#er, t#e% dro&&ed out o/ t#e tec#nical arena altoget#er4 T#e notion o/ letting go also mani/ested itsel/ meta&#oricall% in t#e Fone-nig#t stand0 H a re/usal
to #ang on to dances and to store t#em in a re&ertor%, an ac!nowledgment o/ dance0s e&#emeral nature H and, /urt#er, in t#e met#od o/ im&ro-isation, in w#ic# t#e dance is created /or t#e
moment and instantaneousl% disa&&ears4 ;n t#e *+E9s, t#is im&ulse #as re-ersed4 T#e s&irit is one o/ sur-i-al4 Dances are &reser-ed on /ilm and -ideota&e4 One o/ Tris#a 1rown0s recent wor!s
A2pal 6oop? includes material im&ro-ised in &er/ormance )% Ste-e Pa(ton t#at 1rown0s dancers Lisa 'raus and Ste&#en Petronio learned )% watc#ing a -ideota&e o/ Pa(ton0s &er/ormance4
ow &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers #a-e com&anies H /or instance, t#e Da-id 2ordon Pic!-8& Com&an%, t#e Tris#a 1rown Com&an%, t#e Lucinda C#ilds Dance Com&an%, 'ennet# 'ing and
Dancers H and t#eir com&anies &er/orm wor!s /rom t#e re&ertor%4 ; sus&ect t#at t#is is &artl% a res&onse to economic demands set down )% touring commitments, &roducers, and granting
agenciesN )ut certainl% it is also &art o/ t#e &rocess o/ )ecoming an esta)lis#ed c#oreogra&#er4 ow c#oreogra&#% demands strengt#, s!ill, and endurance4 T#e more a dance #as in it, t#e more it
seems wort# H contra t#e Fless is more0 &#iloso&#% o/ anal%tic &ostmodern dance4 Jirtuosit% )ecomes t#e su)Iect in dances )% c#oreogra&#ers suc# as C#arles Moulton, w#ose wor!s )uild on a
-oca)ular% o/ at#letic mo-esN EliGa)et# Stre), w#ose dances Kuote circus acro)aticsN and Molissa $enle%, w#ose &ieces are Fwalls o/ dance0 t#at o&erate at to& s&eed, and w#ose dancers
re#earse wearing weig#ts4 T#ese dances )order on t#e &#%sical /eats o/ t#e at#lete:g%mnast, w#ile in t#e world o/ g%mnastics, /igure s!ating, and ot#er s&orts, t#e /orm #as )ecome more
dancerl%4 ;ronicall%, as more and more Americans ta!e u& at#letic &astimes, /rom Iogging to weig#t-li/ting, w#at it means to #a-e an ordinar% )od% #as c#anged o-er t#e &ast decade4 ow
e-er%one is an at#lete, and s&orts are no longer /un to do, )ut, /or some, a dail% grind and e-en a source o/ inIur%4 ;n social dancing @)eginning wit# t#e disco routines o/ t#e se-enties )ut
continuing wit# /orms suc# as new wa-e, ro)ot dancing, )rea! dancing, and electric )oogieA, Fdoing %our own t#ing0, as in t#e si(ties, was graduall% re&laced )% actions o/ &#%sical de(terit%,
com&licated timing and &artnering, and acro)atic em)ellis#ment4 T#e ante #as )een u&&ed /or
1<< Sa..y -anes 7lerpsichore in -neakers
&ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers4 ;n t#e -irtuosic wor!s o/ t#e eig#ties, t#e signi/icance o/ t#e dance is t#e re/inement o/ )odil% s!ills, and %et, in lig#t o/ t#e &re-ious generation0s renunciation o/
)ra-ura, t#e current dances also seem to esta)lis# t#emsel-es as anot#er installment o/ t#e de)ate on t#e su)Iect4
;/ in t#e si(ties and se-enties we were content to let artwor!s sim&l% )e, rat#er t#an mean, and to let criticism descri)e, rat#er t#an inter&ret, in t#e eig#ties we want to /ind su)stance and
order in an increasingl% recalcitrant world4 .e can no longer a//ord t#e &ermissi-eness o/ t#e si(ties4 T#e modest t#ri/tiness o/ se-enties retrenc#ment #as gi-en wa% to -alues in e-er% as&ect o/
American li/e more suited to t#e drastic economic cut)ac!s o/ Reaganism4 Ours is an age o/ arti/ice, s&ecialiGation, conser-ation, and com&etition4 As in t#e *+,9s, t#e contradictions )etween
ric# and &oor are great, )ut e-en t#ose wit# less mone% to s&end are willing to s&end it wit# a -engeance on elegant clot#ing and entertainment, immediate &leasures t#at will &artl% com&ensate
/or in/lation, de)t, and unem&lo%ment4 ;n t#is milieu, t#e current -alues in &ostmodern dance o/ -irtuosit%, elegance, and ornament are not sur&rising4
Per#a&s t#e most stri!ing o-erall s#i/t in new dance since t#e se-enties is w#at oel Carroll #as called Ft#e return o/ t#e re&ressed0 H i4e4, e(&ression4 *, T#e searc# /or meaning in art /inds a
&arallel in current critical writing, Iust as t#e artists0 re/usal to manu/acture s&eci/ic meaning in an earlier generation was accom&anied )% a s&ate o/ descri&ti-e criticism, o/ t#e !ind Susan
Sontag called /or in FAgainst inter&retation04 T#e recent intellectual in/atuation wit# structuralism and &oststructuralism, s%m&tomatic o/ our &resent rage /or meaning and order, is in turn
&er#a&s a s%m&tom o/ our national, indeed glo)al, sense o/ insecurit% and doom4 Sc#olars in e-er% /ield turn to linguistic anal%sis and t#e new Iargon o/ literar% criticism and $renc#
&s%c#oanal%sis in attem&ts to ma!e tid% sense o/ t#e messiness o/ e(&erience4 Artists, at times /ollowing t#e t#eorists, incor&orate read%-made sign s%stems and arc# commentaries on ot#er
artwor!s in t#eir wor!s4
.#ile t#e critical communit% in dance #as not rus#ed to em)race semiotics and &oststructuralism wit# t#e /er-or /ound in ot#er /ields, c#oreogra&#ers @t#oug# not necessaril% moti-ated )%
dee&l% t#eoretical concernsA #a-e )een e(&loring some o/ t#e im&lications o/ t#is &ers&ecti-e4 T#ere are man% !inds o/ meaning in current dancing, and man% wa%s o/ ma!ing meaning as well4
To esc#ew content )e%ond t#e dancing per se is in itsel/ a !ind o/ e(&ression, )ut muc# o/ t#e new dance c#oreogra&#% see!s content e(ternal to t#e dance medium4 One met#od o/ installing
meaning in dance, t#e most non-er)al o/ t#e arts, is in /act to a&&ro&riate language and languageli!e s%stems4 A num)er o/ c#oreogra&#ers ma!e dances )ased on t#e #and gesture, an em&#asis
unusual /or Euro-American dance4 Dana ReitG, /or ;nstance, ma!es im&ro-isations in w#ic# t#e mo-ements and static s#a&es o/ t#e #ands are /oregroundedN t#e o&en &alms or wa-eli!e
gestures, rooted in mo-ements o/ Tai C#i C#uan, remind us o/ t#e &ower/ull% em)lematic use o/ t#e #ands in dail% li/e, )ut in t#e dance t#e% do not ser-e as signals4 T#e Flanguage0 o/ gesture
emerges in a di//erent /orm in .end% Perron0s #ig#l% &ersonal s%stem Oi/ arm and #and mo-ements4 Rem% C#arli& uses t#e con-entional gesturei4 .1 American Sign
<=
Language /or t#e dea/, o/ten Iu(ta&osed to -er)al te(ts H dreams and stories and, nota)l%, t#e song FE-er% Little Mo-ement @Has a Meaning All ;ts OwnA04 3ane Com/ort and ot#er %ounger
c#oreogra&#ers #a-e also used sign-language translations o/ s&o!en te(ts as mo-ement -oca)ularies in t#eir dances, muc# li!e closed-ca&tion tele-ision4 Da-id 2ordon since t#e late se-enties
#as elucidated t#e m%steriousl% s#i/ting corres&ondences )etween -er)al )e#a-iour @o/ten em)ellis#ed wit# &unsA and gesture as illustration, as em)lem, as /eed)ac!, and sim&l% as an a)stract
mo-ement &attern4
ot sur&risingl%, t#e interest in -er)al language #as )een accom&anied )% a re!indling o/ interest in narrati-e structures4 .#ere t#e &re-ious generation o/ &ostmodern dancers eit#er
re&udiated literar% de-ices altoget#er, &re/erring t#e radical Iu(ta&osition o/ mo-ement o-er logical connections, or, in t#e case o/ Meredit# Mon!, w#ose wor!s mig#t )e said to add u& to some
!ind o/ stor%, made /ragmented, rat#er t#an linear, tales, in %et anot#er c%clical de-elo&ment so t%&ical o/ dance #istor%, t#e narrati-e, w#ose deat# seemed a certaint% in t#e si(ties and
se-enties, #as )een re)orn in t#e eig#ties4 Yet t#is de-elo&ment is not sim&l% a return to older -alues or e-en tec#niKues, /or t#e new narrati-e /inds e(&osition in wa%s t#at ta!e into account t#e
entire #istor% o/ t#e &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers0 deli)erate dismantling o/ literar% de-ices4
One im&ortant wa% t#e new narrati-e de&arts /rom t#e stories o/ classical modern dance is in its use o/ -er)al language, rat#er t#an mo-ement, to tell t#e stor%4 As in &eter and the .ol/, t#e
narration ta!es &lace on two simultaneous le-els H oral @or, occasionall%, writtenA commentar% and dancing4 @Arnie Sane in /act c#oreogra&#ed a &un! -ersion o/ &eter and the Wolf in *+E> t#at
raised Kuestions o/ gender and linguistic con/usion and se(ual e(tremes4A ;t is stri!ing t#at t#e /ol!tale, an e(em&lar% case o/ literar% narrati-e structure, #as attracted se-eral %ounger new dance
c#oreogra&#ers @as it did, /or di//erent reasons, t#e Romantic c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e *E,9s and *E=9sA, /or instance, Ral&# Lemon in #is $olk ,ales and Ho&e 2illerman in ,he &rincess -tory
@)ot# *+E>A4 T#e renewed /ascination wit# t#e wor!ings o/ narrati-e and wit# language as t#e domain o/ t#e c#oreogra&#er &arallels t#e re-i-al o/ a new orientation toward t#e -er)al in t#e
a-ant-garde generall%, a/ter t#e &re-ious generation0s mistrust o/ t#e word4 And t#is also /its wit# t#e rise o/ semiotic t#eor%4
One outgrowt# o/ t#e re-i-al o/ t#e narrati-e is an em&#asis on t#e genre o/ auto)iogra&#%, a result, &er#a&s, o/ t#e s%nt#esis o/ new narrati-e concerns wit# t#e &ersonal, intimate mode o/
&er/ormance t#at emerged in t#e wor! o/ 2rand 8nion and ot#er earl% &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers, as )oundaries )etween &er/ormer and s&ectator, art and li/e were c#allenged4 T#e &u)lic
dis&la% o/ t#e &ersonal was &artl% a &olitical gesture in t#e st%le o/ t#e ew Le/t, and t#us it is not sur&rising t#at se-eral o/ t#e c#oreogra&#ers w#o wor! in t#e genre o/ auto)iogra&#% o/ten
wor! in t#e arena o/ &olitical dance as well6 1o%ce, Muller, 3Ones and Sane, Perron, 1ernd, ;s#mael Houston-3ones and $red Holland, among ot#ers4 T#e% use t#e intimate re-elation o/
&ersonal details as occasions to meditate on larger issues6 war, racism, se(ual &olitics4 1ut e-en w#ere t#eir dances remain
1<@ Sa..y -anes ,erpsichore in -neakers
s&eci/icall% &ri-ate, t#at -er% act o/ con/essional re-elation seems to ta!e on &olitical meaning4 Auto)iogra&#% also &ro-ides an anti-sentimental twist on t#e &ractice o/ narrati-eN it im)ues a
&lot wit# tension )% mi(ing t#e sus&ense structure o/ a stor% wit# t#e direct, /actual Kualit% o/ intimac% t#at relates to earlier &ostmodern dance4
1e%ond narrati-e meaning, t#e new dance stri-es to e(&ress ot#er /eatures t#at t#e anal%tic dancers tried to &urge /rom t#eir wor!, suc# as c#aracter, mood, emotion, situation4
HC C C1
T#ese dances are di//erent /rom modern dance, #owe-er, )ecause in im&ortant wa%s t#e% present t#e nondance in/ormation @i4e4, &lot, c#aracter, situationA, rat#er t#an represent it4 T#e% are not
seamless t#eatrical illusions, &roductions o/ /ictional worlds Aa 'a Mart#a 2ra#am or Doris Hum&#re%A4 T#e mo-ement -oca)ular% is onl% &artiall% e(&ressi-eN it also remains &artl% a)stract
and it resists de/initi-e inter&retation4 T#e emotional or narrati-e content remains elusi-e and /ragmented, and t#e meaning o/ dance is &la%ed out in se-eral, not alwa%s corres&onding,
dimensions4
One o/ t#e de-ices /or )earing t#e new e(&ression, as ma% )e seen /rom some o/ t#ese e(am&les, is t#e use o/ &o&ular genres and allusions to &o&ular &er/ormance st%les, including
-ernacular dance4 T#is interest in itsel/ constitutes an entire stream o/ new direction in new dance @alt#oug# it #as roots in t#e Po& Art sensi)ilit% o/ t#e earl% si(tiesA4
HC C
T#e merging o/ F#ig# art0 and &o&ular traditions is one o/ t#e c#aracteristics o/ &ostmodernism, and %et in t#e #istor% o/ t#e a-ant-garde arts it is not#ing newN -anguard artists #a-e &erenniall%
turned to /ol!, &o&ular, and e(otic art as sources /or )rea!ing wit# mainstream -alues as well as /or Fnew0 materials and tec#niKues4 Per#a&s w#at ma!es t#e current -ersion o/ t#is &ractice
&articularl% &ostmodern is t#at it is en-elo&ed in an acute #istorical sel/-consciousness, ma!ing Kuotation a laminating &rocess across )ot# #istorical &eriods and current geogra&#ical, social, and
st%listic di-isions4
Anot#er wa% o/ installing e(&ression in dance is t#e use o/ multi&le c#annels o/ communication, t#e &roli/eration o/ media t#at t#e anal%tic c#oreogra&#ers o/ t#e se-enties staunc#l%
renounced4 T#e rigor o/ C#ilds0s wor! o/ t#e se-enties #as so/tened into an elegant e(&ressi-eness in #er recent colla)orati-e wor!s6 <ance @*+<+N Le.itt:2lassA, 4elati.e )a6m @*+E*N
.ilson:2i)sonA, $ormal Abandon @*+E5N RiesmanA, and A.ailable 6i%ht @*+E,N 2e#r%:AdamsA4 At t#e same time, s#e #as em)ellis#ed #er earlier, austere c#oreogra&#% wit# di&s, rises, #o&s,
and &irouettes t#at recall t#e &ulsing musicalit% o/ 1aroKue st%le4 Similarl%, Tris#a 1rown0s colla)orations /lacial <ecoy @*+<+, Rausc#en)ergA, 2pal 6oop/)loud 'nstallation V7"!0# @*+E9N
a!a%aA, -on of /one $ishin1 @*+E*N 3udd:As#le%A, -et and 4eset @*+E,N Rausc#en)erg:AndersOnA, and 6ates1al &ass A1*J!B 2ra-es:SummoA assert t#e liKuidit% o/ #er recent c#oreogra&#% n
man% le-els6 t#e
1<B
sli&&eriness o/ t#e mo-ement as well as t#e trans&arent or e-en water% imager% o/ t#e decor and costumes4 A num)er o/ c#oreogra&#ers #a-e set t#eir dancers c#anging costumes t#roug#out a
wor!, as t#oug# t#e% were using a manual /or t#e semiotic anal%sis o/ clot#ing4 ew dance once again o&ens itsel/ to music, s&ecial lig#ting, /ilm, and new tec#nologies suc# as -ideo and
com&uters4
Per#a&s t#e !e% means /or )earing e(&ression in dance, as c#oreogra&#ers #a-e alwa%s !nown, and t#e maIor, most o)-ious s#i/t /rom t#e &re-ious generation0s -alues, is t#e use o/ music4
T#e e-ocati-e use o/ music can instantl% create an entire moodN /or e(am&le, t#e nostalgia o/ roc!-and-roll Foldies0 or t#e currenc% o/ &un! music, as suggested a)o-e, and t#e recent rise o/
MTJ s#ows a general cultural /ascination wit# -isualiGing music t#roug# dance4 1ut, more generall%, t#e association o/ new dance wit# music H o/ten, t#e -er% closest corres&ondence, Fdancing
to t#e music0 H signals a radical s#i/t in t#e #istor% o/ twentiet#-centur% a-ant-garde dance, w#ic# until t#e eig#ties #ad )een s%stematicall% se&arating itsel/ /rom music4 T#e new musicalit% is
more closel% related to social dance &ractice t#an to t#e de-elo&ment o/ modern dance in t#e twentiet# centur%4 .#ere ;sadora Duncan and Rut# St Denis made t#eir dances -isualiGations o/
s%m&#onic music, Mar% .igman, a generation later, &re/erred to use sim&le &ercussionN Cunning#am ma!es dances t#at do not corres&ond structurall% to t#e music at all @e(ce&t )% accidentAN
t#e anal%tic &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers o/ten danced in silence4 Meredit# Mon!0s Fo&eras0, Laura Dean0s colla)orations wit# Ste-e Reic# @ins&ired )% -arious non-.estern traditionsA, and
Tw%la T#ar&0s use o/ A/ro-American social dance st%le were earl% e(am&les o/ t#e new /usion o/ music and dance4 $enle% intensi/ied t#is trend, ma!ing dances to t#e &ol%r#%t#ms o/ A/ro-
Cari))ean music t#at were ins&ired, in &art, )% t#e ritual and social dancing o/ .est A/rica and t#e #ig# energ% o/ new wa-e music, )ut t#at also re/lect a commitment to a searc# /or an original
mo-ement -oca)ular%4 T#e interest in &o&ular entertainment clearl% rein/orces t#is direction, )ot# in new dance and in new music4 1ut an eKuall% &ower/ul recent interest )% &ostmodern
c#oreogra&#ers in c#oreogra&#ing /or t#e )allet also rein/orces t#e new musicalit%4 *? T#is new relations#i& )etween music and dance #as &ractical results6 w#ere in t#e si(ties and se-enties
&ostmodern dance )ecame &art o/ t#e -isual-art world, s#aring its t#eories and structures as well as its -enues, in t#e eig#ties dance #as mo-ed into t#e music world, ta!ing &lace in clu)s and
ca)arets, rat#er t#an galleries and museums4 ;n t#e eig#ties, t#e worlds o/ a-ant-garde music, a-ant-garde -isual art, &er/ormance, and &o&ular music #a-e )egun to merge, and t#e &ostmodern
c#oreogra&#ers #a-e Ioined t#em, and t#e music scene in ew Yor! #as re&laced t#e -isual-art world in &ro-iding a new conte(t /or &ostmodern dance4 $or reasons o/ its own, t#e -isual-art
world is less conduci-e to &ro-iding t#at conte(t4 Jisual artists #a-e returned to ma!ing commodities t#at will last, and t#e galler% s%stem is no longer inclined to deal in li-e &er/ormance4 T#e
underl%ing im&ulse o/ Conce&tual Art H to undermine t#e status o/ t#e art o)Iect as a means o/ in-estment H is o)-iousl% s&entN in times o/ economic distress, &eo&le want to )u% o)Iects rat#er
t#an /inance ideas or actions4 T#e c#anging social li/e o/ t#e a-ant-garde also re/lects t#e ne(t conte(t4 ;n t#e si(ties,
1=9 Sa..y -anes ,erpsichore in -neakers
artists and dancers went out social dancing a/ter concertsN t#e a-ant-garde o/ t#e eig#ties &rograms &er/ormance into t#e social scene, selling )eer at intermissions or &resenting art dance at
discot#eKues and clu)s in late-nig#t &er/ormances, es&eciall% on t#e Lower East Side, w#ere a ca)aret scene #as Ioined t#e new galler% scene4 T#us, on t#e one #and, &ostmodern dance #as )uilt
its own s&ecial audiences and circuits, and on t#e ot#er #and, it see!s new audiences in t#e wider networ! o/ &o&ular music and dance culture4
T#e downtown dance world #as )% now esta)lis#ed its own institutions /or s#owing new dance4 ;n t#e eig#ties, one can &lace onesel/ in t#e &ostmodern cam& sim&l% )% c#oosing @or )eing
c#osenA to &er/orm in a &ostmodern -enue4
Notes
*4 $or an e(&lication o/ traditional modern dance structures, see t#e t#ree )i)les o/ modern dance com&osition6 Louis Horst, &re-)lassic <ance $orms5 T#e Dance O)ser-er, ew Yor! *+,<N
re&r4 Dance HoriGons, *+<5N Louis Horst and Carroll Russell, (odern <ance $orms5 ;m&ulse Pu)lications, San $rancisco, *+?*N and Doris Hum&#re%, ,he Art of (akin% <ances5 Rine#art,
ew Yor!, *+>+N re&r4 2ro-e Press, *+?5N see also t#e man% re-iews and #istories o/ modern dance4
54 Mic#ael 'ir)%, F;ntroduction0, ,he <rama 4e.iew5 *+ @T-?>N Marc# *+<>A, ,4
#. C#arles 3enc!s, ,he 6an%ua%e of &ost-(odern Architecture5 RiGGoli, ew Yor!, *+<<4
=4 oel Carroll unra-eled some o/ t#ese com&le(ities wit# &articular clarit% in #is lecture on &ostmodernism in t#e arts and in culture generall% at 3aco)0s Pillow, 1ec!et, Massac#usetts, *?
3ul% *+E>4
!. 3erome Rot#en)erg discusses some o/ t#ese as&ects o/ &ostmodernism in Few models, new -isions6 Some notes toward a &oetics o/ &er/ormance0, in Mic#el 1Lnamou and C#arles
Caramello, eds, &erformance in &ostmodern )ulture5 Coda Press, Madison, .;, *+<<4 ;n FPostmodern dance and t#e re&udiation o/ &rimiti-ism0, &artisan 4e.iew5 !0 @*+E,A, *9*H5*,
Roger Co&eland argues t#at modern dance stro-e /or s%nt#esis in terms o/ /orm and unit% in terms o/ t#e audience0s e(&erience o/ t#e wor!4 A mistrust o/ language underlies t#e &rimiti-ist
longings o/ t#e modern dancers4 Here and in a second article, FPostmodern dance:&ostmodern arc#itecture:&ostmodernism0, &erformin% Arts 3ournal5 *+ @*+E,A, 5<H=,, Co&eland ma!es
some use/ul o)ser-ations a)out &ostmodern dance4 Howe-er, #is de/inition is muc# more narrow t#an t#e one ; &ro&ose #ere, alt#oug# #e does suggest t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ two di//erent
cam&s o/ &ostmodern dance @in FPostmodern dance:&ostmodern arc#itecture:&ostmodernism0, &4 ##?.
?4 $or descri&tions and anal%ses o/ Cunning#am0s wor!, see Merce Cunning#am, )han%es:
Hotes on choreo%raphy5 ed4 $rances Starr, Somet#ing Else Press, ew Yor!, *+?EN Sall%
1anes and oel Carroll, FCunning#am and Duc#am&0, Kallet 4e.iew5 **@*+E,A, <,H+N
Roger Co&eland, FT#e &olitics o/ &erce&tion0, ,he Hew 4epublic5 *< o-em)er *+<+4
<4 On t#e a-ant-garde o/ t#e *+>9s, see 3ill 3o#nston, FT#e new American modern dance0, in ,he Hew American Arts5 ed4 Ric#ard 'ostelanetG, Collier 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+?<, &&4 *?5H+,N
and Selma 3eanne Co#en, FA-ant-garde c#oreogra&#%0, )riticism , @*+?*A, *?H,>, re&rinted in t#ree &arts in <ance (a%a8ine5 ,? @3une *+@I, 55H=, ><N @3ul%
*+?5A, 5+, ,*, >EN @August *+?5A, =>, >=?4
A=D
E4 On t#e institutional t#eor% o/ art, see 2eorge Dic!ie, Art and the Ulesthetic5 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+<=4
+4 On )lac! dance in t#e si(ties, see L%nne $aule% Emer%, Klack <ance in the 0nited -tates from 1+1* to 1*705 ational Press 1oo!s, Palo Alto, CA, *+<5N re&r4 Dance HoriGons, 1roo!l%n,
Y, *+E94
*94 Two s#ort /ilms e(ist t#at s#ow t#ese st%listic /eatures -er% clearl%6 C#ilds0s )alico (in%lin% and Rainer0s ,rio A.
**4 On meaning and e(&ressi-eness in &ostmodern dance, see Oel Carroll and Sall% 1a%es F.or!ing and dancing6 A res&onse to Monroe 1eardsle%0s ].#at ;s 2oing On in a DanceDR0,
<ance 4esearch 3ournal5 1! @*+E5A, ,<H=*, and oel Carroll, FPost-modern dance and e(&ression0, in &hilosophical :ssays in <ance5 ed4 2ordon $anc#er and 2erald M%ers, Dance
HoriGons, ew Yor!, *+E*, &&4 +>H*9=4
*54 ;n addition to t#e -arious )oo!s and articles a)out &ostmodern dance cited a)o-e, t#e /ilms (akin% <ances @Mic#ael 1lac!woodA and Keyond the (ainstream @Merrill 1roc!wa% /or Dance
in AmericaA, s#ow wor!s in )ot# t#e anal%tic and meta&#oric -eins o/ *+<9s &ostmodern dance4
*,4 oel Carroll, FT#e return o/ t#e re&ressed6 T#e re-emergence o/ e(&ression in contem&orar% American dance0, <ance ,heatre 3ournal5 5, * @*+E=A, *?H*+, 5<4 De)ora# 3owitt writes
di//erentl% a)out t#e same &#enomenon in FT#e return o/ drama0 <ance ,heatre 3ournal5 5, 5 @*+E=A, 5EH,*4
*=4 See, /or instance, Marcia Pall%, FT#e redisco-er% o/ narrati-e6 dance in t#e *+E9s0, He=t Wa.e $esti-al Catalogue, *+E=4
*>4 See oel Carroll, re-iew o/ T#e Pu)lic T#eater0s $ilmDance $esti-al, <ance (a%a8ine5
>E@*+E=A, >5H=, +9H*, and #is re-iew o/ T#e Mo-ing Camera6 A Series o/ Per/ormance and Jideo Colla)orations, <ance (a%a8ine5 !* @*+E>A, +,H=, +E, /or s&eci/ic descri&tions o/
cinedances and li-e dances using -ideo, and /or anal%ses o/ t#is trend4 Also, see t#e -arious essa%s )% artists and critics in t#e catalogue @ed4 Am% 2reen/ieldA /or t#e $ilmDance $esti-al, a
&roIect o/ t#e E(&erimental ;ntermedia $oundation, *+E,4
*?4 T#e a&&eal o/ )allet to t#e new generation o/ &ostmodern c#oreogra&#ers @as well as to t#e older onesA is a com&le( &#enomenon t#at deser-es closer stud%4 ;n certain wa%s, t#e /ormalist
-alues o/ contem&orar% )allet #a-e more in common wit# &ostmodern dance t#an wit# modern dance4 1ut also, man% &ostmodern dancers )egan to use t#e stud% o/ )allet tec#niKue as an
antidote to t#e &ersonal st%le o/ teac#ing in modern danceN ot#ers #ad /irst studied )allet as c#ildren and /ound in its -oca)ular% %et more material /or t#eir &luralistic -iew o/ dance4 ;/
an%t#ing can )e used in a dance, w#% not t#e .estern #ig#-art-dance tradition as well as social dance, non-.estern dance, and nondance mo-esD
,he &hoto%raphic Acti.ity of &ostmodernism
11 1 ,he &hoto%raphic Acti.ity
of &ostmodernism
Do,.as )ri#0
;t is a /etis#istic, /undamentall% anti-tec#nical notion o/ art wit# w#ic# t#eorists o/ &#otogra&#% #a-e tussled /or almost a centur%, wit#out, o/ course, ac#ie-ing t#e slig#test
result4 $or t#e% soug#t not#ing )e%ond acKuiring credentials /or t#e &#otogra&#er /rom t#e Iudgment-seat w#ic# #e #ad alread% o-erturned4
.ALTER 1E3AM;, FA s#ort #istor% o/ &#otogra&#%0
T#at &#otogra&#% #ad o-erturned t#e Iudgment-seat o/ art is a /act w#ic# t#e discourse o/ modernism /ound it necessar% to re&ress, and so it seems t#at we ma% accuratel% sa% o/ &ostmodernism
t#at it constitutes &recisel% t#e return o/ t#e re&ressed4 Postmodernism can onl% )e understood as a s&eci/ic )reac# wit# modernism, wit# t#ose institutions w#ic# are t#e &reconditions /or and
w#ic# s#a&e t#e discourse o/ modernism4 T#ese institutions can )e named at t#e outset6 /irst, t#e museumN t#en, art #istor%N and /inall%, in a more com&le( sense, )ecause modernism de&ends
)ot# u&on its &resence and u&on its a)sence, &#otogra&#%4 Postmodernism is a)out art0s dis&ersal, its &luralit%, )% w#ic# ; certainl% do not mean &luralism4 Pluralism is, as we !now, t#at /antas%
t#at art is /ree, /ree o/ ot#er discourses, ;nstitutions, /ree, a)o-e all, o/ #istor%4 And t#is /antas% o/ /reedom can )e maintained )ecause e-er% wor! o/ art is #eld to )e a)solutel% uniKue and
original4 Against t#is &luralism o/ originals, ; want to s&ea! o/ t#e &luralit% o/ co&ies4
earl% two %ears ago in an essa% called FPictures0, in w#ic# ; /irst /ound it use/ul to em&lo% t#e term postmodernism5 ; attem&ted to s!etc# in a )ac!ground to t#e wor! o/ a grou& o/ %ounger
artists w#o were Iust )eginning to e(#i)it in ew Yor!4 ; traced t#e genesis o/ t#eir concerns to w#at #ad &eIorati-el% )een la)eled t#e t#eatricalit% o/ minimal scul&ture and t#e e(tensions o/
t#at t#eatrical &osition into t#e art o/ t#e se-enties4 ; wrote at t#at time t#at t#e aest#etic mode t#at was e(em&lar% during t#e se-enties was &er/ormance, all t#ose wor!s t#at were constituted in
a s&eci/ic situation and /or a s&eci/ic durationN wor!s /or w#ic# it
$rom 2ctober5 *> @*+E9A, +*H*9*4
A=8
could )e said literall% t#at %ou #ad to )e t#ereN wor!s, t#at is, w#ic# assumed t#e &resence o/ a s&ectator in /ront o/ t#e wor! as t#e wor! too! &lace, t#ere)% &ri-ileging t#e s&ectator instead o/
t#e artist4
;n m% attem&t to continue t#e logic o/ t#e de-elo&ment ; was outlining, ; came e-entuall% to a stum)ling )loc!4 .#at ; wanted to e(&lain was #ow to get /rom t#is condition o/ &resence H t#e
bein% there necessitated )% &er/ormance H to t#at !ind o/ &resence t#at is &ossi)le onl% t#roug# t#e a)sence t#at we !now to )e t#e condition o/ re&resentation4 $or w#at ; was writing a)out was
wor! w#ic# #ad ta!en on, a/ter nearl% a centur% o/ its re&ression, t#e Kuestion o/ re&resentation4 ; e//ected t#at transition wit# a !ind o/ /udge, an e&igra&# Kuotation sus&ended )etween two
sections o/ t#e te(t4 T#e Kuotation, ta!en /rom one o/ t#e g#ost tales o/ Henr% 3ames, was a /alse tautolog%, w#ic# &la%ed on t#e dou)le, indeed antit#etical meaning o/ t#e word presence: FT#e
&resence )e/ore #im was a &resence40
.#at ; Iust said was a /udge was &er#a&s not reall% t#at, )ut rat#er t#e #int o/ somet#ing reall% crucial a)out t#e wor! ; was descri)ing, w#ic# ; would li!e now to ela)orate4 ;n order to do so,
; want to add a t#ird de/inition to t#e word presence. To t#at notion o/ &resence w#ic# is a)out bein% there5 )eing in /ront o/, and t#at notion o/ &resence t#at Henr% 3ames uses in #is g#ost
stories, t#e &resence w#ic# is a g#ost and t#ere/ore reall% an a)sence, t#e &resence w#ic# is not there5 ; want to add t#e notion o/ &resence as a !ind o/ increment to )eing t#ere, a g#ostl% as&ect
o/ &resence t#at is its e(cess, its su&&lement4 T#is notion o/ &resence is w#at we mean w#en we sa%, /or e(am&le, t#at Laurie Anderson is a &er/ormer wit# &resence4 .e mean )% suc# a
statement not sim&l% t#at s#e is t#ere, in /ront o/ us, )ut t#at s#e is more t#an t#ere, t#at in addition to )eing t#ere, s#e #as &resence4 And i/ we t#in! o/ Laurie Anderson in t#is wa%, it ma% seem
a )it odd, )ecause Laurie Anderson0s &articular &resence is e//ected t#roug# t#e use o/ re&roducti-e tec#nologies w#ic# reall% ma!e #er Kuite a)sent, or onl% t#ere as t#e !ind o/ &resence t#at
Henr% 3ames meant w#en #e said, FT#e &resence )e/ore #im was a &resence40
T#is is &recisel% t#e !ind o/ &resence t#at ; attri)uted to t#e &er/ormances o/ 3ac! 2oldstein, suc# as ,wo $encers5 and to w#ic# ; would now add t#e &er/ormances o/ Ro)ert Longo, suc# as
-urrender. T#ese &er/ormances were little else t#an &resences, &er/ormed ta)leau( t#at were t#ere in t#e s&ectator0s s&ace )ut w#ic# a&&eared et#ereal, a)sent4 T#e% #ad t#at odd Kualit% o/
#olograms, -er% -i-id and detailed and &resent and at t#e same time g#ostl%, a)sent4 2oldstein and Longo are artists w#ose wor!, toget#er wit# t#at o/ a great num)er o/ t#eir contem&oraries,
a&&roac#es t#e Kuestion o/ re&resentation t#roug# &#otogra&#ic modes, Particularl% all t#ose as&ects o/ &#otogra&#%O t#at #a-e to do wit# re&roduction, wit# co&ies, and co&ies o/ co&ies4 T#e
e(traordinar% &resence o/ t#eir wor! is e//ected t#roug# a)sence, t#roug# its un)ridgea)le distance /rom t#e original, /rom e-en t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ an original4 Suc# &resence is w#at ; attri)ute to
t#e !ind o/ P#otogra&#ic acti-it% ; call &ostmodernist4
T#is Kualit% o/ &resence would seem to )e Iust t#e o&&osite o/ w#at .alter
1=2
1=: Do,.as )ri#0 ,he &hoto%raphic Acti.ity of &ostmodern8sm
1enIamin #ad in mind w#en #e introduced into t#e language o/ criticism t#e notion o/ t#e aura4 $or t#e aura #as to do wit# t#e &resence o/ t#e original, wit# aut#enticit%, wit# t#e uniKue
e(istence o/ t#e wor! o/ art in t#e &lace in w#ic# it #a&&ens to )e4 ;t is t#at as&ect o/ t#e wor! t#at can )e &ut to t#e test o/ c#emical anal%sis or o/ connoisseurs#i&, t#at as&ect w#ic# t#e
disci&line o/ art #istor%, at least in its guise as Lunstwissenschaft5 is a)le to &ro-e or dis&ro-e, and t#at as&ect, t#ere/ore, w#ic# eit#er admits t#e wor! o/ art into, or )anis#es it /rom, t#e
museum4 $or t#e museum #as no truc! wit# /a!es or co&ies or re&roductions4 T#e &resence o/ t#e artist in t#e wor! must )e detecta)leN t#at is #ow t#e museum !nows it #as somet#ing
aut#entic4
1ut it is t#is -er% aut#enticit%, 1enIamin tells us, t#at is ine-ita)l% de&reciated t#roug# mec#anical re&roduction, diminis#ed t#roug# t#e &roli/eration o/ co&ies4 FT#at w#ic# wit#ers in t#e
age o/ mec#anical re&roduction is t#e aura o/ t#e wor! o/ art,0 is t#e wa% 1enIamin &ut it4 5 1ut, o/ course, t#e aura is not a mec#anistic conce&t as em&lo%ed )% 1enIamin, )ut rat#er a #istorical
one4 ;t is not somet#ing a #andmade wor! #as t#at a mec#anicall%-made wor! does not #a-e4 ;n 1enIamin0s -iew, certain &#otogra&#s #ad an aura, w#ile e-en a &ainting )% Rem)randt loses its
aura in t#e age o/ mec#anical re&roduction4 T#e wit#ering awa% o/ t#e aura, t#e dissociation o/ t#e wor! /rom t#e /a)ric o/ tradition, is an ine.itable outcome o/ mec#anical re&roduction4 T#is is
somet#ing we #a-e all e(&erienced4 .e !now, /or e(am&le, t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ e(&eriencing t#e aura o/ suc# a &icture as t#e FMona Lisa0 as we stand )e/ore it at t#e Lou-re4 ;ts aura #as )een
utterl% de&leted )% t#e t#ousands o/ times we0-e seen its re&roduction, and no degree o/ concentration will restore its uniKueness /or us4
;t would seem, t#oug#, t#at i/ t#e wit#ering awa% o/ t#e aura is an ine-ita)le /act o/ our time, t#en eKuall% ine-ita)le are all t#ose &roIects to recu&erate it, to &retend t#at t#e original and t#e
uniKue are still &ossi)le and desira)le4 And t#is is now#ere more a&&arent t#an in t#e /ield o/ &#otogra&#% itsel/, t#e -er% cul&rit o/ mec#anical re&roduction4
1enIamin granted a &resence or aura to onl% a -er% limited num)er o/ &#otogra&#s4 T#ese were &#otogra&#s o/ t#e so-called &rimiti-e &#ase, t#e &eriod &rior to &#otogra&#%0s
commercialiGation a/ter t#e *E>9s4 He said, /or e(am&le, t#at t#e &eo&le in t#ese earl% &#otogra&#s F#ad an aura a)out t#em, a medium w#ic# mingled wit# t#eir manner o/ loo!ing and ga-e
t#em a &lenitude and securit%04 T#is aura seemed to 1enIamin to )e a &roduct o/ two t#ings6 t#e long e(&osure time during w#ic# t#e su)Iects grew, as it were, into t#e imagesN and t#e uniKue,
unmediated relations#i& )etween t#e &#otogra&#er w#o was Fa tec#nician o/ t#e latest sc#ool0, and #is sitter, w#o was Fa mem)er o/ a class on t#e ascendant, re&lete wit# an aura w#ic#
&enetrated to t#e -er% /olds o/ #is )ourgeois o-ercoat or )ow-tie04
=
T#e aura in t#ese &#otogra&#s, t#en, is not to )e /ound in t#e &resence o/ t#e &#otogra&#er in t#e &#otogra&# in t#e wa% t#at
t#e aura o/ a &ainting is determined )% t#e &resence o/ t#e &ainter0s unmista!a)le #and in #is &icture4 Rat#er it is t#e &resence o/ t#e su)Iect, o/ w#at is &#otogra&#ed, Ft#e tin0, s&ar! o/ c#ance,
1=$
o/ t#e #ere and now, wit# w#ic# realit% #as, as it were, seared t#e c#aracter o/ t#e &icture04 $or 1enIamin, t#en, t#e connoisseurs#i& o/ &#otogra&#% is an acti-it% diametricall% o&&osed to t#e
connoisseurs#i& o/ a &ainting6 it means loo!ing not /or t#e #and o/ t#e artist )ut /or t#e uncontrolled and uncontrolla)le intrusion o/ realit%, t#e a)solutel% uniKue and e-en magical Kualit% not o/
t#e artist )ut o/ #is su)Iect4 And t#at is &er#a&s w#% it seemed to #im so misguided t#at &#otogra&#ers )egan, a/ter t#e commercialiGation o/ t#e medium, to stimulate t#e lost aura t#roug# t#e
a&&lication tec#niKues imitati-e o/ t#ose o/ a &ainting4 His e(am&le was t#e gum )ic#romate &rocess used in &ictorial &#otogra&#%4
Alt#oug# it ma% at /irst seem t#at 1enIamin lamented t#e loss o/ t#e aura, t#e contrar% is in /act true4 Re&roduction0s Fsocial signi/icance, &articularl% in its most &ositi-e /orm, is
inconcei-a)le0, wrote 1enIamin, Fwit#out its destructi-e, cat#artic as&ect, its liKuidation o/ t#e traditional -alue o/ t#e cultural #eritage04 ? T#at was /or #im t#e greatness o/ Atget6 FHe initiated
t#e li)eration o/ t#e o)Iect /rom t#e aura, w#ic# is t#e most incontesta)le ac#ie-ement o/ t#e recent sc#ool o/ &#otogra&#%40
<
FT#e remar!a)le t#ing a)out VAtget0sY &ictures CCC is t#eir em&tiness4
T#is em&t%ing o&eration, t#e de&letion o/ t#e aura, t#e contestation o/ t#e uniKueness o/ t#e wor! o/ art, #as )een accelerated and intensi/ied in t#e art o/ t#e &ast two decades4 $rom t#e
multi&lication o/ sil!screened &#otogra&#ic images in t#e wor!s o/ Rausc#en)erg and .ar#ol to t#e industriall% manu/actured, re&etiti-el% structured wor!s o/ t#e minimal scul&tors, e-er%t#ing
in radical artistic &ractice seemed to cons&ire in t#at liKuidation o/ traditional cultural -alues t#at 1enIamin s&o!e o/4 And )ecause t#e museum is t#at institution w#ic# was /ounded u&on Iust
t#ose -alues, w#ose Io) it is to sustain t#ose -alues, it #as /aced a crisis o/ considera)le &ro&ortions4 One s%m&tom o/ t#at crisis is t#e wa% in w#ic# our museums, one a/ter anot#er, around
*+<9, a)dicated t#eir res&onsi)ilit% toward contem&orar% artistic &ractice and turned wit# nostalgia to t#e art t#at #ad &re-iousl% )een relegated to t#eir storerooms4 Re-isionist art #istor% soon
)egan to )e -indicated )% Fre-elations0 o/ t#e ac#ie-ements o/ academic artists and minor /igures o/ all !inds4
1% t#e mid-*+<9s anot#er, more serious s%m&tom o/ t#e museum0s crisis a&&eared, t#e one ; #a-e alread% mentioned6 t#e -arious attem&ts to recu&erate t#e auratic4 T#ese attem&ts are
mani/est in two, contradictor% &#enomena6 t#e resurgence o/ e(&ressionist &ainting and t#e trium&# o/ &#otogra&#%-as-art4 T#e museum #as em)raced )ot# o/ t#ese &#enomena wit# eKual
ent#usiasm, not to sa% Joraciousness
Little, ; t#in!, needs to )e said a)out t#e return to a &ainting o/ &ersonal e(&ression4 .e see it e-er%w#ere we turn4 T#e mar!et&lace is glutted wit# it4 ;t Comes in all guises H &attern &ainting,
new-image &ainting, neoconstructi-ism, neoe(&ressionismN it is &luralist to )e sure4 1ut wit#in its indi-idualism, t#is &ainting is utterl% con/ormist on one &oint6 its #atred o/ &#otogra&#%4
.riting a mani/esto-li!e te(t /or t#e catalogue o/ #er American &aintin%: ,he ei%hties H t#at oracular e(#i)ition staged in t#e /all o/ *+<+ to demonstrate t#e miraculous resurrection o/
1=< Do,.as )ri#0
,he &hoto%raphic Acti.ity of &ostmodernism
&ainting H 1ar)ara Rose told us6
T#e serious &ainters o/ t#e eig#ties are an e(tremel% #eterogeneous grou& H some a)stract, some re&resentational4 1ut t#e% are united on a su//icient num)er o/ critical issues t#at it is &ossi)le
to isolate t#em as a grou&4 T#e% are, in t#e /irst &lace, dedicated to t#e &reser-ation o/ &ainting as a transcendental #ig# art, and an art o/ uni-ersal as o&&osed to local or to&ical signi/icance4
T#eir aest#etic, w#ic# s%nt#esiGes tactile wit# o&tical Kualities, de/ines itsel/ in conscious o&&osition to &#otogra&#% and all /orms o/ mec#anical re&roduction w#ic# see! to de&ri-e t#e art
wor! o/ its uniKue Faura04 ;t is, in /act, t#e en#ancement o/ t#is aura, t#roug# a -ariet% o/ means, t#at &ainting now sel/-consciousl% intends H eit#er )% em&#asiGing t#e artist0s #and, or )%
creating #ig#l% indi-idual -isionar% images t#at cannot )e con/used eit#er wit# realit% itsel/ or wit# one anot#er4 O
T#at t#is !ind o/ &ainting s#ould so clearl% see mec#anical re&roduction as t#e enem% is s%m&tomatic o/ t#e &ro/ound t#reat to in#erited ideas @t#e onl% ideas !nown to t#is &aintingA &osed )%
t#e &#otogra&#ic acti-it% o/ &ostmodernism4 1ut in t#is case it is also s%m&tomatic o/ a more limited and internecine t#reat6 t#e one &osed to &ainting w#en &#otogra&#% itsel/ suddenl% acKuires
an aura4 ow it0s not onl% a Kuestion o/ ideolog%N now it0s a real com&etition /or t#e acKuisition )udget and wall s&ace o/ t#e museum4
1ut #ow is it t#at &#otogra&#% #as suddenl% #ad con/erred u&on it an auraD How #as t#e &lenitude o/ co&ies )een reduced to t#e scarcit% o/ originalsD And #ow do we !now t#e aut#entic
/rom its re&roductionD iO
Enter t#e connoisseur4 1ut not t#e connoisseur o/ &#otogra&#%, o/ w#om t#e t%&e is .alter 1enIamin, or closer to us, Roland 1art#es4 eit#er 1enIamin0s Fs&ar! o/ c#ance0 nor 1art#es0s
Ft#ird meaning0 would guarantee &#otogra&#%0s &lace in t#e museum4 T#e connoisseur needed /or t#is Io) is t#e old-/as#ioned art #istorian wit# #is c#emical anal%ses and, more im&ortantl%, #is
st%listic anal%ses4 To aut#enticate &#otogra&#% reKuires all t#e mac#iner% o/ art #istor% and museolog%, wit# a /ew additions, and more t#an a /ew sleig#ts o/ #and4 To )egin, t#ere is, o/ course,
t#e incontesta)le rarit% o/ age, t#e -intage &rint4 Certain tec#niKues, &a&er t%&es, and c#emicals #a-e &assed out o/ use and t#us t#e age o/ a &rint can easil% )e esta)lis#ed4 1ut t#is !ind o/
certi/ia)le rarit% is not w#at interests me, nor its &arallel in contem&orar% &#otogra&#ic &ractice, t#e limited edition4 .#at interests me is t#e su)Iecti-iGation o/ &#otogra&#%, t#e wa%s in w#ic#
t#e connoisseurs#i& o/ t#e &#otogra&#0s Fs&ar! o/ c#ance0 is con-erted into a connoisseurs#i& o/ t#e &#otogra&#0s st%le4 $or now, it seems, we can detect t#e &#otogra&#er0s #and a/ter all,
e(ce&t o/ course t#at it is #is e%e, #is uniKue -ision4 @Alt#oug# it can also )e #is #andN one need onl% listen to t#e &artisans o/ &#otogra&#ic su)Iecti-it% descri)e t#e m%stical ritual &er/ormed )%
t#e &#otogra&#er in #is dar!room4A
; realiGe o/ course t#at in raising t#e Kuestion o/ su)Iecti-it% ; am re-i-ing t#e central de)ate in &#otogra&#%0s aest#etic #istor%, t#at )etween t#e straig#t and t#e mani&ulated &rint, or t#e
man% -ariations on t#at t#eme4 1ut * do so #ere in order to &oint out t#at t#e recu&eration o/ t#e aura /or &#otc a&#% would in /act
1==
su)sume under t#e )anner o/ su)Iecti-it% all o/ &#otogra&#%, t#e &#otogra&#% w#ose source is t#e #uman mind and t#e &#otogra&#% w#ose source is t#e world around us, t#e most t#oroug#l%
mani&ulated &#otogra&#ic /ictions and t#e most /ait#/ul transcri&tions o/ t#e real, t#e directorial and t#e documentar%, t#e mirrors and t#e windows, )amera Work in its in/anc%, 6ife in its
#e%da%4 1ut t#ese are onl% t#e terms o/ st%le and mode o/ t#e agreed-u&on s&ectrum o/ &#otogra&#%Oasart4 T#e restoration o/ t#e aura, t#e conseKuent collecting and e(#i)iting, does not sto&
t#ere4 ;t is e(tended to t#e carte-de--isite, t#e /as#ion &late, t#e ad-ertising s#ot, t#e anon%mous sna& or &olaroid4 At t#e origin o/ e-er% one t#ere is an Artist and t#ere/ore eac# can /ind its &lace
on t#e s&ectrum o/ su)Iecti-it%4 $or it #as long )een a common&lace o/ art #istor% t#at realism and e(&ressionism are onl% matters o/ degree, matters, t#at is, o/ st%le4
T#e &#otogra&#ic acti-it% o/ &ostmodernism o&erates, as we mig#t e(&ect, in com&licit% wit# t#ese modes o/ &#otogra&#%-as-art, )ut it does so onl% in order to su)-ert and e(ceed t#em4
And it does so &recisel% in relation to t#e aura, not, #owe-er, to recu&erate it, )ut to dis&lace it, to s#ow t#at it too is now onl% an as&ect o/ t#e co&%, not t#e original4 A grou& o/ %oung artists
wor!ing wit# &#otogra&#% #a-e addressed &#otogra&#%0s claims to originalit%, s#owing t#ose claims /or t#e /iction t#e% are, s#owing &#otogra&#% to )e alwa%s a re&resentation, alwa%s-alread%-
seen4 T#eir images are &urloined, con/iscated, a&&ro&riated, stolen. ;n t#eir wor!, t#e original cannot )e located, is alwa%s de/erredN e-en t#e sel/ w#ic# mig#t #a-e generated an original is
s#own to )e itsel/ a co&%4
;n a c#aracteristic gesture, S#errie Le-ine )egins a statement a)out #er wor! wit# an anecdote t#at is -er% /amiliar6
Since t#e door was onl% #al/ closed, ; got a Ium)led -iew o/ m% mot#er and /at#er on t#e )ed, one on to& o/ t#e ot#er4 Morti/ied, #urt, #orror-struc!, ; #ad t#e #ate/ul sensation o/ #a-ing
&laced m%sel/ )lindl% and com&letel% in unwort#% #ands4 ;nstincti-el% and wit#out e//ort, ; di-ided m%sel/, so to s&ea!, into two &ersons, o/ w#om one, t#e real, t#e genuine one, continued
on #er own account, w#ile t#e ot#er, a success/ul imitation o/ t#e /irst, was delegated to #a-e relations wit# t#e world4 M% /irst sel/ remains at a distance, im&assi-e, ironical, and watc#ing4
ot onl% do we recogniGe t#is as a descri&tion o/ somet#ing we alread% !now H t#e Primal scene H )ut our recognition mig#t e(tend e-en /urt#er to t#e Mora-ia no-el /rom w#ic# it #as )een
li/ted4 $or Le-ine0s auto)iogra&#ical statement is onl% a string o/ Kuotations &il/ered /rom ot#ersN and i/ we mig#t t#in! t#is a strange wa% o/ writing a)out one0s own wor!ing met#ods, t#en
&er#a&s we s#ould turn to t#e wor! it descri)es4
At a recent e(#i)ition, Le-ine s#owed si( &#otogra&#s o/ a nude %out#4 T#e% were sim&l% re&#otogra&#ed /rom t#e /amous series )% Edward .eston o/ #is %oung Son eil, a-aila)le to
Le-ine as a &oster &u)lis#ed )% t#e .it!in 2aller%4 According to t#e co&%rig#t law, t#e images )elong to .eston, or now to t#e .eston estate4 ; t#in!, to )e /air, #owe-er, we mig#t Iust as well
gi-e t#em to Pra(iteles, /or i/ it
1=@ Do,.as )ri#0
,he &hoto%raphic A ctii Gity 2f &2st?75odern8sn8
is t#e ima%e t#at can )e owned, t#en surel% t#ese )elong to classical scul&ture, w#ic# would &ut t#em in t#e &u)lic domain4 Le-ine #as said t#at, w#en s#e s#owed #er &#otogra&#s to a /riend,
#e remar!ed t#at t#e% onl% made #im want to see t#e originals4 FO/ course,0 s#e re&lied, Fand t#e originals ma!e %ou want to see t#at little )o%, )ut w#en %ou see t#e )o%, t#e art is gone40 $or t#e
desire t#at is initiated )% t#at re&resentation does not come to closure around t#at little )o%, is not at all satis/ied )% #im4 T#e desire o/ re&resentation e(ists onl% inso/ar as it ne-er )e /ul/illed,
inso/ar as t#e original alwa%s )e de/erred4 ;t is onl% in t#e a)sence o/ t#e original t#at re&resentation ma% ta!e &lace4 And re&resentation ta!es &lace )ecause it is alwa%s alread% t#ere in t#e
world as re&resentation4 ;t was, o/ course, .eston #imsel/ w#o said t#at Ft#e &#otogra&# must )e -isualiGed in /ull )e/ore t#e e(&osure is made04 Le-ine #as ta!en t#e master at #is word and in
so doing #as s#own #im w#at #e reall% meant4 T#e a priori .eston #ad in mind was not reall% in #is mind at allN it was in t#e world, and .eston onl% co&ied it4
T#is /act is &er#a&s e-en more crucial in t#ose series )% Le-ine w#ere t#at a priori image is not so o)-iousl% con/iscated /rom #ig# culture H )% w#ic# ; intend )ot# .eston and Pra(iteles H
)ut /rom t#e world itsel/, w#ere nature &oses as t#e antit#esis o/ re&resentation4 T#us t#e images w#ic# Le-ine #as cut out o/ )oo!s o/ &#otogra&#s )% Andreas $eininger and Elliot Porter s#ow
scenes o/ nature t#at are utterl% /amiliar4 T#e% suggest t#at Roland 1art#es0s descri&tion o/ t#e tense o/ &#otogra&#% as t#e F#a-ing )een t#ere0 )e inter&reted in a new wa%4 T#e &resence t#at
suc# &#otogra&#s #a-e /or us is t#e &resence o/ de9a .u5 nature as alread% #a-ing )een seen, nature as re&resentation4
;/ Le-ine0s &#otogra&#s occu&% a &lace on t#at s&ectrum o/ &#otogra&#%-as-art, it would )e at t#e /art#est reac#es o/ straig#t &#otogra&#%, not onl% )ecause t#e &#otogra&#s s#e a&&ro&riates
o&erate wit#in t#at mode )ut )ecause s#e does not mani&ulate #er &#otogra&#s in an% wa%N s#e merel%, and literall%, takes &#otogra&#s4 At t#e o&&osite end o/ t#at s&ectrum is t#e &#otogra&#%
w#ic# is sel/-consciousl% com&osed, mani&ulated, /ictionaliGed, t#e so-called directorial mode, in w#ic# we /ind suc# auteurs o/ &#otogra&#% as Duane Mic#aels and Les 'rims4 T#e strateg% o/
t#is mode is to use t#e a&&arent -eracit% o/ &#otogra&#% against itsel/, creating one0s /ictions t#roug# t#e a&&earance o/ a seamless realit% into w#ic# #as )een wo-en a narrati-e dimension4
Cind% S#erman0s &#otogra&#s /unction wit#in t#is mode, )ut onl% in order to e(&ose an unwanted dimension o/ t#at /iction, /or t#e /iction S#erman discloses is t#e /iction o/ t#e sel/4 Her
&#otogra&#s s#ow t#at t#e su&&osed autonomous and unitar% sel/ out o/ w#ic# t#ose ot#er Fdirectors0 would create t#eir /ictions is itsel/ not#ing ot#er t#an a discontinuous series o/
re&resentations, co&ies, /a!es4
S#erman0s &#otogra&#s are all sel/-&ortraits in w#ic# s#e a&&ears in disguise enacting a drama w#ose &articulars are wit##eld4 T#is am)iguit% o/ narrati-e &arallels t#e am)iguit% o/ t#e sel/
t#at is )ot# actor in t#e narrati-e and creator o/ it4 $or t#oug# S#erman is literall% sel/-created in t#ese wor!s, s#e is created in t#e image o/ alread%-!nown /eminine stereot%&esN #er sel/ is
t#ere
*
ore understood as contingent u&on t#e &ossi)ilities &ro-ided )% t#e culture 4n w#ic# S#erman
A=B
&artici&ates, not )% some inner im&ulse4 As suc#, #er &#otogra&#s res ersc t#e terms o/ art and auto)iogra&#%4 T#e% use art not to re-eal t#e artist0s true sel/, )ut to s#ow t#e sel/ as an imaginar%
construct4 T#ere is no real Cind% S#erman in t#ese &#otogra&#sN t#ere are onl% t#e guises s#e assumes4 And s#e does not create t#ese guisesN s#e sim&l% c#ooses t#em in t#e wa% t#at an% o/ us
do4 T#e &ose o/ atit#ors#i & is dis&ensed wit# not onl% t#roug# t#e mec#anical means o/ ma!ing t#e image, )ut t#roug# t#e e//acement o/ an% continuous, essential &ersona or e-en recogniGa)le
-isage in t#e scenes de&icted4
T#at as&ect o/ our culture w#ic# is most t#oroug#l% mani&ulati-e o/ t#e roles we &la% is, o/ course, mass ad-ertising, w#ose &#otogra&#ic strateg% is to disguise t;-ic directorial mode as a
/orm o/ documentar%4 Ric#ard Prince steals t#e most /ran! and )anal o/ t#ese images, w#ic# register, in t#e conte(t o/ &#otogra&#%-as-art, as a !ind o/ s#oc!4 1ut ultimatel% t#eir rat#er )rutal
/amiliarit% gi-es wa% to strangeness, as an unintended and unwanted dimension o/ /iction rein-ades t#em4 1% isol4sting, enlarging, and Iu(ta&osing /ragments o/ commercial images, Prince
&oints to t#eir in-asion )% t#ese g#osts o/ /iction4 $ocusing directl% on t#e commodit% /etis#, using t#e master tool o/ commodit% /etis#ism o/ our time, Prince0s re&#otogra&#ed &#otogra&#s
ta!e on a Hitc#coc!ian dimension6 t#e commodit% )ecomesO O ne4 ;t #as, we mig#t sa%, acKuired an aura, onl% now it is a /unction not o/ &resence #ut o/ a)sence, se-ered /rom an origin, /rom
an originator, /rom aut#enticit%4 ;n our time, t#e aura #as )ecome onl% a &resence, w#ic# is to sa%, a g#ost4
Notes
*4 Douglas Crim&, FPictures0, 2ctober5 E @*+<+A, <>HEE4
54 .alter 1enIamin, FT#e wor! o/ art in t#e age o/ mec#aniLal rc&nidOction, in 'lluminations5 transl4 Harr% So#n, Sc#oc!en 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+?+4 &4 55*4
#. .alter 1enIamin, FA s#ort #istor% o/ &#otogra&#%0, transl4 Stanles Mitc#ell, -creen5 **,
*@*+<5A, *E4
=4 'bid.5 *+4
!. 'bid.5 <4
?4 1enIamin, F.or! o/ art0, &4 55*4
<4 1enIamin, FS#ort #istor%0, 5@*4
E4 'bid.5 5*4
*. 1ar)ara Rose4 An8erica5t &aintin%: ,he ei%hties5 T#oren-Sidnc% Press, 1u//4ilo4 ew Yor!, *+<+, n4&4
*94 T#e urgenc% o/ t#ese Kuestions /irst )ecame clear tO me a.. ; read t#e cd!orial &re&ared )% Annette Mic#elson /or 2ctober5 O4 A S&ecial ;ssue o# P#otogra&#44- @l+OEA, ,Hi4
**4 S#errIe le-ine, un&u)lis#ed statement, ; +E@*4
L
&ostmodernism in the Visual Arts
12 1 &ostmodernism
in the Visual Arts:
A >uestion of ends
Pa,. )ro1t/er
Introd,ction
T#e Kuestion o/ &ostmodernism in t#e -isual arts #as )een dominated )% a num)er o/ t#emes, nota)l% t#e idea t#at art, its #istor%, and its t#eor%, #a-e come to an end0 and t#at &ostmodernism is
largel% t#e &roduct o/ a /orce e(ternal to art H namel%, t#e mar!et4 ;t mig#t )e argued t#at, /or t#e most &art, t#ese t#emes #a-e )een set /ort# and recei-ed wit# rat#er more ent#usiasm t#an
understanding @t#e wor!s o/ Jictor 1urgin are &er#a&s a case in &oint #ereA4 Howe-er, in t#e writings o/ t#e &#iloso&#er and art critic Art#ur Danto, t#e t#emes are lin!ed in a more co#erent and
incisi-e wa% as &art o/ an interesting discourse concerning t#e end o/ modernit% in t#e -isual arts4 ;n t#is c#a&ter, t#ere/ore, ; s#all use a critiKue o/ Danto0s t#eor% as a means o/ answering t#e
Kuestion o/ &ostmodernism in t#e -isual arts4 S&eci/icall%, in Part ;, ; will outline Danto0s t#eor% at lengt#, and will argue t#at it is not &#iloso&#icall% decisi-e4 ;n Parts ;; and ;;;, ; will go on to
o//er a more &lausi)le alternati-e reading o/ modernit% and &ostmodernit%N and in Part ;J, will o//er a /inal re/utation o/ Danto0s claim t#at @t#roug# )eing rendered &ost-#istorical in t#e
&ostmodern eraA art #as come to an end4
T#e &remise o/ Danto0s argument concerning t#e end o/ art is t#at t#e ad-ent o/ cinematogra&#% &reci&itated a traumatic crisis in t#e art world4 T#is crisis consisted in t#e /act t#at, w#ilst art #ad
alwa%s ta!en itsel/ to )e essentiall% )ound wit# imitating t#e world, it was now recognised t#at cinematogra&#%0 could ac#ie-e t#is in a more total wa%4 Twentiet#-centur% modernist art,
t#ere/ore, turned towards a
$rom 1o%ne, R4 and Rattansi, A4 @edsA, &ost010dernis7n and -ociety5 M FOmillan Education, 1asingsto!e:St Martin0s Press, ew Yor!, *++9, &&4 5,<>+4
1@1
!ind o/ sel/-interrogation4 As Danto &uts it,
;n its great &#iloso&#ical &#ase, /rom a)out *+9> to a)out *+?=, modern art undertoo! a massi-e in-estigation into its own nature and essence4 ;t set out to see! a /orm o/ itsel/ so &ure as art
t#at not#ing li!e w#at caused it to underta!e t#is in-estigation in t#e /irst &lace could e-er #a&&en to it again4 @Danto, *+E<, &4 5*<A
T#is inter&retation is, according to Danto, con/irmed )% t#e /act t#at modernist mo-ements seem to )e in &er&etual con/lict wit# eac# ot#er4 Again, in #is words,
T#ere #a-e )een more &roIected de/initions o/ art, eac# identi/ied wit# a di//erent mo-ement in art, in t#e si( or se-en decades o/ t#is modern era, t#an in t#e si( or se-en centuries t#at
&receded it4 Eac# de/inition was accom&anied )% a se-ere condemnation o/ e-er%t#ing else, as not art4 @Danto, *+E<, &4 5*<A
On t#ese terms, t#en, t#e discontinuit% and con/lict )etween modern mo-ements s#ould )e ta!en as signi/%ing t#e /act t#at all were in-ol-ed in a searc# /or art0s essence, and t#at all were
o//ering di//erent, mutuall% e(clusi-e, answers4
ow /or Danto, t#is searc# ends at a Kuite s&eci/ic &oint H namel% in .ar#ol0s Po& Art, and in &articular t#e e(#i)ition at t#e Sta)le 2aller% in *+?= w#ere t#e in/amous F1rillo 1o(es0 were
s#own /or t#e /irst time4 Since .ar#ol0s 1o(es were ostensi)l% indistinguis#a)le /rom real 1rillo cartons, t#e Kuestion o/ w#at di//erentiates artwor!s /rom real t#ings was &osed in t#e most
na!ed and unam)iguous /as#ion, or, as Danto #as it, Fits true &#iloso&#ical /orm04 And t#e answer emerged as /ollows4 ;t is onl% an atmos&#ere o/ t#eor% w#ic# di//erentiates artwor!s /rom
ot#er t#ings4 T#e essence o/ art does not consist in some &erce&ti)le &ro&ert% or set o/ &ro&erties, )ut rat#er in art0s institutional setting4 1roadl% s&ea!ing, t#e artwor! is w#at t#e artist
designates as suc#, on t#e )asis o/ some t#eor% a)out art4
ow, t#is answer H and its reiteration in minimal and @one &resumesA conce&tual art K e//ecti-el% )roug#t t#e internal logic o/ modernist art0s Kuasi-&#iloso&#ical Kuestioning to /ul/ilment4
1ut t#is created a #iatus4 As Danto &uts it, Ft#e institutions o/ t#e art world continued to )elie-e in H indeed to e(&ect H )rea!t#roug#s, and t#e galleries, t#e collectors, t#e art magaGines, t#e
museums and /inall% t#e cor&orations t#at #ad )ecome t#e maIor &atrons o/ t#e age were also awaiting &ro&#ets and re-elations0 @Danto, *+E<, &4 59>A4 Danto0s &oint, t#en, is t#at t#e radical
im&ro-ements o/ modernist wor! #ad )% t#e late *+?9s and *+<9s /ound a mar!et, and t#ence created a demand /or art t#at was inno-ati-e and new4 1ut (-#at came ne(t was a mere &luralism H
a re&etition or re/inement o/ &roceeding st%les @)e t#e% re&resentational or a)stractA and a willingness to acce&t t#ese on t#eir own terms, rat#er t#an on a &artisan )asis o/ mutual e(clusi-it%4
;ndeed, in t#e terms o/ Danto0s argument t#is is an entirel% logical de-elo&ment, in so /ar as once modernist art #as wor!ed t#roug# to and declared art0s essence, t#ere is not#ing new /or art to
do4 ;t can onl% rewor! old ground4 T#e ad-ent and trium&# o/ eo-E(&ressionism
1@9
1@2 Pa,. )ro1t/er &ost5uodernis5n in the Visual Arts
in t#e *+E9s is sim&l% a s&ecial case o/ t#is4 According to Danto, FeoE(&ressionism raised, as art, no &#iloso&#ical Kuestion at all, and indeed it could raise none t#at would not )e some -ariant
on t#e one raised in its &er/ected /orm )% .ar#ol0 @Danto, *+E<, &4 59+A4
eo-E(&ressionism, t#en, is to )e seen as an e(aggerated and em&t% res&onse to t#e art mar!et0s demand /or inno( ation4 ;t &ro-ides, as it were, a s#ow o/ newness, )ut in terms o/ strict
artistic criteria, can onl%0 )e an in/lated re&etition o/ w#at #as gone )e/ore4
T#e central su)stanti-e claims o/ Danto0s &osition, t#en, are t#ese4 ;n res&onse to t#e usur&ing o/ its mimetic /unctions )% cinematogra&#%, modernist art )ecame energised )% an internal
Flogic0 necessaril% &rogressing towards t#e re-elation o/ art0s real essence H an essence t#at would not )e assimila)le in terms o/ ot#er /orms o/ communication4 ;n .ar#ol0s Po& Art, t#is
&rogression issues in its logical culmination4 T#e essence o/ art is, in e//ect, declared as institutional4 T#is sel/-congruence o/ art wit# its own essence is t#e culmination o/ art #istor%4 A/ter it
t#ere can )e not#ing new in a distincti-el% artistic sense4 On t#ese terms, in ot#er words, &ostmodern art is essentiall% post-historical. Art, in e//ect, #as come to an end4
Ha-ing outlined Danto0s t#eor%, ; s#all now ma!e some o)ser-ations concerning its strengt#s, and some &#iloso&#ical &oints concerning its wea!nesses4 ;ts strengt# lies in two )asic
ac#ie-ements4 $irst, Danto #as &in&ointed a crucial /act H namel% t#at in t#e modern e&oc#, art &ractice #as )een ta!en to its lo%ical limit4 $or once w#at counts as art is determined )% artistic
intention alone Hrat#er t#an )% &ossession o/ s&eci/ia)le &#enomenal c#aracteristics H t#en we #a-e reac#ed a &oint )e%ond w#ic# t#ere can )e no new kinds o/ artwor!4 An%t#ing and e-er%t#ing
is admissi)le in t#e conte(t o/ artistic t#eor% and intention4 T#e second strengt# o/ Danto0s t#eor% is t#at t#is /irst &oint ena)les #im to e(&lain e(actl% w#% &ostmodern art is /undamentall%
em&t% and a &roduct o/ mar!et /orces4 Rat#er t#an sim&l% declaring it as regressi-e or t#e result o/ a general cultural Fslac!ening0 @L%otardA, #e &ro-ides a model w#erein t#e origins o/ t#e
slac!ening can )e traced to art0s &rogression towards logical e(#austion at t#e end o/ t#e modernist era4 Postmodern art is em&t% )ecause it is &ost-#istorical4 Howe-er, w#ilst Danto t#ence
o//ers a su&er/iciall% &lausi)le e(&lanation o/ t#e origins and nature o/ &ostmodernism, it is not, ; t#in!, an ultimatel% satis/%ing one4 $or e-en i/ we allow Danto0s claim t#at twentiet#-centur%
modernism consists /undamentall% in a necessar% &rogression towards t#e logical limit o/ art, t#ere is no reason w#% t#e attainment o/ t#is limit s#ould )e regarded H as Danto clearl% does H as a
restriction u&on t#e creati-it% and #istorical de-elo&ment o/ art4 .#at is lac!ing #ere is an argument to esta)lis# t#at creati-it%0 and artistic ad-ancement are necessaril% connected to t#e #a-ing
o/ new ideas a)out (-#at counts as t#e essence o/ art4 $or e(am&le, we mig#t not count somet#ing as creati(e and Kualit% art unless it does em)od% some new and no-el /eature, )ut t#is /eature
does not ha.e to ta!e t#e /orm o/ an em)odiment o/ new ideas a)out w#at !ind o/ item s#ould )e counted as art4 ;t could, rat#er, ta!e t#e /orm o/ a new st%le o/ #andling, or t#e re/inement o/ an
e(isting srN=e to an o&timum degree4 ;ndeed, it is t#e &attern and structure o/ Iust t#ese so4 ot de-elo&ments
1@8
w#ic# are t#e !e% elements il-i t#e #istor% o/ art4 T#e /act t#at, on Danto0s re4idmig modernist art /i(es @-in a &articular sort o/ inno-ation )ound u& -O it) Kuasg &#iloso&#ical Kuestioning, could
sim&l% )e regarded as t#e !ind o/ e(tended detour /rom t#e standard &reoccu&ations o/ art4 ;ndeed t#e /act t#at t#is detour leads to t#e logical limits o/ art acts onl% as a restriction on t#e sco&e
o/ art w#ic# is e(&licitl% orientated towards t#e Kuestion o/ w#at counts as art4 On t#ese terms, in ot#er words, t#e logical limit reac#ed )% modernist art does not e(#aust t#e &ossi)ilities o/
artistic creati-it% and ad-ancement as suc#4 Hence, (Oe do not hai101 on &#iloso&#ical grounds to regard &ostnodern art as essentiall%0 &ost-#istorical4
T#e second maIor area o/ di//icult% raised )% Danto0s a&&roac# concerns #is -er% reading o/ twentiet#-centur% modernism as a !ind o/ Kuasi-&#iloso&#ical endea( our4 $or one must as!
w#et#er t#ere is an%t#ing w#ic# compels stic# a readingD As ; inter&ret #im, Danto mig#t o//er us two &utati-el% com&elling reasons4 $irst, t#e /act t#at modernist mo-ements o//er, in e//ect,
di//erent and mutuall%0 e(clusise de/initions o/ w#at counts as art H and #ence em)od% ri-al &#iloso&#ical -iew&oints4 ow in relation to t#is, w#ilst it is true t#at t#e twentiet# centur% #as seen
more con/licting &#iloso&#ical t#eories o/ art t#an an% ot#er, t#ese #a-e generall% )een &ut /orward )% &#iloso&#ers rat#er t#an artists4 ;ndeed, w#ilst man% modernist artists #a-e reIected t#e
worth o/ traditional art in relation to modern e(&erience, -er% /ew #a-e claimed t#at it H or t#e wor! o/ ri-al modern mo-ements
H s#ould not )e regarded as art at all4 .#at we /ind, rat#er, is a willingness to e(&and t#e /ield o/ art, rat#er t#an to restrict it to one st%le or one !ind o/ Osrti/act4 Danto, in ot#er words, w#oll%
ignores t#e crucial )onds o/ &ractical and t#eoretical continuity w#ic# lin! modern mo-ements4 ow, t#e second reason w#ic# Danto mig#t argue as Iusti/%ing #is reading o/ modernism
concerns t#e traditional su&&osed /unction o/ art4 He claims t#at )ecause t#e ad-ent o/ cinematogra&#% /inall% -anKuis#ed art0s mimetic /unction, art was led to a necessar% &rogression towards
t#e disco-er% o/ its essence4 T#is, #owe-er, ma!es some &rett% sim&listic assum&tions a)out t#e li/e w#ic# art traditionall% &la%s in our culture4 ;t is certainl%0 true K as Aristotle noted H t#at
mimesis seems to #a-e an intrinsic /ascination /or #uman )eings, )ut one mig#t argue t#at t#e /ascination wit# mimesis /or its own sa!e #as rarel% )een regarded as art0s definiti.e /unction4
Mimesis, #as, rat#er, )een seen as a means to t#e end o/ -arious salutar% e//ects H suc# as moral im&ro-ement, or t#e e(&ression o/ /eeling4 Hence, one mig#t see t#e im&act o/ &#otogra&#% and
cinema not as &reci&itating a crisis o/ &#iloso&#ical Kuestioning, )ut rat#er as a li)eration Artists were now /ree to orientate t#eir sO @-ir! towards salutar% e//ects t#at eluded more con-entional
tec#niKues o/ re&resentation4
; am arguing, t#en, t#at Danto0s a&&roac# to t#e Ktlestion o/ twentiet#-centur% modernism and &ostmodernism is not &#iloso&#icallO decisi44e4 li-i &articular, #e o-erloo!s &ossi)le
dimensions o/ &ractical and t#eoretical continuit% and salutar%0 e//ects w#ic# mig#t lin! modernist and, indeed, &ostrnodern imiA0Oe;(ient> toget#er4 ;n t#e /ollowing section o/ t#is c#a&ter,
t#ere/ore, ; s#all continue m% critiKue o/ Danto )% constructing an alternati-e #istorical inter&retation w#ic# ta!es /ull account o/ t#e dimension o/ continuit%4
1@: Pa,. )ro1t/er &ostmodernism in the Visual Arts
II
Modernist art in t#e twentiet# centur% #as mo-ed in two dominant directions4 On t#e one #and in, sa%, $au-ism, $uturism, E(&ressionism and Surrealism, we /ind a re.isionary a&&roac#
towards re&resentation w#ic# see!s to rea&&ro&riate it /or t#e needs o/ modern e(&erience4 On t#e ot#er #and, in, sa%, Su&rematism, eoPlasticism, and A)stract E(&ressionism, we /ind a
tendency towards &urel% a)stract /orm4 ow, t#ese two tendencies are lin!ed in two crucial res&ects4 $irst, -irtuall% all o/ t#em em)od% to greater or lesser degree a de)t to CeGannesKue and
Cu)ist /orm or s&ace4 T#at is to sa%, t#e% em&lo% a /ormal -oca)ular% w#ic# tends to reduce /orm to more )asic geometric s#a&e, and:or w#ic# distri)utes suc# /orms in a #%&er-&ictorial s&ace H
i4e4 one w#ic# accentuates t#e two-dimensionalit% o/ t#e &icture &lane, and diminis#es t#e sense o/ t#ree-dimensional illusion4 Hence, w#ilst modernist mo-ements tend in di//erent st%listic
directions, t#e% do so on t#e )asis o/ a root -oca)ular% deri-ed /rom CeGanne and Cu)ism4 ow alt#oug# t#is -oca)ular% is one t#at de&arts /rom, and to some degree su)-erts, con-entional
/orms o/ re&resentation, it is not one w#ic# radicall% su)-erts t#e notion o/ #ig# art, as suc#4 Picasso and 1raKue0s Cu)ism, /or e(am&le, rea&&ro&riates and relegitimises traditional genres suc#
as t#e still li/e, t#e nude, and t#e &ortrait, in terms o/ an aggressi-e su)Iecti-it%4 ;ndeed, e-en in Cu)ist collage H w#ere alien &#%sical material is incor&orated into t#e wor! H suc# material is
t#oroug#l% mediated4 An% o&&ositional sense o/ its &#%sical realit% is lost wit#in t#e totalit% o/ t#e o-erall artistic com&osition4 Again, in t#e case o/ Surrealism0s dislocations o/ /orm, t#ese do
not su)-ert art as suc#, )ut rat#er draw on t#e &recedent o/ Romantic and S%m)olist $antas%, in order to e-o!e re&ressed de&t#s o/ su)Iecti-it%4 T#e /unction o/ Cu)ist s&ace, in ot#er words, is
not to &osit an antit#esis to #ig# art, )ut rat#er to re/ocus it in terms o/ a li)erating a//irmation o/ t#e su)Iect4 ;t is t#is a//irmati-e dimension w#ic# &ro-ides t#e second and most im&ortant )ond
)etween twentiet#-centur% modernists4 ;t e-en encom&asses t#ose American A)stract E(&ressionists w#o radicall% )rea! wit# Cu)ist s&ace a/ter *+=>4 1arnett ewman, /or e(am&le, declared
t#at F;nstead o/ ma!ing cathedrals out o/ C#rist, man, or ]li/eR, we are ma!ing it out o/ oursel-es, out o/ our own /eelings0 @ewman in C#i&&, *+?E, &4 !!#?. Com&are t#is wit# t#e /ollowing
set o/ statements6
.#en we in-ented Cu)ism, we #ad no intention o/ in-enting Cu)ism4 .e sim&l% wanted to e(&ress w#at was in us4 @Picasso in C#i&&, *+?E, &4 5*9A
.it#out muc# intention, !nowledge, or t#oug#t, ; #ad /ollowed an irresisti)le desire to re&resent &ro/ound s&iritualit%0, religion and tenderness4 @Emil olde in C#i&&, *+?E, &4 *=?A
.e CCC create a sort o/ emoti-e am)ience, see!ing )% intuition t#e s%m&at#ies and t#e
lin!s w#ic# e(ist )etween t#e e(terior @concreteA scene and t#e interior @a)stractA
emotion4 @8m)erto 1occiono in C#i&&, *+?E, &4 5+<A
T#e trul% modern artist is aware o/ a)straction in an emotion o/ )eaut% Pier Mondrian in C#i&&, *+?E, &4 ,5*A
@$
w#at interests me is t#e intensit% o/ a &ersonalit% trans&osed directl% into t#e s-or!N t#e man and #is -italit%N CCC w#at manner #e !nows #ow to gat#er sensation, emotion, int* a lacewor! o/
words and sentiments4 @Tristan TGara in C#i&&, *+?E, &4 ,E<A
On t#ese terms, t#en, ewman0s declaration t#at #e and #is contem&oraries are ma!ing Fcat#edrals0 o/ Four own /eelings0 is a statement t#at ca&tures a &ro/ound t#eme running t#roug#out
modernist art H namel%, t#at t#e artwor! recei-es its ultimate aut#enti/lcation as a -e#icle /or e(&ression o/ feelin%. .#at sort o/ /eeling is e(&ressed #ere -aries @as t#e /oregoing statements
s#owA /rom artist to artist4 ;n some, it is )ound u& wit# aest#etic e(&erience and religious sentimentsN in ot#ers, it is lin!ed to t#e artist0s a//ecti-e res&onse to tec#nological c#ange and 8to&ian
&olitical ideals4 1ut w#at all t#ese #a-e in common is t#e -iew t#at w#at legitimises modern art, and gi-es it its wort#, is some !ind o/ ele.atin% e(&ressi-e e//ect em)odied in its creation and
rece&tion4 ; s#all #erea/ter call t#is -iew t#e Flegitimising discourse0 o/ art4
T#ere are now two crucial &oints to )e made4 $irst Acontra DantoA /ar /rom modernist art mo-ements )eing engaged in a !ind o/ war )etween mutuall% e(clusi-e de/initions o/ art, t#ere
e(ists a sur&rising degree o/ continuit% )etween t#em at t#e le-el o/ )ot# &#enomenal a&&earance and t#eoretical Iusti/ication4 Second, t#e legitimising discourse o/ modernist art also gi-es it
continuit% wit# more traditional idioms4 $or since t#e Renaissance at least, t#e raison d1Ntre o/ art in .estern culture #as )een insistentl% tied to its ele-ating e//ects4 As JC-JC Da-id &uts it
somew#ere, Ft#e &ur&ose o/ t#e arts is to ser-e moralit% and ele-ate t#e soul04
.#at demarcates modernist art /rom suc# sentiments as t#ese is t#e di//erent readings o/ moralit% and ele-ation w#ic# it in-ol-es, and t#e di//erent &ictorial means wit# w#ic# it o&erates4
1ut t#e /undamental &oint is t#e same H art #as its Iusti/ication as a -e#icle o/ H in t#e )roadest terms H et#ical and aest#etic im&ro-ement and ele-ation4 ;/, t#ere/ore, we are to tal! o/ a Flogic0 o/
modernit% in t#e -isual arts at all, it can onl% )e in t#e loose sense o/ a radical transformation of the e=istin% le%itimisin% discourse of art. T#is, #owe-er, s#ould not )e seen as a logic o/
Fnecessar%0 &rogressionN neit#er must it )e -iewed as a matter w#oll% internal to art itsel/4 $or, in modernist art, t#e di//erent senses o/ ele-ation o&erati-e in t#e wor!s o/ di//erent artists and t#e
means )% w#ic# t#e% are ac#ie-ed are /reKuentl% enmes#ed in com&le( res&onses to )roader societal c#anges4 Danto, t#en, is led astra% in #istorical terms )% #is /ailure to loo! at t#e continuit%
o/ modernist art in its sociological conte(t4
T#ere is, #owe-er, one &oint in t#e growt# o/ modernism w#ic# does seem more amena)le to Danto0s narrati-e4 T#is is to )e located in certain as&ects o/ Po& Art
K suc# as .ar#ol0s F1rillo 1o(es0 H and in t#e de-elo&ment o/ minimal and conce&tual art in t#e *
+
?9s and *+<9s4 T#e /ormer tendenc% seems to insist on Colla&sing t#e distinction )etween
art and li/e, w#ilst t#e latter tendencies @res&ecti-el%A seem to declare H in t#e most strident terms H t#at t#e minimum Conditions /or somet#ing )eing an artwor! are mere o)Iect#ood, or
em)od%ing an Fidea0 a)out w#at counts as art4 ow e-en i/ @wit# DantoA we -iew t#ese as
1@< Pa,. )ro1t/er
Kuasi-&#iloso&#ical statements a)out t#e de/inition o/ art, t#e% &oint in a rat#er di//erent direction /rom t#at w#ic# Danto0s inter&retation would lead us to e(&ect4 $or i/, as ; #a-e argued, t#e
central /eature o/ modernism is a radical trans/ormation o/ t#e legitimising discourse, t#en t#e /act t#at certain mo-ements a/ter *+?9 seem to break wit# t#is carries wit# it t#e im&lication t#at
we #a-e #ere t#e )eginnings o/ a )rea! wit# modernit% itseW .#at Danto0s narrati-e o/ Kuasi-&#iloso&#ical Kuestioning really signi/ies, in ot#er words, is not t#e underl%ing Flogic0 o/
modernit%, )ut t#e transitional &oint at w#ic# modernit% )egins to &ass into &ostmodernit%4 ;n t#e ne(t section o/ t#is c#a&ter, t#ere/ore, ; will de-elo& t#is inter&retation )% s#owing #ow t#e
critiKue o/ t#e legitimising discourse can )e construed as a de/initi-e /eature o/ &ostmodernism in t#e -isual arts4
III
T#e !e% artist in understanding t#e transition /rom modern to &ostmodern is Malcolm Morle%4 ;n t#e late *+>9s and earl% *+?9s, Morle% was wor!ing in an a)stract e(&ressionist idiom muc#
inde)ted to 1arnett ewman4 Howe-er, around *+?> #e )egan &roducing wor!s suc# as G-.-. Amsterdam at Rotterdam04 ow at /irst sig#t, in utilising imager% deri-ed /rom t#e mass media H in
t#is case a common&lace &ostcard H it mig#t seem t#at Morle% is lin!ing #imsel/ to t#ose as&ects o/ Po& Art w#ic# o-ertl% cele)rate t#e -irtues o/ mass culture4 T#is, #owe-er, would )e a -er%
su&er/icial reading4 $or Morle%0s FSu&er Realism0 lac!s an% sense o/ t#e #edonism, #umour, or gentle iron% w#ic# generall% c#aracterises Po& Art0s relation to its sources4 T#e internal resources
o/ an image suc# as G-.-. Amsterdam15 rat#er, declare it as more serious and critical t#roug# t#e -er% insistenc% wit# w#ic# it mani/ests its own origin in an image deri-ed /rom mec#anical
re&roduction4 @E-en t#e margin o/ t#e &ostcard is, in /act, wor!ed into Morle%0s image4A T#is im&ression is consolidated )% !nowledge o/ #ow t#e wor! is created4 ;n t#is @and !indred wor!s o/
t#e late *+?9sA Morle% #as small-scale &#otogra&#ic-)ased material )lown u& into &oster siGe4 He t#en in-erts t#e image, di-ides it u& into a series o/ grid sKuares, and transcri)es it H one sKuare
at a time @wit# t#e rest co-ered u&A H in acr%lic &aint on to a can-as4 T#us t#e &rocess o/ ma!ing t#e wor! is reduced to t#e le-el o/ a Kuasi-mec#anical re&roduction4 .e #a-e a /ramed &icture
o//ered in t#e F)ig0 /ormat c#aracteristic o/ F#ig# art0, )ut w#ose status as #ig# art is su)-erted )% t#e image0s )anal content4 Ot#er le-els o/ negation are also o&erati-e4 $or #ere, a mec#anicall%
re&roduced image @t#e &ostcardA is t#e original, w#ereas t#e #ig#-art /ormat &ainting is onl% a copy o/ t#is original4 ;ndeed, w#ilst t#e common &reIudices o/ t#e general &u)lic eKuate Fgood0
&ainting wit# -erisimilitude @Fit could almost )e a &#otogra&#0A, #ere t#e Fgood0 &ainting is ac#ie-ed )% Kuasi-mec#anical re&roduction, rat#er t#an t#e -irtuoso /luenc% o/ t#e s!illed #and4
Morle%Rs Su&er Realism, in ot#er words, is a critical &ractice w#ic# #ig#lig#ts, Kuestions and t#warts our e(&ectations o/ art as a F#ig#0 cultural acti-it%4 ;t addresses not so muc# t#e minimalist
and conce&tualist &rec- 4u&ation wit# t#e
&ostmoolernism iii i/9o1 Visual A rts
1@=
minimum conditions /or somet#ing to )e counted as art, #ut rat#er t#e legitimising discourse w#ere)% art is Itisti/led as a -e#icle o/ ele-ation and im&ro( ement4 <* o some degree, t#is is
antici&ated in t#e )latant &arodies o/ Duc#am&, )ut in Morles Fs case t#e critical dimension is, as it were, &ainted into t#e image4 .e #a-e not so muc# a !ind o/ e(ternal Fanti-art0, as art w#ic#
internalises and dis&la%s t#e &ro)lematics o/ its own socio-cultural status4 ow, in t#e wor! o/ a num)er o/ ot#er Su&er Realist artists in t#e late *
+
?9s and earl% * +<9s H suc# as t#e &aintings o/
Audre% $lac! and C#uc! Close or t#e scul&tures o/ Duane Hanson H a #roadls similar critical dimension is o&erati-e4 Howe-er, t#e great )ul! o/ wor! in t#is idiom #as a muc# more su&er/icial
orientation4 $or, as t#e Su&er Realist tendenc% s&read, it )egan to address itsel/ to more traditional concerns and )ecame sim&l% a style. ;n t#e wor! o/ 3o#n Salt or Ric#ard Estes, /or e(am&le,
we /ind close-u& images o/ suc# t#ings as cars or /las#%0 s#o& /rontages, w#ic#, w#ilst )eing deri-ed /rom &#otogra&#s, &resent t#emsel-es as ostensi)l% .irtuoso &er/ormances4 Su&er Realism
)ecomes t#e means /or intricate, aest#eticall% daGGling com&ositions on t#e grand scale4 T#e wor! o/ Morle% and t#e ot#er inno-ators, in ot#er words, is rea&&ro&riated wit#in t#e legitimising
discourse4 ;ndeed, Su&er Realism o/ t#is sort #as o-erw#elming mar!et a&&eal t#roug# its com)ining )ot# t#e traditional and modernist e(em&li/lcations o/ t#is discourse4 On t#e one #and, its
/las#% -erisimilitude a&&eals to t#e traditional &reIudices t#at art s#ould u&li/t t#roug# its com&le(it% and -irtuosit%N on t#e ot#er #and, )ecause suc# wor!s loo! so muc# li!e &#otogra&#s, t#e%
still seem odd H -aguel% outrageous e-en H t#us /eeding on t#e demand /or /as#iona)le no-elt% and une(&ectedness t#at is created )% modernism4
One mig#t trace a similar &attern in relation to t#e de-elo&ment and consum&tion o/ t#e tendenc% t#at )egan to dis&lace Su&er Realism in t#e late *
+
<9s H namel%, Feo-E(&ressionism04
Again, t#e case o/ Malcolm Morle% &ro-es decisi-e #ere4 Around *+<9, #e )egan to ru//le t#e sur/aces o/ #is &#otogra&#ic-deri-ed wor!s, )% wor!ing t#em in more )ro!en )rus#stro!es4 O/
es&ecial interest #ere is FSc#ool o/ At#ens0 @*+<5A4 T#is wor! is a co&% o/ a &#otogra&#ic re&roduction o/ Ra&#ael0s original4 Ra&#ael0s wor! H in )ot# content and #andling H a//irms art0s status
as a digni/ied and u&li/ting acti-it% a!in to t#e &ursuit o/ t#ose timeless essential trut#s w#ic# are t#e -ocation o/ t#e great &#iloso&#ers de&icted in t#e &ainting4 ;t is t#e Kuintessential icon o/
t#e -er% notion o/ #ig# art itsel/4 Morle%0s treatment o/ Ra&#ael0s wor!, #owe-er, ma!es t#e artistic enter&rise loo! eart#% and contingent4 T#is is ac#ie-ed not onl%0 t#roug# t#e disru&tions
e//ected )% t#e loose #andling, )ut t#roug# t#e /act t#at Morle%0 lea-es a transcri&tional mistake intact in t#e F/inis#ed0 wor! @namel% a #oriGontal line o/ grid sKuares, t#at is mani/estl%
as%nc#ronous wit# t#e rest o/ t#e com&ositionA4 ;ndeed, it )ecomes acuteis di//icult to locate Morle%0s FSc#ool o/ At#ens0 wit#in t#e customar%0 discourse o/ art #istor% itsel/4 ;s it a co&s is Ot
e(&ressionistN is it a &arod%N is it surrealistN is it classicistD Per#a&s all H %0et none o/ t#ese4 Suc# dislocational e//ects are e-en more mani/est in Morle%0s more recent .or!s4 ;n FDa% o/ t#e
Locust0 @*+<<A, /or e(am&le, Morle% not onl%0 com&letel% mi(es u& suc# categories as e(&ressionist and surrealist, #ut )latantl% &arodies t#at notion o/ Fst%listic de-elo&ment0 w#ic# is so
central to art #istor%4 Morle% inIects
1@@ Pa,. )ro1t/er &ostmodernism in the Visual Arts
moti/s drawn /rom #is earlier wor!, )ut mal/orms t#em and screws t#em u&4 One must also note a /urt#er crucial dimension to t#is and !indred wor!s4 Morle% does not sim&l% o-erload us wit#
images o/ )rea!down and catastro&#e, )ut rat#er tangles t#ese u& in a wa% t#at ma!es di//icult to disentangle strands o/ de&icted realit% /rom strands o/ /iction4 He does not o//er an illusion o/
real s&ace, )ut neit#er does #e o&en u& a surreal s&ace o/ &ure /antas%4 .e are le/t, rat#er, in a state o/ insecurit% t#at seems to )ear witness to &ainting0s inade>uacy in relation to articulating t#e
com&le(it% and:or #orrors o/ conteni&orar% e(istence4 T#is /elt inadeKuac%, in ot#er words, arises /rom a &ictorial compromisation o/ t#e legitimising discourse4 A critical dimension o/ t#is sort
is to )e /ound in ot#er inno-ati-e Feo-E(&ressionist0 artists o/ t#e *+<9s and *+E9s, nota)l% Anselm 'ie/er, 2eorg 1aselitG, and P#ili& 2uston4 'ie/er, /or e(am&le, mo-es /rom large
claustro&#o)ic interiors t#at #int at unseen &owers and -iolence, to de-astated landsca&es lin!ed wit# s%m)ols or inscri&tions t#at allude more directl% to catastro&#e, and, in &articular, t#e
disasters o/ 2erman #istor%4 ;n t#ese wor!s, t#e -er% o-erload o/ scale, catastro&#ic e(cess, and an insistence on t#e &#%sical means o/ t#e medium itsel/, e(&ressl% t#ematises &ainting0s
inadeKuac% in relation to li/e4 ow, w#ilst Morle%, 'ie/er, and ot#ers ma!e eo-E(&ressionism into a critical &ractice, t#eir wor! created a st%listic &recedent and climate w#ic# ena)led less
incisi-e, more mar!et-orientated eo-E(&ressionisms to /louris#4 ;n relation to t#e wor! o/ 3ulian Sc#na)el, Sandro C#ia, and $rancisco Clemente, /or e(am&le, t#e term Feo-E(&ressionism0 is
a catc#-all &#rase t#at &ic!s out a discourse o/ &ainterl% e(cess, and un)ridled eclecticism4 T#e o-erload o/ &aint and imager% connects wit# its audiences /undamentall% at t#e le-el o/ &ri-ate
and ar)itrar% association4 ;/ a dimension o/ &u)lic or collecti-e signi/icance is lac!ing in t#ese wor!s, it is ta!en as a signi/ier o/ t#e artist0s &ro/undit% or de&t# o/ )eing4 T#e -iewer is in-ited to
com&ensate /or #is or #er own lac! o/ e(&erience )% -icarious identi/ication wit# t#e com&le( signs )orne )% t#e can-as4 1% engaging wit# t#e wor!, in ot#er words, t#e -iewer is ele-ated and
im&ro-ed4
; am arguing, t#en, t#at t#ere are two /undamentall% di//erent as&ects to &ostmodernism in t#e -isual arts4 $irst, in t#e late *+?9s and *+<9s t#ere de-elo&ed a !ind o/ art w#ic# is sce&tical
a)out t#e legitimising discourse o/ art as a -e#icle o/ ele-ation and im&ro-ement4 ow, w#ereas radical modern mo-ements suc# as Cu)ism and Surrealism rede&lo% traditional genres suc# as
still li/e and /antas% as a means o/ ele-ating su)Iecti-it%0, artists suc# as Morle% and 'ie/er radicall% Kuestion t#e a//irmati-e discourse o/ #ig# art, as suc#4 T#e% do so eit#er )%0 incor&orating
@in an apparently unmediated /as#ionA t#at w#ic# is most directly antit#etical to #ig# art H namel%, mec#anicall% re&roduced imager%N or )%0 t#ematising @wit#in t#e &articular wor!A t#e
inadeKuac% o/ artistic categories, and, indeed, art0s ina)ilit% to e(&ress t#e com&le(ities and catastro&#es o/ concrete #istorical e(&erience4 .e #a-e, in ot#er words, a new /orm o/ art w#ose
-er% &ictorial means em)od% a sce&ticism as to t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ #ig# art4 1% internalising t#is sce&ticism and ma!ing it t#ematic wit#in art &ractice, )riti:al Su&er Realism and )ritical eo-
E(&ressionism gi-e art a deconstructi.e diirension4 Suc# wor!
1@B
em)odies t#e same !inds o/ strateg% w#ic# in/orm contem&orar% &Oststructuralist a&&roac#es to discourse in general4 T#e% can, t#ere/ore, )e de/ined as t#e de/initi-e &ostmodern tendenc%4
Howe-er, t#is deconstructi-e a&&roac# also created a mar!et demand w#ic# was ra&idl% met )% -econdary @uncriticalA Su&er Realisms and eo E(&ressionisms4 T#ese wor!s ser-ed directl% to
rein-igorate t#e legitimisin g discourse o/ art )% ta&&ing t#e traditional e(&ectation o/ -irtuoso &er/ormances and &ro/undit%0 and t#e modernist a&&etite /or t#e odd and t#e outrageous4 ow in
t#e latter #al/ o/ t#e *+E9s t#e Critical as&ect o/ &ostmodern art #as reac#ed a crisis &oint4 ;t is to a consideration o/ t#is &#enomenon and some )roader Kuestions, t#at ; now turn in t#e /inal
section o/ t#is c#a&ter4
I'
Muc# art &ractice o/ t#e late l
+
E9s in-ol-es a !ind o/ ironic deconstruction t#at recognises and internalises its own ine-ita)le assimilation )% t#e mar!et4 ;n t#e eo 2eo a)stractions o/ P#illi&
Ta//e, /or e(am&le, we /ind &arodies and su)-ersions o/ modernist colour-/ield &ainting and Fo&0 art4 1arnett ewman0s #ig#-modernist F.#o0s A/raid o/ Red, Yellow, and 1lueD0 /inds its
ri&oste in Ta//e0s send-u& ]F.e Are ot A/raidR04 Li!ewise Peter Halle%0s eo-2eo electric cell and conduit &aintings &arod% t#e #ig#-/alutin claims o/ Rot#!o-st%le colour-/ield &ainting )%0
stating it and containing it in terms o/ )anal imager% drawn /rom t#e tec#nological )ase o/ &ostmodern culture4 Again, t#e Fscul&ture0 o/ 3e// 'oons and Da-id Mac# Kuestions con-entional
notions o/ taste and re&resentation, t#roug# creating assem)lages o/ Kuir!% and comical ingenuit%4 Mac#0s F*9* Dalmations0, /or e(am&le, turns Disne%0s #ounds loose on t#e domestic
en-ironment4 T#e distur)ing sense o/ gra-itational &recariousness created )% 1arnett ewman0s F1ro!en O)elis!0 or Ric#ard Serra0s FDelineator0 is #ere ac#ie-ed t#roug# a Dalmatian
)alancing a was#ingmac#ine on its nose4 ow, in all t#ese eo-2eo &aintings and scul&tures, a dimension o/ deconstruction is &resent, in so /ar as art0s &retensions to ele-ation or im&ro-ement
are called into Kuestion or s#i/ted to t#e le-el o/ t#e #umorous4 1ut t#e -er% good #umour o/ t#is strateg% and t#e ludicrousness o/ its means )es&ea!s an o-ertl% sel/-ironical and sel/-negating
le-el o/ insig#t4 .e can deconstruct, #ut t#e legitimising discourse and t#e mar!et will still #a-e us H so let0s #a-e /un wit# t#e w#ole situation w#ile we can4 T#is comic /atalism is o/ some
)roader signi/icanOO in so /ar as it mar!s t#e &oint w#ere critical &ostmodernism recognises Ots own limits4 An% art o)Iects set /ort# wit# internal critical intent will )e assimilated )% t#e
legitimising discourse and mar!et /orces, and redistri)uted in t#e /orm o/ a style. T#is /ate is &romised as soon as t#e attem&t to criticise t#e legitimising discourse o/ art is made internal to art
itsel/4 $or #ere, t#e deconstructi-e tendenc% succeeds in /ul/illing t#e legitimising discourse despite itsel/4 To see w#% t#is is so, one must in-o!e t#e e(&erience o/ t#e su)lime, in terms o/ its
two main e(&ositors H 'ant and 1ur!e4 ;n t#e 'antian -ersion, w#en we encounter some P#enomenon w#ic# o-erw#elms, or t#reatens to o-erw#elm, our imagination or
,h ?st#00dA1rnism in the ' Gisu5tl A rts 1B1
1B9 Pa,. )ro1t/er
emotions, t#is can sometimes issue in a !ind o/ rational countert#rust4 ;n suc# a case, we recognise and com&re#end t#at ss#ic# o-er(-#elms or t#reatens to o-erw#elm us4 ;ndeed, t#e -er%0 /act
t#at a &#enomenon w#ic# so mani/estl% de/eats our sensi)le ca&acities can ne-ert#eless )e articulated and t#ence, in a sense, contained )% reason, ser-es to -i-idl%0 a//irm t#e e(traordinar%
sco&e and resilience o/ rational sel/#ood4 ; would suggest t#at an a//mrm6Oti-e res&onse on somet#ing li!e t#ese lines is em)odied in our engagement OOt# certain as&ects o/ Critical
&ostmodernist art4 Consider, /or e(am&le, t#e 9%9Orw#elining disaster moti/s and dislocational e//ects o/ Critical eo-E(&ressionism
9
0 T#ese signi/% art0s essential inadeKuac% in relation to
e(&ressing t#e com&le(it% and immensit% o/ t#e real world and its &ro)lems4 Howe-er, t#e -er% /act t#at >*c# a &ro/ound insig#t can )e articulated wit#in t#e idioms o/ art ser-es,
&arado(iOallYO to .i.ify t#e e(traordinar% sco&e o/ art itsel/ as a mode o/ rational arti/ice4 T#O disaster o/ /ailure to signi/% is, as it were, contained and redeemed )% t#e ac#ie-ed signi/ication o/
t#is /ailure wit#in t#e -isual means o/ art4 T#e artist 9//ers an a//irmati-e and ele-ating e(&erience o/ a !ind o/ artistic su)limit%4 ow t#ere is anot#er H somew#at cruder
H e(&erience o/ t#e su)lime w#ic# can also )e related tO Critical &ostmodernism @and, indeed, to an% a-ant-garde artA4 One mig#t cOll it t#e protosublime. 1ur!e is its most e//ecti-e e(&ositor4
According to #im, &rl3longed states o/ inacti-it% and monoton% are deleterious to our organic constitutiP
9O
;n order to counter t#is, we need to e(&erience mild s#oc!s H w#ic# will stimuDte our
sensi)ilities, )ut wit#out in-ol-ing an% real sense o/ &ain or danger4 E(&erieoces o/ t#is sort are &ro-ided )% suc# t#ings as -ast or destructi-e o)Iects encountei0ed /rom a &osition o/ sa/et%, or
)% #uman arti/acts w#ic# outrage or t#rill us in >9OIie wa%4 ow, 1ur!e0s argument can )e trans&osed into contem&orar% terms, on t#e )asis o/ our res&onse to &atterns o/ wor! and social
e(istence in a societ% c#aracterised )% t#e di-ision o/ la)our4 ;n suc# a societ%, t#e recti/ied and monotonous &attern o/ li/e demands a com&ensating su)stitute /or real e(&erience4 T#e s#oc!s
and t#rills &ro-ided )% media news items, or suc# Ft#ings as -iolent ad-enture /ilms and t#e li!e, /ul/il t#is /unction4 ;t is t#is -ein o/ com&ensator% a//ecti-e res&onse, ; would >OOgest, w#ic# is
ta&&ed )% Critical &ostmodernism4 ;n t#e case o/ Critical Su&er OOlism and eo-2eo, /or e(am&le, we #a-e wor!s w#ic# engage us /undamentall% in Ogrms o/ a//ecti-e Iolts H t#roug# t#warting
or &arod%ing e(&ectations )ased on our intercourse wit# #ig# art o/ t#e traditional or modernist !inds4 T#e% #a-e a >#oc! or sur&rise -alue w#ic# reIu-enates and #eig#tens our -er% sense o/
)eing ali-e4 T#e means ma% )e )anal or ludicrous, )ut in t#e midst o/ social monoton% Ond accelerating standardisation, t#e Fw#ate-er-will-t#e%-do-ne(t0 as&ect o/ artistic inno-ation is a li/e-
en#ancing /orce4 ;ts a//ecti-e Iolt, indeed, ma% e-en t#ematiOe t#e notion t#at t#e indi-idual creator can resist t#e /orces o/ rei/ication to some degree H #owe-er tri-ial4
; am arguing, t#en, )ot# t#at t#e Critical dimension o/ &ostmodern art #as ended u& in a !ind o/ comical recognition o/ its own linaitsN and t#at t#is !ind o/ result was im&licit in t#e -er%
attem&t to deconstruct art /rom wit#in4 Suc# a &ractice tends towards ele-ating e(&eriences o/ t#e su)lime in eit#er t#e 'a-40tian or 1ur!ean modes4 T#is inter&retation raises two Kuestions4
/
5
irst, is t#er4 any wa% in w#ic#
Critical &ostmodernisrn in t#e -isual arts can a-oid assimilation "y t#e legitin#isinuO discourse and mar!et /orcesN and second, i/ it cannot, does t#is not mean t#at lAantoo is at least rig#t in #is
claim t#at &ostmodernism is &ost-#istoricalD Let i-i-ic address t#e /ormer Kuestion4 $irst, as ; #a-e alread% argued, internalised deconstruction is assimilated )% t#e legitimising discourse in
terms o/ t#e su)lime4 1ut ss #at a)out t#ose cases w#ere t#e critiKue is conducted /rom a more e(ternal -ie0,0, &ointD A good e(am&le #ere is t#e wor! o/ t#e /eminist artist Mar%0 'ell%4 ;n #er
&ost-&.irtun8 <ocument5 'ell% see!s to )rea! out o/ t#e &atriarc#al &ower structures w#ic# #as e regulated w#at is admissi)le as art and w#at is not4 T#e wor! consists o/ a series o/ largel%
documentar% dis&la%s c#arting )iogra&#ical /acts a)out, and t#eoretical inter&retations o/, #er relations#i& wit# #er son H /rom earliest in/anc% to earliest c#ild#ood4 ow t#e &ro)lem wit# t#is
wor! @and, indeed, t#e &ro)lem /aced ! conce&tual art0 in generalA is t#at t#e le-el o/ sensuous, essentiall% -isual meaning is almost entirel% eliminated4 ;t mig#t, o/ course, )e argued t#at t#e
remo( al o/ t#is dimension is an e(tremel% &ositi-e /eature, in so /ar as it is art0s sensuousness w#ic# a&&eals to t#e mar!et and w#ic# &ro-ides t#e essential s&ectacle /or t#e male gaGe4
Howe-er, on t#ese terms, 'ell%0s wor! merel% t#rows out t#e )a)% wit# t#e )at#water4 $or to remo-e t#e a&&eal to distincti-el% -isual meaning is to render t#e notion o/ -isual art itsel/
su&er/luous4 Colla&sing t#e )oundar% )etween art and documentation in t#is wa% sim&l% eliminates art4 ;nterestingl%, #owe-er, 'ell%- H as is t#e case wit# most conce&tual artists H is not willing
to allow #er &ost-&artuni wor! to )e Iudged as a series o/ t#eoretical statements, /or its units are mounted so as to )e #ung in accordance wit# t#e &resentational /ormats o/ con-entional art4
T#us t#e wor! ta!es on its deconstructi-e edge t#roug# t#e &la%-o// )etween its &rimaril% non-artistic content, and its con-entional art /ormat o/ &resentation4 Again, #owe-er, w#ilst t#is t#warts
our normal e(&ectations as to w#at s#ould #e counted as art, t#e /act t#at it is mounted as an-o)Iect-/or-contem&lation serses toA contain t#e s#oc! res&onse4 .e /eel t#at t#is is Iust t#e a-ant-
garde t#rilling us wit# t#e outrageous and e(tending our #oriGons once more4 Our sensi)ilit% is, once more, ele-ated and im&ro-ed4 T#at t#e legitimising discourse s#ould e(ert so &ro/ound a
&ull in relation to e-en t#e most @su&er/iciall%A antit#etical wor!s is #ardl% sur&rising4 $or w#ilst t#e conce&t Fart0 is a social construct o/ .estern culture, it is not merely a construct4 T#e reason
w#% it needs to )e constructed is to &ic! out t#e /act t#at certain !inds o/ arti/act )ring a)out certain &ositi-e e//ects throu%h the mere contemplation of them. ;t is t#e /act t#at certain arti/acts
can )e -alued in t#is wa% t#at necessitates t#e conce&t Fart04 T#e legitimising discourse, in ot#er words, legitimises not Iust t#is art and t#at, )ut t#e -er% conce&t o/ Fart0 as suc#4
; s#all now /inall% return to Danto0s im&licit eKuation )etween &ostmodern art and &ost-#istoricalit%4 ;t Qs0ill )e remem)ered t#at, /or Danto, t#e reason w#% t#is eKuation is Iusti/ied is t#at
modernist art Hil-i t#e /orm o/ QB0ar#ol0s F1rillo 1o(es0
K )rings a)out a congruence )etween art and t#e statement o/ its essence4 T#erea/ter, t#ere cannot )e an%t#ing artisticall% new H onl% a re#as# o/ old /orms4 ow, w#ilst ; re#earsed t#e
&#iloso&#ical o)Iections to t#is claim in Part ;, it is .ort# loo!ing at again in t#e lig#t o/ m% alternati-e #istorical account o/ modernit%
&ostmodernism in the Visual Arts 1B8
1B2 Pa,. )ro1t/er
and &ostmodernit%4 $irst, ; #a-e tried to s#ow t#at t#ere is some continuit% )etween t#e late modernism o/ .ar#ol, minimal art, and conce&tual art, and t#e Critical -arieties o/ &ostmodern Su&er
Realism and eo-E(&ressionism4 All t#ese tendencies are energised )% t#e &#iloso&#ical im&lications o/ art4 T#e di//erence )etween t#em consists in t#e /act t#at w#ereas t#e late modernists
Kuestion t#e logical sco&e o/ art and ta!e it to and )e%ond its limits, t#e Critical &ostmodernists Kuestion t#e social realit% o/ art @i4e4 t#e status o/ t#e legitimising discourseA /rom wit#in4 T#is
latter /act is itsel/ a concrete illustration o/ #ow &ostmodern art H wor!ing wit#in and loosening u& t#e limits o/ alread% esta)lis#ed idioms @i4e4 FRealism0 and FE(&ressionism0A H is aut#enticall%
critical and #istoricall% inno-ati-e, rat#er t#an t#e mere &roduct o/ mar!et demands4 ow, o/ course, ; also argued t#at w#ilst Critical &ostmodernism s#a!es u& and Kuestions t#e legitimising
discourse, it does not esca&e itN )ut t#is /act in no wa% restricts its #istorical &ossi)ilities4 $or, as ; /urt#er suggested, t#e legitimising discourse is t#e -er% )asis o/ our #a-ing a conce&t o/ art at
all H indeed, it is t#e -er% )asis o/ our interest in art0s #istorical de-elo&ment4 To esca&e t#e legitimising discourse, in ot#er words, would in-ol-e gi-ing u& art4 One mig#t e(&ect, t#ere/ore, t#at
/uture &ostmodern art will )ecome less o)sessed wit# criticising t#e legitimising discourse, and will instead orientate itsel/ towards new wa%s o/ e(em&li/%ing it4 To some degree, t#is &rocess is
alread% under wa%4 T#erese Oulton0s &aintings, /or e(am&le, draw on tradition in a wa% t#at redirects rat#er t#an criticises it4 S#e articulates &rime-al e(&eriences o/ &lace and &resence t#roug#
a collecti-el% accessi)le -oca)ular% o/ /orm, te(ture, and colour4 Ross 1lec#ner0s sinister memorial &aintings re/erring to Aids -ictims li!ewise state &ri-ate e(&erience in a wa% t#at is
collecti-el% mo-ing and enlig#tening4 Here, in ot#er words, we #a-e t#e )eginnings o/ a &ostmodern art t#at is &ro/oundl% creati-e, and w#ic# in-ol-es an ele-ating rea&&ro&niation o/ t#e life-
world5 rat#er t#an criticism or eclecticism alone4
;n conclusion, t#en, one must concede onl% one maIor &oint to Danto H namel%, t#at all /uture art will #a-e to wor! wit#in t#e logical limits t#at were set out )% late modernism, and t#is will
in-ol-e o&erating wit# genres and categories alread% de/ined4 E-en t#is, #owe-er, would onl% rule out t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ /uture aut#entic artistic inno-ation on t#e assum&tion t#at suc#
inno-ation is su//icientl% de/ina)le in ne%ati.e terms, i4e4 as simply creating somet#ing t#e li!e o/ w#ic# #as not )een created )e/ore4 1ut, o/ course, t#is assum&tion is /alse4 Historical
inno-ation in art #as alwa%s )een determined in t#e conte(t o/ creati.e )rea!s wit#, or re/inements o/, w#at #as alread% )een gi-en4 .e do not want new arti/acts t#at are sim&l% un&receder!ted
H )ut rat#er ones w#ose un&recedentedness casts new lig#t on t#e traditions o/ art or on our )roader relation to t#e li/e-world4 Artistic inno-ation, in ot#er Qs0ords, is a com&le( relation )etween
art and its &ast, rat#er t#an t#e !ind o/ a)solute &#iloso&#ical )rea! w#ic# Danto0s reading ma!es o/ it4 T#e moral is clear4 Art li-es CCC and will continue to do so w#ilstsoe-er artists see t#eir
world and, in &articular, t#eir disci&line0s #istor%, /rom di//erent -iew&oints4
Note
$or a muc# /uller discussion o/ t#e general relation )etween art and 'ant0s t#eor% o/ t#e su)lime, see Crowt#er, *+E+, c#4 <4
-i".iora0/y
Danto, AC ,he -tate of the Art5 Prentice Hall, ew Yor!, *+E<4
C#i&&, H4 ,heories of (odern Art5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, Los Angeles, *+?E4
Crowt#er, P4 ,he Lantian -ublime: $rom morality to art5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+E+4
,he :t1il <emon of Wina%es/-imulacra 1B$
18 D ,he :.il <emon of 'ma%es
and ,he &recession of
-imulacra
Jean -a,dri..ard
T/e E(i. De#on o? I#aes
T#ere is a !ind o/ &rimal &leasure, o/ ant#ro&ological Io% in images, a !ind o/ )rute /ascination unencum)ered )% aest#etic, moral, social or &olitical Iudgements4 ;t is )ecause o/ t#is t#at ;
suggest t#e% are immoral, and t#at t#eir /undamental &ower lies in t#is immoralit%4
T#is )rute /ascination /or images, a)o-e and )e%ond all moral or social determination, is also not t#at o/ dreaming or t#e imaginar%, understood in t#e traditional sense4 Ot#er images, suc# as
t#ose in &ainting, drawing, t#eatre or arc#itecture, #a-e )een )etter a)le to ma!e us dream or imagineN ot#er modes o/ e(&ression as well @undou)tedl% language ma!es us dream )etter t#an t#e
imageA4 So t#ere is somet#ing more t#an t#at w#ic# is &eculiar to our modern media images6
i/ t#e% /ascinate us so muc# it is not )ecause t#e% are sites o/ t#e &roduction o/ meaning and re&resentation H t#is would not )e new H it is on t#e contrar% )ecause t#e% are sites o/ t#e
disappearance o/ meaning and re&resentation, sites in w#ic# we are caug#t Kuite a&art /rom an% Iudgement o/ realit%, t#us sites o/ a /atal strateg% o/ denegation o/ t#e real and o/ t#e realit%
&rinci&le4
.e #a-e arri-ed at a &arado( regarding t#e image, our images, t#ose w#ic# un/url u&on and in-ade our dail% li/e H images w#ose &roli/eration, it s#ould )e noted, is &otentiall%0 in/inite,
w#ereas t#e e(tension o/ meaning is alwa%s limited &recisel% )% its end, )% its /inalit%N /rom t#e /act t#at images ultimatel% #a-e no /inalit% and &roceed )% total contiguit%, in/initel%
multi&l%ing t#emsel-es according to an irresisti)le e&idemic &rocess w#ic# no one toda% can control, our world #as )ecome trul% in/inite, or rat#er e(&onential )%0 means o/ images4 ;t is caug#t
u& in a mad &ursuit o/ images, in an e-er greater /ascination w#ic# is onl% accentuated )% -ideo and digital images4 .e #a-e t#us come to t#e &arado( t#at t#ese images descri)e t#e eKual
im&ossi)ilit%0 o/ t#e real and o/ t#e imaginar%04
$or us t#e medium, t#e image medium, #as im&osed itsel/ )etween t#e real and
$rom 1audrillard, 34, ,he :.il <emon of 'ma%es5 T#e Power ;nstitute o/ $ine Arts, S%dne%, *+E<, &&4 5EH,*, ,,N and 1audrillard, I, -imulati2ns5 Semiote(t@eA ;nc4 Qew Yor!, *+E,, &&4 *9H*,,
,EH==4
t#e imaginar%, u&setting t#e )alance )etween t#e two, wit# a !ind o/ /atalit%0 w#ic# #as its own logic4 ; call t#is a /atal &rocess in t#e sense t#at t#ere is a de/initi-e immanence o/ t#e image,
wit#out an% &ossi)le transcendent meaning, wit#out an% &ossi)le dialectic o/ #istor% H /atal also in t#e sense not merel% o/ an e(&onential, linear un/olding o/ images and messages )ut o/ an
e(&onential en/olding o/ t#e medium around itsel/4 T#e /atalit%0 lies in t#is endless enwra&&ing o/ images @literall%6 wit#out end, wit#out destinationA w#ic# lea-es images no ot#er destin%0 t#an
images4 T#e same t#ing #a&&ens e-er%w#ere toda%, w#en &roduction #as noA destin% a&art /rom &roduction H o-erdetermination o/ &roduction )% itsel/ H s-#en se( #as no destin% ot#er t#an se( H
se(ual o-erdetermination o/ se(ualit%4 T#is &rocess ma% )e /ound e-er%w#ere toda%, /or )etter and /or worse4 ;n t#e a)sence o/ rules o/ t#e game, t#ings )ecome caug#t u& in t#eir own gameN
images )ecome more real t#an t#e realN cinema itsel/ )ecomes more cinema t#an cinema, in a !ind o/ -ertigo in w#ic# @to return to our initial &ro)lem, t#at o/ resem)lanceA it does no more t#an
resem)le itsel/ and esca&e in its own logic, in t#e -er% &er/ection o/ its own model4
; am t#in!ing o/ t#ose e(act, scru&ulous set-&ieces suc# as )hinatown5 ,he <ay of the )ondor5 Karry 6yndon5 1*005 All the &resident1s (en5 t#e -er% &er/ection o/ w#ic# is distur)ing4 ;t is
as i/ we were dealing wit# &er/ect rema!es, wit# e(traordinar% montages w#ic# )elong more to a com)inator% &rocess @or mosaic in t#e McLu#anesKue senseA, wit# large &#oto, !ino or
#istorio-s%nt#etic mac#ines, rat#er t#an wit# real /ilms4 Let us )e clear6 t#eir Kualit% is not in Kuestion4 T#e &ro)lem is rat#er t#at t#e% lea-e us some#ow totall% indi//erent4
Ta!e ,he 6ast &icture -how. You need onl% )e su//icientl% distracted, as ; was, to see it as a *+>9s original &roductionN a good /ilm o/ manners and t#e am)ience o/ small-town America, etc4
A slig#t sus&icion6 it was a little too good, )etter adIusted, )etter t#an t#e ot#ers, wit#out t#e sentimental, moral and &s%c#ological tics o/ t#e /ilms o/ t#at &eriod4 Astonis#ment at t#e disco-er%
t#at it is a *+<9s /ilm, &er/ectl% nostalgic, )rand new, retouc#ed, a #%&errealist restitution o/ a *+>9s /ilm4 T#ere is tal! o/ rema!ing silent /ilms, dou)tless )etter t#an t#ose o/ t#e &eriod4 A
w#ole generation o/ /ilms is a&&earing w#ic# will )e to t#ose we #a-e !nown w#at t#e android is to man6 mar-ellous, /lawless arti/acts, daGGling simulacra w#ic# lac! onl% an imaginar% and
t#at &articular #allucination w#ic# ma!es cinema w#at it is4 Most o/ t#ose t#at we see toda% @t#e )estA are alread% o/ t#is order4 Karry 6yndon is t#e )est e(am&le6 no )etter #as )een made, no
)etter will )e made, )ut what e(actl%D E-ocationD o, not e-en e-ocation )ut simulation. All t#e to(ic radiation #as )een /iltered out, all t#e ingredients are &resent in &recise doses, not a single
mista!e4
LC C C1
;n its &resent endea-ours cinema increasingl% a&&roac#es, wit# e-er-increasing Per/ection, a)solute realit%6 in its )analit%, in its -eracit%, in its star!ness, in its tedium, and at t#e same time in
its &retentiousness, in itS &retension to )e t#e real, t#e immediate, t#e unsigni/led, w#ic# is t#e maddest o/ enter&rises @in t#e same wa%
1B:
1B< Jean -a,dri..ard
t#at t#e &retension o/ /unctionalist design to designate, as t#e #ig#est degree o/ t#e o)Iect, t#e /orm in w#ic# it coincides wit# its /unction, its use--alue, is &ro&erl% an insane enter&riseA4 o
culture #as e-er #ad t#is nai-e and &aranoiac, t#is &uritanical and terrorist -ision o/ signs4 Terrorism is alwa%s o/ t#e real4 Simultaneous wit# t#is attem&t at a)solute coincidence wit# t#e real,
cinema also a&&roac#es an a)solute coincidence wit# itsel/4 T#is is not contradictor%6 it is t#e -er% de/inition o/ t#e #%&erreal4 H%&ot%&osis and s&ecularit%4 Cinema &lagiarises and co&ies itsel/,
rema!es its classics, retroacti-ates its original m%t#s, rema!es silent /ilms more &er/ect t#an t#e originals, etc4 All t#is is logical4 )inema is fascinated by itself as a lost ob9ect 9ust as it Aand we?
are fascinated by the real as a referential in perdition.
T/e Precession o? Si#,.acra
T#us &er#a&s at sta!e #as alwa%s )een t#e murderous ca&acit% o/ images, murderers o/ t#e real, murderers o/ t#eir own model as t#e 1%Gantine icons could murder t#e di-ine identit%4 To t#is
murderous ca&acit% is o&&osed t#e dialectical ca&acit% o/ re&resentations as a -isi)le and intelligi)le mediation o/ t#e Real4 All o/ .estern /ait# and good /ait# was engaged in t#is wager on
re&resentation6 t#at a sign could re/er to t#e de&t# o/ meaning, t#at a sign could e=chan%e /or meaning, and t#at somet#ing could guarantee t#is e(c#ange H 2od, o/ course4 1ut w#at i/ 2od
#imsel/ can )e simulated, t#at is to sa%, reduced to t#e signs w#ic# attest #is e(istenceD T#en t#e w#ole s%stem )ecomes weig#tless, it is no longer an%t#ing )ut a gigantic simulacrum H not
unreal, )ut a simulacrum, ne-er again e(c#anging /or w#at is real, )ut e(c#anging in itsel/, in an uninterru&ted circuit wit#out re/erence or circum/erence4
So it is wit# simulation, inso/ar as it is o&&osed to re&resentation4 T#e latter starts /rom t#e &rinci&le t#at t#e sign and t#e real are eKui-alent @e-en i/ t#is eKui-alence is uto&ian, it is a
/undamental a(iomA4 Con-ersel%, simulation starts /rom t#e utopia o/ t#is &rinci&le o/ eKui-alence, from the radical ne%ation of the si%n as .alue5 /rom t#e sign as re-ersion and deat# sentence o/
e-er% re/erence4 .#ereas re&resentation tries to a)sor) simulation )% inter&reting it as /alse re&resentation, simulation en-elo&s t#e w#ole edi/ice o/ re&resentation as itsel/ a simulacrum4
T#is would )e t#e successi-e &#ases o/ t#e image6
" it is t#e re/lection o/ a )asic realit%
" it mas!s and &er-erts a )asic realit%
" it mas!s t#e absence o/ a )asic realit%
" it )ears no relation to an% realit% w#ate-er6 it is its own &ure simulacrum4
;n t#e /irst case, t#e image is a %ood a&&earance H t#e re&resentation is o/ t#e order o/ sacrament4 ;n t#e second, it is an e.il a&&earance H o/ t#e order o/ male/ice4 ;n t#e t#ird, it plays at bein% an
a&&earance H it is o/ t#e order o/ sorcer%4 ;n t#e /ourt#, it is no longer in t#e order o/ a&&earance at all, )ut o/ simulOotOon4
T#e transition /rom signs w#ic# dissimulate somet#ing to Signs w#ic# dissimulate
,he :.il <emon of 'ma%es/-imulacra
1B=
t#at t#ere is not#ing mar!s t#e decisi-e turning &oint4 T#e /irst im&lies a t#eolog% o/ trut# and secrec% @to w#ic# t#e notion o/ ideolog% still )elongsA4 T#e second inaugurates an age o/ simulacra
and simulation, in w#ic# t#ere is no longer an% 2od to recognise #is own, nor an% last Iudgement to se&arate true /rom /alse, t#e real /rom its arti/icial resurrection, since e-er%t#ing is alread%
dead and risen in ad-ance4 .#en t#e real is no longer w#at it used to )e, nostalgia assumes its /ull meaning4 T#ere is a &roli/eration o/ m%t#s o/ origin and signs o/ realit%N o/ second-#and trut#,
o)Iecti-it% and aut#enticit%4 T#ere is an escalation o/ t#e true, o/ t#e li-ed e(&erienceN a resurrection o/ t#e /igurati-e w#ere t#e o)Iect and su)stance #a-e disa&&eared4 And t#ere is a &anic-
stric!en &roduction o/ t#e real and t#e re/erential, a)o-e and &arallel to t#e &anic o/ material &roduction6 t#is is #ow simulation a&&ears in t#e &#ase t#at concerns us H a strateg% o/ t#e real, neo-
real and #%&erreal w#ose uni-ersal dou)le is a strateg% o/ deterrence4
HC C C1
-trate%y of the 4eal
O/ t#e same order as t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ redisco-ering an a)solute le-el o/ t#e real is t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ staging an illusion4 ;llusion is no longer &ossi)le, )ecause t#e real is no longer &ossi)le4
;t is t#e w#ole political &ro)lem o/ t#e &arod%, o/ #%&ersimulation or o//ensi-e simulation, w#ic# is &osed #ere4
$or e(am&le6 it would )e interesting to see w#et#er t#e re&ressi-e a&&aratus would not react more -iolentl% to a simulated #old-u& t#an to a real oneD $or t#e latter onl% u&sets t#e order o/
t#ings, t#e rig#t o/ &ro&ert%, w#ereas t#e ot#er inter/eres wit# t#e -er% &rinci&le o/ realit%4 Transgression and -iolence are less serious, /or t#e% onl% contest t#e distribution o/ t#e real4
Simulation is in/initel% more dangerous, #owe-er, since it alwa%s suggests, o-er and a)o-e its o)Iect, t#at law and order themsel.es mi%ht really be nothin% more than a simulation.
1ut t#e di//icult% is in &ro&ortion to t#e &eril4 How to /eign a -iolation and &ut it to t#e testD 2o and simulate a t#e/t in a large de&artment store6 #ow do %ou con-ince t#e securit% guards t#at
it is a simulated t#e/tD T#ere is no Fo)Iecti-e0 di//erence6 t#e same gestures and t#e same signs e(ist as /or a real t#e/tN in /act t#e signs incline neit#er to one side nor t#e ot#er4 As /ar as t#e
esta)lis#ed order is concerned, t#e% are alwa%s o/ t#e order o/ t#e real4
2o and organise a /a!e #old-u&4 1e sure to c#ec! t#at %our wea&ons are #armless, and ta!e t#e most trustwort#% #ostage, so t#at no li/e is in danger @ot#erwise %ou ris! committing an
o//enceA4 Demand ransom, and arrange it so t#at t#e o&eration creates t#e greatest commotion &ossi)le H in )rie/, sta%0 close to t#e Ftrut#0, so as to test t#e reaction o/ t#e a&&aratus to a &er/ect
simulation4 1ut %ou won0t succeed6
t#e we) o/ arti/icial signs will )e ine(trica)l% mi(ed u& wit# real elements @a &olice o//icer will reall% s#oot on sig#tN a )an! customer will /aint and die o/ a #eart attac!N t#e% will reall% turn t#e
&#one% ransom o-er to %ouA H in )rie/, %ou will unwittingl% /ind %oursel/ immediatel% in t#e real, one o/ w#ose /unctions is &recisel% to de-ourO
,he :.il <en8ou of 3Fna%es/-imulacra 1BB
1B@ Jean -a,dri..ard
e-er% attem&t at simulation, to reduce e-er%t#ing to some realit% -- tl-iat0s e(actl% #ow t#e esta)lis#ed order is, well )e/ore institutions and Iustice come into &la%4
;n t#is im&ossi)ilit% o/ isolating t#e &rocess o/ simulation must )e seen t#e w#ole t#rust o/ an order t#an can onl% see and understand in terms o/ some realit%, )ecause it can /unction
now#ere else4 T#e simulation o/ an o//ence, i/ it is &atent, will eit#er )e &unis#ed more lig#tl% @)ecause it #as no FconseKuences0A or )e &unis#ed as an o//ence to &u)lic o//ice @/or e(am&le, i/
one triggered o// a &olice o&eration F/or not#ing0A H )ut ne.er as simulation5 since it is &recisel% as suc# t#at no eKui-alence wit# t#e real is &ossi)le, and #ence no re&ression eit#er4 T#e
c#allenge o/ simulation is irrecei-a)le )% &ower4 How can %ou &unis# t#e simulation o/ -irtueD Yet as suc# it is as serious as t#e simulation o/ crime4 Parod% ma!es o)edience and transgression
eKui-alent, and t#at is t#e most serious crime, since it cancels out the difference upon which the law is based. T#e esta)lis#ed order can do not#ing against it, /or t#e law is a second-order
simulacrum w#ereas simulation is t#ird-order, )e%ond true and /alse, )e%ond eKui-alences, )e%ond t#e rational distinctions u&on w#ic# /unction all &ower and t#e entire social4 Hence, failin%
the real5 it is #ere t#at we must aim at order4
T#is is w#% order alwa%s o&ts /or t#e real4 ;n a state o/ uncertaint%, it alwa%s &re/ers t#is assum&tion @t#us in t#e arm% t#e% would rat#er ta!e t#e simulator as a true madmanA4 1ut t#is
)ecomes more and more di//icult, /or i/ it is &racticall% im&ossi)le to isolate t#e &rocess o/ simulation, t#roug# t#e /orce o/ inertia o/ t#e real w#ic# surrounds us, t#e in-erse is also true @and t#is
-er% re-ersi)ilit% /orms &art o/ t#e a&&aratus o/ simulation and o/ &ower0s im&otenc%A6 namel%, it is now impossible to isolate the process of the real5 or to &ro-e t#e real4
T#us all #old-u&s, #iIac!s and t#e li!e are now as it were simulation #old-u&s, in t#e sense t#at t#e% are inscri)ed in ad-ance in t#e decoding and orc#estration rituals o/ t#e media,
antici&ated in t#eir mode o/ &resentation and &ossi)le conseKuences4 ;n )rie/, t#e% /unction as a set o/ signs dedicated e(clusi-el% to t#eir recurrence as signs, and no longer to t#eir Freal0 goal at
all4 1ut t#is does not ma!e t#em ino//ensi-e4 On t#e contrar%, it is as #%&erreal e-ents, no longer #a-ing an% &articular contents or aims, )ut inde/initel% re/racted )% eac# ot#er @/or t#at
matter , , CED t#at t#e%0
li!e so-called #istorical e-ents6 stri!es, demonstrations crises etc
are &recisel% un-eri/ia)le )% an order w#ic# can onl% e(ert itsel/ on t#e real and t#e rational, on ends and means6 a re/erential order w#ic# can onl% dominate re/erentials, a determinate &ower
w#ic# can onl% dominate a determined world, )ut w#ic# can do not#ing a)out t#at inde/inite recurrence o/ simulation, a)out t#at weig#tless ne)ula no longer o)e%ing t#e law o/ gra-itation o/
t#e real H &ower itsel/ e-entuall% )rea!ing a&art in t#is s&ace and )ecoming a simulation o/ &ower @disconnected /rom its aims and o)Iecti-es, and dedicated to power effects and mass
simulationA4
T#e onl% wea&on o/ &ower, its onl% strateg% against t#is de/ection, is to reinIect realness and re/erentialit% e-er%w#ere, in order to con-ince us o/ t#e realit% o/ t#e social, o/ t#e gra-it% o/ t#e
econom% and t#e /inalities o/ &rHuction4 $or t#at &ur&ose it &re/ers t#e discourse o/ crisis, )ut also H w#% not- H t#e discourse o/
desire4 FTa!e %our desires /or realit%^0 can )e understood as t#e ultimate slogan o/ &ower, /or in a non-re/erential world e-en t#e con/usion o/ t#e realit%0 &rinci&le wit# t#e desire &rinci&le is
less dangerous t#an contagious #%&errealit-4 One renains among &rinci&les, and t#ere &ower is alwa%s rig#t4
H%&errealit% and simulation are deterrents o/ e-er% &rinci&le and o/ e-er% o)Iecti-eN t#e% turn against &ower t#is deterrence w#ic# was itsel/ so well utilised /or a long time4 $or, /inall%, it
was ca&ital w#ic# was t#e /irst to /eed t#roug#out its #istor% on t#e destruction o/ e-er% re/erential, o/ e-er% #uman goal, w#ic# s#attered e-er% ideal distinction )etween true and /alse, good
and e-il, in order to esta)lis# a radical law o/ eKui-alence and e(c#ange, t#e iron law o/ its &ower4 ;t was t#e /irst to &ractise deterrence, a)straction, disconnection, deterritorialisation, etc4N and
i/ it was ca&ital w#ic# /ostered realit%, t#e realit% &rinci&le, it was also t#e /irst to liKuidate it in t#e e(termination o/ e-er% use--alue, o/ e-er% real eKui-alence, o/ &roduction and wealt#, in t#e
-er% sensation we #a-e o/ t#e unrealit% o/ t#e sta!es and t#e omni&otence o/ mani&ulation4 ow, it is t#is -er% logic w#ic# is toda%0 #ardened e-en more a%ainst it4 And w#en it wants to /ig#t
t#is catastro&#ic s&iral )% secreting one last glimmer o/ realit%, on w#ic# to /ound one last glimmer o/ &ower, it onl% multi&lies t#e si%ns and accelerates t#e &la% o/ simulation4
As long as it was #istoricall% t#reatened )% t#e real, &ower ris!ed deterrence and simulation, disintegrating e-er% contradiction )% means o/ t#e &roduction o/ eKui-alent signs4 .#en it is
t#reatened toda% )% simulation @t#e t#reat o/ -anis#ing in t#e &la% o/ signsA, &ower ris!s t#e real, ris!s crisis, it gam)les on remanu/acturing arti/icial, social, economic, &olitical sta!es4 T#is is a
Kuestion o/ li/e or deat# /or it4 1ut it is too late4
.#ence t#e c#aracteristic #%steria o/ our time6 t#e #%steria o/ &roduction and re&roduction o/ t#e real4 T#e ot#er &roduction, t#at o/ goods and commodities, t#at o/ 'a belle ;po>ue o/
&olitical econom%, no longer ma!es an% sense o/ its own, and #as not /or some time4 .#at societ% see!s t#roug# &roduction, and o-er&roduction, is t#e restoration o/ t#e real w#ic# esca&es it4
HC C C1
,he )ity of 4obots 59*
1: w ,he )ity of 4obots
O' Corral, Old Tucson, Legend Cit% near P#oeni(4 T#ere is t#e Old Sout# 1ar-)-C
Ranc# at Clewison, $lorida, and so on4 ;/ %ou -enture )e%ond t#e m%t# o/ t#e .est,
%ou #a-e cities li!e t#e Magic Mountain in Jalencia, Cali/ornia, or Santa Claus
Jillage, Pol%nesian gardens, &irate islands, Astroworlds li!e t#e one in 'ir)%0,
Te(as, and t#e Fwild0 territories o/ t#e -arious Marinelands, as well as ecological
cities4
3#"erto Eco
;n Euro&e, w#en &eo&le want to )e amused, t#e% go to a F#ouse0 o/ amusement @w#et#er a cinema, t#eatre, or casinoAN sometimes a F&ar!0 is created, w#ic# ma% seem a Fcit%0, )ut onl%
meta&#oricall%4 ;n t#e 8nited States, on t#e contrar%, as e-er%one !nows, t#ere e(ist amusement cities4 Las Jegas is one e(am&leN it is /ocused on gam)ling and entertainment, its arc#itecture is
totall% arti/icial, and it #as )een studied )% Ro)ert Jenturi as a com&letel% new &#enomenon in cit% &lanning, a Fmessage0 cit%, entirel% made u& o/ signs, not a cit% li!e t#e ot#ers, w#ic#
communicate in order to /unction, )ut rat#er a cit% t#at /unctions in order to communicate4 1ut Las Jegas is still a Freal0 cit%, and in a recent essa% on Las Jegas, 2io-anni 1rino s#owed #ow,
t#oug# )orn as a &lace /or gam)ling, it is graduall% )eing trans/ormed into a residential cit%, a &lace o/ )usiness, industr%, con-entions4 T#e t#eme o/ our tri& H on t#e contrar% H is t#e A)solute
$a!eN and t#ere/ore we are interested onl% in a)solutel% /a!e cities4 Disne%land @Cali/orniaA and Disne% .orld @$loridaA are o)-iousl% t#e c#ie/ e(am&les, )ut i/ t#e% e(isted alone t#e% would
re&resent a negligi)le e(ce&tion4 T#e /act is t#at t#e 8nited States is /illed wit# cities t#at imitate a cit%, Iust as wa( museums imitate &ainting and t#e Jenetian &alaGGos or Pom&eiian -illas
imitate arc#itecture4 ;n &articular t#ere are t#e Fg#ost towns0, t#e .estern cities o/ a centur% and more ago4 Some are reasona)l%0 aut#entic, and t#e restoration or &reser-ation #as )een carried
out on an e(tant, Farc#eological0 ur)an com&le(N )ut more interesting are t#ose )orn /rom not#ing, out o/ &ure imitati-e determination4 T#e% are Ft#e real t#ing04
T#ere is an em)arrassment o/ ric#es to c#oose /rom6 You can #a-e /ragments o/ cities, as at Stone Mountain near Atlanta, w#ere %ou ta!e a tri& on a nineteent#-centur% train, witness an
;ndian raid, and see s#eri//s at wor!, against t#e )ac!ground o/ a /a!e Mount Rus#more4 T#e Si( 2uns Territor%, in Sil-er S&rings, also #as train and s#eri//s, a s#oot-out in t#e streets and
$renc# cancan in t#e saloon4 T#ere is a series o/ ranc#es and Me(ican missions in AriGonaN Tom)stone wit# its
$rom Eco, 84, ,ra.els in 7yperreality5 Harcourt 1race 3o-ano-ic#, Orlando, $L, *+E?, &&4 ,+H=E4
299
T#ere are also t#e s#i& imitations4 ;n $lorida, /or e(am&le, )etween Tam&a and St Peters)urg, %ou can )oard t#e Kounty5 anc#ored at t#e edge o/ a Ta#itian -illage, /ait#/ull% reconstructed
according to t#e drawings &reser-ed )% t#e Ro%al Societ% in London, )ut wit# an e%e also on t#e old /ilm wit# C#arles Laug#ton and Clar! 2a)le4 Man% o/ t#e nautical instruments are o/ t#e
&eriod, some o/ t#e sailors are wa(wor!s, one o//icer0s s#oes are t#ose worn )% t#e actor w#o &la%ed t#e &art, t#e #istorical in/ormation on t#e -arious &anels is credi)le, t#e -oices t#at &er-ade
t#e atmos&#ere come /rom t#e sound trac! o/ t#e mo-ie4 1ut we0ll stic! to t#e .estern m%t# and ta!e as a sam&le cit% t#e 'nott0s 1err% $arm o/ 1uena Par!, Los Angeles4
Here t#e w#ole tric! seems to )e e(&osedN t#e surrounding cit% conte(t and t#e iron /encing @as well as t#e admission tic!etA warn us t#at we are entering not a real cit% )ut a to% cit%4 1ut as
we )egin wal!ing down t#e /irst streets, t#e studied illusion ta!es o-er4 $irst o/ all, t#ere is t#e realism o/ t#e reconstruction6 t#e dust% sta)les, t#e sagging s#o&s, t#e o//ices o/ t#e s#eri// and t#e
telegra&# agent, t#e Iail, t#e saloon are li/e siGe and e(ecuted wit# a)solute /idelit%N t#e old carriages are co-ered wit# dust, t#e C#inese laundr% is diml% lit, all t#e )uildings are more or less
&ractical, and t#e s#o&s are o&en, )ecause 1err% $arm, li!e Disne%land, )lends t#e realit% o/ trade wit# t#e &la% o/ /iction4 And i/ t#e dr%-goods store is /a!e nineteent#-centur% and t#e s#o&girl
is dressed li!e a 3o#n $ord #eroine, t#e candies, t#e &eanuts, t#e &seudo-;ndian #andicra/ts are real and are sold /or real dollars, Iust as t#e so/t drin!s, ad-ertised wit# antiKue &osters, are real,
and t#e customer /inds #imsel/ &artici&ating in t#e /antas% )ecause o/ #is own aut#enticit% as a consumerN in ot#er words, #e is in t#e role o/ t#e cow)o% or t#e gold-&ros&ector w#o comes into
town to )e /leeced o/ all #e #as accumulated w#ile out in t#e wilds4
$urt#ermore t#e le-els o/ illusion are numerous, and t#is increases t#e #allucination H t#at is to sa%, t#e C#inese in t#e laundr% or t#e &risoner in t#e Iail are wa( dummies, w#o e(ist, in
realistic attitudes, in settings t#at are eKuall% realistic, t#oug# %ou can0t actuall% enter t#emN )ut %ou don0t realiGe t#at t#e room in Kuestion is a glass dis&la% case, )ecause it loo!s as i/ %ou
could, i/ %ou c#ose, o&en t#e door or clim) t#roug# t#e windowN and t#en t#e ne(t room, sa%, w#ic# is )ot# t#e general store and t#e Iustice o/ t#e &eace0s o//ice, loo!s li!e a dis&la% case )ut is
actuall% &ractical, and t#e Iustice o/ t#e &eace, wit# #is )lac! al&aca Iac!et and #is &istols at #is #i&s, is an actual &erson w#o sells %ou #is merc#andise4 ;t s#ould )e added t#at e(tras wal! a)out
t#e streets and &eriodicall% stage a /urious gun )attle, and w#en %ou realiGe t#at t#e a-erage American -isitor is wearing )lue Ieans not -er% di//erent /rom t#e cow)o%0s, man% o/ t#e -isitors
)ecome con/used wit# t#e e(tras, increasing t#e t#eatricalit% o/ t#e w#ole4 $or e(am&le, t#e -illage sc#ool, reconstructed wit# #%&errealistic detail, #as )e#ind t#e des! a sc#oolmarm wearing
,he )ity of 4obots 298
3#"erto Eco
292
a )onnet and an am&le c#ec!ed s!irt, )ut t#e c#ildren on t#e )enc#es are little &assing -isitors, and ; #eard one tourist as! #is wi/e i/ t#e c#ildren were real or F/a!e0 @and %ou could sense #is
&s%c#ological readiness to consider t#em, at will, e(tras, dummies, or mo-ing ro)ots o/ t#e sort we will see in Disne%landA4
A&&arentl% g#ost towns in-ol-e a di//erent a&&roac# /rom t#at o/ wa( museums or museums /or co&ies o/ wor!s o/ art4 ;n t#e /irst no)od% e(&ects t#e wa( a&oleon to )e ta!en /or real, )ut
t#e #allucination ser-es to le-el t#e -arious #istorical &eriods and erase t#e distinction )etween #istorical realit% and /antas%N in t#e case o/ t#e wor!s o/ art w#at is culturall%, i/ not
&s%c#ologicall%, #allucinator% is t#e con/usion )etween co&% and original, and t#e /etis#iGation o/ art as a seKuence o/ /amous su)Iects4 ;n t#e g#ost town, on t#e contrar%, since t#e t#eatricalit%
is e(&licit, t#e #allucination o&erates in ma!ing t#e -isitors ta!e &art in t#e scene and t#us )ecome &artici&ants in t#at commercial /air t#at is a&&arentl% an element o/ t#e /iction )ut in /act
re&resents t#e su)stantial aim o/ t#e w#ole imitati-e mac#ine4
;n an e(cellent essa% on Disne%land as Fdegenerate uto&ia0 @Fa degenerate uto&ia is an ideolog% realiGed in t#e /orm o/ m%t#0A, Louis Mann anal%Ged t#e structure o/ t#at nineteent#-centur%
/rontier cit% street t#at recei-es entering -isitors and distri)utes t#em t#roug# t#e -arious sectors o/ t#e magic cit%4 Disne%land0s Main Street seems t#e /irst scene o/ t#e /iction, w#ereas it is an
e(tremel% s#rewd commercial realit%4 Main Street H li!e t#e w#ole cit%, /or t#at matter H is &resented as at once a)solutel% realistic and a)solutel% /antastic, and t#is is t#e ad-antage @in terms o/
artistic conce&tionA o/ Disne%land o-er t#e ot#er to% cities4 T#e #ouses o/ Disne%land are /ull-siGe on t#e ground /loor, and on a two-t#irds scale on t#e /loor a)o-e, so t#e% gi-e t#e im&ression
o/ )eing in#a)ita)le @and t#e% areA )ut also o/ )elonging to a /antastic &ast t#at we can gras& wit# our imagination4 T#e Main Street /aMades are &resented to us as to% #ouses and in-ite us to
enter t#em, )ut t#eir interior is alwa%s a disguised su&ermar!et, w#ere %ou )u% o)sessi-el%, )elie-ing t#at %ou are still &la%ing4
;n t#is sense Disne%land is more #%&errealistic t#an t#e wa( museum, &recisel% )ecause t#e latter still tries to ma!e us )elie-e t#at w#at we are seeing re&roduces realit% a)solutel%, w#ereas
Disne%land ma!es it clear t#at wit#in its magic enclosure it is /antas% t#at is a)solutel% re&roduced4 T#e Palace o/ Li-ing Arts &resents its Jenus de Milo as almost real, w#ereas Disne%land can
&ermit itsel/ to &resent its reconstructions as master&ieces o/ /alsi/ication, /or w#at it sells is, indeed, goods, )ut genuine merc#andise, not re&roductions4 .#at is /alsi/ied is our will to )u%,
w#ic# we ta!e as real, and in t#is sense Disne%land is reall% t#e Kuintessence o/ consumer ideolog%4
1ut once t#e Ftotal /a!e0 is admitted, in order to )e enIo%ed it must seem totall%0 real4 So t#e Pol%nesian restaurant will #a-e, in addition to a /airl% aut#entic menu, Ta#itian waitresses in
costume, a&&ro&riate -egetation, roc! walls wit# little cascades, and once %ou are inside not#ing must lead %ou to sus&ect t#at outside t#ere is an%t#ing )ut Pol%nesia4 ;/, )etween two trees, t#ere
a&&ears a stretc# o/ ri-er t#at )elongs to anot#er sector, Ad-enturela/ld, t#en t#at section o/ st0-cam is so designed t#at it would not )e unrealistic to see in Ta#iti, )e%ond t#e garden #edge, a
ri-er
li!e t#is4 And i/ in t#e wa( museums wa( is not /les#, in Disne%land, w#en roc!s are in-ol-ed, t#e% are roc!, and water is water, and a )ao)a) a )ao)a)4 .#en t#ere is a /a!e H #i&&o&otamus,
dinosaur, sea ser&ent H it is not so muc# )ecause it wouldn0t )e &ossi)le to #a-e t#e real eKui-alent )ut )ecause t#e &u)lic is meant to admire t#e &er/ection o/ t#e /a!e and its o)edience to t#e
&rogram4 ;n t#is sense Disne%land not onl% &roduces illusion, )ut H in con/essing it H stimulates t#e desire /or it6 A real crocodile can )e /ound in t#e Goo, and as a rule it is doGing or #iding, )ut
Disne%land tells us t#at /a!ed nature corres&onds muc# more to our da%dream demands4 .#en, in t#e s&ace o/ twent%-/our #ours, %ou go @as ; did deli)eratel%0A /rom t#e /a!e ew Orleans o/
Disne%land to t#e real one, and /rom t#e wild ri-er o/ Ad-entureland to a tri& on t#e Mississi&&i, w#ere t#e ca&tain o/ t#e &addle-w#eel steamer sa%s it is &ossi)le to see alligators on t#e )an!s
o/ t#e ri-er, and t#en %ou don0t see an%, %ou ris! /eeling #omesic! /or Disne%land, w#ere t#e wild animals don0t #a-e to )e coa(ed4 Disne%land tells us t#at tec#nolog% can gi-e us more realit%
t#an nature can4
;n t#is sense ; )elie-e t#e most t%&ical &#enomenon o/ t#is uni-erse is not t#e more /amous $antas%land H an amusing carousel o/ /antastic Iourne%s t#at ta!e t#e -isitor into t#e world o/ Peter
Pan or Snow .#ite, a wondrous mac#ine w#ose /ascination and lucid legitimac% it would )e /oolis# to den% H )ut t#e Cari))ean Pirates and t#e Haunted Mansion4 T#e &irate s#ow lasts a
Kuarter o/ an #our @)ut %ou lose an% sense o/ time, it could )e ten minutes or t#irt%AN %ou enter a series o/ ca-es, carried in )oats o-er t#e sur/ace o/ t#e water, %ou see /irst a)andoned treasures, a
ca&tain0s s!eleton in a sum&tuous )ed o/ mold% )rocade, &endent co)we)s, )odies o/ e(ecuted men de-oured )% ra-ens, w#ile t#e s!eleton addresses menacing admonitions to %ou4 T#en %ou
na-igate an inlet, &assing t#roug# t#e cross/ire o/ a galleon and t#e cannon o/ a /ort, w#ile t#e c#ie/ corsair s#outs taunting c#allenges at t#e )eleaguered garrisonN t#en, as i/ along a ri-er, %ou
go )% an in-aded cit% w#ic# is )eing sac!ed, wit# t#e ra&e o/ t#e women, t#e/t o/ Iewels, torture o/ t#e ma%orN t#e cit% )urns li!e a matc#, drun!en &irates s&rawled on &iles o/ !egs sing o)scene
songsN some, com&letel% out o/ t#eir #eads, s#oot at t#e -isitorsN t#e scene degenerates, e-er%t#ing colla&ses in /lames, slowl% t#e last songs die awa%, %ou emerge into t#e sunlig#t4 E-er%t#ing
%ou #a-e seen was on #uman scale, t#e -ault o/ t#e ca-es )ecame con/used wit# t#at o/ t#e s!%, t#e )oundar% o/ t#is underground world was t#at o/ t#e uni-erse and it was im&ossi)le to
glim&se its limits4 T#e &irates mo-ed, danced, sle&t, &o&&ed t#eir e%es, sniggered, dran! H reall%4 You realiGe t#at t#e% are ro)ots, )ut %ou remain dum)/ounded )% t#eir -erisimilitude4 And, in
/act, t#e FAudio-Animatronic0 tec#niKue re&resented a great source o/ &ride /or .alt Disne%, w#o #ad /inall% managed to ac#ie-e #is own dream and reconstruct a /antas% world more real t#an
realit%, )rea!ing down t#e wall o/ t#e second dimension, creating not a mo-ie, w#ic# is illusion, )ut total t#eatre, and not wit# ant#ro&omor&#iGed animals, )ut wit# #uman )eings4 ;n /act,
Disne%0s ro)ots are master&ieces o/ electronicsN eac# was de-ised )% o)ser-ing t#e e(&ressions o/ a real actor, t#en )uilding models, t#en de-elo&ing s!eletons o/ a)solute &recision, aut#entic
com&uters in #uman /orm, to )e dressed in F/les#0 and Fs!in0 made )%
29: 3#"erto Eco ,he )ity of 4obots 29$
cra/tsmen, w#ose command o/ realism is incredi)le4 Eac# ro)ot o)e%s a &rogram, can s%nc#roniGe t#e mo-ements o/ mout# and e%es wit# t#e words and sounds o/ t#e audio, re&eating ad
infnitum all da% long #is esta)lis#ed &art @a sentence, one or two gesturesA and t#e -isitor, caug#t o// guard )%0 t#e succession o/ e-ents, o)liged to see se-eral t#ings at once, to le/t and rig#t and
straig#t a#ead, #as not time to loo! )ac! and o)ser-e t#at t#e ro)ot #e #as Iust seen is alread% re&eating #is eternal scenario4
T#e FAudio-Animatronic0 tec#niKue is used in man% ot#er &arts o/ Disne%land and also enli-ens a re-iew o/ &residents o/ t#e 8nited States, )ut in t#e &irates0 ca-e, more t#an an%w#ere else,
it demonstrates all its miraculous e//icac%4 Humans could do no )etter, and would cost more, )ut t#e im&ortant t#ing is &recisel% t#e /act t#at t#ese are not #umans and we !now t#e%0re not4 T#e
&leasure o/ imitation, as t#e ancients !new, is one o/ t#e most innate in t#e #uman s&iritN )ut #ere we not onl% enIo% a &er/ect imitation, we also enIo% t#e con-iction t#at imitation #as reac#ed
its a&e( and a/terwards realit% will alwa%s )e in/erior to it4
Similar criteria underlie t#e Iourne% t#roug# t#e cellars o/ t#e Haunted Mansion, w#ic# loo!s at /irst li!e a rundown countr% #ouse, somew#ere )etween Edgar Allan Poe and t#e cartoons o/
C#arles AddamsN )ut inside, it conceals t#e most com&lete arra% o/ witc#cra/t sur&rises t#at an%one could desire4 You &ass t#roug# an a)andoned gra-e%ard, w#ere s!eletal #ands raise
gra-estones /rom )elow, %ou cross a #ill enli-ened )% a witc#es0 sa))at# com&lete wit# s&irits and )eldamsN t#en %ou mo-e t#roug# a room wit# a ta)le all laid and a grou& o/ trans&arent g#osts
in nineteent#-centur% costume dancing w#ile dia&#anous guests, occasionall% -anis#ing into t#in air, enIo% t#e )anKuet o/ a )ar)aric so-ereign4 You are graGed )% co)we)s, re/lected in cr%stals
on w#ose sur/ace a greenis# /igure a&&ears, )e#ind %our )ac!N %ou encounter mo-ing candela)ra4 CCC ;n no instance are t#ese t#e c#ea& tric!s o/ some tunnel o/ lo-eN t#e in-ol-ement @alwa%s
tem&ered )% t#e #umor o/ t#e in-entionsA is total4 As in certain #orror /ilms, detac#ment is im&ossi)le, %ou are not witnessing anot#er0s #orror, %ou are inside t#e #orror t#roug# com&lete
s%nest#esiaN and i/ t#ere is an eart#Kua!e t#e mo-ie t#eater must also trem)le4
; would sa% t#at t#ese two attractions sum u& t#e Disne%land &#iloso&#% more t#an t#e eKuall% &er/ect models o/ t#e &irate s#i&, t#e ri-er )oat, and t#e sailing s#i& )olumbia5 all o)-iousl% in
wor!ing order4 And more t#an t#e $uture section, wit# t#e science-/iction emotions it arouses @suc# as a /lig#t to Mars e(&erienced /rom inside a s&acecra/t, wit# all t#e e//ects o/ deceleration,
loss o/ gra-it%, diGG%ing mo-ement awa% /rom t#e eart#, and so onA4 More t#an t#e models o/ roc!ets and atomic su)marines, w#ic# &rom&ted Mann to o)ser-e t#at w#ereas t#e /a!e .estern
cities, t#e /a!e ew Orleans, t#e /a!e Iungle &ro-ide li/e-siGe du&licates o/ organic )ut #istorical or /antastic e-ents, t#ese are reduced-scale models o/ mec#anical realities o/ toda%, and so,
w#ere somet#ing is incredi)le, t#e /ull-scale model &re-ails, and w#ere it is credi)le, t#e reduction ser-es to ma!e it attracti-e to t#e imagination4 T#e Pirates and t#e 2#osts sum u& all
Disne%land, at least /rom t#e &oint o/ -iew o/ our tri&, )ecause t#e% trans/orm t#e w#ole cit% into an immense ro)ot, t#e /inal realiGation o/ t#e dreams o/ t#e eig#teent#-cento6-0% riiec#anics
w#o
ga-e li/e to t#e .riter o/ euc#ctel and t#e C#ess-&la%ing Tur! o/ 1aron -on 'em&elen4
Disne%land0s &recision and co#erence are to some e(tent distur)ed )%0 t#e am)itions o/ Disne% .orld in $lorida4 1uilt later, Disne% .orld is a #undred /i/t%0 times larger t#an Disne%land,
and &roudl% &resents itsel/ not as a to% cit% )ut as t#e model o/ an ur)an agglomerate o/ t#e /uture4 T#e structures t#at ma!e u& Cali/ornia0s Disne%land /orm #ere onl% a marginal &art o/ an
immense com&le( o/ construction co-ering an area twice t#e siGe o/ Man#attan4 T#e great monorail t#at ta!es %ou /rom t#e entrance to t#e Magic 'ingdom @t#e Disne%land &art &ro&erA &asses
arti/icial )a%s and lagoons, a Swiss -illage, a Pol%nesian -illage, gol/ courses and tennis courts, an immense #otel6 an area dedicated, in ot#er words, to organiGed -acationing4 So %ou reac# t#e
Magic 'ingdom, %our e%es alread% daGGled )% so muc# science /iction t#at t#e sig#t o/ t#e #ig# medie-al castle @/ar more 2ot#ic t#an Disne%land6 a Stras)ourg Cat#edral, let0s sa%, com&ared to
a San MiniatoA no longer stirs t#e imagination4 Tomorrow, wit# its -iolence, #as made t#e colors /ade /rom t#e stories o/ Yesterda%4 ;n t#is res&ect Disne%land is muc# s#rewderN it must )e
-isited wit#out an%t#ing to remind us o/ t#e /uture surrounding it4 Mario #as o)ser-ed t#at, to enter it, t#e essential condition is to a)andon %our car in an endless &ar!ing lot and reac# t#e
)oundar% o/ t#e dream cit% )% s&ecial little trains4 And /or a Cali/ornian, lea-ing #is car means lea-ing #is own #umanit%, consigning #imsel/ to anot#er &ower, a)andoning #is own will4
An allegor% o/ t#e consumer societ%, a &lace o/ a)solute iconism, Disne%land is also a &lace o/ total &assi-it%4 ;ts -isitors must agree to )e#a-e li!e its ro)ots4 Access to eac# attraction is
regulated )% a maGe o/ metal railings w#ic# discourages an% indi-idual initiati-e4 T#e num)er o/ -isitors o)-iousl% sets t#e &ace o/ t#e lineN t#e o//icials o/ t#e dream, &ro&erl% dressed in t#e
uni/orms suited to eac# s&eci/ic attraction, not onl% admit t#e -isitor to t#e t#res#old o/ t#e c#osen sector, )ut, in successi-e &#ases, regulate #is e-er% mo-e @Fow wait #ere &lease, go u& now,
sit down &lease, wait )e/ore standing u&0, alwa%s in a &olite tone, im&ersonal, im&erious, o-er t#e micro&#oneA4 ;/ t#e -isitor &a%s t#is &rice, #e can #a-e not onl% Ft#e real t#ing0 )ut t#e
a)undance o/ t#e reconstructed trut#4 Li!e t#e Hearst Castle, Disne%land also #as no transitional s&acesN t#ere is alwa%s somet#ing to see, t#e great -oids o/ modern arc#itecture and cit%
&lanning are un!nown #ere4 ;/ America is t#e countr% o/ t#e 2uggen#eim Museum or t#e new s!%scra&ers o/ Man#attan, t#en Disne%land is a curious e(ce&tion and American intellectuals are
Kuite rig#t to re/use to go t#ere4 1ut i/ America is w#at we #a-e seen in t#e course o/ our tri&, t#en Disne%land is its Sistine C#a&el, and t#e #%&errealists o/ t#e art galleries are Onl% t#e timid
-o%eurs o/ an immense and continuous F/ound o)Iect04
1$ w A%ainst 'ntellectual
)omple=ity in (usic
Mic/ae. Ny#an
Stoc!#ausen0s notoriousl% arrogant aside to Morton $eldman H FV;Y once told $eldman t#at one o/ #is &ieces could )e a moment in m% music, )ut ne-er t#e ot#er wa% aroundOi H is indicati-e o/
an attitude t#at cannot com&re#end true sim&licit% in music4 A sim&le Fmoment0 can )e recogniGed as suc# onl% w#en &osited against anot#er, more com&le( moment4 ;n Stoc!#ausen0s music
simplified moments are eit#er set against ot#er moments o/ greater com&le(it%, or t#e% /ul/ill a com&le( role in t#e total structure o/ t#e wor!N w#ereas $eldman0s simple wor! is a com&lete
/ield in w#ic# moments o/ greater and:or lesser sim&licit%, i/ t#e% occur at all, #a-e no intended relational signi/icance in t#e traditional sense4 ;n w#at we call e(&erimental music H loosel%
s&ea!ing, t#e music o/ t#e Cage Ftradition0 H sim&licit% is somet#ing a&&roac#ing a constant, an a)solute, alt#oug# t#ere are o)-iousl% degrees o/ sim&licit%, Iust as t#ere are degrees o/
com&le(it%4 Still, sim&licit% is not one alternati-e to )e selected /rom t#e -ast reser-oir o/ means o/ e(&ression or tec#niKues u&on w#ic# t#e a-ant-garde com&oser can draw as occasion,
instrumentation, or com&ositional situation demands4 T#e straig#t/orwardness o/ most e(&erimental music, w#ic# usuall% /inds t#e most direct route to t#e e//ecti-e &resentation o/ t#e c#osen
sound material, mig#t )e inter&reted )% an outsider as a reaction to traditional and modernist intellectual com&le(it%4 1ut it #as not simplified t#e com&le( tec#nical &ara&#ernalia w#ic# ma!es
Euro&ean art music res&ecta)leN it #as Kuite )luntl% ignored t#at &ara&#ernalia, since t#e aest#etic, structural, and e(&ressi-e reKuirements o/ t#e so-called ew Sim&licit% demand t#e
de-elo&ment o/ a totall% di//erent, inde&endent @some mig#t sa% nai-e, innocent, and sim&le-mindedA com&ositional met#odolog%4
4eaction a%ainst com&le(it% is, in /act, a c#aracteristic o/ intellectuall% com&le( music itsel/, as Stoc!#ausen #imsel/ noted w#en #e o)ser-ed t#at in t#e earl% da%s of total serialism in t#e
/i/ties6
all elements #ad eKual rig#ts in t#e /orming &rocess and constantl% renes-cd all t#eir
c#aracteristics /rom one sound to t#e ne(t4444 ;/ /rom one sound to t#e ne(t, &itc#,
$rom 2ctober5 *, @*+E9A, E*H+4
A%ainst 'ntellectual )omple=ity in (usic 29=
duration, tim)re, and intensit% c#ange, t#en t#e music /inall% )ecomes static6 it c#anges e(tremel% Kuic!l%, one is constantl% tra-ersing t#e entire realm o/ e(&erience in a -ets0 s#ort time
and t#us one /inds onesel/ in a state o/ sus&ended animation, t#e music Fstands still04 ;/ one wanted to articulate larger time-&#ases, t#e onl% wa%0 o/ doing t#is was to let one sound-
c#aracteristic &redominate o-er all ot#ers /or some time4 Howe-er, under t#e circumstances t#en &re-alent, t#is would #a-e radicall% contradicted t#e sound-c#aracteristics4 And a solution
was /ound to distri)ute i.-i s&ace, among di//erent grou&s o/ louds&ea!ers, or instruments, -ariousl%- long time-&#ases o/ t#is !ind o/ #omogeneous sound-structure4 5
;n t#e re-ol-ing )rass c#ords in /ruppen5 /or instance, t#is sim&li/ication a demonstra)le reaction against a com&le( statistical rat#er t#an musical &rocess, )ears a)solutel% no relation to t#e
sim&licit% descri)ed )% 3o#n Cage in *+?* w#en discussing t#e music o/ La Monte Young6
Young is doing somet#ing Kuite di//erent /rom w#at ; am doing, and it stri!es me as )eing -er% im&ortant4 T#roug# t#e /ew &ieces o/ #is ;0-e #eard V&resuma)l%0 suc# minimal classics as X
for 7enry $lint and )omposition 1*+0 Ho. <*, ;0-e #ad, actuall%, utterl% di//erent e(&eriences o/ listening t#an ;0-e #ad wit# an% ot#er music4 He is a)le eit#er t#roug# t#e re&etition o/ a
single sound or t#roug# t#e continued &er/ormance o/ a single sound /or a &eriod li!e twent% minutes, to )ring it a)out t#at a/ter, sa%, /i-e minutes, ; disco-er t#at w#at ; #a-e all along )een
t#in!ing was t#e same t#ing is not t#e same t#ing a/ter all, )ut /ull o/ -ariet%4 ; /ind #is wor! remar!a)le almost in t#e same sense t#at t#e c#ange o/ e(&erience o/ seeing is w#en %ou loo!
t#roug# a microsco&e4 You see t#at t#ere is somet#ing ot#er t#an w#at %ou t#oug#t was t#ere4
On t#e ot#er #and, La Monte Young0s music can )e #eard )% Euro&eans as )eing Euro&ean4 $or e(am&le, ta!e t#e re&etition o/ a tone cluster or a single sound at a seemingl% constant
am&litude o-er, sa%, a ten-minute &eriod4 T#e Euro&ean listener is a)le to t#in!, F.ell, t#at is w#at we0-e alwa%s #ad, minus all t#e elements o/ -ariation40 So t#e% imagine, %ou see, t#at
somet#ing is )eing done to t#em, namel% a sim&li/ication o/ w#at t#e%0re /amiliar wit#4 M% res&onse is not t#at #e is doing somet#ing to me, )ut t#at ; am a)le to #ear di//erentl% t#an ; e-er
#eard4
,
Consider Young0s c#ord o/ 1 and $ s#ar& in )omposition 1*+0 Ho. 75 or t#e dominant ele-ent# e(tended /rom one )eat to o-er 599 )eats )%0 Ste-e Reic# in #is $our 2r%ans. ;/ we ta!e t#ese
F&rimiti-e0 musical materials as reductions or concentrations o/ traditional tonal occurrences, t#en we are indeed tal!ing o/ sim&li/ication ;t is &ossi)le, o/ course, to anal%0Ge @rat#er t#an to #earA
t#em in t#is .a%, es&eciall% i/ %ours is a s%m)olic or meta&#oric -iew o/ music4 Reic#, /or instance, em&lo%s t#e dominant ele-ent# in suc# a ((0a% t#at it Fcontains0 )ot# tonic and dominant
c#ords, and could t#ere/ore )e said to Fre&resent0, in digest /orm, t#e tensions o/ t#e tonal s%stem4 As t#e dominant ele-ent# e(tends itsel/, we ma% Percei-e t#e tonic:dominant &ull, t#at is, t#e
dominant in t#e c#ord a&&ears to resol-e0 onto its tonic element4 ;t would, #owe-er, )e incorrect to )elie-e t#at w#en Reic# sat down to com&ose $our 2r%ans #e #ad an%t#ing more in mind
t#an t#e
29<
29@ Mic/ae. Ny#an A%ainst 'ntellectual )omple=ity in (usic 29B
material itsel/ @a F&re/erred /ragment0 ta!en not /rom traditional music )ut more li!el% /rom DiGG% 2illes&ieA and t#e most suita)le &rocess /or articulating t#is /ragment o-er a com&arati-el%
long &eriod o/ time4
=
;n t#e instance o/ t#e dominant ele-ent#, it s#ould )e remem)ered t#at one o/ t#e most /undamental lessons o/ Cage0s aest#etic is t#e &rinci&le o/ not reducing t#e w#ole o/ music H or culture
H to a single set, )ut t#e o&&osite6 )eginning /rom not#ing, )uilding /rom Gero or, as =0 ##Y s#ows, /rom silence4 T#is is &er#a&s t#e /undamental di//erence )etween, on t#e one #and, an a-ant-
garde w#ose intellectuall% com&le( music )uilds on, gro(-s /rom, de-elo&s, and e(tends traditional com&ositional tec#niKues and conce&ts and, on t#e ot#er, e(&erimental music, in w#ic#
a&&arent straig#t/orwardness and lac! o/ notated com&le(it%-deri-es /rom &rinci&les alien to Euro&ean music, at least since *?994O
.#ile t#e material o/ a wor! H t#e o&en /i/t# or t#e dominant ele-ent# H a&&ears to arise /rom Gero, t#is new com&ositional attitude actuall% arose out o/ serialism4 ;n Reic# and Young,
s&eci/ic, i/ uncon-entional, musical attitudes re-ealed t#emsel-es to )e at wor! within serialism, rat#er t#an as a )lan!et reaction a%ainst serialism4 .riting serial music /or 1erio at Mills
College, Reic# a-oided trans&osing #is rows in order to retain some sort o/ tonal /eeling4 And #e a&&roac#ed t#e row itsel/ as a re&eating constant to )e regrou&ed eac# time it recurred4
A totall% new attitude towards duration arose out o/ Young0s serial writing in t#e /i/tiesN indi-idual &itc#es )egan to e(tend t#emsel-es /rom wit#in t#e serial conte(t, so t#at in #is
2ctetforKrass A1*!7? long notes would o/ten )e#eld /or t#ree or /our minutes4 ot#ing else would #a&&en, a&art /rom t#e o-erla&&ing o/ ot#er occasional long notes, and rests w#ic# lasted /or a
minute or more4 $rom t#e -iew&oint o/ traditional com&osition, we ma% Iusti/ia)l% s&ea! o/ sim&li/ication, since t#ere #as )een a signi/icant reduction in &itc# in/ormation and r#%t#mic
com&le(it%4 T#is is em&#asiGed e-en more in Young0s su)seKuent ,rio for -trin%s5 w#ere according to t#e com&oser t#ere is a greater em&#asis on #armon% t#an in an% ot#er music, Fto t#e
e(clusion o/ almost an% sem)lance o/ w#at #ad )een generall% !nown as melod%04
?
1ut once t#is new em&#asis on e(tended duration as t#e sub9ect o/ t#e com&osition emerged out o/ t#e old
serial organism H leading naturall% to t#e e(clusi-e use o/ sustained notes, t#e melod%less #armon% w#ic# Young continued to e(&lore in #is tem&orall% all-em)racing ,he ,ortoise5 7is
3ourneys and <reams H we can no longer s&ea! o/ reduction, reaction, or e-en reIection, )ut o/ entirel% new musical concerns and materials demanding entirel%0 new met#ods o/ structuring and
articulation4
;n s!etc#ing t#is )ac!ground to t#e so-called ew Sim&licit%, it is also use/ul to distinguis# two di//erent reactions to one o/ t#e main e(&onents o/ intellectuall% com&le( music H Anton
.e)ern4 1ot# Reic# and Young @as well as C#ristian .ol// in t#e F/irst generation0 o/ e(&erimental com&osers in t#e earl% /i/tiesA #eard t#e results o/ .e)ern0s serial mani&ulations in an
entirel% selecti-e wa%4 Reic# #as s&o!en o/ t#e Finter-allic consistenc%0 o/ t#e 2rchestral Variations5 w#ic# Fgi-e VsY a !ind o/ #armonic sound to #is music04
<
And Young, noting .c#crn0s
&ractice o/ re&eating t#e same &itc#es in t#e same octa-e &ositions w#ate4 4t t#eir &osition in
t#e di//erent /orms and trans&ositions o/ t#e row, remar!ed t#at w#ile on t#e sur/ace t#is re&resented Fconstant -ariation0, it could also )e #eard as stasis, F)ecause it uses t#e same /orm
t#roug#out t#e &iece4444 .e #a-e t#e same in/ormation re&eated o-er and o-er and o-er again40
E
T#is !ind o/ selecti-e #earing, w#ic# de&ends, o/ course, on t#e #earer0s indi-idual musical
interests and &erce&tions, is t#e o)-erse o/ t#e situation outlined )% Cage4 ;n .e)ern one &ercei-es sameness out o/ @a&&arentA -ariet%, w#ile in Young0s, 2lass0s, or Reic#0s music one
&ercei-es -ariet% out o/ @a&&arentA sameness H a -ariet% o/ a di//erent order, demanding a di//erent mode o/ listening and o/ e(&eriencing musical time4
At times t#e Kuestion o/ -ariet%-in-sameness &oses &ro)lems /or t#e &er/ormer as well, as Cornelius Cardew indicated in #is anal%sis o/ Young0s seminal Xfor 7enry $lint. Young0s wor!
e(ists onl% in oral /orm and concerns a single, dense, #ea-%, deca%ing sound re&eated as uni/orml% and regularl% as &ossi)le4 Cardew as!s6
.#at is t#e model /or t#is uni/ormit%D T#e /irst soundD Or does eac# sound )ecome t#e model /or t#e one succeeding itD ;/ t#e /ormer, t#e /irst sound #as to )e /i(ed in t#e mind as a mental
ideal w#ic# all t#e remaining sounds are to a&&roac# as closel% as &ossi)le4 @;n &ractice t#e /irst sound too is an attem&t to a&&roac# a mental image t#at e(ists )e/ore t#e &iece )egan4A ;/ t#e
latter met#od is c#osen, constant care #as to )e ta!en to assimilate t#e -arious accidental -ariations as t#e% occur4 Da-id Tudor #as a&&roac#ed t#e &iece in t#is wa% and tells #ow, on
noticing t#at certain !e%s in t#e centre o/ t#e !e%)oard were not )eing de&ressed, it )ecame #is tas! to ma!e sure t#at t#ese &articular !e%s continued to )e silent4 T#e tas! o/ assimilating and
maintaining accidental -ariations, i/ logicall% &ursued, reKuires su&er#uman &owers o/ concentration and tec#niKue4444 ;t must )e remem)ered t#at alt#oug# uni/ormit% is demanded @Fas /ar as
&ossi)le0A, w#at is desired is -ariation4 ;t is sim&l% t#is6 t#at t#e -ariation t#at is desired is t#at w#ic# results /rom t#e #uman @not t#e su&er#umanA attem&t at uni/ormit%4
.ritten in *+?,, suc# minutel% detailed anal%tical so&#istr% ma% )e somew#at outdated in terms o/ contem&orar% musical &racticeN %et it does s#ow t#at t#ere are /orms o/ com&le(it% ot#er t#an
t#e intellectual at wor! in e(&erimental music, w#ic#, generall% s&ea!ing, re-eal creati-e and &erce&tual areas neglected in traditional and a-ant-garde music, and w#ic# #a-e c#anged t#e
acce&ted em&#ases in t#e conce&tionHcom&osition&er/ormance&erce&tion c#ain4
To return to t#e e(&erimental com&osers0 res&onse to .e)ern6 How are we to Iudge t#e reaction to .e)ern0s intellectual com&le(it% as it mani/ests itsel/ in t#e wor! o/ Morton $eldman, /or
e(am&leD ;t was t#roug# .e)ern t#at $eldman /irst met Cage H a/ter a &er/ormance o/ t#e -ymphony5 w#ic# )ot# /ound F)eauti/ul04 $eldman0s interest in t#e earl% /i/ties was, #e claims, in sound
rat#er t#an structure4 A)stractOe(&ressionist &ainting suggested a sound world Fmore direct, more immediate, more &#%sical t#an an%t#ing t#at #ad e(isted )e/ore04 Jar#se, #e /elt, #ad searc#ed
a/ter t#is ideal, F)ut #e was too ]Jarese N .e)ern also glim&sed it, F)ut #is wor! was too in-ol-ed wit# t#e disci&lines o/ t#e *5-tone s%stem04 iO ;t is well !nown t#at $eldman0s /irst
Fe(&erimental0 &ieces #ad certain im&ro-isational or
A%ainst 'ntellectual )omple=ity in (usic 5**
219 Mic/ae. Ny#an
/ree elements, since Ft#e new structure reKuired a concentration more demanding t#an i/ t#e tec#niKue were t#at o/ still &#otogra&#%0, w#ic# is w#at &recise notation #ad )ecome /or #im4 ;n a
&iece li!e &ro9ection Ho. " /or /lute, trum&et, and cello, #e said t#at #is desire was not to Fcom&ose0 )ut to F&roIect sounds into time, /ree /rom a com&ositional r#etoric t#at #ad no &lace #ere4 ;n
order not to in-ol-e t#e &er/ormer V$eldman #imsel/Y in memor% Vrelations#i&sY, and )ecause sounds no longer #ad an in#erent s#a&eO,il #e allowed /or certain indeterminacies in &itc#4 T#is
was certainl% a #eretical idea in t#e /ace o/ a serial s%stem w#ic# was t#en, as it is now, more or less e(clusi-el% &itc# oriented4 ;n a later statement, $eldman made #is attitude towards serialism
startlingl% clear6
;t a&&ears to me t#at t#e su)Iect o/ music, /rom Mac#aut to 1ouleG, #as alwa%s )een its construction4 Melodies o/ *5-tone rows Iust don0t #a&&en4 T#e% must )e constructed4444 To
demonstrate an% /ormal idea in music, w#et#er structure or stricture, is a matter o/ construction, in w#ic# t#e met#odolog% is t#e controlling meta&#or o/ t#e com&osition4444 Onl% )%
Fun/i(ing0 t#e elements traditionall% used to construct a &iece o/ music could t#e sounds e(ist in t#emsel-es H not as s%m)ols, or memories w#ic# were t#e memories o/ ot#er music to )egin
wit#4
T#e radical conce&t is, o/ course, t#at o/ unfi=in% relationships5 since all &ost-Renaissance music #as )een concerned wit# /i(ing wit# increasing e(actitude t#e relations#i&s )etween sounds4
Cage0s attitude towards un/i(ing relations#i&s was Hand un/ortunatel% remains H as rigorous and strict as t#e serialist0s towards /i(ing relations#i&s4 ;t mig#t )e use/ul to recall Cage0s a&&roac#,
e-en t#oug# it mig#t a&&ear to )e onl% indirectl% related to t#e so-called ew Sim&licit%4 ;n *+<9 #e remar!ed t#at #e would assume6
t#at relations would e(ist )etween sounds as t#e% would e(ist )etween &eo&le and t#at t#ose relations#i&s are more com&le( t#an an% ; would )e a)le to &rescri)e4 So )%0 sim&l% dro&&ing
t#at res&onsi)ilit% o/ ma!ing relations#i&s ; don0t lose t#e relations#i&4 ; !ee& t#e situation in w#at %ou mig#t call a natural com&le(it% t#at can )e o)ser-ed in one wa% or anot#er4 ow it
used to )e t#oug#t t#at t#e /unction o/ t#e artist was to e(&ress #imsel/ and t#ere/ore #e #ad to set u& &articular relations#i&s4 ; t#in! t#at t#is w#ole Kuestion o/ art is a Kuestion o/ c#anging
our minds and t#at t#e /unction o/ t#e artist is not sel/-e(&ression )ut rat#er sel/-alteration, and t#e t#ing )eing altered is clearl% not #is #ands or #is e%es )ut rat#er #is mind4444
2i-en a &articular situation, one &erson will o)ser-e certain relations#i&s, anot#er will o)ser-e ot#ers4 ;/ we #a-e t#e -iew we used to #a-e, t#at t#ere was onl% one rig#t wa% o/ o)ser-ing
t#e relations#i&s o/ t#ings, t#en we #a-e a situation t#at reall% doesn0t a&&eal to me4 .e #a-e, in ot#er words, one t#ing t#at0s rig#t and all t#e rest are wrong4 ; would li!e to #a-e a
multi&licit% o/ rig#ts4 *5
Com&ared wit# t#e music o/ La Monte Young, Cage0s music a&&ears, at its most c#aracteristic @and #e would sa% its )estA, to )e Fcom&le(0N )ut t#is non- or e-en anti-intellectual com&le(it% is
onl% a&&arent, since an% relations#i&s tOat emerge are onl% s!in dee&, li!e t#e relations#i&s )etween strangers w#o #a&&en L3 &ass on t#e street4
T#is, t#en, is Iust one e(treme o/ t#e ew Sim&licit%, w#ere all musical e-ents de-oid o/ intentional relations#i&s, are o/ eKual im&ortance @or, in Cage, o/ eKual unim&ortanceA4 T#e o&&osite
e(treme, re&resented in America )% t#e music o/ Terr% Rile%, Reic#, 2lass, Young, and 3on 2i)son, and in England )% 2a-in 1r%ars, 3o#n .#ite, C#risto&#er Ho))s, and m%sel/, is closel%
related conce&tuall%, met#odologicall%, and structurall% to Cage, e-en w#en its &ur&oses and met#ods a&&ear to contradict t#is relation4 Cage #imsel/ &ercei-ed t#e similarit%N #is own music
ma% )e antistructure, %et i/ one o/ t#ese %ounger com&osers Fmaintains in #is wor! as&ects o/ structure, t#e% are s%mmetrical in c#aracter, canonic or enIo%0ing an eKual im&ortance o/ &arts,
eit#er t#ose t#at are &resent at one instant, or t#ose t#at succeed one anot#er in time04 18 Once Cage #ad attem&ted H and succeeded H in remo-ing t#e glue /rom musical relations#i&s )% resorting
to c#ance met#ods o/ articulating a multi&licit% o/ sounds in com)ination and seKuence, %ounger com&osers /ound t#emsel-es /ree to e(&lore and to realiGe t#e &otential o/ e(tending sin%le
sounds or limited sets o/ sounds and to create relations#i&s )etween di//erent as&ects o/ t#ese restricted sets4
T#e eKualit% o/ -ertical and #oriGontal com&ositional as&ects is /undamental to e(&erimental music4 Sim&licit% is an a)solute, a constant, not &art o/ a scale o/ -alues, te(tures, tec#niKues,
dramatic structure, or w#ate-er, s&anning t#e entire gamut /rom a)solute sim&licit% to /rig#tening @and usuall% sel/-de/eatingA com&le(it%4 or are t#ere moments o/ greater or lesser sim&licit%
during a wor!, unless t#e% result naturall% /rom t#e c#osen &rocess, as /or e(am&le in Reic#0s &endulum (usic5 at t#e conclusion o/ w#ic# all t#e micro&#ones come to rest Hreac# unison, so to
s&ea! H a/ter t#e more Fcom&le(0 interaction o/ inde&endent and graduall% elongated /eed)ac! &ulses4 Similarl%, sim&licit% is not a dualistic or multi&le Kualit% @in t#e end, t#e a&&arent
com&le(it% o/ Cage0s multi&licit% is sim&le, since no structural relations are esta)lis#ed )etween successi-e &artsAN onl%0 in rare cases, suc# as 2a-in 1r%ars0s 3esus1 Klood He.er $ailed (e Uet5
are melod%:#armon%0 &olariGations aimed /or or ac#ie-ed4 .#en t#e% are H in m% own music, /or instance
K re&etition guarantees t#at suc# o-ert )ac!ground:/oreground /ocus is destro%ed, negated, or reassessed in some wa%4 Similarl%, t#e &arts o/ a sectional wor!, suc# as Reic#0s <rummin%5
relate to eac# ot#er in a *6*, or *6 * Z * CCC relations#i&4
;n t#is new, sim&le e(&erimental music t#e gi-en material o/ a &iece is its only material and relates onl% to itsel/N t#ere are no contrasting, com&lementar%0, or secondar% ideas4 T#e single,
unitar% musical idea, usuall% o/ immense and deli)erate sim&licit%, is e(tended t#roug# t#e com&osition )% means o/ re&etition, augmentation, &#rase s#i/ting, imitation, accumulation, rotation,
num)er &ermutation, -ertical stac!ing, addition, la%ering, etc4 T#ese )asic tec#niKues are not used, as t#e% are in Fcom&le(0 music, to trans/orm, disguise, transu)stantiate, or intermodulate
eit#er t#emsel-es or t#e initial musical ideaN w#ere c#ange is an im&ortant &art o/ a wor! @in t#e old terminolog%, w#en t#e wor! is /ll@AtC Fde-elo&ed0A, t#e s%stems, &rocedures, and &rocesses
guarantee t#at t#e identit%0 o/ t#e material is alwa%s audi)l% retained4
Per#a&s t#e reaction o/ e(&erimental com&osers to t#e so-called intellectual
212 Mic/ae. Ny#an A%ainst 'ntellectual )omple=ity in (usic 5*,
com&le(it% o/ a-ant-garde music is a reaction not against intellectual com&le(it% itsel/, )ut against w#at )rings a)out t#e need /or suc# com&le(it%, as well as its audi)le result4 .e s#ould
&er#a&s s&ea! o/ t#e Kualities t#at serial music denied and w#ic# #a-e resur/aced in e(&erimental music6 s%mmetrical r#%t#ms @i4e4 regular )eatAN eu&#on%N consonant, diatonic, or modal
materialsN a)sence o/ t#eatricalit% and grandiloKuence, o/ drama, o/ sound used as s%m)ol4
;n discussing e(&erimental music as a w#ole, we s#ould &er#a&s read Few O)Iecti-it%0 /or Few Sim&licit%0, since com&oser-&u)lis#er-&u)licist Dic! Higgins /ound Cage0s em&#asis on
c#ance &rocedures signi/icant as a means o/ distancing onesel/ /rom one0s materialsN t#e com&oser no longer /eels t#e necessit% o/ consciousl% in/luencing t#e creati-e &rocess at e-er% moment4
According to Higgins, F.#at Cage did was to &lace t#e material at one remo-e /rom t#e com&oser, )% allowing it to )e determined )% a s%stem w#ic# #e determined4 And t#e real inno-ation
lies in t#e em&#asis on t#e creation o/ a s%stem40 1: T#is Fem&#asis on t#e creation o/ a s%stem0 a&&lies )ot# to t#e mec#anical acce&tance o/ a s%stem @in t#e &ercussion music o/ Ho))s and
.#ite, /or e(am&leA and to t#e music o/ Ste-e Reic#, w#o #as increasingl% soug#t to ma!e &ersonal Faest#etic0 inter-entions w#ic# seem to contradict t#e &rinci&les laid down in t#e *+?E
statement (usic as a /radual &rocess. Des&ite t#e inter-ention o/ &ersonal decisions w#ic# to some e(tent o-erride t#e a)stract mec#anics o/ t#e s%stem, Reic#0s music still retains t#e )asic
nontraditional c#aracteristics s#ared )% all e(&erimental music6 t#at o/ stasis and a nondirectional, nondramatic, nond%namic a&&roac# to musical structureN t#ere are no #ierarc#ies, no
transitions, no tension, no rela(ation, and c#ange is Kuantitati-e rat#er t#an Kualitati-e4
;n *+=E Cage wrote6 F.e ma% recogniGe w#at ma% )e called &er#a&s a new contem&orar% awareness o/ /orm6 it is static, rat#er t#an &rogressi-e in c#aracter40
*>
T#is was unconsciousl%
ec#oed some twent% %ears later )% La Monte Young w#en #e distinguis#ed #is music /rom t#at o/ t#e .estern tradition6 FClima( and directionalit% #a-e )een among t#e most im&ortant guiding
/actors Vin music since t#e t#irteent# centur%Y, w#ereas music )e/ore t#at time, /rom t#e c#ants t#roug# organum and Mac#aut, used stasis as a &oint o/ structure a little )it more t#e wa% certain
Eastern musical s%stems #a-e40 1< And Iust as &re-t#irteent#-centur% and non-.estern music o/ten &resent sur&risingl% com&le( &erce&tual &ro)lems /or t#e listener reared on Euro&ean classical
music, so too does t#is Fsim&le0 music t#at ; #a-e c#osen to call e(&erimental4
Notes
*4 3onat#an Cott, FTal!ing @w#ew^A to 'arl#eInG Stoc!#ausen0, 4ollin% -tone5 E 3ul% *+<*4
54 'arl#einG Stoc!#ausen, FMusic in s&ace0, FTwo lectures0, <ie 4eihe5 !5 T#eodore Presser, 1r%n Mawr, *+?*, &4 ?+4
,4 Roger Re%nolds, F;nter-iew wit# 3o#n Cage0, in 3ohn )a%e5 Henmar Press, ew Yor!,
*+?5, &4 >54
. Two &oints o/ clari/ication are necessar%6 /irst, twent% or so minutes ma% not )e a long duration /or a &iece o/ Fnew music0, %et it ma% @or ma% notA )e a long &eriod /or t#e gradual
augmentation o/ a single c#ordN second, Fsitting down to com&ose0 is a meta&#or ta!en /rom traditional com&osition4 ;t usuall% #as little to do wit# t#e &rocess o/ &roducing e(&erimental
music, w#ic# e//ecti-el% )%&asses t#e traditional idea o/ t#e Fcra/t o/ musical com&osition0 and all t#at it in-ol-es4
!. M% own music, w#ic# ; consider to /all into t#e e(&erimental categor%0 as de/ined in no )oo! :=perimental (usic5 )a%e and Keyond @Sc#irmer 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+<=,, is, #owe-er,
related to se-enteent#- and eig#teent#-centur% -ariation /orms, w#ile s%stems music in general is related, #owe-er distantl%, to serialism4
?4 Ric#ard 'ostelanetG, FCon-ersation wit# La Monte Young0, in La Monte Young and Maria SaGeela, -elected Writin%s5 Heiner $riedric#, Munic#, *+?+4
<4 Personal communication to t#e aut#or4
E4 'ostelanetG, FCon-ersation wit# La Monte Young04
+4 Cornelius Cardew, ,reatise 7andbook5 Peters Editions, London, *+<*4
*94 Cited in Mic#ael %man, :=perimental (usic5 &4 ==4
**4 'bid.
*54 $ran! 'ermode, F;s an elite necessar%D0 @inter-iew wit# CageA, ,he 6istener @LondonA,
! o-em)er *+<94
*,4 3o#n Cage, A Uear from (onday5 .esle%an 8ni-ersit% Press, Middletown, CT, *+?<,
&4,*4
*=4 Dic! Higgins, foew [ ornbwhnw5 Somet#ing Else Press, ew Yor!, *+?+4
*>4 Ric#ard 'ostelanetG @ed4A, 3ohn )a%e5 Praeger, ew Yor!, *+<9, &4 E*4
*?4 'ostelanetG, FCon-ersation wit# La Monte Young04
PART $O8R
)risis in the A.ant-/arde
Introduction
Parado(icall%, tradition is re-olutionar%4 A tradition is alwa%s older t#an t#e immediate &astN #ence t#e endorsement o/ tradition alwa%s im&lies a reIection o/ t#at immediate &ast
in t#e interests o/ somet#ing &urer, and suc# reIection is alwa%s e(&erienced as re-olutionar%, an o-erturning o/ t#e -alues o/ an immediate &ast w#ic# #a-e outli-ed t#eir
use/ulness4 T#is ma!es sense o/ t#e great modernist &arado( in w#ic# T4 S4 Eliot claimed Ftradition0 as #is own in w#at was &ercei-ed as an o-ertl% re-olutionar% /orm o/ &oetr%4
1% e(tension, t#e endorsement o/ tradition, in t#e reIection o/ t#e immediate &ast, also alwa%s &resu&&oses t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a di//erent /utureN and t#e ado&tion o/ tradition can
t#us @t#oug# t#is is not alwa%s necessarily t#e caseA &ut an artist in t#e &osition o/ )eing a-ant-garde, t#e originator o/ a di//erent /uture, t#e li)erator o/ a num)er o/ &role&tic
&ossi)ilities4 A second le-el o/ &arado( arises, #owe-er, w#ene-er t#is strateg% is re&eated4 Once it )ecomes &ossi)le to re&eat t#e a-ant-garde &rocedure o/ t#e re-olutionar%0
ado&tion o/ Ftradition0, one #as )egun t#e &rocess w#ere)% t#e a-ant-garde strateg% is in danger o/ )ecoming itsel/ Ftraditional0 in a wea! sense o/ t#e term4 An in)uilt crisis o/
o)solescence is necessaril% inscri)ed in t#e logic o/ t#e a-ant-garde4 T#e a-ant-garde artist is an emanci&ator% F#ero0 w#ose -er% indi-iduation and status as a leading /igure or
e(em&lar% artist is necessaril% wort#less, /or suc# indi-iduation is c#aracterised )% t#e necessit% o/ #er or #is sel/-sacri/ice in t#e interests o/ t#e arriZre-garde4
;/ we are in a moment w#en modernism is no longer adeKuate to our condition, and i/ we #a-e t#e emergence o/ somet#ing w#ic# can )e c#aracterised as &ostmodern0 in t#e
wea!, c#ronological sense o/ t#e term, t#en it seems o)-ious to identi/% t#e &ostmodern wit# a contem&orar% a-ant-garde4 1ut suc# an allegiance )etween t#e &ostmodern and t#e
a-ant-garde is, at )est, rat#er uneas%4 Hu%ssen indicates in t#e &iece included #ere t#at two crucial as&ects o/ t#e a-ant-garde are, /irst, t#e constitution o/ an intimate relation
)etween art and t#e e-er%da% li-ed-world and, secondl%, t#e -i)rant &roduction o/ a sense o/ t#e /uture4 ;n a com&arison )etween t#e cultural conditions o/ Euro&e and t#e 8nited
States o/ America in t#e twentiet# centur%, Hu%ssen manages to identi/% t#e #istorical Euro&ean a-ant-garde @Dada, surrealism, Constructi-iSm, etc4A as Ot#e most /ascinating
com&onent o/ modernit%0, wit# w#ose F&rogreSSiJe0 &roIect it is Com&licit4 Man% sectors o/ t#e contem&orar% H &ostmodern H culture Fwould reIect t#e a-ant-garde0s
uni-ersaliGing and totaliGing gesture as muc# as its am)iguous es&ousal o/ tec#nolog% and moderniGation04 Yet t#is does not necessaril% &ut t#e
21=
5*E
&ostmodern in t#e cam& o/ t#ose w#o reIect t#e re-olutionar% credentials o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-garde4 T#is #istorical a-ant-garde itsel/ ma% now occu&% t#e &osition o/ an immediate &ast w#ic#
is to )e reIected in t#e name o/ a &ostmodern gesture4
T#is does not deal wit# t#e w#ole o/ t#e &ro)lem4 As 1urger s#ows, Ft#e &rotest o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-garde against art as institution is acce&ted as art15 w#ic# ma!es it rat#er di//icult /or a
contem&orar% a-ant-garde to continue t#is &rocess, a &rocess w#ic# is central to t#e &oint o/ t#e a-ant-garde0s &roIect o/ eliminating t#e idea o/ an autonomous art, di-orced /rom t#e e-er%da%
&olitical and li-ed world4 ;n t#e contem&orar% situation, we do indeed #a-e wor!s w#ic# )rea! down t#e di-ision )etween autonomous aest#etic realm and li-ed-#istorical &olitical realmN )ut
t#e% can )e &o&ulist wor!s w#ic# ma!e art merel% consuma)le, &roducing a commodit% aest#etics w#ic# is #ardl% conduci-e to re-olutionar% acti-it%4 ;t seems t#at t#e a-ant-garde, i/ it is to
continue its &roIect, must )e Fdi//icult04
T#e a-ant-garde artwor! is, in a strict sense o/ t#e word, Funtimel%0N )% de/inition, it must )e out o/ its F&ro&er0 #istorical moment, more a&&ro&riatel% located in t#e /uture w#ic# it en-isages
and towards w#ic# it )ec!ons4 ;t t#ere)% &ro)lematises, in t#e manner o/ Hegel at t#e start o/ ,he &henomenolo%y of -pirit5 t#e great deictics F#ere0 and Fnow04 ;t is t#is terrain on w#ic# L%otard
e(ercises #is t#oug#t on t#e a-ant-garde in t#e &iece included #ere4 T#e a-ant-garde is caug#t in an Fe-ent0, a term w#ic# #as a -er% s&eci/ic sense in L%otard0s le(icon4 T#ere is an Fit #a&&ens0
w#ic# cannot )e assimilated to consciousness, or does not ta!e its &lace wit#in consciousness4 T#at is to sa%, as L%otard &uts it #ere, t#e Fit #a&&ens0 rat#er Fdismantles0 consciousness, and is not
mastered )% it4 .e mig#t &ut it in ot#er words )% sa%ing t#at t#e Fit #a&&ens0 re/uses to )e assimilated into a s%stem according to w#ic# consciousness orientates itsel/ to t#e world4 T#e Fit
#a&&ens0 is t#us t#e moment o/ a dislocation, t#e moment w#en a Fnow0 or a F#ere0 gi-es a momentar% glim&se o/ a Ft#en0 and a Ft#ere04 T#e /unction o/ an a-ant-garde is to go a stage /urt#er
and to ena)le t#e &osing o/ t#e Kuestion6 FDoes it #a&&enD0 .it# suc# a Kuestion, t#e consciousness im&licitl% ac!nowledges its de&ri-ation o/ a s&eci/ic master%, t#e master% o/ time4 T#e
master% o/ time is t#at w#ic# allows consciousness to insert a random Fit #a&&ens0 into a seKuence or narrati-e w#ic# will Fma!e sense0 o/ t#e Fit #a&&ens0 and t#ere)% e-acuate it o/ /orce4 T#at
meaning/ul seKuence is itsel/ gi-en )% t#e structure o/ consciousness itsel/4 1ut t#e a-ant-garde disru&ts and denies suc# master%, dislocating consciousness wit# res&ect to time, de&ri-ing it o/
its Fmaster%0, )ut ena)ling t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a contem&orar% Fsu)lime04
L%otard0s &ostmodern, t#us, #as its own tradition, deri-ing /rom H among ot#ers
H 'ant and 1ur!e on t#e su)lime4 Oli-a ado&ts an ostensi)l% more radical &osition t#an t#is in FT#e ;nternational Trans-a-ant-garde0, included #ere4 T#is &iece is in/luenced )% de)ates in
ant#ro&ological linguistics and in t#e Fe-olution0 o/ s&eci/ic languages in s&eci/ic cultures4 Rat#er t#an ado&ting t#e idea t#at one uni-ersal language slowl% e-ol-es into -ariant linguistic
&rogrammes wit# a resulting linear -iew o/ #istorical de-elo&ment, Oli-a a&&roac#es contem&orar% art #istor% /rom w#at #e c#aracterIses as a more Fnomadic0 -iew&oint4 ;n t#is s&ect, #e is at
one
21B
wit# t#e nomadism ad-anced )% DeleuGe and 2uattari in t#eir critiKue o/ totalising and uni-ersalising s%stems or in t#eor% itsel/4 T#e Ftradition0 according to w#ic# t#e trans-a-ant-garde de/ines
itsel/ is not singular, )ut rat#er eclecticN t#e result is t#at t#e trans-a-ant-garde is, in a strict sense o/ t#e term, Fdirectionless0 or amor&#ous4 .e #a-e #ere t#e -alidation o/ an art t#at Fdoes not
entail identi/ication wit# t#e st%les o/ t#e &ast, )ut t#e a)ilit% to &ic! and c#oose /rom t#eir sur/ace, in t#e con-iction t#at, in a societ% in transition toward an unde/ina)le end, t#e onl% o&tion
o&en is t#at a//orded )% a nomadic and transitor% mentalit%04 T#e international trans-a-ant-garde will t#us a-oid t#e con/rontational Fre-olutionar%0 stance o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-gardes, and will
&re/er to o&erate Flaterall%0, ma!ing a//iliations w#ic# do not &resu&&ose t#e arrogation to t#emsel-es o/ a &role&tic status4 T#e tem&oral linearit% im&licit in t#e re-olutionar% stance o/ all
#istorical a-ant-gardes gi-es wa% #ere to a s&atial #oriGon across w#ic# a//iliations and disa//iliations ma% occurN /ragmentariness, muta)ilit%, inconstanc% are t#e results4
T#e articles gat#ered #ere /ocus t#e crisis o/ t#e a-ant-garde in wa%s w#ic# are rele-ant to t#e entire &ostmodern de)ate4 .#at we witness is t#e graduated s#i/ts )etween a consciousness
determined )% time on t#e one #and, and a consciousness determined )% t#e #oriGontalit% o/ s&ace on t#e ot#er6 t#e F#ere, now0 w#ic# is called into Kuestion in &ostmodernism4
&art $our: )risis in the A.ant-/arde 'ntroduction
,he -earch for ,radition
1< w &he /earch for &radition:
A0ant$garde and *ost$modernism in the 4567s
Andreas !,yssen
;magine .alter 1enIamin in 1erlin, t#e cit% o/ #is c#ild#ood, wal!ing t#roug# t#e international a-ant-garde e(#i)it ,enden8en der 8wan8i%er 3ahre5 on dis&la% in *+<< in t#e new
ationalgalerie )uilt )% 1au#aus arc#itect Mies -an der Ro)e in t#e *+?9s4 ;magine .alter 1enIamin as a flaneur in t#e cit% o/ )oule-ards and arcades #e so admira)l% descri)ed, #a&&ening
u&on t#e Centre 2eorges Pom&idou and its multi-iiiedia s#ow &arisIKerlin 1 *00I1 *##5 w#ic# was a maIor cultural e-ent in *+<E4 Or imagine t#e t#eorist o/ media and image re&roduction in
*+E* in /ront o/ a tele-ision set watc#ing Ro)ert Hug#es0s 11C-&roduced eig#t-&art series on a-ant-garde art, FT#e S#oc! o/ t#e ew040 .ould t#is maIor critic and aest#etician o/ t#e a-ant-
garde #a-e reIoiced in its success H mani/est e-en in t#e arc#itecture o/ t#e museums #ousing t#e e(#i)its H or would s#adows o/ melanc#ol% #a-e clouded #is e%esD .ould #e, &er#a&s, #a-e
)een s#oc!ed )% FT#e S#oc! o/ t#e ew0, or would #e #a-e /elt called u&on to re-ise t#e t#eor% o/ &ost-auratic artD Or would #e sim&l% #a-e argued t#at t#e administered culture o/
lateca&italism #ad /inall% succeeded in im&osing t#e &#on% s&ell o/ commodit% /etis#ism e-en on t#at art w#ic# more t#an an% ot#er #ad c#allenged t#e -alues and traditions o/ )ourgeois
cultureD Ma%)e a/ter anot#er &enetrating gaGe at t#at arc#itectural monument to w#olesale tec#nological &rogress in t#e #eart o/ Paris, 1enIamin would #a-e Kuoted #imsel/6 F;n e-er% era t#e
attem&t must )e made to wrest tradition awa% /rom a con/ormism t#at is a)out to o-er&ower it40
5
T#us mig#t #e ac!nowledge not onl% t#at t#e a-ant-garde H em)odiment o/ anti-tradition H #as
itsel/ )ecome tradition4 )ut, moreo-er, t#at its in-entions and its imagination #a-e )ecome integral e-en to .estern culture0s most o//icial mani/estations4
O/ course, t#ere is not#ing new in suc# o)ser-ations4 Alread% in t#e earl% *+?9s Hans Magnus EnGens)erger #ad anal%Ged t#e a&orias o/ t#e a-ant-garde,
,
and Ma( $risc# #ad attri)uted to
1rec#t Ft#e stri!ing ine//ectualness o/ a classic04
=
T#e use o/ -isual montage, one o/ t#e maIor in-entions o/ t#e a-ant-garde, #ad alread% )ecome
$rom Hu%ssen, A4, A/ter the /redt <i.ide5 Macmillan, London:;ndiOr04O 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+E?, &&4 *?9H<<4
559
standard &rocedure in commercial ad-ertising, and reminders o/ literar% modernism &o&&ed u& in Jol!swagen0s )eetle ads6 F8nd ldu/t und lTu/t und lbu/t04 ;n /act, o)ituaries on modernism and
t#e a-ant-garde a)ounded in t#e l+?9s, in )ot# .estern Euro&e and t#e 8nited States4
A-ant-garde and modernism #ad not onl% )een acce&ted as maIor cultural e(&ressions o/ t#e twentiet# centur%4 T#e% were /ast )ecoming #istor%4 T#is t#en raised Kuestions a)out t#e status
o/ t#at art and literature w#ic# was &roduced a/ter .orld .ar ;;, a/ter t#e e(#austion o/ surrealism and a)straction, a/ter t#e deat# o/ Musil and T#omas Mann, Jaler% and 2ide, 3o%ce and T4 S4
Eliot4 One o/ t#e /irst critics to t#eoriGe a)out a s#i/t /rom modernism to &ostmodernism was ;r-ing Howe in #is 1*!* essa% FMass societ% and &ostmodern /iction04
>
And onl% a %ear later, Harr%
Le-in used t#e same conce&t o/ t#e &ostmodern to designate w#at #e saw as an Fanti-intellectual undercurrent0 w#ic# t#reatened t#e #umanism and enlig#tenment so c#aracteristic o/ t#e culture
o/ modernism4 ? .riters suc# as EnGens)erger and $risc# clearl% continued in t#e tradition o/ modernism @and t#is is true /or EnGens)erger0s &oetr% o/ t#e earl% *
+
?9s as well as /or $risc#0s
&la%s and no-elsA, and critics suc# as Howe and Le-in sided wit# modernism against t#e newer de-elo&ments, w#ic# t#e% could onl% see as s%m&toms o/ decline4 1ut &ostmoderntsm
<
too! o//
wit# a -engeance in t#e earl% to mid-*+?9s, most -isi)l% in Po& art, in e(&erimental /iction, and in t#e criticism o/ Leslie $iedler and Susan Sontag4 Since t#en t#e notion o/ &ostmodernIsm #as
)ecome t#e !e% to almost an% attem&t to ca&ture t#e s&eci/ic and uniKue Kualities o/ contem&orar% acti-ities in art and arc#itecture, in dance and music, in literature and t#eor%4 De)ates in t#e
late l+?9s and earl% *+<9s in t#e 8nited States were increasingl% o)li-ious to modernism and to t#e #istorical a-ant-garde4 Postmodernism reigned su&reme, and a sense o/ no-elt% and cultural
c#ange was &er-asi-e4
How t#en do we e(&lain t#e stri!ing /ascination o/ t#e late ; +<9s wit# t#e a-ant-garde o/ t#e /irst t#ree to /our decades o/ t#is centur%D .#at is t#e meaning o/ t#is energetic come)ac!, in
t#e age o/ &ostmodernism, o/ Dada, constructi-isrn, /uturism, surrealism, and t#e ew O)Iecti-it% o/ t#e .eimar Re&u)licD E(#i)its o/ t#e classical a-ant-garde in $rance, 2erman%, England
and t#e 8nited States turned into maIor cultural e-ents4 Su)stantial studies o/ t#e a-ant-garde were &u)lis#ed in t#e 8nited States and in .est 2erman%, initiating li-el% de)ates4 O Con/erences
were #eld on -arious as&ects o/ modernism and t#e a-ant-garde4 O All o/ t#is #as #a&&ened at a time w#en t#ere seems to )e little dou)t t#at t#e classical a-ant-garde #as e(#austed its creati-e
&otential and w#en t#e waning o/ t#e a-ant-garde is widel% ac!nowledged as a fait accompli. ;s t#is a case, t#en, o/ Hegel0s owl o/ Miner-a )eginning its /lig#t a/ter t#e s#ades o/ nig#t #a-e
/allenD Or are we dealing wit# a nostalgia /or t#e Fgood %ears0 o/ twentiet#-centur% cultureD And i/ nostalgia it is, does it &oint to t#e e(#austion o/ cultural resources and creati-it% in our own
time or does it #old t#e &romise o/ a re-italiGation in contem&orar% cultureD .#at, a/ter all, is t#e &lace o/ &ostmodernism in all t#isD Can we &er#a&s com&are t#is P#enomenon wit# t#at ot#er
o)no(ious nostalgia o/ t#e *+<9s, t#e nostalgia /or Eg%&tian mummies @Tut e(#i)it in 8nited StatesA, medie-al em&erors @Stau//er
,he -earch 3br ,radition 55,
And reas !,yssen
e(#i)it in StuttgartA, or, most recentl%, Ji!ings @Minnea&olisAD A searc# /or traditions seems to )e in-ol-ed in all t#ese instances4 ;s t#is searc# /or tradition &er#a&s Iust anot#er sign o/ t#e
conser-atism o/ t#e *+<9s, t#e cultural eKui-alent, as it were, o/ t#e &olitical )ac!las# or t#e so-called ,enden8wende@ Or, alternati-el%, can we inter&ret t#e museum and TJ re-i-al o/ t#e
classical a-ant-garde as a de/ense against t#e neo-coi,Ser-ati-e attac!s on t#e culture o/ modernism and a-ant-gardism, attac!s w#ic# #a-e intensi/ied in t#ese last %ears in 2erman%, $rance
and t#e 8nited StatesD
;n order to answer some o/ t#ese Kuestions it ma% )e use/ul to com&are t#e status o/ art, literature, and criticism in t#e late *+<9s wit# t#at o/ t#e *+?9s4 Parado(icall%, t#e *+?9s, /or all t#eir
attac!s on modernism and t#e a-ant-garde, still stand closer to t#e traditional notion o/ t#e a-ant-garde t#an t#e arc#eolog% o/ modernit% so c#aracteristic o/ t#e late *+<9s4 Muc# con/usion
could #a-e )een a-oided i/ critics #ad &aid closer attention to distinctions t#at need to )e made )etween a-ant-garde and modernism as well as to t#e di//erent relations#i& o/ eac# one to mass
culture in t#e 8nited States and Euro&e res&ecti-el%4 American critics es&eciall% tended to use t#e terms a-ant-garde and modernism interc#angea)l%4 To gi-e Iust two e(am&les, Renato
Poggioli0s ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 translated /rom t#e ;talian in *+?E, was re-iewed in t#e 8nited States as i/ it were a )oo! a)out modernism, *9 and 3o#n .eig#tman0s ,he )oncept of the
A.ant-/arde o/ *+<, is su)titled :=plorations in (odernism. FO 1ot# a-ant-garde and modernism ma% legitimatel% )e understood as re&resenting artistic emanations /rom t#e sensi)ilit% o/
modernit%, )ut /rom a Euro&ean &ers&ecti-e it ma!es little sense to lum& T#omas Mann toget#er wit# Dada, Proust wit# Andre 1reton, or Ril!e wit# Russian constructi-ssm4 .#ile t#ere are
areas o/ o-erla& )etween t#e tradition o/ t#e a-ant-garde and t#at o/ modernism @e4g4 -orticism and EGra Pound, radical language e(&erimentation and 3ames 3o%ce, e(&ressionism and 2ott/ried
1ennA, t#e o-erall aest#etic and &olitical di//erences are too &er-asi-e to )e ignored4 T#us Matei Calinescu ma!es t#e /ollowing &oint6
;n $rance, ;tal%, S&ain and ot#er Euro&ean countries t#e a-antgarde, des&ite its -arious and o/ten contradictor% claims, tends to )e regarded as t#e most e(treme /orm o/ artistic negati-ism H
art itsel/ )eing t#e /irst -ictim4 As /or modernism, w#ate-er its s&eci/ic meaning in di//erent languages and /or di//erent aut#ors, it ne-er con-e%s t#at sense o/ uni-ersal and #%sterical
negation so c#aracteristic o/ t#e a-antgarde4 T#e anti-traditionalism o/ modernism is o/ten su)tl% traditional4 *5
As to t#e &olitical di//erences, t#e #istorical a-ant-garde tended &redominantl% to t#e le/t, t#e maIor e(ce&tion )eing ;talian /uturism, w#ile t#e rig#t could claim a sur&rising num)er o/
modernists among its su&&orters, EGra Pound, 'nut Hamsun, 2ott/ried 1enn, Ernst 3unger among ot#ers4
.#ereas Calinescu ma!es muc# o/ t#e negati-istic, anti-aest#etic and sel/-destructi-e as&ects o/ t#e a-ant-garde as o&&osed to t#e reconstructi-e art o/ t#e moderniSts, t#e aest#etic and
&olitical &roIect o/ t#e a-OOgarde mig#t )e
a&&roac#ed in more &ositi-e terms4 ;n modernism art and literature retained t#eir traditional nineteent#-centur% autonom% /rom e-er%da% li/e, an autonom% w#ic# #ad /irst )een articulated )%
'ant and Sc#iller in t#e late eig#teent# centur%N t#e Finstitution art0 @Peter 1urgerA, O i4e4 t#e traditional wa% in w#ic# art and literature were &roduced, disseminated, and recei-ed, is ne-er
c#allenged )% modernism #ut maintained intact4 Modernists suc# as T4 S4 Eliot and Ortega % 2asset em&#asiGed time and again t#at it was t#eir mission to sal-age t#e &urit% o/ #ig# art /rom t#e
encroac#ments o/ ur)aniGation, massi/ication, tec#nological moderniGation H in s#ort, o/ modern mass culture4 T#e a-ant-garde o/ t#e /irst t#ree decades o/ t#is centur%, #owe-er, attem&ted to
su)-ert art0s autonom%, its arti/icial se&aration /rom li/e, and its institutionaliGation as F#ig# art0 t#at was &ercei-ed to /eed rig#t into t#e legitimation needs o/ t#e nineteent#-centur% /orms o/
)ourgeois societ%4 T#e a-ant-garde &osited t#e reintegration o/ art and li/e as its maIor &roIect at a time w#en t#at traditional societ%, es&eciall% in ;tal%, Russia, and 2erman%, was undergoing a
maIor trans/ormation towards a Kualitati-el% new stage o/ modernit%4 Social and &olitical /erment o/ t#e *+*9s and *+59s was t#e )reeding ground /or a-ant-garde radicalism in art and literature
as well as in &olitics4 *= .#en EnGens)erger wrote a)out t#e a&orias o/ t#e a-ant-garde se-eral decades later, #e did not Iust #a-e t#e co-o&tion o/ t#e a-ant-garde )% t#e culture industr% in
mind, as is sometimes surmisedN #e /ull% understood t#e &olitical dimension o/ t#e &ro)lem and &ointed out #ow t#e #istorical a-ant-garde #ad /ailed to deli-er w#at it #ad alwa%s &romised6 to
se-er &olitical, social and aest#etic c#ains, e(&lode cultural rei/ications, t#row o// traditional /orms o/ domination, li)erate re&ressed energies4 *>
;/ wit# t#ese distinctions in mind we loo! at 8nited States culture o/ t#e *+?9s it )ecomes clear t#at t#e * +?9s can )e regarded as t#e closing c#a&ter in t#e tradition o/ a-ant-gardism4 Li!e
all a-ant-gardes since Saint-Simon and t#e uto&ian socialists and anarc#ists u& t#roug# Dada, surrealism, and t#e &ost-re-olutionar% art o/ So-iet Russia in t#e earl% *+59s, t#e *+?9s /oug#t
tradition, and t#is re-olt too! &lace at a time o/ &olitical and social turmoil4 T#e &romise o/ unlimited a)undance, &olitical sta)ilit%, and new tec#nological /rontiers o/ t#e 'enned% %ears was
s#attered /ast, and social con/lict emerged dominant in t#e ci-il rig#ts mo-ement, in t#e ur)an riots, and in t#e anti-war mo-ement4 ;t certainl% is more t#an coincidental t#at t#e &rotest culture
o/ t#e &eriod ado&ted t#e la)el Fcounterculture0, t#us &roIecting an image o/ an a-ant-garde leading t#e wa% to an alternati-e !ind o/ societ%4 ;n t#e /ield o/ art, Po& re-olted against a)stract
e(&ressionism and s&ar!ed o// a series o/ art mo-ements /rom O& to $lu(us, Conce&t, and Minimalism w#ic# made t#e art scene o/ t#e *+?9s as li-el% and -i)rating as it was commerciall%
&ro/ita)le and /as#iona)le4 *? Peter 1roo! and t#e Li-ing T#eatre e(&loded t#e endless entra&ments o/ a)surdism and created a new st%le o/ t#eatrical &er/ormance4 T#e t#eater attem&ted to
)ridge t#e ga& )etween stage and audience and e(&erimented wit# new /orms o/ immediac% and s&ontaneit% in &er/ormance4 T#ere .as a &artici&ator% et#os in t#e t#eater and in t#e arts w#ic#
can easil% )e lin!ed to t#e teac#-ins and sit-ins o/ t#e &rotest mo-ement4 E(&onents o/ a new sensi)ilit% re)elled against t#e com&le(ities and am)iguities o/ modernism, em)racing cam&
22: Andreas !,yssen
,he -earch /br ,radition
and &o& culture instead, and literar% critics reIected t#e congealed canon and inter&reti-e &ractices o/ t#e ew Criticism, claiming /or t#eir own writing t#e creati-it%, autonom% and &resence o/
original creation4
.#en Leslie $iedler declared t#e FDeat# o/ a-ant-garde literature0 in *+?=, *< #e was reall% attac!ing modernism, and #e #imsel/ em)odied t#e et#os o/ t#e classical a-ant-garde, American
st%le4 ; sa% FAmerican st%le0 )ecause $iedler0s maIor concern was not to democratiGe F#ig# art0N #is goal was rat#er to -alidate &o&ular culture and to c#allenge t#e increasing institutionaliGation
o/ #ig# art4 T#us w#en a /ew %ears later #e Fanted to FCross t#e )order H close t#at ga&0 @*+?EA*E )etween #ig# culture and &o&ular culture, #e rea//irmed &recisel% t#e classical a-ant-garde0s
&roIect to reunite t#ese arti/iciall% se&arated realms o/ culture4 $or a moment in t#e *+?9s it seemed t#e P#oeni( a-ant-garde #ad risen /rom t#e as#es, /anc%ing a /lig#t toward t#e new /rontier
o/ t#e &ostmodern4 Or was American &ostmodernism rat#er a 1audelairean al)atross tr%ing in -ain to li/t o// t#e dec! o/ t#e culture industr%D .as &ostmodernism &lagued /rom its -er%
ince&tion )% t#e same a&orias EnGens)erger #ad alread% anal%Ged so eloKuentl% in *+?5D ;t seems t#at e-en in t#e 8nited States t#e uncritical em)racing o/ .estern and cam&, &orno and roc!,
&o& and counter-culture as genuine &o&ular culture &oints to an amnesia w#ic# ma% #a-e )een t#e result o/ Cold .ar &olitics as muc# as o/ t#e &ostmodernists0 relentless /ig#t against tradition4
American anal%ses o/ mass culture did #a-e a critical edge in t#e late *+=9s and 1*!0s
1*
w#ic# went all )ut unac!nowledged in t#e *+?9s0 uncritical ent#usiasm /or cam&, &o&, and t#e media4
A maIor di//erence )etween t#e 8nited States and Euro&e in t#e *+?9s is t#at Euro&ean writers, artists, and intellectuals t#en were muc# more aware o/ t#e increasing co-o&tion o/ all
modernist and a-ant-garde art )% t#e culture industr%4 EnGens)erger, a/ter all, #ad not onl% written a)out t#e a&orias o/ t#e a-ant-garde, )ut a)out t#e &er-asi-eness o/ t#e Fconsciousness
industr%0 as well4
59
Since t#e tradition o/ t#e a-ant-garde in Euro&e did not seem to o//er w#at, /or #istorical reasons, it could still o//er in t#e 8nited States, one &oliticall% /easi)le wa% to react
to t#e classical a-ant-garde and to cultural tradition in general was to declare t#e deat# o/ all art and literature and to call /or cultural re-olution4 1ut e-en t#is r#etorical gesture, articulated most
em&#aticall% in EnGens)erger0s Lursbuch in *+?E and in t#e Parisian gra//iti o/ Ma% F?E, was &art o/ t#e traditional anti-aest#etic, anti-elitist, and anti-)ourgeois strategies o/ t#e a-ant-garde4
And )% no means all writers and artists #eeded t#e call4 Peter Hand!e, /or instance, denounced as in/antile t#e attac! on all #ig# art and literature and #e continued to write e(&erimental &la%s,
&oetr%, and &rose4 And t#e cultural le/t in .est 2erman%, w#ic# agreed wit# EnGens)erger0s /uneral /or art and literature as long as it )uried F)ourgeois0 art onl%, undertoo! t#e tas! o/
uneart#ing an alternati-e cultural tradition, es&eciall% t#at o/ t#e le/t a-ant-gardes o/ t#e .eimar Re&u)lic4 1ut t#e rea&&ro&riation o/ t#e le/t tradition o/ t#e .eimar Re&u)lic did not re-italiGe
contem&orar% art and literature in 2erman% t#e wa% t#e undercurrent o/ Dada #ad re-italiGed t#e American art scene o/ t#e *+?9s4 ;m&ortant e(ce&tions to t#is general
55>
o)ser-ation can )e /ound in t#e wor! o/ 'laus Staec!, 2Xnter .allra//, and Ale(ander 'luge, )ut t#e% remain isolated cases4
;t soon )ecame clear t#at t#e Euro&ean attem&t to esca&e /rom t#e Fg#etto0 o/ art and to )rea! t#e )ondage oi t#e culture industr% also #ad ended in /ailure and /rustration4 .#et#er in t#e
2eman &rotest mo-ement or in Ma% F?E in $rance, t#e illusion t#at cultural re-olution was imminent /oundered on t#e #ard realities o/ t#e status Kuo4 Art was not reintegrated into e-er%da% li/e4
T#e imagination did not come to &ower4 T#e Centre 2eorges Pom&idou was )uilt instead, and t#e SPD came to &ower in .est 2erman%4 T#e -anguard t#rust o/ grou& mo-ements de-elo&ing
and asserting t#e newest st%le seemed to )e )ro!en a/ter *+?E4 ;n Euro&e, *+?E mar!s not t#e )rea!t#roug# t#en #o&ed /or, )ut rat#er t#e re&la%ed end o/ t#e traditional a-ant-garde4
S%m&tomatic o/ t#e l+<9s were loners li!e Peter Hand!e w#ose wor! de/ies t#e notion o/ a unitar% st%leN cult /igures li!e 3ose&# 1eu%s, w#o conIures u& an arc#aic &astN or /ilm-ma!ers li!e
HerGog, .enders, and $ass)inder, w#ose /ilms H des&ite t#eir critiKue o/ contem&orar% 2erman% H lac! One o/ t#e )asic &rereKuisites o/ a-ant-garde art, a sense o/ t#e /uture4
;n t#e 8nited States, #owe-er, t#e sense o/ t#e /uture, w#ic# #ad asserted itsel/ so &ower/ull% in t#e l+?9s, is still ali-e toda% in t#e &ostmodernist scene, e-en t#oug# its )reat#ing s&ace is
s#rin!ing /ast as a result o/ recent economic and &olitical c#anges @e4g4 t#e cutting o/ t#e EA )udgetA4 T#ere also seems to )e a maIor s#i/t o/ &ostmodernist interest /rom t#e earlier two-
&ronged concern wit# &o&ular culture and wit# e(&erimental art and literature, to a new /ocus on cultural t#eor%, a s#i/t w#ic# certainl% re/lects t#e academic institutionaliGation o/
&ostmodernism, )ut is not /ull% e(&lained )% it4 More on t#is later4 .#at concerns me #ere is t#e tem&oral imagination o/ &ostmodernism, t#e uns#a!en con/idence o/ )eing at t#e edge o/
#istor% w#ic# c#aracteriGes t#e w#ole traIector% o/ American &ostmodernism since t#e *+?9s and o/ w#ic# t#e notion o/ a post-histoirc is onl% one o/ t#e sillier mani/estations4 A &ossi)le
e(&lanation o/ t#is resilience to t#e s#i/ting mood o/ t#e culture at large, w#ic# certainl% since t#e mid-*+<9s #as all )ut lost its con/idence in t#e /uture, ma% lie &recisel% in t#e su)terranean
&ro(imit% o/ &ostmodernism to t#ose mo-ements, /igures and intentions o/ t#e classical Euro&ean a-ant-garde w#ic# were #ardl% e-er ac!nowledged )% t#e Anglo-Sa(on notion o/ modernism
Des&ite t#e im&ortance o/ Man Ra% and t#e acti-ities o/ Pica)ia and Duc#am& in ew Yor!, ew Yor! Dada remained at )est a marginal &#enomenon in American culture, and neit#er Dada
nor surrealism e-er met wit# muc# &u)lic Success in t#e 8nited States4 Precisel% t#is /act made Po&, #a&&enings, Conce&t, e(&erimental music, sur/iction, and &er/ormance art o/ t#e l+?9s and
l+<9s loo! more no-el t#an t#e% reall% were4 T#e audience0s e(&ectation #oriGon in t#e 8nited States was /undamentall% di//erent /rom w#at it was in Euro&e4 .#ere Euro&eans mig#t react
wit# a sense o/ dd9Q .u5 Americans could legitimatel% sustain a sense o/ /lo-elt%, e(citement, and )rea!t#roug#4
A second maIor /actor comes into &la% #ere4 ;/ we want to understand /ull% t#e Power t#e dadaist su)current assumed in t#e 8nited States in t#e *+?9s, t#e a)sence
Andreas !,yssen ,he -earch for ,radition 22=
o/ an American Dada or surrealist mo-ement in t#e earlier twentiet# centur% also needs to )e e(&lained4 As Peter 1urger #as argued, t#e maIor goal o/ t#e Euro&ean a-ant-gardes was to
undermine, attac!, and trans/orm t#e )ourgeois Finstitution art04 Suc# an iconoclastic attac! on cultural institutions and traditional modes o/ re&resentatiOOO narrati-e structure, &ers&ecti-e, and
&oetic sensi)ilit% onl% made sense in countries w#ere F#ig# art0 #ad an essential role to &la% in legitimiGing )ourgeois &olitical and social domination, e4g4 in t#e museum and salon culture, in t#e
t#eaters, concert #alls and o&era #ouses and in t#e socialiGation and education &rocess in general4 T#e cultural &olitics o/ twentiet#-centur% a-ant-gardism would #a-e )een meaningless @i/ not
regressi-eA in t#e 8nited States, w#ere F#ig# art0 was still struggling #ard to gain wider legitimac% and to )e ta!en seriousl% )% t#e &u)lic4 T#us it is not sur&rising t#at maIor American writers
since Henr% 3ames, suc# as
T4 S4 Eliot, $aul!ner and Hemingwa%, Pound and Ste-ens, /elt drawn to t#e constructi-e sensi)ilit% o/ modernism, w#ic# insisted on t#e dignit% and autonom% o/ literature, rat#er t#an to t#e
iconoclastic and anti-aest#etic et#os o/ t#e Euro&ean a-ant-garde, w#ic# attem&ted to )rea! t#e &olitical )ondage o/ #ig# culture t#roug# a /usion wit# &o&ular culture, and to integrate art into
li/e4
; would suggest t#at it was not onl% t#e a)sence o/ an indigenous American a-ant-garde in t#e classical Euro&ean sense, sa% in t#e *+59s, w#ic#, /ort% %ears later, )ene/ited t#e
&ostmodernists0 claim to no-elt% in t#eir struggle against t#e entrenc#ed traditions o/ modernism, a)stract e(&ressionism, and ew Criticism4 T#ere is more to it t#an t#at4 A Euro&ean-st%le
a-ant-gardist re-olt against tradition made eminent sense in t#e 8nited States at a time w#en #ig# art #ad )ecome institutionaliGed in t#e )urgeoning museum, concert, and &a&er)ac! culture o/
t#e 1*!0s5 w#en modernism itsel/ #ad entered t#e mainstream -ia t#e culture industr%, and later, during t#e 'enned% %ears, w#en #ig# culture )egan to ta!e on /unctions o/ &olitical
re&resentation @Ro)ert $rost and Pa)lo Casals at t#e .#ite HouseA4
All o/ t#is, t#en, is not at all to sa% t#at &ostmodernism is merel% a &astic#e o/ an earlier continental a-ant-garde4 ;t rat#er ser-es to &oint to t#e similarit% and continuit% )etween American
&ostmodernism and certain segments o/ an earlier Euro&ean a-ant-garde, a similarit% on t#e le-els o/ /ormal e(&erimentation and o/ a critiKue o/ t#e Finstitution art04 T#is continuit% was alread%
marginall%
5*
ac!nowledged in some &ostmodernist criticism, e4g4, )% $iedler and ;#a) Hassan,
)ut it emerged in /ull clarit% wit# t#e recent retros&ecti-es o/ and writings on t#e classical Euro&ean a-ant-garde4 $rom t#e &ers&ecti-e o/ toda%, American art o/ t#e *
+
?9s H &recisel% )ecause o/
its success/ul attac! on a)stract e(&ressionism H s#ines as t#e color/ul deat# mas! o/ a classical a-ant-garde w#ic# in Euro&e #ad alread% )een liKuidated culturall% and &oliticall% )% Stalin and
Hitler4 Des&ite its radical and legitimate critiKue o/ t#e gos&el o/ modernism, &ostmodernism, w#ic# in its artistic &ractices and its t#eor% was a &roduct o/ t#e *+?9s, must )e seen as t#e
endgame o/ t#e a-ant-garde and not as t#e radical )rea!t#roug# it o/ten claimed to )e4
55
At t#e same time it goes wit#out sa%ing t#at t#e &ostmodernist re-olt against t#e institution art in t#e 8nited States was u& against )igger odds t#an /uturism, Dada, or surrealism were in t#eir
time4 T#e earlier a-ant-garde was c O6/ronted wit# t#e
culture industr% in its stage o/ ince&tion, w#ile &ostmodernism #ad to /ace a tec#nologicall% and economicall% /ull% de-elo&ed media culture w#ic# #ad mastered t#e #ig# art o/ integrating,
di//using, and mar!eting e-en t#e most serious c#allenges4 T#is /actor, com)ined wit# t#e altered constitution o/ audiences, accounts /or t#e /act t#at, com&ared wit# t#e earlier twentiet#
centur%, t#e s#oc! o/ t#e new was muc# #arder, &er#a&s e-en im&ossi)le, to sustain4 $urt#ermore, w#en Dada eru&ted in *+*? in t#e &lacid nineteent#-centur% culture o/ )ourgeois Suric#, t#ere
were no ancestors to contend wit#4 E-en t#e /ormall% muc# less radical a-ant-gardes o/ t#e nineteent# centur% #ad not %et #ad a measura)le im&act on Swiss culture at large4 T#e #a&&enings at
t#e Ca)aret Joltaire could not )ut scandaliGe t#e &u)lic4 .#en Rausc#en)erg, 3as&er 3o#ns, and t#e Madison A-enue &o& artists )egan t#eir assault on a)stract e(&ressionism, drawing t#eir
ins&iration as t#e% did /rom t#e e-er%da% li/e o/ American consumerism, t#e% soon #ad to /ace serious com&etition6 t#e wor! o/ dadaist /at#er /igure Marcel Duc#am& was &resented to t#e
American &u)lic in maIor museum and galler% retros&ecti-es, e4g4 in Pasadena @*+?,A and ew Yor! A1*+!?. T#e g#ost o/ t#e /at#er was not onl% out o/ t#e closet o/ art #istor%, )ut Duc#am&
#imsel/ was alwa%s alread% t#ere in /les# and )lood sa%ing, li!e t#e #edge#og to t#e #are6 F;c# )in sc#on da40
All o/ t#is goes to s#ow t#at t#e mammot# a-ant-garde s&ectacles o/ t#e late *+<9s can )e inter&reted as t#e /li& side o/ &ostmodernism, w#ic# now a&&ears muc# more traditional t#an it did
in t#e *+?9s4 ot onl% do t#e a-ant-garde s#ows o/ t#e late l+<9s in Paris and 1erlin, London, ew Yor!, and C#icago #el& us come to terms wit# t#e tradition o/ t#e earlier twentiet# centur%,
)ut &ostmodernism itsel/ can now )e descri)ed as a searc# /or a -ia)le modern tradition a&art /rom, sa%, t#e ProustH3o%ceHMann triad and outside t#e canon o/ classical modernism4 T#e
searc# /or tradition com)ined wit# an attem&t at recu&eration seems more )asic to &ostmodernism t#an inno-ation and )rea!t#roug#4 T#e cultural &arado( o/ t#e l+<9s is not so muc# t#e side-
)%-side coe(istence o/ a /uture-#a&&% &ostmodernism wit# a-ant-garde museum retros&ecti-es4 or is it t#e in#erent contradiction o/ t#e Postmodernist a-ant-garde itsel/, i4e4 t#e &arado( o/ an
art t#at simultaneousl% wants to )e art and anti-art and o/ a criticism t#at &retends to )e criticism and anti-criticism4 T#e &arado( o/ t#e *+<9s is rat#er t#at t#e &ostmodernist searc# /or cultural
tradition and continuit%, w#ic# underlies all t#e radical r#etoric o/ ru&ture, discontinuit%, and e&istemological )rea!s, #as turned to t#at tradition w#ic# /undamentall% and on &rinci&le des&ised
and denied all traditions4
Seeing t#e a-ant-garde e(#i)its o/ t#e *+<9s in t#e lig#t o/ &ostmodernism ma also #el& /ocus attention on some im&ortant di//erences )etween American
POStmodernism and t#e #istorical a-ant-garde4 ;n &ost-.orld .ar ;; America, t#e #istorical realities o/ massi-e tec#nological, social, and &olitical c#ange, w#ic# #ad gi-en t#e m%t# o/ a-ant-
gardism and inno-ation its &ower, &ersuasi-eness, and 8to&ian dri-e in t#e earlier twentiet# centur%, #ad all )ut -anis#ed4 During t#e l+=9s and 1*!0s American art and intellectual li/e #ad gone
t#roug# a &eriod o/ O in w#ic# a-ant-gardism and modernism actuall% #ad )een realigned .it# t#e conser-ati-e li)eralism o/ t#e times4 5, .#ile &ostmodernism re)elled
22<
55E Andreas !,yssen
against t#e culture and &olitics o/ t#e 1*!0s5 it ne-ert#eless lac!ed a radical -ision o/ social and &olitical trans/ormation t#at #ad )een so essential to t#e #istorical a-ant-garde4 Time and again
t#e /uture was incanted r#etoricall%, )ut it ne-er )ecame clear #ow and in w#at /orms &ostmodernism would #el& im&lement t#at alternati-e culture o/ t#e coming age4 Des&ite t#is ostentatious
orientation toward t#e /uture, &ostmodernism ma% well #a-e )een an e(&ression o/ t#e contem&orar% crisis o/ culture rat#er t#an t#e &romised transcendence toward cultural reIu-enation4 Muc#
more t#an t#e #istorical a-ant-garde, w#ic# was surre&titiousl% connected to t#e dominant moderniGing and anti-traditionalist trends o/ nineteent#-and twentiet#-centur% .estern ci-iliGation,
&ostmodernism was in danger o/ )ecoming a//irmati-e culture rig#t /rom t#e start4 Most o/ t#e gestures w#ic# #ad sustained t#e s#oc! -alue o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-garde were no longer and
could no longer )e e//ecti-e4 T#e #istorical a-ant-garde0s a&&ro&riation o/ tec#nolog% /or #ig# art @e4g4 /ilm, &#otogra&#%, montage &rinci&leA could &roduce s#oc!, since it )ro!e wit# t#e
aest#eticism and t#e doctrine o/ art0s autonom% /rom Freal0 li/e w#ic# were dominant in t#e late nineteent# centur%4 T#e &ostmodernist es&ousal o/ s&ace-age tec#nolog% and electronic media in
t#e wa!e o/ McLu#an, #owe-er, could scarcel% s#oc! an audience w#ic# #ad )een inculturated to modernism -ia t#e -er% same media4 or did Leslie $iedler0s di-e into &o&ular culture cause
outrage in a countr% w#ere t#e &leasures o/ &o&ular culture #a-e alwa%s )een ac!nowledged @e(ce&t &er#a&s in academiaA wit# more ease and less secrec% t#an in Euro&e4 And most
&ostmodernist e(&eriments in -isual &ers&ecti-e, narrati-e structure, and tem&oral logic, w#ic# all attac!ed t#e dogma o/ mimetic re/erentialit%, were alread% !nown /rom t#e modernist
tradition4 T#e &ro)lem was com&ounded )% t#e /act t#at e(&erimental strategies and &o&ular culture were no longer connected in a critical aest#etic and &olitical &roIect, as t#e% #ad )een in t#e
#istorical a-ant-garde4 Po&ular culture was acce&ted uncriticall% @Leslie $iedlerA and &ostmodernist e(&erimentation #ad lost t#e a-ant-gardist consciousness t#at social c#ange and t#e
trans/ormation o/ e-er%da% li/e were at sta!e in e-er% artistic e(&eriment4 Rat#er t#an aiming at a mediation )etween art and li/e, &ostmodernist e(&eriments soon came to )e -alued /or t%&icall%
modernist /eatures suc# as sel/-re/le(i-it%, immanence, and indeterminac% @;#a) HassanA4 T#e American &ostmodernist a-ant-garde, t#ere/ore, is not onl% t#e endgame o/ a-ant-gardism4 ;t also
re&resents t#e /ragmentation and t#e decline o/ t#e a-ant-garde as a genuinel% critical and ad-ersar% culture4
M% #%&ot#esis t#at &ostmodernism alwa%s #as )een in searc# o/ tradition w#ile &retending to inno-ation is also )orne out )% t#e recent s#i/t toward cultural t#eor% w#ic# distinguis#es t#e
&ostmodernism o/ t#e *+<9s /rom t#at o/ t#e *+?9s4 On one le-el, o/ course, t#e American a&&ro&riation o/ structuralist and es&eciall% &oststructuralist t#eor% /rom $rance re/lects t#e e(tent to
w#ic# &ostmodernism itsel/ #as )een academiciGed since it won its )attle against modernism and t#e ew Criticism4
5=
;t is also tem&ting to s&eculate t#at t#e s#i/t toward t#eor% actuall% &oints
to t#e /alling rate o/ artistic and literar% creati-it% in t#e *
+
<9s, a &ro&osition w#ic# would #el& e(&lain t#e resurgence o/ #istorical retros&ecPies in t#e museums4
,he -earch for ,radition 55+
To &ut it sim&l%, i/ t#e contem&orar% art scene does not generate enoug# mo-ements, /igures, and trends to sustain t#e et#os o/ a-ant-gardism, t#en museum directors #a-e to turn to
t#e &ast to satis/% t#e demand /or cultural e-ents4 Howe-er, t#e artistic and literar% su&eriorit% o/ t#e *+?9s o-er t#e l+<9s s#ould not )e ta!en /or granted, and Kuantit% is no
a&&ro&riate criterion an%wa%4 Per#a&s t#e culture o/ t#e *+<9s is Iust more amor&#ous and di//use, ric#er in di//erence and -ariation t#an t#at o/ t#e *+?9s, w#en trends and
mo-ements e-ol-ed in a more or less Forderl%0 seKuence4 1eneat# t#e sur/ace o/ continuousl% c#anging trends, t#ere was indeed a uni/%ing dri-e )e#ind t#e culture o/ t#e * +?9s
w#ic# was in#erited &recisel% /rom t#e tradition o/ a-ant-gardism4 Since t#e cultural di-ersit% o/ t#e l
+<
9s no longer sustained t#is sense o/ unit% H e-en i/ it was t#e unit% o/
e(&erimentation, /ragmentation, Verfremdun%5 and indeterminac% H &ostmodernism wit#drew into a !ind o/ t#eor% w#ic#, wit# its !e% notions o/ decentering and deconstruction,
seemed to guarantee t#e lost center o/ a-ant-gardism4 Sus&icion is in order t#at t#e &ostmodernist critics0 s#i/t to continental t#eor% is t#e last des&erate attem&t o/ t#e &ostmodernist
a-ant-garde to #old on to a notion o/ a-ant-gardism w#ic# #ad alread% )een re/uted )% certain cultural &ractices o/ t#e *+<9s4 T#e iron% is t#at in t#is &eculiarl% American
a&&ro&riation o/ recent $renc# t#eor% t#e &ostmodernist searc# /or tradition comes /ull circleN /or se-eral maIor e(&onents o/ $renc# &oststructuralism suc# as $oucault, DeleuGe,
2uattari, and Derrida are more concerned wit# t#e arc#eolog% o/ modernit% t#an wit# )rea!t#roug# and inno-ation, wit# #istor% and t#e &ast more t#an wit# t#e %ear 599*4
Two concluding Kuestions can )e &osed at t#is Iuncture4 .#% was t#ere t#is intense searc# /or -ia)le traditions in t#e *+<9s and w#at, i/ an%t#ing, is #istoricall% s&eci/ic a)out itD
And, secondl%, w#at can t#e identi/ication wit# t#e classical a-ant-garde contri)ute to our sense o/ cultural identit%, and to w#at e(tent is suc# an identi/ication desira)leD T#e
.estern industrialiGed countries are currentl% e(&eriencing a /undamental cultural and &olitical identit% crisis4 T#e *+<9s0 searc# /or roots, /or #istor% and traditions, was an
ine-ita)le and in man% wa%s &roducti-e o//s#oot o/ t#is crisisN a&art /rom t#e nostalgia /or mummies and em&erors, we are con/ronted wit# a multi/aceted and di-erse searc# /or t#e
&ast @o/ten /or an alternati-e &astA w#ic#, in man% o/ its more radical mani/estations, Kuestions t#e /undamental orientation o/ .estern societies toward /uture growt# and toward
unlimited &rogress4 T#is Kuestioning o/ #istor% and tradition H as it in/orms, /or instance, t#e /eminist interest in women0s #istor% and t#e ecological searc# /or alternati-es in our
relations#i& wit# nature H s#ould not )e con/used wit# t#e Sim&leminded rearguard assertion o/ traditional norms and -alues, alt#oug# )ot# &#enomena re/lect, wit# diametricall%
o&&osed &olitical intentions, t#e same dis&osition toward tradition and #istor%4 T#e &ro)lem wit# &ostmodernism is t#at it relegates #istor% to t#e dust)in o/ an o)solete ;pist;me5
arguing glee/ull% t#at #istor% does not e(ist e(ce&t as te(t, i4e4 as #istoriogra&#%4 5> O/ course, i/ t#e Fre/erent0 o/ #istoriogra&#%, t#at w#ic# #istorians write about5 is eliminated,
t#en #istor% is indeed u& /or gra)s H or, to &ut it in more trend% words, u& /or Fstrong
misreadings0 .#en Ha%den .#ite lamented t#e F)urden o/ #istor%0 in *+?? and
Andreas !,yssen
5,9
suggested, &er/ectl% in line wit# t#e earl% &#ase o/ &ostmodernism, t#at we acce&t our lot o/ discontinuit%, disru&tion, and c#aos,
5?
#e re&la%ed t#e ietGsc#ean im&etus o/ t#e classical a-ant-
garde, )ut #is suggestion is less t#an #el&/ul in dealing wit# t#e new cultural constellations o/ t#e *+<9s4 Cultural &ractices o/ t#e *+<9s
H &ostmodernist t#eor% notwit#standing H actuall% &oint to t#e -ital need not to a)andon #istor% and t#e &ast to tradition-mongering neo-conser-ati-es )ent on reesta)lis#ing t#e norms o/ earlier
industrial ca&italism6 disci&line, aut#orit%, t#e wor! et#ic, and t#e traditional /amil%4 T#ere is indeed an alternati-e searc# /or tradition and #istor% going on toda% w#ic# mani/ests itsel/ in t#e
concern wit# cultural /ormations not dominated )% logocentric and tec#nocratic t#oug#t, in t#e decentering o/ traditional notions o/ identit%, in t#e searc# /or women0s #istor%, in t#e reIection o/
centralisms, mainstreams and melting &ots o/ all !inds, and in t#e great -alue &ut on di//erence and ot#erness4 T#is searc# /or #istor% is o/ course also a searc# /or cultural identities toda%, and as
suc# it clearl% &oints to t#e e(#austion o/ t#e tradition o/ t#e a-ant-garde, including &ostmodernism4 T#e searc# /or tradition, to )e sure, is not &eculiar to t#e *+<9s alone4 E-er since .estern
ci-iliGation entered t#e t#roes o/ moderniGation, t#e nostalgic lament /or a lost &ast #as accom&anied it li!e a s#adow t#at #eld t#e &romise o/ a )etter /uture4 1ut in all t#e )attles )etween
ancients and moderns since t#e se-enteent# and eig#teent# centuries, /rom Herder and Sc#legel to 1enIamin and t#e American &ostmodernists, t#e moderns tended to em)race modernit%,
con-inced t#at t#e% #ad to &ass t#roug# it )e/ore t#e lost unit% o/ li/e and art could )e reconstructed on a #ig#er le-el4 T#is con-iction was t#e )asis /or a-ant-gardism4 Toda%, w#en modernism
loo!s increasingl% li!e a dead end, it is t#is /oundation itsel/ w#ic# is )eing c#allenged4 T#e uni-ersaliGing dri-e in#erent in t#e tradition o/ modernit% no longer #olds t#at promesse de bonheur
as it used to4
.#ic# )rings me to t#e second Kuestion6 w#et#er an identi/ication wit# t#e #istorical a-ant-garde H and, )% e(tension, wit# &ostmodernism H can contri)ute to our sense o/ cultural identit% in
t#e *+E9s4 ; do not want to gi-e a de/initi-e answer, )ut ; suggest t#at an attitude o/ s!e&ticism is called /or4 ;n traditional )ourgeois culture t#e a-ant-garde was success/ul in sustaining
di//erence4 .it#in t#e &roIect o/ modernit% it launc#ed a success/ul assault on nineteent#-centur%0 aest#eticism, w#ic# insisted on t#e a)solute autonom% o/ art, and on traditional realism, w#ic#
remained loc!ed into t#e dogma o/ mimetic re&resentation and re/erentialit%4 Postmodernism #as lost t#at ca&acit% to gain s#oc! -alue /rom di//erence, e(ce&t &er#a&s in relation to /orms o/ a
-er% traditional aest#etic conser-atism4 T#e counter-measures t#e #istorical a-ant-garde &ro&osed to )rea! t#e gri& o/ )ourgeois institutionaliGed culture are no longer e//ecti-e4 T#e reasons t#at
a-ant-gardism is no longer -ia)le toda% can )e located not onl% in t#e culture industr%0s ca&acit% to co-o&t, re&roduce, and commodi/%, )ut, more interestingl%4 in t#e a-ant-garde itsel/4 Des&ite
t#e &ower and integrit% o/ its attac!s against traditional )ourgeois culture and against t#e de&ri-ations o/ ca&italism, t#ere are moments in t#e #istorical a-ant-garde w#ic# s#ow #ow dee&l%
a-ant gardism itsel/ is im&licated in t#e .estern tradition o/ growt# and &rogress4 /#e /uturist and
,he -earch for ,radition 5,*
constructi-ist con/idence in tec#nolog% and moderniGation, t#e relentless assaults on t#e &ast and on tradition w#ic# went #and in #and wit# a Kuasi-meta&#%sical glori/ication o/ a &resent on t#e
edge o/ t#e /uture, t#e uni-ersaliGing, totaliGing, and centraliGing im&etus in#erent in t#e -er% conce&t o/ a-ant-garde @not to s&ea! o/ its meta&#oric militarismA, t#e ele-ation to dogma o/ an
initiall% legitimate critiKue o/ traditional artistic /orms rooted in mimesis and re&resentation, t#e unmitigated media and com&uter ent#usiasm o/ t#e *+?9s H all t#ese &#enomena re-eal t#e secret
)ond )etween a-ant-garde and o//icial culture in ad-anced industrial societies4 Certainl% t#e a-ant-gardists0 use o/ tec#nolog% was mostl% .erfremdend and critical rat#er t#an a//irmati-e4 And
%et, /rom toda%0s &ers&ecti-e t#e classical a-ant-garde0s )elie/ in tec#nological solutions /or culture a&&ears more a s%m&tom o/ t#e disease t#an a cure4 Similarl% one mig#t as! w#et#er t#e
uncom&romising attac! on tradition, narration, and memor% w#ic# c#aracteriGes large segments o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-garde is not Iust t#e ot#er side o/ Henr% $ord0s notorious statement t#at
F#istor% is )un!04 Per#a&s )ot# are e(&ressions o/ t#e same s&irit o/ cultural modernit% in ca&italism, a dismantling o/ stor% and &ers&ecti-e indeed &aralleling, e-en i/ onl% su)terraneousl%, t#e
destruction o/ #istor%4
At t#e same time, t#e tradition o/ a-ant-gardism, i/ stri&&ed o/ its uni-ersaliGing and normati-e claims, lea-es us wit# a &recious #eritage o/ artistic and literar% materials, &ractices, and
strategies w#ic# still in/orm man% o/ toda%0s most interesting writers and artists4 Preser-ing elements o/ t#e a-ant-gardist tradition is not at all incom&ati)le wit# t#e recu&eration and
reconstitution o/ #istor% and o/ stor% w#ic# we #a-e witnessed in t#e *+<9s4 2ood e(am&les o/ t#is !ind o/ coe(istence o/ seemingl% o&&osite literar% strategies can )e /ound in t#e &ost-
e(&erimental &rose wor!s o/ Peter Hand!e /rom ,he /oalie1s An=iety at the &enalty Lick t#roug# -hort 6etter5 6on% $arewell and A -orrow Keyond <reams to ,he 6eft-7anded Woman or,
Kuite di//erentl%, in t#e wor! o/ women writers suc# as C#rista .ol/ /rom ,he Muest for )hrista ,. t#roug# -elf-:=periment to Ho &lace on :arth. T#e recu&eration o/ #istor% and t#e
reemergence o/ stor% in t#e * +<9s are not &art o/ a lea& )ac! into a &re-modern, &re-a-ant-garde &ast, as some &ostmodernists seem to suggest4 T#e% can )e )etter descri)ed as attem&ts to s#i/t
into re-erse in order to get out o/ a dead-end street w#ere t#e -e#icles o/ a-ant gardism and &ostmodernism #a-e come to a standstill4 At t#e same time, t#e Contem&orar% concern /or #istor%
will !ee& us /rom la&sing )ac! into t#e a-antgardist gesture o/ totall% reIecting t#e &ast H t#is time t#e a-ant-garde itsel/4 Es&eciall% in t#e /ace o/ recent w#olesale neo-conser-ati-e attac!s on
t#e culture o/ modernism a-ant-gardism and &ostmodernism, it remains &oliticall% im&ortant to de/end t#is tradition against neo-conser-ati-e insinuations t#at modernist and
POstmodernist culture is to )e #eld res&onsi)le /or t#e current crisis o/ ca&italism4
Em&#asiGing t#e su)terranean lin!s )etween a-ant-gardism and t#e de-elo&ment o/
Ca&italism in t#e twentiet# centur% can e//ecti-el%0 counteract Daniel 1ell0s
Pro&ositions w#ic# se&arate an Fad-ersar% culture0 /rom t#e realm o/ social norms
in order to )lame t#e /ormer /or t#e disintegration o/ t#e latter04
;n m% -iew, #owe-er, t#e &ro)lem in contem&orar% culture is not so muc# t#eOH
Andreas !,yssen ,he -earch for ,radition 288
282
struggle )etween modernit% and &ostmodernit%, )etween a-ant-gardism and conser-atism, as 3urgen Ha)ermas #as argued in #is Adorno-&riGe s&eec#4
5<
O/ course, t#e old conser-ati-es, w#o
reIect t#e culture o/ modernism and t#e a-ant-garde, and t#e neo-conser-ati-eS, w#o ad-ocate t#e immanence o/ art and its se&arateness /rom t#e 6ebenswelt5 must )e /oug#t and re/uted4 ;n t#at
de)ate, es&eciall%, t#e cultural &ractices o/ a-ant-gardism #a-e not %et lost t#eir -igor4 1ut t#is struggle ma% well turn out to )e a rearguard s!irmis# )etween two dated modes o/ t#oug#t, two
cultural dis&ositions w#ic# relate to eac# ot#er li!e t#e two sides o/ one coin6 t#e uni-ersalistS o/ tradition &itted against t#e uni-ersalists o/ a modernist enlig#tenment4 .#ile ; stand wit#
Ha)ermas against old conser-ati-es and neo-conser(0atiJeS, ; /ind #is call /or t#e com&letion o/ t#e &roIect o/ modernit%, w#ic# is t#e &olitical core o/ #is argument, dee&l% &ro)lematic4 As ;
#o&e to #a-e s#own in m% discussion o/ a-ant-garde and &ostmodernism, too man% as&ects o/ t#e traIector% o/ modernit% #a-e )ecame sus&ect and un-ia)le toda%4 E-en t#e aest#eticall% and
&oliticall% most /ascinating com&onent o/ modernit%, t#e #istorical a-ant-garde, no longer o//ers solutions /or maIor sectors o/ contem&orar% culture, w#ic# would reIect t#e a-ant-garde0s
uni-ersaliGing and totaliGing gesture as muc# as its am)iguous es&ousal o/ tec#nolog% and moderniGation4 .#at Ha)ermas as a t#eoretician s#ares wit# t#e aest#etic tradition o/ a-ant-gardism is
&recisel% t#is uni-ersaliGing gesture, w#ic# is rooted in t#e )ourgeois enlig#tenment, &er-ades Mar(ism, and ultimatel% aims at a #olistic notion o/ modernit%4 Signi/icantl%, t#e original title o/
Ha)ermas0s te(t, as it was &rinted in <ie Peit in Se&tem)er *+E9, was FModernit% H An ;ncom&lete ProIect04 T#e title &oints to t#e &ro)lem H t#e teleological un/olding o/ a #istor% o/ modernit%
H and it raises a Kuestion6 to w#at e(tent is t#e assum&tion o/ a telos o/ #istor% com&ati)le wit# F#istories0D And t#is Kuestion is legitimate4 $or not onl% does Ha)ermas smoot# o-er
contradictions and discontinuities in t#e traIector% o/ modernit% itsel/, as Peter 1urger #as &oignantl% &ointed out4 5E Ha)ermas ignores t#e /act t#at t#e -er% idea o/ a #olistic modernit% and o/ a
totaliGing -iew o/ #istor% #as )ecome anat#ema in t#e *+<9s, and &recisel% not on t#e conser-ati-e rig#t4 T#e critical deconstruction o/ enlig#tenment rationalism and logocentrism )%
t#eoreticians o/ culture, t#e decentering o/ traditional notions o/ identit%, t#e /ig#t o/ women and ga%s /or a legitimate social and se(ual identit% outside o/ t#e &arameters o/ male, #eterose(ual
-ision, t#e searc# /or alternati-es in our relations#i& wit# nature, including t#e nature o/ our own )odies H all t#ese &#enomena, w#ic# are !e% to t#e culture o/ t#e *+<9s, ma!e Ha)ermas0s
&ro&osition to com&lete t#e &roIect o/ modernit% Kuestiona)le, i/ not undesira)le4
2i-en Ha)ermas0s inde)tedness to t#e tradition o/ critical enlig#tenment, w#ic# in 2erman &olitical #istor% H and t#is s#ould )e mentioned in Ha)ermas0s de/ense
H alwa%s was t#e ad-ersar% and underdog current rat#er t#an t#e mainstream, it comes as no sur&rise t#at 1ataille, $oucault, and Derrida are lum&ed wit# t#e conser-ati-es in t#e cam& o/
&ostmodernit%4 T#ere is no dou)t in m% mind t#at muc# o/ t#e &ostmodernist a&&ro&riation o/ $oucault and es&eciall% Derrida in t#e 8nited States is indeed &oliticall% conser-ati-e, )ut t#at,
a/ter dl4 is onl% one line
I;
o/ rece&tion and res&onse4 Ha)ermas #imsel/ could )e accused o/ constructing a Manic#ean dualism in #is essa% w#ere #e &its t#e dar! /orces o/ anti-modern conser-atism against t#e
enlig#tened and enlig#tening /orces o/ modernit%4 T#is Manic#ean -iew mani/ests itsel/ again in t#e wa% Ha)ermas tends to reduce t#e &roIect o/ modernit% to its rational enlig#tenment
com&onents and to dismiss ot#er, eKuall% im&ortant &arts o/ modernit% as mista!es4 3ust as 1ataille, $oucault, and Derrida are said to #a-e ste&&ed outside t#e modern world )% remo-ing t#e
imagination, emotionalit%, and sel/-e(&erience into t#e s&#ere o/ t#e arc#aic @a &ro&osition w#ic# is itsel/ de)ata)leA, surrealism is descri)ed )% Ha)ermas as modernit% gone astra%4 Rel%ing on
Adorno0s critiKue o/ surrealism, Ha)ermas re&roac#es t#e surrealist a-ant-garde /or #a-ing ad-ocated a /alse su)lation EAufhebun%D o/ t#e art:li/e dic#otom%4 .#ile ; agree wit# Ha)ermas t#at
a total su)lation o/ art is indeed a /alse &roIect /raug#t wit# contradictions, ; would de/end surrealism on t#ree counts4 More t#an an% ot#er a-ant-garde mo-ement, surrealism dismantled /alse
notions o/ identit% and artistic creati-it%N it attem&ted to e(&lode t#e rei/ications o/ rationalit% in ca&italist culture and, )% /ocusing on &s%c#ic &rocesses, it e(&osed t#e -ulnera)ilit% o/ all
rationalit%, not onl% t#at o/ instrumental rationalit%N and, /inall%, it included t#e concrete #uman su)Iect and #is:#er desires in its artistic &ractices and in its notion t#at t#e rece&tion o/ art s#ould
s%stematicall% disru&t &erce&tion and senses4 5+
Alt#oug# Ha)ermas, in t#e section entitled FAlternati-es0, seems to retain t#e surrealist gesture w#en #e s&eculates a)out t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ relin!ing art and literature wit# e-er%da% li/e,
e-er%da% li/e itsel/ H contrar% to surrealism H is de/ined in e(clusi-el% rational, cogniti-e and normati-e terms4 Signi/icantl%, Ha)ermas0s e(am&le a)out an alternati-e rece&tion o/ art in w#ic#
t#e e(&erts0 culture is rea&&ro&riated /rom t#e stand&oint o/ t#e 6ebens welt in-ol-es %oung male wor!ers, F&oliticall% moti-ated0 and F!nowledge #ungr%0N t#e time is *+,<, 1erlinN t#e artwor!
rea&&ro&riated )%0 t#e wor!ers is t#e Pergamon altar, s%m)ol o/ classicism, &ower, and rationalit%N and t#e status o/ t#is rea&&ro&riation is /iction, a &assage in Peter .eiss0s no-el <ie Asthetik
des Widerstands. T#e one concrete e(am&le Ha)ermas gi-es is se-eral times remo-ed /rom t#e 6ebenswelt o/ t#e *+<9s and its cultural &ractices, w#ic#, in suc# maIor mani/estations as t#e
women0s mo-ement, t#e ga% mo-ement, and t#e ecolog% mo-ement, seem to &oint )e%ond t#e culture o/ modernit%, )e%ond a-ant-garde and &ostmodernism, and most certainl% )e%ond neo-
conser-atism
Ha)ermas is rig#t in arguing t#at a relin!ing o/ modern culture wit# e-er%da% &ra(is can onl% )e success/ul i/ t#e 6ebensu1elt is a)le Fto de-elo& institutions out o/ itsel/ w#ic# set limits to t#e
internal d%namics and to t#e im&erati-es o/ an almost autonomous economic s%stem and its administrati-e com&lements04 As a result o/ t#e conser-ati-e )ac!las# t#e c#ances /or t#is ma%
indeed not )e -er% good at t#e &resent time4 1ut to suggest, as Ha)ermas im&licitl% does, t#at t#ere are as %et no suc# attem&ts to steer modernit% in di//erent and alternati-e directions, is a -iew
.#ic# results /rom t#e )lind s&ot o/ t#e Euro&ean enlig#tenment, its tendenc% to #omogeniGe #eterogeneit%, ot#erness, and di//erence4
,he -earch for ,radition 5,>
28: Andreas !,yssen
P4S46 Some time ago, a-antgarde:&ostmodernist artist C#risto &lanned to wra& t#e 1erlin Reic#stag, an e-ent w#ic#, according to 1erlin ma%or Sto))e, could #a-e led to a stimulating &olitical
discussion4 Conser-ati-e 1undestags&rcsident 'arl Carstens, #owe-er, /eared s&ectacle and scandal, so instead Sto))e suggested t#e organiGation o/ a maIor #istorical e(#i)ition a)out Prussia4
.#en t#e great Preu/OenAusstellung o&ens in 1erlin in August *+E*, t#e a-ant-garde will trul% )e dead4 Time /or Heiner Muller0s /ermania <eath in Kerlin.
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 Catalogues6 ,enden8en der Pwan8i%er3ahre: 1!. 6uropdische Lunstausstellun% @1erlin,
*+<<AN Wem %ehbrt die Welt: Lunst nod /esellschaft in der Weimarer 4epublik5 eue
2esellsc#a/t /Xr )ildende 'unst @1erlin, *+<<AN &arisIKerlin 1*00I1*##5 Centre
2eorges Pom&idou @Paris, *+<EA4 Ro)ert Hug#es0s tele-ision series #as also )een
&u)lis#ed in )oo! /orm as ,he -hock of the Hew5 *+E*4 See also &arisI(oscou1
1*00I1 +,9, Centre 2eorges Pom&idou @Paris, *+<+A4
54 .alter 1enIamin, FT#eses on t#e &#iloso&#% o/ #istor%0, in 'lluminations5 ed4 Hanna# Arendt, Sc#oc!en 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+?+4
#. Hans Magnus EnGens)erger, FDie A&orien der A-antgarde0, in :in8elheiten: &oesie nod &olitik5 Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt am Main, *+?54 ;n t#is essa% EnGens)erger anal%Ges t#e
contradictions in t#e tem&oral sensi)ilit% o/ a-ant-gardism, t#e relations#i& o/ artistic and &olitical a-ant-gardes, and certain &ost-*+=> a-ant-garde &#enomena suc# as art informel5 action
&ainting, and t#e literature o/ t#e )eat generation4 His maIor t#esis is t#at t#e #istorical a-ant-garde is dead and t#at t#e re-i-al o/ a-ant-gardism a/ter *+=> is /raudulent and regressi-e4
=4 Ma( $risc#, FDer Autor und das T#eater0, *+?=, in /esamrnelte Wt1rke in 8eitlicl=1r $ol%e5 -ol4 >,5, Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt am Main, *+<?, &4 ,=54
!. &artisan 4e.iew5 1*!*5 =59H,?4 Re&rinted in ;r-ing Howe, ,he <ecline of the en Harcourt, 1race and .orld, ew Yor!, *+<9, &&4 *+9H59<4
?4 Harr% Le-in, F.#at was modernismD0, *+?9, in 4efractions5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+??, &4 5<*4
<4 ;t is not m% &ur&ose in t#is essa% to de/ine and delimit t#e term F&ostmodernisnl0 conce&tuall%4 Since t#e *+?9s t#e term #as accumulated se-eral la%ers o/ meaning w#ic# s#ould not )e
/orced into t#e straitIac!et o/ a s%stematic de/inition4 ;n t#is essa%0 t#e term F&ostmodernism0 will -ariousl% re/er to American art mo-ements /rom &o& to &er/ormance, to recent
e(&erimentalism in dance, t#eater and /iction, and to certain a-ant-gardist trends in literar% criticism /rom t#e wor! o/ Leslie $iedler and Susan Sontag in t#e *+?9s to t#e more recent
a&&ro&riation o/ $renc# cultural t#eor% )% American critics w#o ma% or ma% not call t#emsel-es &ostmodernists4 Some use/ul discussions Xt &ostmodernism can )e /ound in Matei
Calinescu, $aces o3 (odernity: A.ant-%ard. decadence5 kitsch5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington and London, *+<<, es&eciall% &&4 *,5H=,N and in a s&ecial issue on &ostmodernism o/
Amerikastudien5 5, @*+<<AN t#is issue also contains a su)stanti-e )i)liogra&#% on &ostmodernisrR ibid.5 =9H?4
E4 Calinescu @see note 7?B Peter 1urger, ,heorie der At1ant%arde5 Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt am Main, *+<=N Engl4 translation6 ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 *+E=N G,heorie der
A.ant%arde1: Antworten auf &eter Kur%ers Kestimmun% .on Lunst und bflr%erlicher /esellschaft5 ed4 .4 Martin Lud!e, Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt am Main, *+<?, 1urger0s re&l% to #is critics
is contained in t#e introduction to #is Vermittlun%-4e8eption-$unktion5 Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt am Main, *+<+N s&ecial issue on (onta%e/A.ant%arde o/ t#e 1erlin Iournal Alternati.e5 *55H,
@*+<EA4 See also t#e essa%s )%3Xrgen Ha)ermas, Hans Platsc#ec! and 'arl HeinG 1o#rer in -tichworte 8ur G/eisti%en -ituation der Peit15 5 mis, ed4 3urgen Ha)ermas, Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt
am Main, *+<+4
+4 E4g4 t#e *+<+ con/erence on /ascism and t#e a-ant-garde in Madison, .isconsin6
$aschismus und A.ant%arde5 ed4 Rein#old 2rimm and lost Hermand, At#endum, 'OnigsteinITs, *+E94
*94 Re/erences in Calinescu, $aces of (odernity5 &4 *=9 and &4 5E<, /n =94
**4 3o#n .eig#tman, ,he )oncept of the Ad.ant-/arde5 Li)rar% Press, La Salle, ;L, *+<,4
*54 Calinescu, $aces of (odernity5 &4 *=94
*,4 Peter 1urger, ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 *+E=4
*=4 On t#e &olitical as&ects o/ t#e le/t a-ant-garde, see Da-id 1at#ric!, FA//irmati-e and negati-e culture6 Tec#nolog% and t#e le/t a-ant-garde0, in ,he ,echnolo%ical 'ma%ination5 ed4
Teresa de Lauretis, Andreas Hu%ssen, and 'at#leen .oodward, Coda Press, Madison, .;, *+E9, &&4 *9<H554
1!. See EnGens)erger, FA&orien0, &&4 ?? /4
*?4 On Po& Art see Andreas Hu%ssen, FT#e cultural &olitics o/ &o&0, in After the /reat <i.ide.
*<4 Leslie $iedler, ,he )ollected :ssays of 6eslie $iedler5 -ol4 ;;, Stein \ Da%, ew Yor!,
*+<*, &&4 =>=H?*4
*E4 Re&rinted in Leslie $iedler, A $iedler 4eader5 Stein \ Da%0, ew Yor!, *+<<, &&4 5<9H+=4
*+4 C/4 man% essa%s in t#e ant#olog% (ass )ulture: ,he popular arts in America5 eds 1ernard Rosen)erg and Da-id Manning .#ite, T#e $ree Press, ew Yor!, *+><4
594 Hans Magnus EnGens)erger, :in8elheiten ': Kewufltseinsindustrie5 Su#r!am&, $ran!/urt am Main, *+?54
5*4 ;#a) Hassan, &aracriticsms: -e.en speculations of the times5 *+<>4 See also ;#a) Hassan, ,he 4i%ht &romethean $ire: 'ma%ination5 science5 and cultural chan%e5 *+E94
554 $or an incisi-e critiKue o/ &ostmodernism /rom an aest#eticall% rat#er conser-ati-e &osition, see 2erald 2ra/t, FT#e m%t# o/ t#e &ostmodernist )rea!t#roug#0, *+<,, ,E,H=*<4
T#e essa% also a&&eared in 2ra//, 6iterature A%ainst 'tself 6iterary1 ideas on modern society5 *+<+, &&4 , *H?54
5,4 See Serge 2uil)aut, FT#e new ad-entures o/ t#e a-ant-garde in America0, *+E9, ? *H<E4 C/4 also E-a Coc!ro/t, FA)stract E(&ressionism6 .ea&on o/ t#e Cold .ar0, Art9oruni5 B;;
@*+<=A4
5=4 ; am not identi/%ing &oststructuralism wit# &ostmodernism, e-en t#oug# t#e conce&t o/ &ostmodernism #as recentl%0 )een incor&orated into $renc# &oststructuralist writing in t#e wor!s o/
3ean-$rancois L%otard4 All ; am sa%ing is t#at t#ere are de/inite lin!s )etween t#e et#os o/ &ostmodernisrn and t#e American a&&ro&riation o/ &oststructuralism as t#e latest a-ant-garde in
t#eor%4 $or more on t#e &ostmodernismH&oststructuralism constellation, see Andreas Hu%ssen, FMa&&ing t#e &ostmodern0, in After the /reat <i.ide.
"!. $or a sustained critiKue o/ t#e denial o/ #istor% in contem&orar% American literar%4P
28< Andreas !,yssen
criticsm, see $redric 3ameson, ,he &olitical 0nconscious: Harrati.e as a socially symbolic act5 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+E*, es&eciall% c#4 *4
5?4 Ha%den .#ite, FT#e )urden o/ #istor%0, re&rinted in ,ropics of <iscourse: :ssays in cultural criticism5 *+<E, &&4 5<H>94
5<4 3Orgen Ha)ermas, OModernit% -s4 &ostmodernit%0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 55 @*+E*A,
,H*=N see &&4 +EH*9+ o/ t#e &resent -olume4
5E4 Peter 1urger, FA-antgarde and contem&orar% aest#etics6 a re&l% to 3Xrgen Ha)ermas0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 55 @*+E*A, *+H554
5+4 See Peter 1urger, <erfran8bsische -urrealismus5 At#enbum, $ran!/urt am Main, *+<*4
46 D &he !egation of the Autonom( of Art 2( the
A0ant$8arde
Peter -,rer
;n sc#olarl% discussion u& to now, t#e categor% Fautonom%0 #as su//ered /rom t#e im&recision o/ t#e -arious su)categories t#oug#t o/ as constituting a unit% in t#e conce&t o/ t#e autonomous
wor! o/ art4 Since t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#e indi-idual su)categories is not s%nc#ronous, it ma% #a&&en t#at sometimes courtl% art seems alread% autonomous, w#ile at ot#er times onl% )ourgeois
art a&&ears to #a-e t#at c#aracteristic4 To ma!e clear t#at t#e contradictions )etween t#e -arious inter&retations result /rom t#e nature o/ t#e case, we will s!etc# a #istorical t%&olog%
t#at is deli)eratel% reduced to t#ree elements @&ur&ose or /unction, &roduction, rece&tionA, )ecause t#e &oint #ere is to #a-e t#e nons%nc#ronism in t#e de-elo&ment o/
indi-idual categories emerge wit# clarit%4
A. Sacral Art @e(am&le6 t#e art o/ t#e Hig# Middle AgesA ser-es as cult o)Iect4 ;t is w#oll% integrated into t#e social institution Freligion04 ;t is &roduced collecti-el%, as a
cra/t4 T#e mode o/ rece&tion also is institutionaliGed as collecti-e4
9. Courtl% Art @e(am&le6 t#e art at t#e court o/ Louis B;JA also #as a &recisel% de/ined /unction4 ;t is re&resentational and ser-es t#e glor% o/ t#e &rince and t#e sel/-
&ortra%al o/ courtl% societ%4 Courtl% art is &art o/ t#e li/e &ra(is o/ courtl% societ%, Iust as sacral art is &art o/ t#e li/e &ra(is o/ t#e /ait#/ul4 Yet t#e detac#ment /rom t#e sacral
tie is a /irst ste& in t#e emanci&ation o/ art4 @FEmanci&ation0 is )eing used #ere as a descri&ti-e term, as re/erring to t#e &rocess )% w#ic# art constitutes itsel/ as a distinct
social su)s%stem4A T#e di//erence /rom sacral art )ecomes &articularl% a&&arent in t#e realm o/ &roduction6 t#e artist &roduces as an indi-idual and de-elo&s a consciousness
o/ t#e uniKueness o/ #is acti-it%4 Rece&tion, on t#e ot#er #and, remains collecti-e4 1ut t#e content o/ t#e collecti-e &er/ormance is no longer Sacral, it is socia)ilit%4
C4 Onl% to t#e e(tent t#at t#e )ourgeoisie ado&ts conce&ts o/ -alue #eld )% t#e
Prom 1urger, P4, ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 Manc#ester 8ni-erSit% Press, Manc#ester: 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, M, *+E=, &&4 =<H>=4
28=
28@ Peter -,rer He%ation of the Autonomy of Art
aristocrac% does )ourgeois art #a-e a re&resentational /unction4 .#en it is genuinel% )ourgeois, t#is art is t#e o)Iecti/ication o/ t#e sel/-understanding o/ t#e )ourgeois class4
Production and rece&tion o/ t#e sel/-understanding as articulated in art are no longer tied to t#e &ra(is o/ li/e4 Ha)ermas calls t#is t#e satis/action o/ residual needs, t#at is, o/
needs t#at #a-e )ecome su)merged in t#e li/e &ra(is o/ )ourgeois societ%4 ot onl% &roduction )ut rece&tion also are now indi-idual acts4 T#e solitar%0 a)sor&tion in t#e wor!
is t#e adeKuate mode o/ a&&ro&riation o/ creations remo-ed /rom t#e li/e &ra(is o/ t#e )ourgeois, e-en t#oug# t#e% still claim to inter&ret t#at &ra(is4 ;n Aest#eticism, /inall%,
w#ere )ourgeois art reac#es t#e stage o/ sel/-re/lection, t#is claim is no longer made4 A&artness /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, w#ic# #ad alwa%s )een t#e condition t#at
c#aracteriGed t#e wa% art /unctioned in )ourgeois societ%, now )ecomes its content4 T#e t%&olog% we #a-e s!etc#ed #ere can )e re&resented in t#e accom&an%ing ta)ulation
@t#e -ertical lines in )old/ace re/er to a decisi-e c#ange in t#e de-elo&ment, t#e )ro!en ones to a less decisi-e oneA4
Sacral Art
Pur&ose or /unction
Production
Rece&tion
cult o)Iect
collecti-e cra/t collecti-e @sacralA
Courtl% Art
re&resentational I o)Iect
indi-idual
collecti-e
@socia)leA
1ourgeois Art
&ortra%al o/ )ourgeois sel/-understanding
indi-idual ; indi-idual
T#e ta)ulation allows one to notice t#at t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#e categories was not s%nc#ronous4 Production )% t#e indi-idual t#at c#aracteriGes art in )ourgeois societ%
#as its origins as /ar )ac! as courtl% &atronage4 1ut courtl% art still remains integral to t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, alt#oug# as com&ared wit# t#e cult /unction, t#e re&resentational
/unction constitutes a ste& toward a mitigation o/ claims t#at art &la%s a direct social role4 T#e rece&tion o/ courtl% art also remains collecti-e, alt#oug# t#e content o/ t#e collecti-e
&er/ormance #as c#anged4 As regards rece&tion, it is onl% wit# )ourgeois art t#at a decisi-e c#ange sets in6 its rece&tion is one )% isolated indi-iduals4 T#e no-el is t#at literar% genre in
w#ic# t#e new mode o/ rece&tion /inds t#e /orm a&&ro&riate to it4
5
T#e ad-ent o/ )ourgeois art is also t#e decisi-e turning &oint as regards use or /unction4 Alt#oug# in di//erent
wa%s, )ot# sacral and courtl% art are integral to t#e li/e &ra(is o/ t#e reci&ient4 As cult and re&resentational o)Iects, wor!s o/ art are &ut to a s&eci/ic use4 T#is reKuirement no longer
a&&lies to t#e same e(tent to )ourgeois art4 ;n )ourgeois art, t#e &ortra%al o/ )ourgeois sel/-understanding occurs in a s&#ere t#at lies outside t#e &ra(is o/ li/e4 T#e citiGen
w#o, in e-er%da% li/e, #as )een reduced to a &artial /unction @meansHends acti-it%A can )e disco-ered in art as F#uman )einc04 Here, one can un/old t#e a)undance o/ one0s
talents, t#oug# wit# t#e &ro-OO4o t#at t#is s&#ere
28B
remain strictl% se&arate /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e4 Seen in t#is /as#ion, t#e se&aration o/ art /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e )ecomes t#e decisi-e c#aracteristic o/ t#e autonom% o/
)ourgeois art @a /act t#at t#e ta)ulation does not )ring out adeKuatel%A4 To a-oid misunderstandings, it must )e em&#asiGed once again t#at autonom% in t#is sense de/ines t#e status
o/ art in )ourgeois societ%, )ut t#at no assertions concerning t#e contents o/ wor!s are in-ol-ed4 Alt#oug# art as an institution ma% )e considered /ull% /ormed toward t#e end
o/ t#e eig#teent# centur%, t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#e contents o/ wor!s is su)Iect to a #istorical d%namics, w#ose terminal &oint is reac#ed in Aest#eticism, w#ere art )ecomes
t#e content o/ art4
T#e Euro&ean a-ant-garde mo-ements can )e de/ined as an attac! on t#e status o/ art in )ourgeois societ%4 .#at is negated is not an earlier /orm o/ art @a st%leA )ut art as
an institution t#at is unassociated wit# t#e li/e &ra(is o/ men4 .#en t#e a-ant-gardists demand t#at art )ecome &ractical once again, t#e% do not mean t#at t#e contents o/ wor!s
o/ art s#ould )e sociall% signi/icant4 T#e demand is not raised at t#e le-el o/ t#e contents o/ indi-idual wor!s4 Rat#er, it directs itsel/ to t#e wa% art /unctions in societ%, a
&rocess t#at does as muc# to determine t#e e//ect t#at wor!s #a-e as does t#e &articular content4
T#e a-ant-gardists -iew its dissociation /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e as t#e dominant c#aracteristic o/ art in )ourgeois societ%4 One o/ t#e reasons t#is dissociation was &ossi)le is
t#at Aest#eticism #ad made t#e element t#at de/ines art as an institution t#e essential content o/ wor!s, ;nstitution and wor! contents #ad to coincide to ma!e it logicall%
&ossi)le /or t#e a-ant-garde to call art into Kuestion4 T#e a-antgardists &ro&osed t#e su)lation o/ art H su)lation in t#e Hegelian sense o/ t#e term6
art was not to )e sim&l% destro%ed, )ut trans/erred to t#e &ra(is o/ li/e w#ere it would )e &reser-ed, al)eit in a c#anged /orm4 T#e a-ant-gardists t#us ado&ted an essential
element o/ Aest#eticism4 Aest#eticism #ad made t#e distance /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e t#e content o/ wor!s4 T#e &ra(is o/ li/e to w#ic# Aest#eticism re/ers and w#ic# it negates
is t#e meansHends rationalit% o/ t#e )ourgeois e-er%da%4 ow, it is not t#e aim o/ t#e a-ant-gardists to integrate art into this &ra(is4 On t#e contrar%, t#e% assent to t#e
aest#eticists0 reIection o/ t#e world and its meansHends rationalit%4 .#at distinguis#es t#em /rom t#e latter is t#e attem&t to organiGe a new li/e &ra(is /rom a )asis in art4 ;n
t#is res&ect also, Aest#eticism turns out to #a-e )een t#e necessar% &recondition o/ t#e a-ant-gardist intent4 Onl% an art t#e contents o/ w#ose indi-idual wor!s is w#oll%
distinct /rom t#e @)adA &ra(is o/ t#e e(isting Societ% can )e t#e center t#at can )e t#e starting &oint /or t#e organiGation o/ a new li/e &ra(is4
.it# t#e #el& o/ Her)ert Marcuse0s t#eoretical /ormulation concerning t#e two/old c#aracter o/ art in )ourgeois societ% Vin FT#e a//irmati-e c#aracter o/ Culture0Y, t#e
a-ant-gardist intent can )e understood wit# &articular clarit%4 All t#ose needs t#at cannot )e satis/ied in e-er%da% li/e, )ecause t#e &rinci&le o/ Com&etition &er-ades all s&#eres, can
I
;
/ind a #ome in art, )ecause art is remo-ed /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e4 Jalues suc# as #umanit%, Io%, trut#, solidarit% are e(truded /rom li/e, as it were, and &reser-ed in art4 ;n )ourgeois societ%, art
#as aO44 Contradictor% role6 it &roIects t#e image o/ a )etter order and to t#at e(tent &rotests
2:9 Peter -,rer He%ation of the Autonomy of Art
against t#e )ad order t#at &re-ails4 1ut )% realiGing t#e image o/ a )etter order in /iction, w#ic# is sem)lance E-cheinD onl%, it relie-es t#e e(isting societ% o/ t#e &ressure o/
t#ose /orces t#at ma!e /or c#ange4 T#e% are assigned to con/inement in an ideal s&#ere4 .#ere art accom&lis#es t#is, it is Fa//irmati-e0 in Marcuse0s sense o/ t#e term4 ;/ t#e
two/old c#aracter o/ art in )ourgeois societ% consists in t#e /act t#at t#e distance /rom t#e social &roduction and re&roduction &rocess contains an element o/ /reedom and an element
o/ t#e noncommittal and an a)sence o/ an% conseKuences, it can )e seen t#at t#e a-ant-gardists0 attem&t to reintegrate art into t#e li/e &rocess is itsel/ a &ro/oundl%
contradictor% endea-or4 $or t#e @relati-eA /reedom o/ art .is-d-.is t#e &ra(is o/ li/e is at t#e same time t#e condition t#at must )e /ul/illed i/ t#ere is to )e a critical cognition o/
realit%4 An art no longer distinct /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e )ut w#oll% a)sor)ed in it will lose t#e ca&acit% to criticiGe it, along wit# its distance4 During t#e time o/ t#e #istorical
a-ant-garde mo-ements, t#e attem&t to do awa% wit# t#e distance )etween art and li/e still #ad all t#e &at#os o/ #istorical &rogressi-eness on its side4 1ut in t#e meantime, t#e
culture industr% #as )roug#t a)out t#e /alse elimination o/ t#e distance )etween art and li/e, and t#is also allows one to recogniGe t#e contradictoriness o/ t#e a-ant-gardist
underta!ing4 O
;n w#at /ollows, we will outline #ow t#e intent to eliminate art as an institution /ound e(&ression in t#e t#ree areas t#at we used a)o-e to c#aracteriGe autonomous art6 &ur&ose
or /unction, &roduction, rece&tion4 ;nstead o/ s&ea!ing o/ t#e a-antgardist wor!, we will s&ea! o/ a-ant-gardist mani/estation4 A dadaist mani/estation does not #a-e wor! c#aracter
)ut is nonet#eless an aut#entic mani/estation o/ t#e artistic a-ant-garde4 T#is is not to im&l% t#at t#e a-ant-gardists &roduced no wor!s w#ate-er and re&laced t#em )% e&#emeral e-ents4
.e will see t#at w#ereas t#e% did not destro% it, t#e a-ant-gardists &ro/oundl% modi/ied t#e categor% o/ t#e wor! o/ art4
O/ t#e t#ree areas, t#e intended purpose or function o/ t#e a-ant-gardist mani/estation is most di//icult to de/ine4 ;n t#e aest#eticist wor! o/ art, t#e disIointure o/ t#e wor!
and t#e &ra(is o/ li/e c#aracteristic o/ t#e status o/ art in )ourgeois societ% #as )ecome t#e wor!0s essential content4 ;t is onl% as a conseKuence o/ t#is /act t#at t#e wor! o/ art
)ecomes its own end in t#e /ull meaning o/ t#e term4 ;n Aest#eticism, t#e social /unctionlessness o/ art )ecomes mani/est4 T#e a-ant-gardist artists counter suc#
/unctionlessness not )% an art t#at would #a-e conseKuences wit#in t#e e(isting societ%, )ut rat#er )% t#e &rinci&le o/ t#e su)lation o/ art in t#e &ra(is o/ li/e4 1ut suc# a conce&tion
ma!es it im&ossi)le to de/ine t#e intended &ur&ose o/ art4 $or an art t#at #as )een reintegrated into t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, not e-en t#e a)sence o/ a social &ur&ose can )e indicated, as was
still &ossi)le in Aest#eticism4 .#en art and t#e &ra(is o/ li/e are one, w#en t#e &ra(is is aest#etic and art is &ractical, art0s &ur&ose can no longer )e disco-ered, )ecause t#e e(istence o/
two distinct s&#eres @art and t#e &ra(is o/ li/eA t#at is constituti-e o/ t#e conce&t o/ &ur&ose or intended use #as come to an end4
.e #a-e seen t#at t#e production o/ t#e autonomous wor! o/ Ort is t#e act o/ an indi-idual4 T#e artist &roduces as indi-idual, indi-idualit% not O(ing understood as
2:1
t#e e(&ression o/ somet#ing )ut as radicall% di//erent4 T#e conce&t o/ genius testi/ies to t#is4 T#e Kuasi-tec#nical consciousness o/ t#e ma!ea)ilit% o/ wor!s o/ art t#at Aest#eticism attains
seems onl% to contradict t#is4 Jaler%, /or e(am&le, dem%sti/ies artistic genius )% reducing it to &s%c#ological moti-ations on t#e one #and, and t#e a-aila)ilit% to it o/ artistic
means on t#e ot#er4 .#ile &seudo-romantic doctrines o/ ins&iration t#us come to )e seen as t#e sel/-dece&tion o/ &roducers, t#e -iew o/ art /or w#ic# t#e indi-idual is t#e
creati-e su)Iect is let stand4 ;ndeed, Jal)r%Rs t#eorem concerning t#e /orce o/ &ride Eor%ueilD t#at sets o// and &ro&els t#e creati-e &rocess renews once again t#e notion o/ t#e
indi-idual c#aracter o/ artistic &roduction central to art in )ourgeois societ%4 FO ;n its most e(treme mani/estations, t#e a-ant-garde0s re&l% to t#is is not t#e collecti-e as t#e
su)Iect o/ &roduction )ut t#e radical negation o/ t#e categor% o/ indi-idual creation4 .#en Duc#am& signs mass-&roduced o)Iects @a urinal, a )ottle drierA and sends t#em to
art e(#i)its, #e negates t#e categor% o/ indi-idual &roduction4 T#e signature, w#ose -er% &ur&ose it is to mar! w#at is indi-idual in t#e wor!, t#at it owes its e(istence to t#is
&articular artist, is inscri)ed on an ar)itraril% c#osen mass &roduct, )ecause all claims to indi-idual creati-it% are to )e moc!ed4 Duc#am&0s &ro-ocation not onl% unmas!s t#e
art mar!et w#ere t#e signature means more t#an t#e Kualit% o/ t#e wor!N it radicall% Kuestions t#e -er% &rinci&le o/ art in )ourgeois societ% according to w#ic# t#e indi-idual is
considered t#e creator o/ t#e wor! o/ art4 Duc#am&0s Read%-Mades are not wor!s o/ art )ut mani/estations4 ot /rom t#e /ormHcontent totalit% o/ t#e indi-idual o)Iect
Duc#am& signs can one in/er t#e meaning, )ut onl% /rom t#e contrast )etween mass-&roduced o)Iect on t#e one #and, and signature and art e(#i)it on t#e ot#er4 ;t is o)-ious
t#at t#is !ind o/ &ro-ocation cannot )e re&eated inde/initel%4 T#e &ro-ocation de&ends on w#at it turns against6 #ere, it is t#e idea t#at t#e indi-idual is t#e su)Iect o/ artistic
creation4 Once t#e signed )ottle drier #as )een acce&ted as an o)Iect t#at deser-es a &lace in a museum, t#e &ro-ocation no longer &ro-o!esN it turns into its o&&osite4 ;/ an artist
toda% signs a sto-e &i&e and e(#i)its it, t#at artist certainl% does not denounce t#e art mar!et )ut ada&ts to it4 Suc# ada&tation does not eradicate t#e idea o/ indi-idual creati-it%, it
a//irms it, and t#e reason is t#e /ailure o/ t#e a-ant-gardist intent to su)late art4 Since now t#e &rotest o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-garde against art as institution is acce&ted as art5
t#e gesture o/ &rotest o/ t#e neo-a-ant-garde )ecomes inaut#entic4 Ha-ing )een s#own to )e irredeema)le, t#e claim to )e &rotest can no longer )e maintained4 T#is /act
accounts /or t#e arts-and-cra/ts im&ression t#at wor!s o/ t#e a-antgarde not in/reKuentl% con-e%4
T#e a-ant-garde negates not onl% t#e categor% o/ indi-idual &roduction )ut also t#at o/ indi-idual reception. T#e reactions o/ t#e &u)lic during a dada mani/estation w#ere it
#as )een mo)iliGed )% &ro-ocation, w#ic# can range /rom s#outing to /isticu//s, are certainl% collecti-e in nature4 True, t#ese remain reactions, res&onses to a &receding
&ro-ocation4 Producer and reci&ient remain clearl% distinct, #owe-er acti-e t#e &u)lic ma% )ecome4 2i-en t#e a-ant-gardist intention to do awa% wit# art as a s&#ere t#at is
se&arate /rom t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, it is logical to eliminate t#e444 antit#esis )etween &roducer and reci&ient4 ;t is no accident t#at )ot# TGara0s
2:2 Peter -,rer He%ation of the Autonomy1 of Art
instructions /or t#e ma!ing o/ a dadaist &oem and 1reton0s /or t#e writing o/ automatic te(ts #a-e t#e c#aracter o/ reci&es4 ? T#is re&resents not onl% a &olemical attac! on t#e
indi-idual creati-it% o/ t#e artistN t#e reci&e is to )e ta!en Kuite literall% as suggesting a &ossi)le acti-it% on t#e &art o/ t#e reci&ient4 T#e automatic te(ts also s#ould )e read as
guides to indi-idual &roduction4 Howe-er, &roduction is to )e understood not as artistic &roduction, )ut as &art o/ a li)erating li/e &ra(is4 T#is is w#at is meant )% 1reton0s demand
t#at &oetr% )e &racticed Eprati>uer 'a podsieD. 1e%ond t#e coincidence o/ &roducer and reci&ient t#at t#is demand im&lies, t#ere is t#e /act t#at t#ese conce&ts lose t#eir meaning6
&roducers and reci&ients no longer e(ist4 All t#at remains is t#e indi-idual w#o uses &oetr% as an instrument /or li-ing one0s li/e as )est one can4 T#ere is also a danger #ere to w#ic#
Surrealism at least &artl% succum)ed, and t#at is soli&sism, t#e retreat to t#e &ro)lems o/ t#e isolated su)Iect4 1reton #imsel/ saw t#is danger and en-isaged di//erent wa%s o/ dealing
wit# it4 One o/ t#em was t#e glori/ication o/ t#e s&ontaneit% o/ t#e erotic relations#i&4 Per#a&s t#e strict grou& disci&line was also an attem&t to e(orciGe t#e danger o/ soli&sism t#at
surrealism #ar)ors4 O
;n summar%, we note t#at t#e #istorical a-ant-garde mo-ements negate t#ose determinations t#at are essential in autonomous art6 t#e disIunction o/ art and t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, indi-idual
&roduction, and indi-idual rece&tion as distinct /rom t#e /ormer4 T#e a-ant-garde intends t#e a)olition o/ autonomous art, )% w#ic# it means t#at art is to )e integrated into t#e
&ra(is o/ li/e4 T#is #as not occurred, and &resuma)l% cannot occur, in )ourgeois societ% unless it )e as a /alse su)lation o/ autonomous art4
E
Pul& /iction and commodit%
aest#etics &ro-e t#at suc# a /alse su)lation e(ists4 A literature w#ose &rimar% aim is to im&ose a &articular !ind o/ consumer )e#a-ior on t#e reader is in /act &ractical, t#oug#
not in t#e sense t#e a-ant-gardists intended4 Here, literature ceases to )e an instrument o/ emanci&ation and )ecomes one o/ su)Iection4
+
Similar comments could )e made
a)out commodit% aest#etics t#at treat /orm as mere enticement, designed to &rom&t &urc#asers to )u% w#at t#e% do not need4 Here also, art )ecomes &ractical, )ut it is an art
t#at ent#ralls4 *9 T#is )rie/ allusion will s#ow t#at t#e t#eor% o/ t#e a-ant-garde can also ser-e to ma!e us understand &o&ular literature and commodit% aest#etics as /orms o/
a /alse su)lation o/ art as institution4 ;n late ca&italist societ%, intentions o/ t#e #istorical a-ant-garde are )eing realiGed, )ut t#e result #as )een a dis-alue4 2i-en t#e e(&erience
o/ t#e /alse su)lation o/ autonom%0, one will need to as! w#et#er a su)lation o/ t#e autonom% status can )e desira)le at all, w#et#er t#e distance )etween art and t#e &ra(is o/
li/e is not reKuisite /or t#at /ree s&ace wit#in w#ic# alternati-es to w#at e(ists )ecome concei-a)le4
2:8
und -piel. &robleme der (y1thenre8eption5 ed4 $u#rmann, .il#elm *-in! QFcrlag4 Munic#, *+<*, &&4 5**H,+4
54 Hegel alread% re/erred to t#e no-el as Ft#e modern middle-class e&ic0 AAsthettk5 cd4
$4 1assenge, 5 -ols V1erlin:.eimar, *+?>Y , -ol4 ;;, &4 =>5A4 V;n #is translation o/ t#e Aesthetics5 T4 M4 'no( renders t#is &assage as /ollows6 F1ut it is Kuite di//erent (s it# romance, t#e
modern &o&ular e&ic0 @-ol4 ;;, &4 *9+5A, )ut t#is seems wrong4 Transl,mtXrQ note4Y
,4 On t#e &ro)lem o/ t#e /alse su)lation o/ art in t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, see 34 Ha)errnas, -trukturwandel der 2ffentlichkeit. 0ntersuchun%en Pn einer Late%orit1 der biir%61rliF h1 u /esellschaft5
euwied:1erlin4 *+?E, O *E, &&4 *<? //4
=4 See P4 1urger, F$un!tion und 1edeutung des or%ueil #ei Paul Jaler%0, 4omanisti\1 h51s 3ahrbuch5 *? @*+?>A, *=+H?E4
!. E(am&les o/ neo-a-ant-gardist &aintings and scul&tures to )e /ound in t#e catalog o/ t#e e(#i)it -ammlun% )remer. :uropdische A.ant%arde 1*!0I1*705 ed4 )5. Adriani, TX)ingen,
*+<,4
?4T4 TGara, FPour /aire on PoZme dadaiste0, in TGara, 6an8pisteries preccdees des sept mantfestes dada5 &lace o/ &u)lication not gi-en, *+?,, &4 ?=4 A4 1reton, Mani/este do surrLalisme0
@*+5=A, in 1reton, (an8festes du surr;alisme5 Co;l4 ;dees 5,, l0aris, *+?,, &&4 =5 /4
<4 On t#e Surrealists0 conce&tion o/ grou&s and t#e collecti-e e(&eriences t#e% soug#t and &artiall% realiGed, see Elisa)et# Len!, <er sprin%ende Har8iss. Andr; Kretons poetischer
(aterialismus5 Munic#, *+<*, &&4 ><//4, <, /4
E4 One would #a-e to in-estigate to w#at e(tent, a/ter t#e Octo)er re-olution, t#e Russian a-ant-gardists succeeded to a degree, )ecause social conditions #ad c#anged, in realiGing t#eir
intent to reintegrate art in t#e &ra(is o/ li/e4 1ot# 14 Ar-ato- and S4 TretIa!o(0 turn t#e conce&t o/ art as de-elo&ed in )ourgeois societ% around and de/ine art Kuite
straig#t/orwardl% as sociall% use/ul acti-it%6 FT#e &leasure o/ trans/orming t#e raw material into a &articular, sociall% use/ul /orm, connected to t#e s!ill and t#e intensi-e searc# /or
t#e suita)le /orm H t#ose are t#e t#ings t#e slogan ]art /or allR s#ould mean0
@S4 TretIa!o-, FDie 'unst in der Re-olution und die Re-olution in der 'unst0, in TretIa!o-, <ie Arbeit des -chr8ftstellers5 ed4 H4 1oe#nc!e, Rowo#lt, Rein)e! )ei Ham)urg, *+<*, &4 1#?.
F1asing #imsel/ on t#e tec#niKue w#ic# is common to all s&#eres o/ li/e, t#e artist is im)ued wit# t#e idea o/ suita)ilit%4 ;t is not )% su)Iecti-e taste t#4it #e will allow #imsel/ to )e guided
as #e wor!s on #is material )ut )% t#e o#IectiOe tas!s o/ &roduction0 @14 Ar-ato-, FDie 'unst im S%stem der &roletarisc#en 'ultur0, in Ar-,ito-, Lunst und &roduktion5 &4 *>A4 .it#
t#e t#eor% o/ t#e a-ant-garde as a &oint o/ de&arture, and wit# concrete in-estigations as guide, one s#ould also discuss t#e &ro)lem o/ t#e e(tent @and o/ t#e !inds o/ conseKuences /or
t#e artistic su)IectsA to w#ic# art as an institution occu&ies a &lace in t#e societ% o/ t#e socialist countries t#at di//ers /rom its &lace in )ourgeois societ%4
+4 See C#rista 1urger, ,e=tanalyse als 'deolo%iekritik. /8tr 4e8ept8on 8ett%enossischer 0nterhaltun%sliteratur5 At#enOium, $ran!/urt, *+<,4
*94 See .4 $4 Hang, Lrit9k der WarenQsthet8k5 Su#r!am&4 $ran!/urt4 *+*4
Notes
*4 On t#is, see t#e essa% )% R4 .arning, FRims, M%t#os und geisti #es S&iel0, in ,error
,he -ublime and the A.ant-/arde 5=>
*E w &he /u2lime and the
A0ant$8arde
Jean-Francois Lyotard
;n *+>9H*, 1arnett 1aruc# ewman &ainted a can-as measuring 54=5 m )% >4=5 m w#ic# #e called FJir Heroicus Su)limis04 ;n t#e earl% si(ties #e entitled #is /irst t#ree
scul&tures FHere ;0, FHere ;;0, FHere ;;;04 Anot#er &ainting was called Fot O-er T#ere, Here0, two &aintings were called Fow0, and two ot#ers were entitled F1e04 ;n
Decem)er *+=E, ewman wrote an essa% entitled FT#e su)lime is now04
How is one to understand t#e su)lime, or let us sa% &ro-isionall%, t#e o)Iect o/ a su)lime e(&erience, as a F#ere and now0D Cuite to t#e contrar%, isn0t it essential to t#is
/eeling t#at it alludes to somet#ing w#ic# can0t )e s#own, or &resented @as 'ant said, dar%estellt?@ ;n a s#ort un/inis#ed te(t dating /rom late *+=+, &rolo%ue for a Hew Aesthetic5
ewman wrote t#at in #is &ainting, #e was not concerned wit# a Fmani&ulation o/ s&ace nor wit# t#e image, )ut wit# a sensation o/ time04 He added t#at )% t#is #e did not
mean time laden wit# /eelings o/ nostalgia, or drama, or re/erences and #istor%, t#e usual su)Iects o/ &ainting4 A/ter t#is denial Ed;nd%ationD t#e te(t sto&s s#ort4
So, w#at !ind o/ time was ewman concerned wit#, w#at Fnow0 did #e #a-e in mindD T#omas Hess, #is /riend and commentator, /elt Iusti/ied in writing t#at ewman0s time was
t#e (akom or t#e 7amakom o/ He)raic tradition H t#e there5 t#e site, t#e &lace, w#ic# is one o/ t#e names gi-en )% t#e Tora# to t#e Lord, t#e 8nnamea)le4 ; do not !now enoug# a)out
(akom to !now w#et#er t#is was w#at ewman #ad in mind4 1ut t#en again, w#o does !now enoug# a)out How@ ewman can certainl% not #a-e )een t#in!ing o/ t#e F&resent
instant0, t#e one t#at tries to #old itsel/ )etween t#e /uture and t#e &ast, and gets de-oured )% t#em4 T#is now is one o/ t#e tem&oral Fecstasies0 t#at #as )een anal%sed since Augustine0s da% and
since Edmund Husserl, according to a line o/ t#oug#t t#at #as attem&ted to constitute time on t#e )asis o/ consciousness4 ewman0s now w#ic# is no more t#an now is a stranger to
consciousness and cannot )e constituted )% it4 Rat#er,
$rom 1enIamin, A4 @ed4A, ,he 6yotard 4eader5 1asil 1lac!wdl, O(/ord, AE+, &&4 *+?H5**4
2::
it is w#at dismantles consciousness, w#at de&oses consciousness, it is w#at consciousness cannot /ormulate, and e-en w#at consciousness /orgets in order to constitute itsel/4 .#at we do
not manage to /ormulate is t#at somet#ing #a&&ens, dass etwas %eschieht. Or rat#er, and more sim&l%, t#at it #a&&ens 444 dass 8S %eschieht. ot a maIor e-ent in t#e media sense, not e-en a
small e-ent4 3ust an occurrence4
T#is isn0t a matter o/ sense or realit% )earing u&on what #a&&ens or what t#is mig#t mean4 1e/ore as!ing Kuestions a)out w#at it is and a)out its signi/icance, )e/ore t#e >uid5 it must F/irst0
so to s&ea! F#a&&en0, >uod. T#at it #a&&ens F&recedes0, so to s&ea!, t#e Kuestion &ertaining to w#at #a&&ens4 Or rat#er, t#e Kuestion &recedes itsel/, )ecause Ft#at it #a&&ens0 is t#e Kuestion
rele-ant as e-ent, and it Ft#en0 &ertains to t#e e-ent t#at #as Iust #a&&ened4 T#e e-ent #a&&ens as a Kuestion mar! F)e/ore0 #a&&ening as a Kuestion4 't happens is rat#er Fin t#e
/irst &lace0 is it happenin%5 is this it5 is it possible@ Onl% Ft#en0 is an% mar! determined )O,0 t#e Kuestioning6 is t#is or t#at #a&&ening, is it t#is or somet#ing else, is it &ossi)le t#at
t#is or t#atD
An e-ent, an occurrence H w#at Martin Heidegger called em :rei%nis H is in/initel% sim&le, )ut t#is sim&licit% can onl% )e a&&roac#ed t#roug# a state o/ &ri-ation4 T#at
w#ic# we call t#oug#t must )e disarmed4 T#ere is a tradition and an institution o/ &#iloso&#%, o/ &ainting, o/ &olitics, o/ literature4 T#ese Fdisci&lines0 also #a-e a /uture in t#e
/orm o/ Sc#ools, o/ &rogrammes, &roIects, and Ftrends04 T#oug#t wor!s o-er w#at is recei-ed, it see!s to re/lect on it and o-ercome it4 ;t see!s to determine w#at #as alread%
)een t#oug#t, written, &ainted, or socialiGed in order to determine w#at #asn0t )een4 .e !now t#is &rocess well, it is our dail% )read4 ;t is t#e )read o/ war, soldiers0 )iscuit4
1ut t#is agitation, in t#e most no)le sense o/ t#e word @agitation is t#e word 'ant gi-es to t#e acti-it% o/ t#e mind t#at #as Iudgement and e(ercises itA, t#is agitation is onl%
&ossi)le i/ somet#ing remains to )e determined, somet#ing t#at #asn0t %et )een determined4 One can stri-e to determine t#is somet#ing )% setting u& a s%stem, a t#eor%, a
&rogramme or a &roIect
H and indeed one #as to, all t#e w#ile antici&ating t#at somet#ing4 One can also inKuire a)out t#e remainder, and allow t#e indeterminate to a&&ear as a Kuestion mar!4
.#at all intellectual disci&lines and institutions &resu&&ose is t#at not e-er%t#ing #as )een said, written down or recorded, t#at words alread% #eard or &ronounced are not
t#e last words4 FA/ter0 a sentence, Fa/ter0 a colour, comes anot#er sentence, anot#er colour4 One doesn0t !now w#ic#, )ut one t#in!s one !nows i/ one relies on t#e rules t#at
&ermit one sentence to lin! u& wit# anot#er, one colour wit# anot#er, rules &reser-ed in &recisel% t#ose institutions o/ t#e &ast and /uture t#at ; mentioned4 T#e Sc#ool, t#e
&rogramme, t#e &roIect H all &roclaim t#at a/ter t#is Sentence comes t#at sentence, or at least t#at !ind o/ sentence is mandator%, t#at One !ind o/ sentence is &ermitted, w#ile
anot#er is /or)idden4 T#is #olds true /or Painting as muc# as /or t#e ot#er acti-ities o/ t#oug#t4 A/ter one &ictorial wor!, anot#er is necessar%, &ermitted, or /or)idden4 A/ter
one colourN t#is ot#er colourL4 a/ter t#is line, t#at one4 T#ere isn0t an enormous di//erence )etween an a-ant-garde
2:< Jean-Francois Lyotard ,he -ublime and the A.ant-/arde 5=<
mani/esto and a curriculum at t#e Ecole des 1eau(-Arts, i/ one considers t#em in t#e lig#t o/ t#is relations#i& to time4 1ot# are o&tions wit# res&ect to w#at t#e% /eel is a good t#ing
to #a&&en su)seKuentl%4 1ut )ot# also /orget t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ not#ing #a&&ening, o/ words, colours, /orms or sounds not comingN o/ t#is sentence )eing t#e last, o/ )read not
coming dail%4 T#is is t#e miser% t#at t#e &ainter /aces wit# a &lastic sur/ace, o/ t#e musician wit# t#e acoustic sur/ace, t#e miser% t#e t#in!er /aces wit# a desert o/ t#oug#t,
and so on4 ot onl% /aced wit# t#e em&t% can-as or t#e em&t% &age, at t#e F)eginning0 o/ t#e wor!, )ut e-er% time somet#ing #as to )e waited /or, and t#us /orms a Kuestion at
e-er% &oint o/ Kuestioning Epoint d1interro%ationD5 at e-er% Fand w#at nowD0
T#e &ossi)ilit% o/ not#ing #a&&ening is o/ten associated wit# a /eeling o/ an(iet%, a term wit# strong connotations in modern &#iloso&#ies o/ e(istence and o/ t#e
unconscious4 ;t gi-es to waiting, i/ we reall% mean waiting, a &redominantl% negati-e -alue4 1ut sus&ense can also )e accom&anied )% &leasure, /or instance &leasure in welcoming t#e
un!nown, and e-en )% Io%, to s&ea! li!e 1aruc# S&inoGa, t#e Io% o)tained )% t#e intensi/ication o/ )eing t#at t#e e-ent )rings wit# it4 T#is is &ro)a)l% a contradictor% /eeling4 ;t is at t#e -er%
least a sign, t#e Kuestion mar! itsel/, t#e wa% in w#ic# it happens is wit##eld and announced6 's it happenin%@ T#e Kuestion can )e modulated in an% tone4 1ut t#e mar! o/ t#e Kuestion is
Fnow0, now li!e t#e /eeling t#at not#ing mig#t #a&&en6 t#e not#ingness now4
1etween t#e se-enteent# and eig#teent# centuries in Euro&e t#is contradictor% /eeling H &leasure and &ain, Io% and an(iet%, e(altation and de&ression H was c#ristened or re-c#ristened )%
t#e name o/ t#e sublime. ;t is around t#is name t#at t#e destin% o/ classical &oetics was #aGarded and lostN it is in t#is name t#at aest#etics asserted its critical rig#ts o-er art, and t#at
romanticism H in ot#er words, modernit% H trium&#ed4
;t remains to t#e art #istorian to e(&lain #ow t#e word su)lime rea&&eared in t#e language o/ a 3ewis# &ainter /rom ew Yor! during t#e /orties4 T#e word su)lime is common
currenc% toda% in colloKuial $renc# to suggest sur&rise and admiration, somew#at li!e America0s Fgreat0, )ut t#e idea connoted )% it #as )elonged @/or at least two centuriesA to t#e
most rigorous !ind o/ re/lection on art4 ewman is not unaware o/ t#e aest#etic and &#iloso&#ical sta!es wit# w#ic# t#e word sublime is in-ol-ed4 He read Edmund 1ur!e0s 'n>uiry and
criticiGed w#at #e saw as 1ur!e0s o-er- surrealist0 descri&tion o/ t#e su)lime wor!4 .#ic# is as muc# as to sa% t#at, con-ersel%, ewman Iudged surrealism to )e o-er-reliant on a
&re-romantic or romantic a&&roac# to indeterminac%4 T#us, w#en #e see!s su)limit% in t#e #ere and now #e )rea!s wit# t#e eloKuence o/ romantic art )ut #e does not reIect its /undamental tas!,
t#at o/ )earing &ictorial or ot#erwise e(&ressi-e witness to t#e ine(&ressi)le4 T#e ine(&ressi)le does not reside in an o-er t#ere, in anot#er world, or anot#er time, )ut in t#is6 in t#at @somet#ingA
#a&&ens4 ;n t#e determination o/ &ictorial art, t#e indeterminate, t#e Fit #a&&ens0 is t#e &aint, t#e &icture4 T#e &aint4 t#e &icture as occurrence or e-ent, is not e(&ressi)le, and it is to t#is t#at it
#as to witness4
To )e true to t#is dis&lacement in w#ic# consists &er#a&s O#e w#ole o/ t#e
di//erence )etween romanticism and t#e Fmodern0 a-ant-garde, one would #a-e to read FT#e su)lime is now0 not as FT#e su)lime is now0 )ut as Fow t#e su)lime is li!e t#is04 ot
elsew#ere, not u& t#ere or o-er t#ere, not earlier or later, not once u&on a time4 1ut as #ere, now, it #a&&ens t#at, 444 and it0s t#is &ainting4 Here and now t#ere is t#is &ainting, rat#er t#an not#ing,
and t#at0s w#at is su)lime4 Letting go o/ all gras&ing intelligence and o/ its &ower, disarming it, recogniGing t#at t#is occurrence o/ &ainting was not necessar% and is scarcel% /oreseea)le, a
&ri-ation in t#e /ace o/ 's it happenin%@ guarding t#e occurrence F)e/ore0 an% de/ence, an% illustration, and an% commentar%, guarding )e/ore )eing on one0s guard, )e/ore Floo!ing0 Ere%arderD
under t#e aegis o/ now5 t#is is t#e rigour o/ t#e a-ant-garde4 ;n t#e determination o/ literar% art t#is reKuirement wit# res&ect to t#e 's it happenin%@ /ound one o/ its most rigorous realiGations in
2ertrude Stein0s 7ow to Write. ;t0s still t#e su)lime in t#e sense t#at 1ur!e and 'ant descri)ed, and %et it isn0t t#eir su)lime an% more4
II
; #a-e said t#at t#e contradictor% /eeling wit# w#ic# indeterminac% is )ot# announced and missed was w#at was at sta!e in re/lection on art /rom t#e end o/ t#e se-enteent# to t#e
end o/ t#e eig#teent# centuries4 T#e su)lime is &er#a&s t#e onl% mode o/ artistic sensi)ilit% to c#aracteriGe t#e modern4 Parado(icall%, it was introduced to literar% discussion
and -igorousl% de/ended )% t#e $renc# writer w#o #as )een classi/ied in literar% #istor% as one o/ t#e most dogged ad-ocates o/ ancient classicism4 ;n *?<= 1oileau &u)lis#ed #is
Art po;ti>ue5 )ut #e also &u)lis#ed <u -ublime5 #is translation or transcri&tion /rom t#e &en tou hupsou. ;t is a treatise, or rat#er an essa%, attri)uted to a certain Longinus, a)out w#ose
identit% t#ere #as long )een con/usion, and w#ose li/e we now estimate as #a-ing )egun towards t#e end o/ t#e /irst centur% o/ our era4 T#e aut#or was a r#etorician4 1asicall%, #e taug#t t#ose
oratorical de-ices wit# w#ic# a s&ea!er can &ersuade or mo-e @de&ending on t#e genreA #is audience4 T#e didactics o/ r#etoric #ad )een traditional since Aristotle, Cicero, and Cuintilian4 T#e%
were lin!ed to t#e re&u)lican institutionN one #ad to !now #ow to s&ea! )e/ore assem)lies and tri)unals4
One mig#t e(&ect t#at Longinus0s te(t would in-o!e t#e ma(ims and ad-ice transmitted )% t#is tradition )% &er&etuating t#e didactic /orm o/ technT rhetorikT. 1ut
sur&risingl%, t#e su)lime, t#e indeterminate H were desta)iliGing t#e te(t0s didactic intention4 ; cannot anal%se t#is uncertaint% #ere4 1oileau #imsel/ and numerous ot#er commentators,
es&eciall% $LnLlon, were aware o/ it and concluded t#at t#e su)lime could onl% )e discussed in su)lime st%le4 L4onginus certainl% tried to de/ine su)limit% in discourse, writing t#at it was
un/orgetta)le, irresisti)le, and most im&ortant, t#oug#t-&ro-o!ing H Gii y a a partir d1elle beaucoup de r;fle=ion1 V#ou polle anatheoresisD @/rom t#e su)lime s&rings a lot o/ re/lectionA4
He also tried to locate sources /or t#e su)lime in t#e et#os o/ r#etoric, in its &at#os, in its tec#niKues6 /igures o/ s&eec#, diction, enunciation, com&osition4 He soug#t in t#O
JeanCFrancois Lyotard ,he -ublime and the A.ant-/arde 2:B
2:@
wa% to )end #imsel/ to t#e rules o/ t#e genre o/ t#e Ftreatise0 @w#et#er o/ r#etoric or &oetics, or &oliticsA destined to )e a model /or &ractitioners4
Howe-er, w#en it comes to t#e su)lime, maIor o)stacles get in t#e wa% o/ a regular e(&osition o/ r#etorical or &oetic &rinci&les4 T#ere is, /or e(am&le, wrote Longinus, a
su)limit% o/ t#oug#t sometimes recogniGa)le in s&eec# )% its e(treme sim&licit% o/ turn o/ &#rase, at t#e &recise &oint w#ere t#e #ig# c#aracter o/ t#e s&ea!er ma!es one
e(&ect greater solemnit%4 ;t sometimes e-en ta!es t#e /orm o/ outrig#t silence4 ; don0t mind i/ t#is sim&licit%, t#is silence, is ta!en to )e %et anot#er r#etorical /igure4 1ut it must
)e granted t#at it constitutes t#e most indeterminate o/ /igures4 .#at can remain o/ r#etoric @or o/ &oeticsA w#en t#e r#etorician in 1oileau0s translation announces t#at to
attain t#e su)lime e//ect Ft#ere is no )etter /igure o/ s&eec# t#an one w#ic# is com&letel% #idden, t#at w#ic# we do not e-en recogniGe as a /igure o/ s&eec#0D Must we admit t#at
t#ere are tec#niKues /or #iding /igures, t#at t#ere are /igures /or t#e erasure o/ /iguresD How do we distinguis# )etween a #idden /igure and w#at is not a /igureD And w#at is
it, i/ it isn0t a /igureD And w#at a)out t#is, w#ic# seems to )e a maIor )low to didactics6 w#en it is su)lime, discourse accommodates de/ects, lac! o/ taste, and /ormal
im&er/ections4 Plato0s st%le, /or e(am&le, is /ull o/ )om)ast and )loated strained com&arisons4 Plato, in s#ort, is a mannerist, or a )aroKue writer, com&ared to L%sias, and so
is So&#ocles com&ared to an ;on or Pindar com&ared to a 1acc#%lides4 T#e /act remains t#at, li!e t#ose /irst named, #e is su)lime, w#ereas t#e second ones are merel%
&er/ect4 S#ortcomings in tec#niKue are t#ere/ore tri/ling matters i/ t#e% are t#e &rice to )e &aid /or Ftrue grandeur04 2randeur in s&eec# is true w#en it )ears witness to t#e
incommensura)ilit% )etween t#oug#t and t#e real world4
;s it 1oileau0s transcri&tion t#at suggests t#is analog%, or is it t#e in/luence o/ earl% C#ristianit% on LonginusD T#e /act t#at grandeur o/ s&irit is not o/ t#is world cannot )ut
suggest Pascal0s #ierarc#% o/ orders4 T#e !ind o/ &er/ection t#at can )e demanded in t#e domain o/ technT isn0t necessaril% a desira)le attri)ute w#en it comes to su)lime /eeling4
Longinus e-en goes so /ar as to &ro&ose in-ersions o/ re&utedl% natural and rational s%nta( as e(am&les o/ su)lime e//ect4 As /or 1oileau, in t#e &re/ace #e wrote in *?<= /or
Longinus0s te(t, in still /urt#er addenda made in *?E, and *<9* and also in t#e Xth 4dfle=ion &u)lis#ed in *<*9 a/ter #is deat#, #e ma!es /inal t#e &re-ious tentati-e )rea! wit#
t#e classical institution o/ technT. T#e su)lime, #e sa%s, cannot )e taug#t, and didactics are t#us &owerless in t#is res&ectN t#e su)lime is not lin!ed to rules t#at can )e
determined t#roug# &oeticsN t#e su)lime onl% reKuires t#at t#e reader or listener #a-e conce&tual range, taste, and t#e a)ilit% Fto sense w#at e-er%one senses /irst04 1oileau
t#ere/ore ta!es t#e same stand as PZre 1ou#ours, w#en in *?<* t#e latter declared t#at )eaut% demands more t#an Iust a res&ect /or rules, t#at it reKuires a /urt#er Ge ne sais >uoi15
also called %enius or somet#ing Fincom&re#ensi)le and ine(&lica)le0, a Fgi/t /rom 2od0, a /undamentall% F#idden0 &#enomenon t#at can )e recogniGed onl% )% its e//ects on
t#e addressee4 And in t#e &olemic t#at set #im against Pierre-Daniel Huet, o-er t#e issue o/ w#et#er t#e 1i)le0s $iat 6u=5 et 6u= fuit is su)lime, as ; anginus t#oug#t it was,
1oileau re/ers to t#e o&inion o/ t#e Messieurs de Port-Ro% Ol and in &articular
to Sil-estre de Saci6 t#e 3ansenists are masters w#en it comes to matters o/ #idden meaning, o/ eloKuent silence, o/ /eeling t#at transcends all reason and /inall%0 o/ o&enness to t#e
's it happenin%@
At sta!e in t#ese &oetic-t#eological de)ates is t#e status o/ wor!s o/ art4 Are t#e% co&ies o/ some ideal modelD Can re/lection on t#e more F&er/ect0 e(am&les %ield rules o/
/ormation t#at determine t#eir success in ac#ie-ing w#at t#e% want, t#at is, &ersuasi-eness and &leasureD Can understanding su//ice /or t#is !ind o/ re/lectionD 1% meditating
on t#e t#eme o/ su)limit% and o/ indeterminac%, meditation a)out wor!s o/ art im&oses a maIor c#ange on technT and t#e institutions lin!ed to it HAcademies, Sc#ools, masters
and disci&les, taste, t#e enlig#tened &u)lic made u& o/ &rinces and courtiers4 ;t is t#e -er% destination or destin% o/ wor!s w#ic# is )eing Kuestioned4 T#e &redominance o/ t#e
idea o/ technT &laced wor!s under a multi&le regulation, t#at o/ t#e model taug#t in t#e studios, Sc#ools, and Academies, t#at o/ t#e taste s#ared )% t#e aristocratic &u)lic, t#at
o/ a &ur&osi-eness o/ art, w#ic# was to illustrate t#e glor% o/ a name, di-ine or #uman, to w#ic# was lin!ed t#e &er/ection o/ some cardinal -irtue or ot#er4 T#e idea o/ t#e
su)lime disru&ts t#is #armon%4 Let us magni/% t#e /eatures o/ H t#is disru&tion4 8nder Diderot0s &en, technT )ecomes Gle petit techni>ue1 @mere tri-ial tec#niKueA4 T#e artist
ceases to )e guided )% a culture w#ic# made o/ #im t#e sender and master o/ a message o/ glor%6
#e )ecomes, inso/ar as #e is a genius, t#e in-oluntar% addressee o/ an ins&iration come to #im /rom an F; !now not w#at04 T#e &u)lic no longer Iudges according to t#e
criteria o/ a taste ruled )% t#e tradition o/ s#ared &leasure6 indi-iduals un!nown to t#e artist @t#e F&eo&le0A read )oo!s, go t#roug# t#e galleries o/ t#e Salons, crowd into t#e
t#eatres and t#e &u)lic concerts, t#e% are &re% to un/oreseea)le /eelings6
t#e% are s#oc!ed, admiring, scorn/ul, indi//erent4 T#e Kuestion is not t#at o/ &leasing t#em )% leading t#em to identi/% wit# a name and to &artici&ate in t#e glori/ication o/ its
-irtue, )ut t#at o/ sur&rising t#em4 FT#e su)lime0, writes 1oileau, Fis not strictl% s&ea!ing somet#ing w#ic# is &ro-en or demonstrated, )ut a mar-el, w#ic# seiGes one, stri!es one,
and ma!es one /eel40 T#e -er% im&er/ections, t#e distortions o/ taste, e-en ugliness, #a-e t#eir s#are in t#e s#oc!-e//ect4 Art does not imitate nature, it creates a world a&art,
eine Pwischenwelt5 as Paul 'lee will sa%, eine Hebenwelt5 one mig#t sa%, in w#ic# t#e monstrous and t#e /ormless #a-e t#eir rig#ts )ecause t#e% can )e su)lime4
You will @; #o&eA e(cuse suc# a sim&li/ication o/ t#e trans/ormation w#ic# ta!es &lace wit# t#e modern de-elo&ment o/ t#e idea o/ t#e su)lime4 T#e trace o/ it could )e
/ound )e/ore modern times, in medie-al aest#etics H t#at o/ t#e Jictorines, /or e(am&le4 ;n an% case, it e(&lains w#% re/lection on art s#ould no longer )ear essentiall% on t#e
F4sender0 instancelagenc% o/ wor!s, )ut on t#e Faddressee0 instance4 And under t#e name Fgenius0 t#e latter instance is situated, not onl% on t#e side o/ t#e &u)lic, )ut also on
t#e side o/ t#e artist, a /eeling w#ic# #e does not master4 Hence/ort# it seems rig#t to anal%se t#e wa%s in w#ic# t#e su)Iect is a//ected, its .a%s o/ recei-ing and e(&eriencing
/eelings, its wa%s o/ Iudging wor!s4 T#is is #ow aest#etics, t#e anal%sis o/ t#e addressee0s /eelings, comes to su&&lant &oetics and r#etoric, w#ic# are didactic /orms, o/ and
)% t#e understanding, intended /or t#eR
Jean-Francois Lyotard ,he -ublime and the A.ant-/arde
artist as sender4 o longer FHow does one ma!e a wor! o/ artD0, )ut F.#at is it to e(&erience an a//ect &ro&er to artD0 And indeterminac% returns, e-en wit#in t#e anal%sis o/ t#is last
Kuestion4
III
1aumgarten &u)lis#ed #is Aesthetica5 t#e /irst aest#etics, in *<>94 'ant will sa% o/ t#is wor! sim&l% t#at it was )ased on an error4 1aumgarten con/uses Iudgement, in its determinant usage,
w#en t#e understanding organiGes &#enomena according to categories, wit# Iudgement in its re/le(i-e usage w#en, in t#e /orm o/ /eeling, it relates to t#e indeterminate relations#i&
)etween t#e /aculties o/ t#e Iudging su)Iect4 1aumgarten0s aest#etics remains de&endent on a conce&tuall% determined relations#i& to t#e wor! o/ art4 T#e sense o/ )eaut% is /or
'ant, on t#e contrar%, !indled )% a /ree #armon% )etween t#e /unction o/ images and t#e /unction o/ conce&ts occasioned )% an o)Iect o/ art or nature4 T#e aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime is still
more indeterminate6 a &leasure mi(ed wit# &ain, a &leasure t#at comes /rom &ain4 ;n t#e e-ent o/ an a)solutel% large o)Iect H t#e desert, a mountain, a &%ramid
H or one t#at is a)solutel% &ower/ul H a storm at sea, an eru&ting -olcano H w#ic#, li!e all a)solutes, can onl% )e t#oug#t, wit#out an% sensi)le:sensor% intuition, as an ;dea o/ reason, t#e
/acult% o/ &resentation, t#e imagination, /ails to &ro-ide a re&resentation corres&onding to t#is ;dea4 T#is /ailure o/ e(&ression gi-es rise to a &ain, a !ind o/ clea-age wit#in t#e su)Iect )etween
w#at can )e concei-ed and w#at can )e imagined or &resented4 1ut t#is &ain in turn engenders a &leasure, in /act a dou)le &leasure6 t#e im&otence o/ t#e imagination attests a
contra rio to an imagination stri-ing to /igure e-en t#at w#ic# cannot )e /igured, and t#at imagination t#us aims to #armoniGe its o)Iect wit# t#at o/ reason H and t#at /urt#ermore, t#e
inadeKuac% o/ t#e images is a negati-e sign o/ t#e immense &ower o/ ideas4 T#is dislocation o/ t#e /aculties among t#emsel-es gi-es rise to t#e e(treme tension @'ant calls it
agitationA t#at c#aracteriGes t#e &at#os o/ t#e su)lime, as o&&osed to t#e calm /eeling o/ )eaut%4 At t#e edge o/ t#e )rea!, in/init%, or t#e a)soluteness o/ t#e ;dea can )e
re-ealed in w#at 'ant calls a negati-e &resentation, or e-en a non-&resentation4 He cites t#e 3ewis# law )anning images as an eminent e(am&le o/ negati-e &resentation6
o&tical &leasure w#en reduced to near not#ingness &romotes an in/inite contem&lation o/ in/init%4 E-en )e/ore romantic art #ad /reed itsel/ /rom classical and )aroKue
/iguration, t#e door #ad t#us )een o&ened to inKuiries &ointing towards a)stract and Minimal art4 A-ant-gardism is t#us &resent in germ in t#e 'antian aest#etic o/ t#e su)lime4
Howe-er, t#e art w#ose e//ects are anal%sed in t#at aest#etics is, o/ course, essentiall% made u& o/ attem&ts to re&resent su)lime o)Iects4 And t#e Kuestion o/ time, o/ t#e 's it
happenin%@5 does not /orm &art H at least not e(&licitl% H o/ 'ant0s &ro)lematic4
; do, #owe-er, )elie-e t#at Kuestion to )e at t#e centre o/ Edmund 1ur!e0s &hilosophical 'n>uiry into the 2ri%in of our 'deas of the -ubl[ne and Keautiful5 &u)lis#ed in *<><4 'ant
ma% well reIect 1ur!e0s t#esis 44O em&iricism and
2$1
&#%siologism, #e ma% well )orrow /rom 1ur!e t#e anal%sis o/ t#e c#aracteriGing contradiction o/ t#e /eeling o/ t#e su)lime, )ut #e stri&s 1ur!e0s aest#etic o/ w#at ; consider to )e its maIor
sta!e H to s#ow t#at t#e su)lime is !indled )0- t#e t#reat o/ not#ing /urt#er #a&&ening4 1eaut% gi-es a &ositi-e &leasure4 1ut t#ere is anot#er !ind o/ &leasure t#at is )ound to a
&assion stronger t#an satis/action, and t#at is &ain and im&ending deat#4 ;n &ain t#e )od% a//ects t#e soul4 1ut t#e soul can also a//ect t#e )od% as t#oug# it were e(&eriencing
some e(ternall% induced &ain, )% t#e sole means o/ re&resentations t#at are unconsciousl% associated wit# &ain/ul situations4 T#is entirel% s&iritual &assion, in 1ur!e0s le(icon, is
called terror4 Terrors are lin!ed to &ri-ation6 &ri-ation o/ lig#t, terror o/ dar!nessN &ri-ation o/ ot#ers, terror o/ solitudeN &ri-ation o/ language, terror o/ silenceN &ri-ation o/
o)Iects, terror o/ em&tinessN &ri-ation o/ li/e, terror o/ deat#4 .#at is terri/%ing is t#at t#e 't happens that does not #a&&en, t#at it sto&s #a&&ening4
1ur!e wrote t#at /or t#is terror to mingle wit# &leasure and wit# it to &roduce t#e /eeling o/ t#e su)lime, it is also necessar% t#at t#e terror-causing t#reat )e sus&ended, !e&t
at )a%, #eld )ac!4 T#is sus&ense, t#is lessening o/ a t#reat or a danger, &ro-o!es a !ind o/ &leasure t#at is certainl% not t#at o/ a &ositi-e satis/action, )ut is, rat#er, t#at o/
relie/4 T#is is still a &ri-ation, )ut it is &ri-ation at one remo-e6 t#e soul is de&ri-ed o/ t#e t#reat o/ )eing de&ri-ed o/ lig#t, language, li/e4 1ur!e distinguis#es t#is &leasure o/
secondar% &ri-ation /rom &ositi-e &leasures, and #e )a&tiGes it wit# t#e name deli%ht.
Here, t#en, is an account o/ t#e su)lime /eeling6 a -er% )ig, -er% &ower/ul o)Iect t#reatens to de&ri-e t#e soul o/ an% Fit #a&&ens0, stri!es it wit# Fastonis#ment0 @at lower
intensities t#e soul is seiGed wit# admiration, -eneration, res&ectA4 T#e soul is t#us dum), immo)iliGed, as good as dead4 Art, )% distancing t#is menace, &rocures a &leasure o/
relie/, o/ delig#t4 T#an!s to art, t#e soul is returned to t#e agitated Gone )etween li/e and deat#, and t#is agitation is its #ealt# and its li/e4 $or 1ur!e, t#e su)lime was no
longer a matter o/ ele-ation @t#e categor% )% w#ic# Aristotle de/ined traged%A, )ut a matter o/ intensi/ication4
Anot#er o/ 1ur!e0s o)ser-ations merits attention )ecause it #eralds t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ emanci&ating wor!s o/ art /rom t#e classical rule o/ imitation4 ;n t#e long de)ate o-er
t#e relati-e merits o/ &ainting and &oetr%, 1ur!e sides wit# &oetr%4 Painting is doomed to imitate models, and to /igurati-e re&resentations o/ t#em4 1ut i/ t#e o)Iect o/ art is
to create intense /eelings in t#e addressee o/ wor!s, /iguration )% means o/ images is a limiting constraint on t#e &ower o/ emoti-e e(&ression, since it wor!s )% recognition4
;n t#e arts o/ language, &articularl% in &oetr%, and
Particularl% in &oetr% w#ic# 1ur!e considered to )e not a genre wit# rules, )ut t#e /ield w#ere certain researc#es into language #a-e /ree rein, t#e &ower to mo-e is /ree /rom
t#e -erisimilitudes o/ /iguration4 F.#at does one do (-#en one wants to re&resent an angel in a &aintingD One &aints a )eauti/ul %oung man wit# wings6 )ut will &ainting e-er
&ro-ide an%t#ing as great as t#e 6sddition o/ t#is one word H t#e Angel o/ t#e 6ord@ and #ow does one go a)out &ainting, wit# eKual strengt# o/ /eeling, t#e words ]A uni-erse
o/ deat#R w#ere ends t#e Iourne4% o/ t#e /allen angels in Milton0s &aradise 6ost@1
2$9
JeanCFrancois Lyotard ,he -ublime and the A.ant-/arde 2$8
2$2
.ords enIo% se-eral &ri-ileges w#en it comes to e(&ressing /eelings6 t#e% are t#emsel-es c#arged wit# &assionate connotationsN t#e% can e-o!e matters o/ t#e soul wit#out
#a-ing to consider w#et#er t#e% are -isi)leN /inall%, 1ur!e adds, F;t is in our &ower to e//ect wit# words com)inations t#at would )e im&ossi)le )% an% ot#er means40 T#e arts,
w#ate-er t#eir materials, &ressed /orward )% t#e aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime in searc# o/ intense e//ects, can and must gi-e u& t#e imitation o/ models t#at are merel% )eauti/ul,
and tr% out sur&rising, strange, s#oc!ing com)inations4 S#oc! is, par e=cellence5 t#e e-idence o/ @somet#ingA happenin%5 rat#er t#an not#ing, sus&ended &ri-ation4
1ur!e0s anal%ses can easil%, as %ou will #a-e guessed, )e resumed and ela)orated in a $reudianHLacanian &ro)lematic @as Pierre 'au/man and 1aldine Saint-2irons #a-e
doneA4 1ut ; recall t#em in a di//erent s&irit, t#e one m% su)Iect H t#e a-ant-garde H demands4 ; #a-e tried to suggest t#at at t#e dawn o/ romanticism, Kurke1s ela)oration o/ t#e
aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime, and to a lesser degree Lant1s5 outlined a world of possibilities for artistic e=periments in which the a.ant-%ardes would later trace out their paths. T#ere are in
general no direct in/luences, no em&iricall% o)ser-a)le connections4 Manet, CeGanne, 1raKue, and Picasso &ro)a)l% did not read 'ant or 1ur!e4 ;t is more a matter o/ an
irre-ersi)le de-iation in t#e destination o/ art, a de-iation a//ecting all t#e -alencies o/ t#e artistic condition4 T#e artist attem&ts com)inations allowing t#e e-ent4 T#e art-
lo-er does not e(&erience a sim&le &leasure, or deri-e some et#ical )ene/it /rom #is contact wit# art, )ut e(&ects an intensi/ication o/ #is conce&tual and emotional ca&acit%,
an am)i-alent enIo%ment4 ;ntensit% is associated wit# an ontological dislocation4 T#e art o)Iect no longer )ends itsel/ to models, )ut tries to &resent t#e /act t#at t#ere is an
un&resenta)leN it no longer imitates nature, )ut is, in 1ur!e, t#e actualiGation o/ a /igure &otentiall% t#ere in language4 T#e social communit% no longer recogniGes itsel/ in art
o)Iects, )ut ignores t#em, reIects t#em as incom&re#ensi)le, and onl%0 later allows t#e intellectual a-ant-garde to &reser-e t#em in museums as t#e traces o/ o//ensi-es t#at
)ear witness to t#e &ower, and t#e &ri-ation, o/ t#e s&irit4
I'
.it# t#e ad-ent o/ t#e aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime, t#e sta!e o/ art in t#e nineteent# and twentiet# centuries was to )e t#e witness to t#e /act t#at t#ere is indeterminac%4 $or &ainting,
t#e &arado( t#at 1ur!e signalled in #is o)ser-ations on t#e &ower o/ words is t#at suc# testimon% can onl% )e ac#ie-ed in a determined /as#ion4 Su&&ort, /rame, line, colour,
s&ace, t#e /igure H were to remain, in romantic art, su)Iect to t#e constraint o/ re&resentation4 1ut t#is contradiction o/ end and means #ad, as earl% as Manet and CeGanne, t#e e//ect o/ casting
dou)t on certain rules t#at #ad determined, since t#e Cuattrocento, t#e re&resentation o/ t#e /igure in s&ace and t#e organiGation o/ colours and -alues4 Reading CeGanne0s
corres&ondence, one understands t#at #is oeu.re was not t#at o/ a talented &ainter /ind0tsg #is Fst%le0, )ut t#at o/ an artist attem&ting to res&ond to t#e Kuestion6 w#at is a &aintingD
His wor!
*
#ad at sta!e to inscri)e on t#e su&&orting can-as onl% t#ose Fcolouristic sensations0, t#ose Flittle sensations0 t#at o/ t#emsel-es, according to CeGanne0s #%&ot#esis, constitute
t#e entire &ictorial e(istence o/ o)Iects, /ruit, mountain, /ace, /lower, wit#out consideration o/ eit#er #istor% or Fsu)Iect0, or line, or s&ace, or e-en lig#t4 T#ese elementar%
sensations are #idden in ordinar% &erce&tion, w#ic# remains under t#e #egemon% o/ #a)itual or classical wa%s o/ loo!ing4 T#e% are un;- accessi)le to t#e &ainter, and can
t#ere/ore onl% )e re-esta)lis#ed )% #im, at t#e e(&ense o/ an interior ascesis t#at rids &erce&tual and mental /ields o/ &reIudices inscri)ed e-en in -ision itsel/4 ;/ t#e -iewer
does not su)mit to a com&lementar%0 ascesis, t#e &ainting will remain senseless and im&enetra)le to #im4 T#e &ainter must not #esitate to run t#e ris! o/ )eing ta!en to )e a
mere dau)er4 FOne &aints /or -er% /ew &eo&le,0 writes CeGanne4 Recognition /rom t#e regulator% institutions o/ &ainting H Academ%, salons, criticism, taste H is o/ little
im&ortance com&ared to t#e Iudgement made )% t#e &ainter-researc#er and #is &eers on t#e success o)tained )% t#e wor! o/ art in relation to w#at is reall% at sta!e6 to ma!e
seen w#at ma!es one see, and not w#at is -isi)le4
Maurice Merleau-Pont% ela)orated on w#at #e rig#tl% called FCeGanne0s dou)t0, as t#oug# w#at was at sta!e /or t#e &ainter was indeed to gras& and render &erce&tion at its
)irt# H&erce&tion F)e/ore0 &erce&tion4 ; would sa%6 colour in its occurrence, t#e wonder t#at Fit #a&&ens0 @Fit0, somet#ing6 colourA, at least to t#e e%e4 T#ere is some credulit% on
t#e &art o/ t#e &#enomenologist in t#is trust #e &laces in t#e Foriginar%0 -alue o/ CeGanne0s Flittle sensations04 T#e &ainter #imsel/, w#o o/ten com&lained o/ t#eir inadeKuac%,
wrote t#at t#e% were Fa)stractions0, t#at Ft#e%0 did not su//ice /or co-ering t#e can-as04 1ut w#% s#ould it )e necessar% to co-er t#e can-asD ;s it /or)idden to )e a)stractD
T#e dou)t w#ic# gnaws at t#e a-ant-gardes did not sto& wit# CeGanne0s Fcolouristic sensations0 as t#oug# t#e% were indu)ita)le, and, /or t#at matter, no more did it sto&
wit# t#e a)stractions t#e% #eralded4 T#e tas! o/ #a-ing to )ear witness to t#e indeterminate carries awa%, one a/ter anot#er, t#e )arriers set u& )% t#e writings o/ t#eorists and
)% t#e mani/estos o/ t#e &ainters t#emsel-es4 A /ormalist de/inition o/ t#e &ictorial o)Iect, suc# as t#at &ro&osed in *+?* )%0 Clement 2reen)erg w#en con/ronted wit#
American F&ost-&lastic0 a)straction, was soon o-erturned )% t#e current o/ Minimalism4 Do we #a-e to #a-e stretc#ers so t#at t#e can-as is tautD o4 .#at a)out coloursD
Male-ic#0s )lac! sKuare on w#ite #ad alread% answered t#is Kuestion in *+*>4 ;s an o)Iect necessar%D 1od% art and #a&&enings went a)out &ro-ing t#at it is not4 A s&ace, at
least, a s&ace in w#ic# to dis&la%, as Duc#am&0s F/ountain0 still suggestedD Daniel 1uren0s wor! testi/ies to t#e /act t#at e-en t#is is su)Iect to dou)t4
.#et#er or not t#e% )elong to t#e current t#at art #istor% calls Minimalism or
Arte Po-era, t#e in-estigations o/ t#e a-ant-gardes Kuestion one )% one t#e
Constituents one mig#t #a-e t#oug#t Felementar%0 or at t#e Forigin0 o/ t#e art o/
Painting4 T#e% o&erate e= minimis. One would #a-e to con/ront t#e demand /or
rigour t#at animates t#em wit# t#e &rinci&le s!etc#ed out )% Adorno at t#e end o/
He%ati.e <ialectics5 and t#at controls t#e writing o/ #is Aesthetic ,heory: t#e
JeanCFrancois Lyotard ,he -ublime and the A.antI/arde
2$:
t#oug#t t#at Faccom&anies meta&#%sics in its /all0, #e said, can onl% &roceed in terms o/ Fmicrologies04
Microlog% is not Iust meta&#%sics in crum)s, an% more t#an ewman0s &ainting is Delacroi( in scra&s4 Microlog% inscri)es t#e occurrence o/ a t#oug#t as t#e unt#oug#t
t#at remains to )e t#oug#t in t#e decline o/ Fgreat0 &#iloso&#ical t#oug#t4 T#e a-ant-gardist attem&t inscri)es t#e occurrence o/ a sensor% now as w#at cannot )e &resented and remains
to )e &resented in t#e decline o/ great re&resentational &ainting4 Li!e microlog%, t#e a-ant-garde is not concerned wit# w#at #a&&ens to t#e Fsu)Iect0, )ut wit#6 FDoes it #a&&enD0, wit# &ri-ation4
T#is is t#e sense in w#ic# it still )elongs to t#e aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime4
;n as!ing Kuestions o/ t#e 't happens t#at t#e wor! o/ art is, a-ant-garde art a)andons t#e role o/ identi/ication t#at t#e wor! &re-iousl% &la%ed in relation to t#e communit% o/
addressees4 E-en w#en concei-ed, as it was )% 'ant, as a de 9une #oriGon or &resum&tion rat#er t#an a de facto realit%, a sensus communis @w#ic#, moreo-er, 'ant re/ers to onl% w#en
writing a)out )eaut%, not t#e su)limeA does not manage to ac#ie-e sta)ilit% w#en it comes to interrogati-e wor!s o/ art4 ;t )arel% coalesces, too late, w#en t#ese wor!s, de&osited
in museums, are considered &art o/ t#e communit% #eritage and are made a-aila)le /or its culture and &leasure4 And e-en #ere, t#e% must )e o)Iects, or t#e% must tolerate
o)Iecti/ication, /or e(am&le t#roug# &#otogra&#%4
;n t#is situation o/ isolation and misunderstanding, a-ant-garde art is -ulnera)le and su)Iect to re&ression4 ;t seems onl% to aggra-ate t#e identit%-crisis t#at communities went
t#roug# during t#e long Fde&ression0 t#at lasted /rom t#e t#irties until t#e end o/ Freconstruction0 in t#e mid-/i/ties4 ;t is im&ossi)le #ere e-en to suggest #ow t#e Part%-states )orn o/ /ear /aced
wit# t#e F.#o are weD0, and t#e an(iet% o/ t#e -oid, tried to con-ert t#is /ear or an(iet% into #atred o/ t#e a-ant-gardes4 Hildegarde 1renner0s stud% o/ artistic &olic% under aGism, or t#e /ilms
o/ Hans-3#rgen S%)er)erg, do not merel% anal%se t#ese re&ressi-e manoeu-res4 T#e% also e(&lain #ow neo-romantic, neo-classical and s%m)olic /orms im&osed )% t#e cultural commissars and
colla)orationist artists H &ainters and musicians es&eciall%
H #ad to )loc! t#e negati-e dialectic o/ t#e F;s it #a&&eningD0, )% translating and )etra%ing t#e Kuestion as a waiting /or some /a)ulous su)Iect or identit%6 F;s t#e &ure &eo&le comingD0,
F;s t#e $X#rer comingD0, F;s Sieg/ried comingD0 T#e aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime, t#us neutraliGed and con-erted into a &olitics o/ m%t#, was a)le to come and )uild its arc#itectures o/ #uman
F/ormations0 on t#e Se&&elin $eld in urn)erg4
T#an!s to t#e Fcrisis o/ o-erca&italiGation0 t#at most o/ toda%0s so-called #ig#l%0 de-elo&ed societies are going t#roug#, anot#er attac! on t#e a-ant-gardes is coming to lig#t4 T#e t#reat
e(erted against t#e a-ant-garde searc# /or t#e artwor! e-ent, against attem&ts to welcome t#e now5 no longer reKuires Part%-states to )e e//ecti-e4 ;t &roceeds Fdirectl%0 out o/ mar!et
economics4 T#e correlation )etween t#is and t#e aest#etics o/ t#e su)lime is am)iguous, e-en &er-erse4 T#e latter, no dou)t, #as )een and continues to )e a reaction against t#e matter-o/-/act
&ositi-ism and t#e calculated realism t#at go-erns t#e /ormer, as writers on art F,uc# as Stend#al, 1audelaire, MallarmL, A&ollinaire and 1reton all em&#asiGe4
2$$
Yet t#ere is a !ind o/ collusion )etween ca&ital and t#e a-ant-garde4 T#e /orce o/ sce&ticism and e-en o/ destruction t#at ca&italism #as )roug#t into &la%0, and t#at Mar( ne-er ceased
anal%sing and identi/%ing, in some wa% encourages among artists a mistrust o/ esta)lis#ed rules and a willingness to e(&eriment wit# means o/ e(&ressiOn, wit# st%les, wit# e-er-new materials4
T#ere is somet#ing o/ t#e su)lime in ca&italist econom%4 ;t is not academic, it is not &#%siocratic, it admits o/ no nature4 ;t is, in a sense, an econom% regulated )% an ;dea H in/inite wealt#
or &ower4 ;t does not manage to &resent an% e(am&le /rom realit% to -eri/% t#is ;dea4 ;n ma!ing science su)ordinate to itsel/ t#roug# tec#nologies, es&eciall% t#ose o/ language, it onl%
succeeds, on t#e contrar%, in ma!ing realit% increasingl% ungras&a#le, su)Iect to dou)t, unstead%4
T#e e(&erience o/ t#e #uman su)Iect H indi-idual and collecti-e H and t#e aura t#at surrounds t#is e(&erience, are )eing dissol-ed into t#e calculation o/ &ro/ita)ilit%, t#e satis/action o/
needs, sel/-a//irmation t#roug# success4 E-en t#e -irtuall% t#eological de&t# o/ t#e wor!er0s condition, and o/ wor!, t#at mar!ed t#e socialist and union mo-ements /or o-er a
centur%, is )ecoming de-aloriGed, as wor! )ecomes a control and mani&ulation o/ in/ormation4 T#ese o)ser-ations are )anal, )ut w#at merits attention is t#e disa&&earance o/
t#e tem&oral continuum t#roug# w#ic# t#e e(&erience o/ generations used to )e transmitted4 T#e a-aila)ilit% o/ in/ormation is )ecoming t#e onl% criterion o/ social im&ortance4 ow
in/ormation is )% de/inition a s#ort-li-ed element4 As soon as it is transmitted and s#ared, it ceases to )e in/ormation, it )ecomes an en-ironmental gi-en, and Fall is said0, we F!now04 ;t
is &ut into t#e mac#ine memor%4 T#e lengt# o/ time it occu&ies is, so to s&ea!, instantaneous4 1etween two &ieces o/ in/ormation, Fnot#ing #a&&ens0, )%0 de/inition4 A con/usion
t#ere)% )ecomes &ossi)le )etween w#at is o/ interest to in/ormation and t#e director, and w#at is t#e Kuestion o/ t#e a-ant-gardes )etween w#at #a&&ens H t#e new H and t#e F;s it #a&&eningD0,
t#e now.
;t is understanda)le t#at t#e art-mar!et, su)Iect li!e all mar!ets to t#e rule o/ t#e new, can e(ert a !ind o/ seduction on artists4 T#is attraction is not due to corru&tion alone4 ;t e(erts itsel/
t#an!s to a con/usio*4 )etween inno-ation and t#e :rei%nis5 a con/usion maintained )% t#e tem&oralit% s&eci/ic to contem&orar% ca&italism4 FStrong0 in/ormation, i/ one can call it t#at, e(ists in
in-erse &ro&ortiOn to t#e meaning t#at can )e attri)uted to it in t#e code a-aila)le to its recei-er4 ;t is li!e Fnoise04 ;t is eas% /or t#e &u)lic and /or artists, ad-ised )%0 intermediaries H t#e
di//users o/ cultural merc#andise H to draw /rom t#is o)ser-ation t#e &rinci&le t#at a wor! o/ art is a-ant-garde in direct &ro&ortion to t#e e(tent t#at it is stri&&ed o/ meaning4 ;s it not t#en li!e an
e-entD
;t is still necessar% t#at its a)surdit% does not discourage )u%ers, Iust as t#e inno-ation introduced into a commodit% must allow itsel/ to )e a&&roac#ed, a&&reciated and &urc#ased )% t#e
consumers4 T#e secret o/ an artistic success, li!e t#at o/ a commercial success, resides in t#e )alance )etween w#at is sur&rising and .#at is Fwell-!nown0, )etween in/ormation and code4 T#is
is #ow inno-ation in art O&erates6 one re-uses /ormulae con/irmed )% &re-ious success, one t#rows t#em o// )alance )% com)ining t#em wit# ot#er, in &rinci&le incom&ati)le, /ormulae, )0I
2$< Jean-Francois Lyotard
amalgamations, Kuotations, ornamentations, &astic#e4 One can go as /ar as !itsc# or t#e grotesKue4 One /latters t#e Ftaste0 o/ a &u)lic t#at can #a-e no taste, and t#e eclecticism or a sensi)ilit%
en/ee)led )% t#e multi&lication o/ a-aila)le /orms and o)Iects4 ;n t#is wa% one t#in!s t#at one is e(&ressing t#e s&irit o/ t#e times, w#ereas one is merel% re/lecting t#e s&irit o/ t#e mar!et4
Su)limit% is no longer in art, )ut in s&eculation on art4
T#e enigma o/ t#e F;s it #a&&eningD0 is not dissol-ed /or all t#is, nor is t#e tas! o/ &ainting6 t#at t#ere is somet#ing w#ic# is not determina)le, t#e FT#ere is0 E'l y aD itsel/, out o/ date4 T#e
occurrence, t#e :rei%nis5 #as not#ing to do wit# t#e petit fnisson , t#e c#ea& t#rill, t#e &ro/ita)le &at#os, t#at accom&anies an inno-ation4 Hidden in t#e c%nicism o/ inno-ation is certainl% t#e
des&air t#at not#ing /urt#er will #a&&en4 1ut inno-ating means to )e#a-e as t#oug# lots o/ t#ings #a&&ened, and to ma!e t#em #a&&en4 T#roug# inno-ation, t#e will a//irms its #egemon% o-er
time4 ;t t#us con/orms to t#e meta&#%sics o/ ca&ital, w#ic# is a tec#nolog% o/ time4 T#e inno-ation Fwor!s04 T#e Kuestion mar! o/ t#e F;s it #a&&eningD0 sto&s4 .it# t#e occurrence, t#e will is
de/eated4 T#e a-ant-gardist tas! remains t#at o/ undoing t#e &resum&tion o/ t#e mind wit# res&ect to time4 T#e su)lime /eeling is t#e name o/ t#is &ri-ation4
*+ w &he International
&rans$A0ant$8arde
Ac/i..e -onito O.i(a
T#e art o/ t#e last generation o&erates in t#e area o/ t#e trans-a.ant-%arde5 w#ere language is considered an instrument o/ c#ange, o/ &assage /rom one wor! to anot#er and /rom
one st%le to anot#er4 ;/ one acce&ts t#e idea t#at t#e a-ant-garde o/ t#e last twent% or t#irt% %ears de-elo&ed along t#e e-olutionar% lines o/ linguistic Darwinism, loo!ing /or
&recedents to t#e accom&lis#ments o/ t#e /irst decades o/ t#e centur%, t#en one must draw a distinction wit# res&ect to t#e trans-a-ant-garde, w#ic# o&erates outside t#ese o)ligator%
limits, /ollowing a nomadic attitude t#at #as &ro-en ca&a)le o/ re-ersing t#e language o/ t#e &ast4
T#e dematerialiGation o/ t#e wor! and t#e im&ersonalit% o/ e(ecution t#at c#aracteriGed t#e art o/ t#e se-enties @carr%ing /urt#er ideas &ioneered )% Duc#am&A #a-e gi-en wa% to
#and cra/tsmans#i& and to a &leasure o/ e(ecution w#ic# reintroduces t#e tradition o/ &ainting into art4 T#e trans-a-ant-garde reIects t#e idea o/ an artistic &rocess aimed entirel% at
conce&tual a)straction4 ;t introduces t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ not considering t#e linear course o/ earlier art as /inal, )%0 o&ting /or attitudes t#at ta!e into account languages t#at #ad &re-iousl%
)een a)andoned4
T#is reco-er% does not entail identi/ication wit# t#e st%les o/ t#e &ast, )ut t#e a)ilit% to &ic! and c#oose /rom t#eir sur/ace, in t#e con-iction t#at, in a societ% in transition toward an
unde/ina)le end, t#e onl% o&tion o&en is t#at a//orded )% a nomadic and transitor% mentalit%4 3ust as &#iloso&#ical &ositi-ism @w#ic# &enetrated and to a great e(tent determined t#e
de-elo&ment o/ .estern ci-iliGation, accelerating social and economic c#anges in terms o/ tec#nological e(&erimentationA #as recentl% come under /ire, so #as its cultural im&lication, t#e
#%steria /or t#e new t%&ical o/ t#e traditional a-ant-garde4 T#is #as caused t#e #istorical o&timism o/ t#e a-ant-garde H t#e idea o/ &rogress in#erent in its e(&erimentation wit# new
tec#niKues and new materials H to colla&se4 T#e attention o/ t#e artists o/ t#e trans-a-ant-garde is t#us &ol%centric and dis&ersed o-er a )road area4 T#ese artists no longer see! #ead-on
con/rontation4 T#e% engage instead in a continuous lateral
$rom $lash Art5 *9= @*+E*A, ,?H=,4
2$=
2$@ Ac/i..e -onito O.i(a ,he 'nternational ,rans-A.ant-/arde
mo-ement w#ose &at# crosses e-er% contradiction and e-er% common&lace, including t#at o/ tec#nical and o&erati-e originalit%4
;n s#ort, t#e recent a-ant-gardes es&oused t#e &rinci&le o/ dialectics, regarding art as a means o/ o-ercoming and reconciling contradictions and di//erences4 T#e trans-a-ant-garde, in
contrast, is an inde/inite area t#at grou&s artists toget#er, not on t#e )asis o/ trends and linguistic a//inities, )ut in -iew o/ an artistic attitude and &#iloso&#% w#ic# em&#asiGes t#eir own
centralit%, and ad-ocates t#e reco-er% o/ an internal reason un)ounded )% t#e /etters o/ t#e art o/ t#e immediate &ast @t#e c#ie/ asset o/ w#ic# was t#e co#erent de-elo&ment o/ t#e linguistic
&recedents o/ t#e maIor mo-ements o/ t#e earl% twentiet# centur%A4
T#e trans-a-ant-garde does not )oast t#e &ri-ilege o/ a direct lineage4 ;ts /amil%0 stoc! e(tends /an-li!e o-er &recedents o/ di-erse descent and &ro-enance, encom&assing not onl% suc# no)le
ancestors as t#e earl%-twentiet#-centur% a-ant-garde, )ut also lesser ones, li!e cra/ts and t#e minor arts4 T#e artists o/ t#e trans-a-ant-garde realiGe t#at cultural growt# ma% e(tend downward as
well as u&wardN t#at ant#ro&ological roots, w#ile inde&endent o/ eac# ot#er, all tend to a//irm t#e )iolog% o/ art, t#e necessit% o/ a !ind o/ creati-it% aimed at e(tending its own e(&erience as an
instance o/ seduction and mutation4
T#e second #al/ o/ t#e se-enties and t#e )eginning o/ t#e eig#ties #a-e )een dee&l% a//ected )% t#is mentalit%4 Art #as a-ailed itsel/ o/ numerous e(&ressi-e means, es&eciall% t#at o/ &ainting,
o/ t#e tools connected wit# t#e language o/ mar!s and color4 1% a&&l%ing its meta&#oric and meton%mic ca&acities @t#e latter )eing t#e a)ilit% to trans/er or s#i/t meaning )etween t#e &arts and
t#e w#oleA, and aided )% a #ig#l% strati/ied cultural conte(t @w#ic# a//ords a more generall% ant#ro&ological climate, conduci-e to t#e a)stract /uries o/ t#e imagination and to a )road range o/
linguistic and social im&licationsA, t#e new image #as /ound a natural #a)itat in t#e #istor% o/ art and o/ st%les4
T#e /a)ric o/ t#e new artistic &roduction is mar!ed )% an interte(ture o/ su)Iecti-it% w#ic# is not an auto)iogra&#ical or &ersonal &#enomenon, )ut w#ic# re&resents art0s res&onse to &ersonal
moti-es &uri/ied /rom t#e use o/ a conscious and controlled language4 Language is ne-er t#e gauge o/ a totall% su)Iecti-e conditionN rat#er, it is t#e !nowing and ironic medium o/ a -ision w#ic#
contains t#e &leasure o/ its own &resence and t#e reasons /or its own &ersistence4
Persistence and emergence are t#e c#aracteristics o/ t#e new image, understood as t#e &ossi)ilit%, on one #and, to ta!e u& again t#e traditional &rocesses o/ art and t#e constant /elicit% t#at
su&&orts itN and, on t#e ot#er #and, to reIect or di//erentiate )etween &receding accom&lis#ments4 Here t#e art o/ t#e last generation redisco-ers t#e &leasure o/ timelessness, w#ic# consists in
&art o/ t#e reco-er% o/ languages4 &ositions, and met#odologies &ertaining to t#e &ast4
T#e /ailure o/ &olitical discourse and ideological dogma #as caused t#e su&erstition o/ art as a &rogressi-e attitude to )e o-ercome4 Artists #a-e realiGed t#at t#e &rinci&les o/ &rogressi-ist
t#oug#t can )e reduced, in t#e /inal anal%sis, to an internal &rogression or e-olution o/ language along lines o/ esca&e FO-liic# &arallel t#e uto&ian esca&e o/ ideolog%4 T#e art o/ t#e immediate
&ast souO,nt to ta!e &art in
2$B
Social c#ange t#roug# t#e e(&ansion o/ new &rocesses and new materials, mo-ing awa% /rom &ainting and /rom t#e static time o/ t#e wor!4 Present art tends to discard illustrations o/ w#at
lies outside itsel/, and to turn )ac! on its own /ootste&s4
aturall%, t#is does not entail enclosure o/ t#e &ainting wit#in t#e /rame4 T#e sensi)ilit% o/ t#e wor! calls u& ec#oes o/ t#e outside in t#e /ield o/ language4 ;t )inds s&atial
and tem&oral moti-es to t#e reasons o/ art t#roug# installations o/ &ainting, collage, and drawing4
T#is &rocess is /a-ored )% t#e disintegration o/ t#e unitar% idea o/ t#e w0or!, a &roIection o/ t#e disintegration o/ unitar% -isions o/ t#e world4 T#e totaliGing -ainglor% o/ ideolog%
was re/lected in t#e stringent arrogance o/ t#e wor! o/ art, w#ic# )ore models /or t#e s%m)olic trans/ormation o/ t#e world4 ow, t#at arrogance #as died out, and t#e artist no longer
intends &at#eticall% to &reser-e t#e m%t# o/ an im&ossi)le and im&ractica)le integrit%4
.or!ing in /ragments means &re/erring t#e -i)rations o/ sensi)ilit% to monolit#ic ideological content4 T#ese -i)rations are necessaril% discontinuous4 T#e% carr% t#e artist toward a &roIect
made o/ numerous linguistic accidents, )e%ond t#e logical co#erence o/ &oetr%4 $ragments are s%m&toms o/ an ecstas% o/ dissociation4 T#e% are signs o/ a desire /or continuous mutation4
T#is continuous mutation )ecomes &ossi)le w#en t#e artist returns to t#e centralit% o/ art4 T#e wor! t#en )ecomes t#e &oint w#ere t#e s#i/ts in sensi)ilit% /low toget#er4 1ut
t#is sensi)ilit% does not e(clude t#e emotion o/ t#e mind, nor does it )loc! out t#e tension o/ intelligence and culture4 ;n /act, t#e wor! solidi/ies wit#in itsel/ t#e cultural and -isual
memor% o/ ot#er wor!s H not as a Kuotation, )ut as a mo)ile and s#i/ting in-estigation o/ &receding linguistic modules4
$ragments &oint to t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ constructing images &iece )% &iece, outside t#e logic o/ &lanning, )ut wit#in t#e )ounds o/ a conce&tion o/ art #istor% t#at is o&en to
re&rise4 As t#e ideological im&erati-e #as /allen, so #as t#e &reclusion o/ /ormer linguistic models4 Ta!ing t#ese models u& again im&lies t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a duet and a duel animated )%
ot#er collisions o/ language4 $ragments &resent t#e O&tion o/ inIecting t#e wor! wit# a #ealt#% dose o/ inconstanc%4
T#e artist em&lo%s t#e image as t#e solidi/ication o/ numerous currents, as t#e agent o/ a t#ousand /actors t#at guide t#e creati-e im&ulse4 T#e latter )ecomes t#e new
su)Iect o/ t#e wor!N and t#e artist )ecomes a -e#icle o/ sensi)ilit% w#ic#, t#roug# its s#i/tings, leads to t#e wor! and to t#e /inal result4 T#is, in its ultimate &ersistence, is t#e /ruit o/ a wor!
&rocess t#at redisco-ers t#e et#ic o/ a time o/ e(ecution t#at was lost in t#e &rocesses o/ conce&tual art4
T#e discontinuit% o/ sensi)ilit% leads also to t#e &roduction o/ di//erent images )ound toget#er )% a &ractice t#at ne-er re&eats itsel/4 T#ese images ta!e t#e disguise o/ /iguration, o/
a)stract mar!s o/ o&ulence o/ material and color, wit#out e-er su)mitting to standardiGation4 T#e wor! alwa%s res&onds to t#e reKuirements o/ t#e unre&eata)le c#ance, )ecause t#e
relations#i& )etween t#e artist and #is means o/ e(&ression is unre&eata)le4
T#is /eature, too, ma!es t#e wor! timeless, in t#e sense t#at it is ne-er a)le to re&resent t#e artist in t#e &resent4 ;/ an%t#ing, it )ecomes t#e s%m&tom of a sensi)le
2<9 Ac/i..e -onito O.%(a
/ragmentation o/ ma!ing art4 Descri&tion and decoration are t#e em)lems t#at adorn t#e wor!, leading it awa% /rom t#e o)ligator% &osition o/ a one-wa% /unction4
Descri&tion is t#e &ur&ort o/ a tension t#at tends to &resent itsel/ in t#e guise o/ a cordial e(&licitness aimed at drawing e(ternal attention to itsel/4 Decoration is t#e mar! o/
a st%le w#ic# /inds in a)straction and in t#e re&etition o/ /anci/ul moti/s t#e wa% to create a /ield o/ /ascination and indeterminateness t#at does not see! to im&ose its own
meaning4 ;n )ot# cases t#e image is /reed /rom its traditional connotations4 ;t is still t#e result o/ a s%m)olic condensation, t#e &ur&ort o/ an idea mas!ed )e#ind t#e -isual /orm it ta!es
on4 1ut, in t#e wor! o/ t#e last generation, it does not condense a strong meaning wit#in itsel/ H it does not transmit an e(&licit idea4 ;t is a bewildered ima%e w#ic# no longer s#ows in
a #aug#t% wa% t#e sedimentations deri-ed /rom a s&ecial situation, )ut re-eals t#e declarati-e as&ect o/ a minor &resence4
Minorit% is an e(&licit /eature o/ creati-e wor!4 ;t is t#e /ruit o/ a mentalit% /ree /rom su&erstition4 T#e wor! intentionall% lac!s c#aracter, it does not #old #eroic attitudes,
and it does not recall e(em&lar% situations4 ;nstead, it &resents small e-ents related to indi-idual sensi)ilit% and circumscri)ed )% ad-entures laced wit# iron% and su)tle
detac#ment4
T#e new art, t#en, -iolates t#e e(&ectations t#at deri-e /rom its usual /unction as a -e#icle o/ meaning4 ;t acKuires t#e /ree will to )e w#im, to descri)e internal states o/
sensi)ilit% wit#out im&l%ing a &s%c#ological condition4
An ironic com&onent is )ot# e(&licitl% and im&licitl% &resent in suc# art4 E(&licitl%, it is gi-en )% t#e miniaturiGation o/ t#e e-ent &resented, )% &lacing t#e wor! at t#e
ser-ice o/ a microsensi)ilit% t#at dramatiGed not#ing )ecause it lac!s t#e #istorical energ% to do so4 A #ealt#% #istorical )rea!down #as &uri/ied language o/ all s%m)olic or
ideological -alenc%, in /a-or o/ /ree-/lowing and interc#angea)le usage4 ;m&licitl%, t#e ironic element is gi-en )% t#e use o/ t#e wor! as a logos o/ continuous s#i/rings o/
meaning, an unending c#ain t#at /ollows t#e Iourne% o/ t#e image t#roug# great and small ad-entures4 T#e iron% is released in t#e in-ersion t#at a traditionall% meta&#orical
&osition &roduces on one t#at is more s&eci/icall% meton%mical and #ence /ree o/ s%m)olic ca&acit%4 T#e image is engaged t#roug# a neutraliGation o/ its strong meaning, as
t#e occasion /or a re&resentation in w#ic# t#e a)stract and t#e /igurati-e are eKualiGed4
E-er%t#ing is /air game /or t#e mar! in a conce&tion w#ic# constantl% sees language wit#out gradients, #oriGontall%4 To de&ri-e language o/ meaning alwa%s means
somet#ingN in t#is case it is t#e s%m&tom o/ a mentalit% t#at no longer s#ows &re/erences, )ut tends to consider t#e language o/ &ainting entirel% interc#angea)le, remo-ing it
/rom /i(ation and mania and deli-ering it to a &ractice w#ic# sees -alue in inconstanc%4
;/ e-er% language #as its own internal e(em&larit%, or ca&acit% /or descri&tion, t#en its de&ri-ation &roduces an ideological destitution t#at is )ot# conseKuent and conseKuential
wit# res&ect to t#at de&ri-ation4
T#e wor! &resents an intentionall% #eterogeneous result, c&eti to color and
,he 'nternational ,rans-A.ant-/arde
material as to /igurati-e and a)stract mar!s4 T#e &leasure &rinci&le re&laces t#e realit% &rinci&le, understood #ere as t#e ingratiating econom% o/ artistic acti-it%04 T#e wor! )ecomes
an o&ulent s#ow w#ic# no longer tends toward econom%, )ut toward wasteN and w#ic# no longer recogniGes a s&ecial reser-e to draw u&on4
T#e contiguit% o/ di//erent st%les &roduces a c#ain o/ images, all o/ w#ic# wor! on t#e )asis o/ s#i/ting and &rogression w#ic# is /luid rat#er t#an &lanned, and w#ic# mo-es in sudden lea&s
and )ounds4 ;n e-er% instance t#e image oscillates )etween in-ention and con-ention4 T#e con-ention is t#e moment in w#ic# t#e language is ta!en u& as st%le, in w#ic# t#e artist
reco-ers t#e mar! rat#er t#an t#e meaning, t#e sur/ace le-el4 T#e in-ention is triggered t#roug# t#e contiguit% and un&redicta)le meeting o/ linguistic di//erences and assonances, w#ic#
do not cause dissonances or lacerations, and do not determine /ields o/ -isual distur)ance, )ut esta)lis# t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ an une(&ected out/low, crisscrossed and animated )%
a lig#t sensi)ilit%4
T#e wor! is a micro-e-ent t#at alwa%s starts /rom t#e inside o/ t#e image, t#e center o/ radiation o/ sensi)ilit%4 T#ere/ore in-ention is not e(&licit, o)-ious, or coarsel%
linguistic4 ;ts originalit% consists in )ringing /ort# emotional, cultural and conce&tual latencies condensed under t#ese meetings and continuities4
Anot#er le-el o/ intuitional con-entionalit% is t#at o/ t#e use o/ a -isual language tied to t#e use o/ mar!s, drawing, color, and &ictorial s&aceN and o/ t#e consideration o/
e(ternal s&ace as a &otential area o/ e(tension, in w#ic# t#e /ragments o/ t#e wor! are re/lected wit#out t#e &resence o/ &re/erential &oints4
1ut t#e wor! is not a mosaic o/ /orms6 an image alwa%s remains as a conseKuence4 $orm, )% de/inition, internaliGes idea and -isual mar! in an ine(trica)le unitN an image is a
metamor&#osis o/ a conce&t w#ic# ta!es on t#e a&&earance o/ /igurati-e re&resentations t#at ma% di//er greatl% /rom one anot#er4
;n order to /acilitate t#is &rocess o/ un)urdening, images a-ail t#emsel-es o/ a tension entirel% )ased on a -icissitude o/ &leasure com&osed o/ mo)ilit% and small gestures4
Attention is )% no means associated wit# care or cle-ernessN rat#er, it is a ca&acit% to gras& t#e relations and lin!s )etween t#e -arious c#aracters t#e wor! ta!es on4
;n /act, t#e wor! &ossesses an inner inconstanc% w#ic# arises /rom a -olu)le use o/ language, t#at is, /rom t#e /ragments w#ic# go to ma!e u& t#e /inal organic constellation ;t
com)ines #ot and cold, concrete and a)stract, da% and nig#t, in a timeless and &er-asi-e interte(ture4 T#e wor! loses its traditional com&osure as it is /reed /rom t#e st%liGed rigidit% o/ art as an
ideal w#ole4 ow, in contrast, it iS crowded wit# tensions o/ di-erse &ro-enance t#at cannot )e e(&lained according to t#e sedateness o/ its &oetics4 ;/ it #as a meaning, t#is meaning is one o/
disseminated attention o/ a sensi)ilit% t#at o&ens out /an-li!e to aid and encourage numerous Fnattentions T#e use o/ meton%m% &ermits t#e image to ta!e on a mo)ile meaning t#at
arises &rogressi-el% /rom t#e language0s internal econom%, t#roug# -isual assonances and &assages o/ mar!s t#at esta)lis# t#e wor! o/ a /ield w#ic#, )% de/inition, deri-es its -alue /rom t#e
&otentialit% o/ mo)ile relations4 T#O
Ac/i..e -onito O.i(a
2<2
accentuation o/ t#e s#i/ting c#aracter now ma!es &ossi)le a &recarious and unsta)le meaning, constructed t#roug# a continuous c#ain o/ mar!s w#ic# do not /unction according
to &redicta)le and rigid mec#anics4
;n t#is wa% meaning is )ewildered, attenuated, made relati-e, and related to ot#er semantic su)stances w#ic# /loat )e#ind t#e reco-er% o/ t#e innumera)le s%stems o/ mar!s4 T#ere results a
sort o/ mildness o/ t#e wor!, w#ic# no longer s&ea!s &erem&toril%, nor )ases its a&&eal on ideological /i(it%, )ut dissol-es in multi-directional digression4 T#e numerous directions are t#ose o/
t#e language and its &oints o/ reco-er%, w#ic# at t#is stage can no longer )e circumscri)ed /or t#e% are su)Iected to an assiduous searc#, and intense courts#i& wit#out &re/erences and
&reclusions4 T#e new art draws on an endless reser-e w#ere a)stract and /igurati-e, a-ant-garde and tradition coe(ist4
T#e art o/ t#e si(ties o&erated t#roug# t#e &resentation o/ real materials as an image o/ energ% and a re/erence to nature4 T#at o/ t#e se-enties was t#e sum o/ &resentation and re&resentation,
an intersection o/ nature and culture4 ow art #as /inall% c#osen t#e area o/ re&resentation, a)olis#ing concrete re/erence to t#e real, or re&lacing t#e naturalness o/ materials directl% introduced
into art wit# t#e arti/ice o/ strictl% &ictorial materials4 T#e reduction o/ t#e material &#%sicalit% o/ t#e wor! and its orientation toward materials more tig#tl% )ound to t#e artistic tradition arise
/rom a #istorical consideration t#at does not allow /or illusions wit# regard to t#e ca&acit% /or e(&ansion )e%ond t#e /rame, )e%ond its own s&eci/ic condition, or )e%ond artistic creation4
T#e m%t#ic /orce o/ art deli)eratel% loses its monolit#ic tension in /a-or o/ an image t#at is )ot# intense and, at t#e same time, deconcentrated, sliding across t#e sur/ace o/ st%le and o/
reco-ered languages4 T#e new art re-i-es t#e am)i-alenc% o/ &oetic &la% as descri)ed in Martin Heidegger0s de/inition6 FPoetr% a&&ears as &la% and %et is not &la%4 Pla% )rings men
toget#er, )ut in suc# a wa% t#at eac# one /orgets #imsel/40
Architecture and :r2anicit(
Introduction
;n *+,5 t#e /irst F;nternational E(#i)ition o/ Modern Arc#itecture0 was #eld at t#e Museum o/ Modern Art in ew Yor!, and it e(#i)ited wor! )% 2ro&ius, Mies and Le
Cor)usier, w#o were #eralded as t#e leading /igures in a new arc#itectural st%le, t#e F;nternational St%le0 @w#ic# was t#e name o/ t#e catalogue &re&ared /or t#e
e(#i)ition )% P#ili& 3o#nson and Henr%-Russell Hitc#coc!A4 ;n t#e wa!e o/ t#e $irst .orld .ar, t#ere were two im&ortant determinants o/ t#e new st%le4 $irst,
ur)an &lanning on a large scale was called /or as de-astated economies tried to re#a)ilitate t#emsel-esN and it was o/ central im&ortance t#at cities could )e re)uilt
wit# a large amount o/ low-cost materials and standardised units o/ construction4 Secondl%, since t#is /irst necessit% was more or less uni/orm across Euro&e,
and since international communications were Kuic!l% re-esta)lis#ed, regional or national -ariations in arc#itectural design )egan to disa&&ear4 T#e resulting
;nternational St%le was c#aracterised )% t#ree central /actors4 $irst, design was e(ecuted according to an econom% o/ F/unction0, according to w#ic# t#e use o/ a
)uilding was a determinant o/ its st%le4 Secondl%, /erroconcrete and steel, as t#e main )uilding materials, t#emsel-es determined certain &ossi)ilities and
limitations in design, suc# as a geometric regularit%4 T#irdl%, a&&lied decoration was out, in /a-our o/ a !ind o/ austerit%4 T#e result was a #omogeneit% o/
ur)an &lanning and )uilding design w#ic# t#reatened t#e idea o/ a s&eci/ic located traditionN in s#ort, t#e Fgenius loci0, t#e -er% /oundation o/ arc#itectural
t#oug#t, was under t#reat as a guiding &rinci&le /or t#e determination o/ li-ed s&ace4
Arc#itecture, as a means o/ in#a)iting s&ace, is also a means o/ in#a)iting time, /or H as Heidegger would #a-e #ad it H )uilding in a &lace must ac!nowledge
t#e #istor% o/ t#at &lace, its )eing in time as well as its )eing in s&ace4 T#e danger o/ a #omogenising internationalism is &recisel% t#at it will reduce criticism to
con/ormism, to commodit% aest#etics4 T#e critical consciousness is critical &recisel% to t#e e(tent t#at it is #istorical, aware o/ t#e &ossi)ilit% t#at tomorrow mig#t
di//er /rom toda%4 Homogeneit% in an international st%le #as t#e &otential e//ect o/ ma!ing t#e accident o/ st%le a&&ear to )e a matter o/ necessity: in a strict sense o/ t#e
&#rase, Ft#ere is no alternati-e04 T#e critical consciousness is one w#ic# ac!nowledges t#at .#ile t#ere is no alternati-e, t#ere still %et can be.
T#e modernist ;nternational &roIect in arc#itecture )egins to come under &ressure almost as soon as it is esta)lis#ed as a dominant st%le4 Tec#nolog% ma!es
neO% materials a-aila)leN and t#e out)rea! o/ t#e Second .orld .ar )rings t#e return o/
2<$
2<< &art $i.e: Architecture and 0rbanicity 'ntroduction 2<=
a consciousness o/ &lace, a sense o/ Flocation0 e-o!ed )% t#e -arious dislocations o/ war itsel/4
;n #is &iece included #ere, 'ennet# $ram&ton argues /or an arc#itecture w#ic# will ena)le a critical Fresistance0, an ad-ersarial stance /or consciousness, a stance w#ic# will not encourage
t#e #istorical #uman Su)Iect to )ecome a mere con/ormist going along )lindl% wit# t#e socio-cultural organisation o/ li/e as determined )% t#e )uilt en-ironment4 ;n #is argument, t#ere is no
denial o/ t#e actualit% o/ a Funi-ersal ci-ilisation0N )ut $ram&ton argues t#at t#is s#ould )e tem&ered and mediated )% t#e s&eci/ics o/ a &articular &lace4 T#e result is a Fregionalism0 w#ic#
a-oids &astoral m%t#, )ut retains a sense o/ t#e &ossi)ilities o/ #eterogeneous traditions4 He is t#us not s%m&at#etic to a modernist traditionN %et nor is #e an% more in agreement wit# t#e
&ostmodernism o/ 3enc!s and ot#ers4
T#e !ind o/ )uilding &ro&osed )% 3enc!s is, according to $ram&ton, one w#ic# encourages &recisel% t#e commodit% aest#etics and t#e con/ormit% o/ consciousness o/ a media-
saturated societ%4 3enc!s #imsel/ #ardl% sees it t#is wa%, o/ course4 ;ndeed, in #is FEmergent Rules0, re&rinted #ere, #e e(&licitl% argues /or a &ostmodernism t#at is c#aracterised )% &luralism,
ant#ro&omor&#ic #umanism, multi-alence and H &ro)a)l% #is most /a-oured term H Fdou)le-coding04 Dou)le-coding is, in a word, iron%N or, as 3enc!s #imsel/ de/ines it #ere, Fcontradiction04
T#e &ur&ose o/ contradiction in arc#itecture and ur)anicit% /or 3enc!s is t#at it Fac!nowledges t#e simultaneous -alidit% o/ o&&osite a&&roac#es and di//erent tastes04 $urt#er, t#is contradiction is
most e//icientl% considered )% 3enc!s as a !ind o/ #istorical contradiction, a contradiction set in time4 He is !een on t#e idea o/ a #istorical continuum, )ut one in w#ic#, wit#in a
s&eci/ic instance o/ )uilding, one will )e aware simultaneousl% o/ t#e &resent in t#e &ast and o/ t#e &ast in t#e &resent4 As in Oli-a0s consideration o/ a trans-a-ant-garde, t#e &ostmodern #ere is
not con/rontational )e/ore its traditionN rat#er, it )rings t#e tradition to )ear w#ile s#i/ting it in a gradualist H and, 3enc!s would argue, contra $ram&ton, Fcritical0 Hmanner4
3enc!s0s Fnew classicism0 is entertaining, decidel% and a-owedl% u&)eat, o&timistic a)out t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ new and most /reKuentl% une(&ected disco-eries4 Yet some mig#t argue t#at t#e
&ostmodern arc#itecture w#ic# #e /a-ours #as )ecome &recisel% as #omogeneous internationall% as t#e -er% modernist ;nternational St%le w#ic# it e(ists to c#allenge4 T#e world #as
increasingl% )egun to loo! t#e same, it is sometimes argued, /or we #a-e all )een FLearning /rom Las Jegas04 Ro)ert Jenturi and #is associates @Denise Scott-1rown, 3o#n Rauc#A ta!e t#e line
t#at !itsc# is good4 Against t#e F#eroic originalit%0 o/ )uildings w#ic# t#e% c#aracterise as Fduc!s04 Jenturi and associates set t#e Fugl% and ordinar%0 t%&e o/ )uilding, t#e Fdecorated s#ed0 o/
t#eir own &re/erred design4 $or t#em, as /or 3enc!s, contradiction is im&ortant4 T#e ideal decorated s#ed is one w#ere Fsome /orm o/ con-entional s%stems-)uilding s#elter t#at corres&onds
closel% to t#e s&ace, structure, and &rogram reKuirements o/ t#e arc#itecture0 is e(&licitl% contradicted )% a Fdecoration0 w#ic# is su&erim&osed u&on it4 At times, Jenturi reads li!e t#e
TLsturist Marinetti, singing t#e &raise o/ an automo)ile culture li-ing at #ig# s&eed 4o an ur)an s&rawl4
$or $ram&ton @as, to a lesser or less e(&licit e(tent, /or Portog#esi and 3enc!sA suc# a neo-$uturist &ostmodern arc#itecture is anat#ema4 Portog#esi0s notions o/ t#e &resence o/ t#e &ast, li!e t#at
o/ 3enc!s0s #istorical continuum, are consistent wit# t#e &ostmodern sus&icion o/ &rogress, or o/ s&eed as a cultural -alue /or its own sa!e4
.#at is at sta!e in t#e de)ate in &ostmodern arc#itecture, /undamentall%, is t#e issue o/ t#e #eterogeneit% o/ li-ed s&ace and, &er#a&s &arado(icall%, o/ li-ed time4 Postmodern
t#in!ing in t#is area #as made it clear t#at arc#itecture is an art o/ time e-er% )it as muc# as it is an art o/ s&ace4 ;ts signi/icance, as t#e essa%s gat#ered #ere ma!e clear, is #istorical as well as
s&atialN its orientation, as some o/ t#e writing #ere would testi/%, is towards a cultural #eterogeneit% in t#e /orm o/ &luralism4 Once more, t#e s&irit o/ &lace @t#e F#ere0A is also t#e s&irit o/ time
@t#e Fnow0A4
,oward a )ritical 4e%ionalism 2<B
59 Li &oward a Critical
Regionalism. /i; *oints for an architecture of resistance
-er% o/ten reKuires t#e &ure and sim&le a)andon o/ a w#ole cultural &ast4 ;t is a /act6 e-er% culture cannot sustain and a)sor) t#e s#oc! o/ modern ci-iliGation4 T#ere is t#at &ara do(6 #ow to
)ecome modern and to return to sourcesN #ow to re-i-e an old, dormant ci-iliGation and ta!e &art in uni-ersal ci-iliGation4
PA8L R;COE8R, 7istor?1 and ,ruth
I ),.t,re and )i(i.i7ation
4ennet/ Fra#0ton
T#e &#enomenon o/ uni-ersaliGation, w#ile )eing an ad-ancement o/ man!ind, at t#e same time constitutes a sort o/ su)tle destruction, not onl% o/ traditional cultures, w#ic#
mig#t not )e an irre&ara)le wrong, )ut also o/ w#at ; s#all call /or t#e time )eing t#e creati-e nucleus o/ great cultures, t#at nucleus on t#e )asis o/ w#ic# we inter&ret li/e, w#at ;
s#all call in ad-ance t#e et#ical and m%t#ical nucleus o/ man!ind4 T#e con/lict s&rings u& /rom t#ere4 .e #a-e t#e /eeling t#at t#is single world ci-iliGation at t#e same time
e(erts a sort o/ attrition or wearing awa% at t#e e(&ense o/ t#e cultural resources w#ic# #a-e made t#e great ci-iliGations o/ t#e &ast4 T#is t#reat is e(&ressed, among ot#er
distur)ing e//ects, )% t#e s&reading )e/ore our e%es o/ a mediocre ci-iliGation w#ic# is t#e a)surd counter&art o/ w#at ; was Iust calling elementar% culture4 E-er%w#ere
t#roug#out t#e world, one /inds t#e same )ad mo-ie, t#e same slot mac#ines, t#e same &lastic or aluminium atrocities, t#e same twisting o/ language )% &ro&aganda, etc4 ;t seems
as i/ man!ind, )% a&&roac#ing en masse a )asic consumer culture, were also sto&&ed en masse at a su)cultural le-el4 T#us we come to t#e crucial &ro)lem con/ronting nations
Iust rising /rom underde-elo&ment4 ;n order to get on to t#e road toward moderniGation, is it necessar% to Iettison t#e old cultural &ast w#ic# #as )een t#e raison d1Ntre o/ a
nationD 444 .#ence t#e &arado(6 on t#e one #and, it #as to root itsel/ in t#e soil o/ its &ast, /orge a national s&irit, and un/url t#is s&iritual and cultural re-indication )e/ore t#e
colonialist0s &ersonalit%4 1ut in order to ta!e &art in modern ci-iliGation, it is necessar% at t#e same time to ta!e &art in scienti/ic, tec#nical, and &olitical rationalit%, somet#ing
w#ic#
$rom $oster, H4 @edA, ,he Anti-Aesthetic: :ssays on postmodern cu/s1ire5 1a% Press, Port Townsend, .A, *+E,, &&4 *?H,94
Modern )uilding is now so uni-ersall% conditioned )% o&timiGed tec#nolog% t#at t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ creating signi/icant ur)an /orm #as )ecome e(tremel% limited4 T#e restrictions
Iointl% im&osed )% automoti-e distri)ution and t#e -olatile &la% o/ land s&eculation ser-e to limit t#e sco&e o/ ur)an design to suc# a degree t#at an% inter-ention tends to )e reduced
eit#er to t#e mani&ulation o/ elements &redetermined )% t#e im&erati-es o/ &roduction, or to a !ind o/ su&er/icial mas!ing w#ic# modern de-elo&ment reKuires /or t#e
/acilitation o/ mar!eting and t#e maintenance o/ social control4 Toda% t#e &ractice o/ arc#itecture seems to )e increasingl% &olariGed )etween, on t#e one #and, a so-called F#ig#-
tec#0 a&&roac# &redicated e(clusi-el% u&on &roduction and, on t#e ot#er, t#e &ro-ision o/ a
5
com&ensator% /aMade0 to co-er u& t#e #ars# realities o/ t#is uni-ersal s%stem4
Twent% %ears ago t#e dialectical inter&la% )etween ci-iliGation and culture still a//orded t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ maintaining some general control o-er t#e s#a&e and signi/icance o/ t#e
ur)an /a)ric4 T#e last two decades, #owe-er, #a-e radicall% trans/ormed t#e metro&olitan centers o/ t#e de-elo&ed world4 .#at were still essentiall% nineteent#-centur% cit% /a)rics in t#e earl%
*+?9s #a-e since )ecome &rogressi-el% o-erlaid )% t#e two s%m)iotic instruments o/ Megalo&olitan de-elo&ment H t#e /reestanding #ig#-rise and t#e ser&entine /reewa%4 T#e /ormer
#as /inall% come into its own as t#e &rime de-ice /or realiGing t#e increased land -alue )roug#t into )eing )% t#e latter4 T#e t%&ical downtown w#ic#, u& to twent% %ears ago, still &resented a
mi(ture o/ residential stoc! wit# tertiar% and secondar% industr% #as now )ecome little more t#an a burolandschaft cit%-sca&e6 t#e -ictor% o/ uni-ersal ci-iliGation o-er locall% in/lected culture4
T#e &redicament &osed )% Ricoeur H namel%, F#ow to )ecome modern and to return to sources0
,
H now seems to )e circum-ented )% t#e a&ocal%&tic t#rust o/ moderniGation, w#ile t#e ground in
w#ic# t#e m%t#o-et#ical nucleus o/ a societ% mig#t ta!e root #as )ecome eroded )% t#e ra&acit% o/ de-elo&ment4
=
E-er since t#e )eginning o/ t#e Enlig#tenment, ci.ili8ation #as )een &rimaril% Concerned wit# instrumental reason, w#ile culture #as addressed itsel/ to t#e S&eci/ics o/ e(&ression H
to t#e realiGation o/ t#e )eing and t#e e-olution o/ its )2llecti.e &s%c#osocial realit%4 Toda% ci-iliGation tends to )e increasingl% em)roiled in a ne-er-ending c#ain o/ Fmeans
and ends0 w#erein, according to Hanna# Arendt,
2<@
2=9 4ennet/ Fra#0ton
FT#e ]in order toR #as )ecome t#e content o/ t#e ]/or t#e sa!e o/RN utilit% esta)lis#ed as meaning generates meaninglessness40
>
2 T/e Rise and Fa.. o? t/e A(ant-&arde
T#e emergence o/ t#e a-ant-garde is inse&ara)le /rom t#e moderniGation o/ )ot# societ% and arc#itecture4 O-er t#e &ast centur%-and-a-#al/ a-ant-garde culture #as assumed di//erent roles, at
times /acilitating t#e &rocess o/ moderniGation and t#ere)% acting, in &art, as a &rogressi-e, li)erati-e /orm, at times )eing -irulentl% o&&osed to t#e &ositi-ism o/ )ourgeois culture4 1% and large,
a-ant-garde arc#itecture #as &la%ed a &ositi-e role wit# regard to t#e &rogressi-e traIector% ot t#e Enlig#tenment4 E(em&lar% o/ t#is is t#e role &la%ed )% eoclassicism6 /rom
t#e mid-eig#teent# centur% onwards it ser-es as )ot# a s%m)ol o/ and an instrument /or t#e &ro&agation o/ uni-ersal ci-iliGation4 T#e mid-nineteent# centur%, #owe-er, saw t#e
#istorical a-ant-garde assume an ad-ersar% stance towards )ot# industrial &rocess and eoclassical /orm4 T#is is t#e /irst concerted reaction on t#e &art o/ Ftradition0 to t#e &rocess o/
moderniGation as t#e 2ot#ic Re-i-al and t#e Arts-and-Cra/ts mo-ements ta!e u& a categoricall% negati-e attitude towards )ot# utilitarianism and t#e di-ision o/ la)or4 Des&ite t#is
critiKue, moderniGation continues una)ated, and t#roug#out t#e last #al/ o/ t#e nineteent# centur% )ourgeois art distances itsel/ &rogressi-el% /rom t#e #ars# realities o/ colonialism and &aleo-
tec#nological e(&loitation4 T#us at t#e end o/ t#e centur% t#e a-antgardist Art ou-eau ta!es re/uge in t#e com&ensator% t#esis o/ Fart /or art0s sa!e0, retreating to nostalgic or &#antasmagoric
dream-worlds ins&ired )% t#e cat#artic #ermeticism o/ .agner0s music-drama4
T#e &rogressi-e a-ant-garde emerges in /ull /orce, #owe-er, soon a/ter t#e turn o/ t#e centur% wit# t#e ad-ent o/ $uturism4 T#is uneKui-ocal critiKue o/ t#e ancien r;%ime gi-es rise to t#e
&rimar% &ositi-e cultural /ormations o/ t#e *+59s6 to Purism, eo&lasticism and Constructi-ism4 T#ese mo-ements are t#e last occasion on w#ic# radical a-ant-gardism is
a)le to identi/% itsel/ w#ole#eartedl% wit# t#e &rocess o/ moderniGation4 ;n t#e immediate a/termat# o/ .orld .ar ; H Ft#e war to end all wars0 H t#e trium&#s o/ science, medicine
and industr% seemed to con/irm t#e li)erati-e &romise o/ t#e modern &roIect4 ;n t#e *+,9s, #owe-er, t#e &re-ailing )ac!wardness and c#ronic insecurit% o/ t#e newl% ur)aniGed masses, t#e
u&#ea-als caused )% war, re-olution and economic de&ression, /ollowed )% a sudden and crucial need /or &s%c#osocial sta)ilit% in t#e /ace o/ glo)al &olitical and economic crises, all induce a
state o/ a//airs in w#ic# t#e interests o/ )ot# mono&ol% and state ca&italism are, /or t#e /irst time in modern #istor%, di-orced /rom t#e li)erati-e dri-es o/ cultural moderniGation4 8ni-ersal
ci-iliGation and world culture cannot )e drawn u&on to sustain Ft#e m%t# o/ t#e State0, and one reaction-/ormation succeeds anot#er as t#e #istorical a-ant-garde /ounders on t#e roc!s o/ t#e
S&anis# Ci-il .ar4
ot least among t#ese reactions is t#e reassertion o/ eo-'amian aest#etics as a su)stitute /or t#e culturall% li)erati-e modern &roIect4 Con/used )% t#e &olitical and
,oward a )ritical 4e%ionalism
2=1
cultural &olitics o/ Stalinism, /ormer le/t-wing &rotagonists o/ socio-cultural moderniGation now recommend a strategic wit#drawal /rom t#e &roIect o/ totall% trans/orming t#e e(isting
realit%4 T#is renunciation is &redicated on t#e )elie/ t#at as long as t#e struggle )etween socialism and ca&italism &ersists @wit# t#e mani&ulati-e mass-culture &olitics t#at t#is con/lict
necessaril% entailsA, t#e modern world cannot continue to entertain t#e &ros&ect o/ e-ol-ing a marginal, li)erati-e, a-ant-gardist culture w#ic# would )rea! @or s&ea! o/ t#e )rea!A wit# t#e
#istor% o/ )ourgeois re&ression4 Close to l1art pour l1art5 t#is &osition was /irst ad-anced as a F#olding &attern0 in Clement 2reen)erg0s FA-ant-garde and !itsc#0 o/ *+,+N t#is essa%
concludes somew#at am)iguousl% wit# t#e words6 FToda% we loo! to socialism simply /or t#e &reser-ation o/ w#ate-er li-ing culture we #a-e rig#t now40
?
2reen)erg re/ormulated t#is
&osition in s&eci/icall% /ormalist terms in #is essa% FModernist &ainting0 o/ *+?>, w#erein #e wrote6
Ha-ing )een denied )% t#e Enlig#tenment o/ all tas!s t#e% could ta!e seriousl%, t#e% Vt#e artsY loo!ed as t#oug# t#e% were going to )e assimilated to entertainment &ure and
sim&le, and entertainment loo!ed as t#oug# it was going to )e assimilated, li!e religion, to t#era&%4 T#e arts could sa-e t#emsel-es /rom t#is le-eling down onl% )% demonstrating
t#at t#e !ind o/ e(&erience t#e% &ro-ided was -alua)le in its own rig#t and not to )e o)tained /rom an% ot#er !ind o/ acti-it%4
<
Des&ite t#is de/ensi-e intellectual stance, t#e arts #a-e nonet#eless continued to gra-itate, i/ not towards entertainment, t#en certainl% towards commodit% and Hin t#e case o/ t#at
w#ic# C#arles 3enc!s #as since classi/ied as Post-Modern Arc#itecture
E
H towards &ure tec#niKue or &ure scenogra&#%4 ;n t#e latter case, t#e so-called &ostmodern arc#itects are merel%
/eeding t#e media societ% wit# gratuitous, Kuietistic images rat#er t#an &ro//ering, as t#e% claim, a creati-e rappel a l1ordre a/ter t#e su&&osedl% &ro-en )an!ru&tc% o/ t#e li)erati-e
modern &roIect4 ;n t#is regard, as Andreas Hu%ssens #as written, FT#e American &ostmodernist a-ant-garde, t#ere/ore, is not onl% t#e endgame o/ a-ant-gardism4 ;t also re&resents t#e
/ragmentation and decline o/ t#e a-ant-garde as a genuinel% critical and ad-ersar% culture40
+
e-ert#eless, it is true t#at moderniGation can no longer )e sim&listicall% identi/ied as li)erati-e in se5 in &art )ecause o/ t#e domination o/ mass culture )%0 t#e media industr%
@a)o-e all tele-ision w#ic#, as 3err% Mander reminds us, e(&anded its &ersuasi-e &ower a t#ousand/old )etween *+=> and *+<>A*9 and in &art )ecause t#e traIector% o/ moderniGation #as
)roug#t us to t#e t#res#old o/ nuclear war and t#e anni#ilation o/ t#e entire s&ecies4 So too, a-ant-gardism can no longer )e sustained as a li)erati-e moment, in &art )ecause its initial uto&ian
Promise #as )een o-errun )% t#e internal rationalit% o/ instrumental reason4 T#is FClosure0 was &er#a&s )est /ormulated )% Her)ert Marcuse w#en #e wrote6
T#e tec#nological apriori is a &olitical apriori inasmuc# as t#e trans/ormation o/
nature in-ol-es t#at o/ man, and inasmuc# as t#e Fman-made creations0 issue /rom and
2=2 4ennet/ Fra#0ton ,oward a )ritical 4e%ionalism 2=8
re-enter t#e societal ensem)le4 One ma% still insist t#at t#e mac#iner% o/ t#e tec#nological uni-erse is Fas suc#0 indi//erent towards &olitical ends H it can re-olutioniGe or retard societ%4 444
Howe-er, w#en tec#nics )ecomes t#e uni-ersal /orm o/ material &roduction, it circumscri)es an entire culture, it &roIects a #istorical totalit%
H a Fworld04 O
8 )ritica. Reiona.is# and >or.d ),.t,re
Arc#itecture can onl% )e sustained toda% as a critical &ractice i/ it assumes an arridre-%arde &osition, t#at is to sa%, one w#ic# distances itsel/ eKuall% /rom t#e Enlig#tenment
m%t# o/ &rogress and /rom a reactionar%, unrealistic im&ulse to return to t#e arc#itectonic /orms o/ t#e &reindustrial &ast4 A critical arriZre-garde #as to remo-e itsel/ /rom
)ot# t#e o&timiGation o/ ad-anced tec#nolog% and t#e e-er-&resent tendenc% to regress into nostalgic #istoricism or t#e gli)l% decorati-e4 ;t is m% contention t#at onl% an
arriere-garde #as t#e ca&acit% to culti-ate a resistant identit%-gi-ing culture w#ile at t#e same time #a-ing discreet recourse to uni-ersal tec#niKue4
;t is necessar% to Kuali/% t#e term arriZre-garde so as to diminis# its critical sco&e /rom suc# conser-ati-e &olicies as Po&ulism or sentimental Regionalism wit# w#ic# it #as
o/ten )een associated4 ;n order to ground arriZre-gardism in a rooted %et critical strateg%, it is #el&/ul to a&&ro&riate t#e term Critical Regionalism as coined )% Ale( TGonis and Liliane Le/ai-re
in FT#e grid and t#e &at#wa%0 @*+E*AN in t#is essa% t#e% caution against t#e am)iguit% o/ regional re/ormism, as t#is #as )ecome occasionall% mani/est since t#e last Kuarter o/ t#e nineteent#
centur%6
Regionalism #as dominated arc#itecture in almost all countries at some time during t#e &ast two centuries and a #al/4 1% wa% o/ general de/inition we can sa% t#at it u&#olds t#e indi-idual
and local arc#itectonic /eatures against more uni-ersal and a)stract ones4 ;n addition, #owe-er, regionalism )ears t#e #allmar! o/ am)iguit%4 On t#e one #and, it #as )een associated wit#
mo-ements o/ re/orm and li)erationN 444 on t#e ot#er, it #as &ro-ed a &ower/ul tool o/ re&ression and c#au-inism4 444 Certainl%, critical regionalism #as its limitations4 T#e u&#ea-al o/ t#e
&o&ulist mo-ement H a more de-elo&ed /orm o/ regionalism H #as )roug#t to lig#t t#ese wea! &oints4 o new arc#itecture can emerge wit#out a new !ind o/ relations )etween designer and
user, wit#out new !inds o/ &rograms4 444 Des&ite t#ese limitations critical regionalism is a )ridge o-er w#ic# an%
12
#umanistic arc#itecture o/ t#e /uture must &ass4
T#e /undamental strateg% o/ Critical Regionalism is to mediate t#e im&act o/ uni-ersal ci-iliGation wit# elements deri-ed indirectly /rom t#e &eculiarities o/ a &articular &lace4 ;t is clear /rom t#e
a)o-e t#at Critical Regionalism de&ends u&on maintaining a #ig# le-el o/ critical sel/-consciousness4 ;t ma% /ind its go-erning ins&iration in suc# t#ings as t#e range and Kualit% o/ t#e local
lig#t, or in a tectomc deri-ed /rom a &eculiar structural mode, or in t#e to&ogra&#O o/ a gi-en site4
1ut it is necessar%, as ; #a-e alread% suggested, to distinguis# )etween Critical Regionalism and sim&le-minded attem&ts to re-i-e t#e #%&ot#etical /orms o/ a lost -ernacular4 ;n
contradistinction to Critical Regionalism, t#e &rimar% -e#icle o/ &o&ulism is t#e communicati.e or instrumental sign4 Suc# a sign see!s to e-o!e not a critical &erce&tion o/ realit%, )ut rat#er t#e
su)limation o/ a desire /or direct e(&erience t#roug# t#e &ro-ision o/ in/ormation4 ;ts tactical aim is to attain, as economicall% as &ossi)le, a &reconcei-ed le-el o/ grati/ication in )e#a-ioristic
terms4 ;n t#is res&ect, t#e strong a//init% o/ Po&ulism /or t#e r#etorical tec#niKues and imager% o/ ad-ertising is #ardl% accidental4 8nless one guards against suc# a con-ergence, one will
con/use t#e resistant ca&acit% o/ a critical &ractice wit# t#e demagogic tendencies o/ Po&ulism4
T#e case can )e made t#at Critical Regionalism as a cultural strateg% is as muc# a )earer o/ world culture as it is a -e#icle o/ uni.ersal ci.ili8ation. And w#ile it is o)-iousl% misleading to
concei-e o/ our in#eriting world culture to t#e same degree as we are all #eirs to uni-ersal ci-iliGation, it is nonet#eless e-ident t#at since we are, in &rinci&le, su)Iect to t#e im&act o/ )ot#, we
#a-e no c#oice )ut to ta!e cogniGance toda% o/ t#eir interaction4 ;n t#is regard t#e &ractice o/ Critical Regionalism is contingent u&on a &rocess o/ dou)le mediation4 ;n t#e /irst &lace, it
#as to Fdeconstruct0 t#e o-erall s&ectrum o/ world culture w#ic# it ine-ita)l% in#eritsN in t#e second &lace, it #as to ac#ie-e, t#roug# s%nt#etic contradiction, a mani/est critiKue o/ uni-ersal
ci-iliGation4 To deconstruct world culture is to remo-e onesel/ /rom t#at eclecticism o/ t#e fin de siTcle w#ic# a&&ro&riated alien, e(otic /orms in order to re-italiGe t#e
e(&ressi-it% o/ an ener-ated societ%4 @One t#in!s o/ t#e F/orm-/orce0 aest#etics o/ Henri -an de Jelde or t#e Fw#i&las#-Ara)esKues0 o/ Jictor Horta4A On t#e ot#er #and, t#e mediation o/
uni-ersal tec#niKue in-ol-es im&osing limits on t#e o&timiGation o/ industrial and &ost-industrial tec#nolog%4 T#e /uture necessit% /or res%nt#esiGing &rinci&les and elements drawn /rom
di-erse origins and Kuite di//erent ideological sets seems to )e alluded to )% Ricoeur w#en #e
.rites6
o one can sa% w#at will )ecome o/ our ci-iliGation w#en it #as reall% met di//erent ci-iliGations )% means ot#er t#an t#e s#oc! o/ conKuest and domination4 1ut we #a-e to admit t#at t#is
encounter #as not %et ta!en &lace at t#e le-el o/ an aut#entic dialogue4 T#at is w#% we are in a !ind o/ lull or interregnum in w#ic# we can no longer &ractice t#e dogmatism o/ a
single trut# and in w#ic# we are not %et ca&a)le o/ conKuering t#e s!e&ticism into w#ic# we #a-e ste&&ed4 18
A &arallel and com&lementar% sentiment was e(&ressed )% t#e Dutc# arc#itect Aldo Jan E%c! w#o, Kuite coincidentall%, wrote at t#e same time6 F.estern ci-iliGation #a)ituall% identi/ies itsel/
wit# ci-iliGation as suc# on t#e &onti/ical assum&tion t#at w#at is not li!e it is a de-iation, less ad-anced, &rimiti-e, or, at )est, e(oticall% interesting at a sa/e distance40 *=
T#at Critical Regionalism cannot )e sim&l% )ased on t#e autoc#t#onous /ormc o/ a s&eci/ic region alone was well &ut )% t#e Cali/ornian arc#itect Hamilton
2=: 4ennet/ Fra#0ton
Harwell Harris w#en #e wrote, now nearl% t#irt% %ears ago6
O&&osed to t#e Regionalism o/ Restriction is anot#er t%&e o/ regionalism, t#e Regionalism o/ Li)eration4 T#is is t#e mani/estation o/ a region t#at is es&eciall% in tune wit# t#e emerging
t#oug#t o/ t#e time4 .e call suc# a mani/estation Oregional0 onl% )ecause it #as not %et emerged elsew#ere4444 A region ma% de-elo& ideas4 A region ma% acce&t ideas4 ;magination and
intelligence are necessar% /or )ot#4 ;n Cali/ornia in t#e late Twenties and T#irties modern Euro&ean ideas met a still-de-elo&ing regionalism4 ;n ew England, on t#e ot#er #and, Euro&ean
Modernism met a rigid and restricti-e regionalism t#at at /irst resisted and t#en surrendered4 ew England acce&ted Euro&ean Modernism w#ole )ecause its own regionalism #ad )een
reduced to a collection o/ restrictions4
T#e sco&e /or ac#ie-ing a sel/-conscious s%nt#esis )etween uni-ersal ci-iliGation and world-culture ma% )e s&eci/icall% illustrated )% 3oin 8tGon0s 1ags-aerd C#urc#, )uilt near Co&en#agen in
*+<?, a wor! w#ose com&le( meaning stems directl% /rotn a re-ealed conIunction )etween, on t#e one #and, t#e rationality o/ normati-e tec#niKue and on t#e ot#er, t#e arationality o/
idios%ncratic /orm4 ;nasmuc# as t#is )uilding is organiGed around a regular grid and is com&rised o/ re&etiti-e, in-/ill modules H concrete )loc!s in t#e /irst instance and &recast concrete wall
units in t#e second H we ma% Iustl% regard it as t#e outcome o/ uni-ersal ci-iliGation4 Suc# a )uilding s%stem, com&rising an in situ concrete /rame wit# &re/a)ricated concrete in-/ill elements,
#as indeed )een a&&lied countless times all o-er t#e de-elo&ed world4 Howe-er, t#e uni-ersalit% o/ t#is &roducti-e met#od H w#ic# includes, in t#is instance, &atent glaGing on t#e roo/ H is
a)ru&tl% mediated w#en one &asses /rom t#e o&timal modular s!in o/ t#e e(terior to t#e /ar less o&timal rein/orced concrete s#ell -ault s&anning t#e na-e4 T#e last is o)-iousl% a relati-el%
uneconomic mode o/ construction, selected and mani&ulated /irst /or its direct associati-e ca&acit% Ht#at is to sa%, t#e -ault signi/ies sacred s&ace H and second /or its multi&le cross-cultural
re/erences4 .#ile t#e rein/orced concrete s#ell -ault #as long since #eld an esta)lis#ed &lace wit#in t#e recei-ed tectonic canon o/ .estern modern arc#itecture, t#e #ig#l% con/igurated section
ado&ted in t#is instance is #ardl% /amiliar, and t#e onl% &recedent /or suc# a /orm, in a sacred conte(t, is Eastern rat#er t#an .estern H namel%, t#e C#inese &agoda roo/, cited )% 8tGon in #is
seminal essa% o/ *+?,, FPlat/orms and &lateaus04 *? Alt#oug# t#e main 1ags-aerd -ault s&ontaneousl% signi/ies its religious nature, it does so in suc# a wa% as to &reclude an e(clusi-el%
Occidental or Oriental reading o/ t#e code )% w#ic# t#e &u)lic and sacred s&ace is constituted4 T#e intent o/ t#is e(&ression is, o/ course, to seculariGe t#e sacred /orm )% &recluding t#e usual set
o/ semantic religious re/erences and t#ere)% t#e corres&onding range o/ automatic res&onses t#at usuall% accom&an% t#em4 T#is is argua)l% a more a&&ro&riate wa% o/ rendering a c#urc# in a
#ig#l% secular age, w#ere an% s%m)olic allusion to t#e ecclesiastic usuall% degenerates immediatel% into t#e -agaries o/ !itsc#4 And %et &arado(icall%, ;sis desacraliGation at 1ags-aerd su)tl%
reconstitutes a renewed )asis /or t#e s&O ,tiial, one /ounded,
,oward a )ritical 4e%ionalism
2=$
; would argue, in a regional rea//irmation H grounds, at least, /or some /orm o/ collecti-e s&iritualit%4
: T/e Resistance o? t/e P.ace-?or#
T#e Megalo&olis recogniGed as suc# in *+?* )% t#e geogra&#er 3ean 2ottmann
continues to &roli/erate t#roug#out t#e de-elo&ed world to suc# an e(tent t#at, wit# t#e e(ce&tion o/ cities w#ic# were laid in &lace )e/ore t#e turn o/ t#e centur%, we are no longer a)le to
maintain de/ined ur)an /orms4 T#e last Kuarter o/ a centur% #as seen t#e so-called /ield o/ ur)an design degenerate into a t#eoretical su)Iect w#ose discourse )ears little relation to t#e &rocessal
realities o/ modern de-elo&ment4 Toda% e-en t#e su&er-managerial disci&line o/ ur)an &lanning #as entered into a state o/ crisis4 T#e ultimate /ate o/ t#e &lan w#ic# was o//iciall%
&romulgated /or t#e re)uilding o/ Rotterdam a/ter .orld .ar ;; is s%m&tomatic in t#is regard, since it testi/ies, in terms o/ its own recentl% c#anged status, to t#e current tendenc% to reduce all
&lanning to little more t#an t#e allocation o/ land use and t#e logistics o/ distri)ution4 8ntil relati-el% recentl%, t#e Rotterdam master &lan was re-ised and u&graded e-er% decade in t#e lig#t o/
)uildings w#ic# #ad )een realiGed in t#e interim4 ;n *+<>, #owe-er, t#is &rogressi-e ur)an cultural &rocedure was une(&ectedl% a)andoned in /a-or o/ &u)lis#ing a non&#%sical,
in/rastructure &lan concei-ed at a regional scale4 Suc# a &lan concerns itsel/ almost e(clusi-el% wit# t#e logistical &roIection o/ c#anges in land use and wit# t#e augmentation o/ e(isting
distri)ution s%stems4
;n #is essa% o/ *+>=, F1uilding, dwelling, t#in!ing0, Martin Heidegger &ro-ides us wit# a critical -antage &oint /rom w#ic# to )e#old t#is &#enomenon o/ uni-ersal &lacelessness4
Against t#e Latin or, rat#er, t#e antiKue abstract conce&t o/ s&ace as a more or less endless continuum o/ e-enl% su)di-ided s&atial com&onents or integers H w#at #e terms spatium and
e=tensio H Heidegger o&&oses t#e 2erman word /or s&ace @or, rat#er, &laceA, w#ic# is t#e term 4aum. Heidegger argues t#at t#e &#enomenological essence o/ suc# a s&ace:&lace de&ends u&on t#e
concrete5 clearl% de/ined nature o/ its )oundar%, /or, as #e &uts it, A )oundar% is not t#at at w#ic# somet#ing sto&s, )ut, as t#e 2ree!s recogniGed, t#e )oundar% is t#at /rom w#ic# somet#ing
)egins its &resencing40 *E A&art /rom con/irming t#at .estern a)stract reason #as its origins in t#e antiKue culture o/ t#e Mediterranean, Heidegger s#ows t#at et%mologicall% t#e 2erman
gerund buildin% is closel% lin!ed wit# t#e arc#aic /orms o/ bein%5 culti.atin% and dwellin%5 and goes on to state t#at t#e condition o/ Fdwelling0, and #ence ultimatel% o/ O)eing0, can onl% ta!e
&lace in a domain t#at is clearl% )ounded4
.#ile we ma% well remain s!e&tical as to t#e merit o/ grounding critical &ractice in a conce&t so #ermeticall% meta&#%sical as 1eing, (-e are, w#en con/ronted wit# t#e u)iKuitous
&lacelessness o/ our modern en-ironment, nonet#eless )roug#t to POsit, a/ter Heidegger, t#e a)solute &recondition o/ a )ounded domain in order tO Create an arc#itecture o/ resistance4 Onl%
suc# a de/ined )oundar% will &ermit t#e
2=< 4ennet/ Fra#0ton ,oward a )ritical 4e%ionalism 2==
)uilt /orm to stand against H and #ence literall% to wit#stand in an institutional sense
H t#e endless &rocessal /lu( o/ t#e Megalo&olis4
T#e )ounded &lace-/orm, in its &u)lic mode, is also essential to w#at Hanna# Arendt #as termed Ft#e s&ace o/ #uman a&&earance0, since t#e e-olution o/ legitimate &ower #as alwa%s )een
&redicated u&on t#e e(istence o/ t#e polis and u&on com&ara)le units o/ institutional and &#%sical /orm4 .#ile t#e &olitical li/e o/ t#e 2ree! polis did not stem directl% /rom t#e &#%sical
&resence and re&resentation o/ t#e cit%-state, it dis&la%ed, in contrast to t#e Megalo&olis, t#e cantonal attri)utes o/ ur)an densit%4 T#us Arendt writes in ,he 7uman )ondition:
T#e onl% indis&ensa)le material /actor in t#e generation o/ &ower is t#e li-ing toget#er o/ &eo&le4 Onl% w#ere men li-e so close toget#er t#at t#e &otentialities /or action are alwa%s &resent
will &ower remain wit# t#em and t#e /oundation o/ cities, w#ic# as cit% states #a-e remained &aradigmatic /or all .estern &olitical organiGation, is t#ere/ore t#e most im&ortant material
&rereKuisite /or &ower4 *+
ot#ing could )e more remo-ed /rom t#e &olitical essence o/ t#e cit%-state t#an t#e rationaliGations o/ &ositi-istic ur)an &lanners suc# as Mel-in .e))er, w#ose ideological conce&ts o/
community without propin>uity and t#e non-place urban realm are not#ing i/ not slogans de-ised to rationaliGe t#e a)sence o/ an% true &u)lic realm in t#e modern moto&ia4
59
T#e mani&ulati-e
)ias o/ suc# ideologies #as ne-er )een more o&enl% e(&ressed t#an in Ro)ert Jenturi0s )omple=ity and )ontradiction in Architecture @*+??A, w#erein t#e aut#or asserts t#at Americans do not
need &iaGGas, since t#e% s#ould )e at #ome watc#ing tele-ision4
5*
Suc# reactionar% attitudes em&#asiGe t#e im&otence o/ an ur)aniGed &o&ulace w#ic# #as &arado(icall% lost t#e o)Iect
o/ its ur)aniGation4
.#ile t#e strateg% o/ Critical Regionalism as outlined a)o-e addresses itsel/ mainl% to t#e maintenance o/ an e=pressi.e density and resonance in an arc#itecture o/ resistance @a cultural
densit% w#ic# under toda%0s conditions could )e said to )e &otentiall% li)erati-e in and o/ itsel/, since it o&ens t#e user to mani/old e=periences?5 t#e &ro-ision o/ a &lace-/orm is eKuall%
essential to critical &ractice, inasmuc# as a resistant arc#itecture, in an institutional sense, is necessaril% de&endent on a clearl% de/ined domain4 Per#a&s t#e most generic e(am&le o/
suc# an ur)an /orm is t#e &erimeter )loc!, alt#oug# ot#er related, intros&ecti-e t%&es ma% )e e-o!ed, suc# as t#e galleria, t#e atrium, t#e /orecourt and t#e la)%rint#4 And w#ile t#ese t%&es #a-e
in man% instances toda% sim&l% )ecome t#e -e#icles /or accommodating &seudo-&u)lic realms @one t#in!s o/ recent megastructures in #ousing, #otels, s#o&&ing centers, etc4A, one cannot e-en in
t#ese instances entirel% discount t#e latent &olitical and resistant &otential o/ t#e &lace-/orm4
$ ),.t,re 'ers,s Nat,re: To0ora0/yD )onte2tD
).i#ateD Li/t and Tectonic For#
Critical Regionalism necessaril% in-ol-es a more directl% dialcctOcal relation wit# nature t#an t#e more a)stract, /ormal traditions o/ modern aO ant-garde arc#itecture
allow4 ;t is sel/-e-ent t#at t#e tabula rasa tendenc% o/ moderniGation /a-ors t#e o&timum use o/ eart#-mo-ing eKui&ment inasmuc# as a totall% /lat datum is regarded as t#e most economic
matri( u&on w#ic# to &redicate t#e rationaliGation o/ construction4 Here again, one touc#es in concrete terms t#is /undamental o&&osition )etween uni-ersal ci-iliGation and autoc#t#onous
culture4 T#e )ulldoGing o/ an irregular to&ogra&#% into a /lat site is clearl% a tec#nocratic gesture w#ic# as&ires to a condition o/ a)solute placelessness5 w#ereas t#e terracing o/ t#e same site to
recei-e t#e ste&&ed /orm o/ a )uilding is an engagement in t#e act o/ Fculti-ating0 t#e site4
Clearl% suc# a mode o/ )e#olding and acting )rings one close once again to Heidegger0s et%molog%N at t#e same time, it e-o!es t#e met#od alluded to )% t#e Swiss arc#itect Mario 1otta as
F)uilding t#e site04 ;t is &ossi)le to argue t#at in t#is last instance t#e s&eci/ic culture o/ t#e region H t#at is to sa%, its #istor% in )ot# a geological and agricultural sense H )ecomes inscri)ed into
t#e /orm and realiGation o/ t#e wor!4 T#is inscri&tion, w#ic# arises out o/ Fin-la%ing0 t#e )uilding into t#e site, #as man% le-els o/ signi/icance, /or it #as a ca&acit% to em)od%, in )uilt /orm, t#e
&re#istor% o/ t#e &lace, its arc#eological &ast and its su)seKuent culti-ation and trans/ormation across time4 T#roug# t#is la%ering into t#e site t#e idios%ncrasies o/ &lace /ind t#eir
e(&ression wit#out /alling into sentimentalit%4
.#at is e-ident in t#e case o/ to&ogra&#% a&&lies to a similar degree in t#e case o/ an e(isting ur)an /a)ric, and t#e same can )e claimed /or t#e contingencies o/ climate and t#e tem&orall%
in/lected Kualities o/ local lig#t4 Once again, t#e sensiti-e modulation and incor&oration o/ suc# /actors must almost )% de/inition )e /undamentall% o&&osed to t#e o&timum use o/ uni-ersal
tec#niKue4 T#is is &er#a&s most clear in t#e case o/ lig#t and climate control4 T#e generic window is o)-iousl% t#e most delicate &oint at w#ic# t#ese two natural /orces im&inge u&on t#e outer
mem)rane o/ t#e )uilding, /enestration #a-ing an innate ca&acit% to inscri)e arc#itecture wit# t#e c#aracter o/ a region and #ence to e(&ress t#e &lace in w#ic# t#e wor! is situated4
8ntil recentl%, t#e recei-ed &rece&ts o/ modern curatorial &ractice /a-ored t#e e(clusi-e use o/ arti/icial lig#t in all art galleries4 ;t #as &er#a&s )een insu//icientl% recogniGed #ow t#is
enca&sulation tends to reduce t#e artwor! to a commodit%, since suc# an en-ironment must cons&ire to render t#e wor! &laceless4 T#is is )ecause t#e local lig#t s&ectrum is ne-er &ermitted to
&la% across its sur/ace6 #ere, t#en, we see #ow t#e loss o/ aura, attri)uted )% .alter 1enIamin to t#e &rocesses o/ mec#anical re&roduction, also arises /rom a relati-el% static a&&lication o/
uni-ersal tec#nolog%4 T#e con-erse o/ t#is O&laceless0 &ractice (-ould )e to &ro-ide t#at art galleries )e to&-lit t#roug# care/ull%0 contri-ed monitors so t#at, w#ile t#e inIurious e//ects o/ direct
sunlig#t are a-oided, t#e am)ient lig#t o/ t#e e(#i)ition Jolume c#anges under t#e im&act o/ time, season, #umidit%0, etc4 Suc# conditions guarantee t#e a&&earance o/ a &lace-conscious &oetic
H a /orm o/ /iltration Com&ounded out o/ an interaction )etween culture and nature, )etween art and lig#t4 Clearl% t#is &rinci&le a&&lies to all /enestration, irres&ecti-e o/ siGe ana location4 A
constant Fregional in/lection0 o/ t#e /orm arises directl% /rom t#e /act t#at in certain climates t#e glaGed a&erture is ad-anced, w#ile in ot#ers it is
G'. ward a )ritical & e%ionalisnl 2=B
2=@ 4ennet/ Fra#0ton
recessed )e#ind t#e masonr% /aMade @or alternati-el%, s#ielded )% adIusta)le sun )rea!ersA4
T#e wa% in w0#ic# suc# o&enings &ro-ide /or a&&ro&riate -entilation also constitutes an uitsentimental element re/lecting t#e nature o/ local culture4 Here, clearl%, t#e maie antagonist o/
rooted culture is t#e u)iKuitous air-conditioner, a&&lied in all tinOes and in all &laces, irres&ecti-e o/ t#e local climatic conditions w#ic# #a-e a ca&acit% to e(&ress t#e s&eci/ic &lace and t#e
seasonal -ariations o/ its climate4 .#ere-er t#e% occur, t#e /i(ed window and t#e remote-controlled air-conditioning s%stem are mutuall% indicati-e o/ domination )% uni-ersal tec#niKue4
Des&ite t#e critical im&ortance o/ to&ogra&#% and lig#t, t#e &rimar% &rinci&le o/ arc#itectural autsnom% resides in t#e tectonic rat#er t#an t#e sceno%raphic: t#at is to sa%, t#is autonom% is
em)odied in t#e re-ealed ligaments o/ t#e construction and in t#e wa% in w#ic# t#e s%ntactical /orm o/ t#e structure e(&licitl% resists t#e action o/ gra-it%4 ;t is olt-ious t#at t#is discourse o/ t#e
load )orne @t#e )eamA and t#e load-)earing @t#e columnA cannot )e )roug#t into )eing w#ere t#e structure is mas!ed or ot#erwise concealed4 On t#e ot#er #and, t#e tectonic is not to )e con/used
wit# t#e &urel% tec#nical, /or it is more t#an t#e sim&le re-elation o/ stereotom% or t#e e(&ression o/ s!eletal /ramewor!4 ;ts essence was /irst de/ined )% t#e 2erman aest#etician 'arl lO`ttic#er
in #is )oo! <ie ,ektonik der7ellenen @*E>5AN and it was &er#a&s )est summariGed )% t#e arc#itectural #istorian Stan/ord Anderson w#en #e wrote6
G,ektonik1 re/erred not Iust to t#e acti-it% o/ ma!ing t#e materiall% reKuisite construction 444 )ut rat#er to t#e acti-it% t#at raises t#is construction to an art /orm4444 T#e /unctionall% adeKuate
/orm must )e ada&ted so as to gi-e e(&ression to its /unction4 T#e sense o/ )earing &ro-ided )% t#e entasis o/ 2ree! columns )ecame t#e touc#stone o/ t#is conce&t o/ ,ektonik.
""
T#e tectonic remains to us toda% as a &otential means /or distilling &la% )etween material, cra/twor! and gra-it%, so as to %ield a com&onent w#ic# is in /act a condensation o/ t#e entire
structure4 .e ma% s&ea! #ere o/ t#e &resentation o/ a structural &oetic rat#er t#an t#e re-&resentation o/ a /aMade4
< T/e 'is,a. 'ers,s t/e Tacti.e
T#e tactile resilience o/ t#e &lace-/orm and t#e ca&acit% o/ t#e )od% to read t#e en-ironment in terms ot#er t#an t#ose o/ sig#t alone suggest a &otential strateg% /or resisting t#e dorrOination o/
uni-ersal tec#nolog%4 ;t is s%m&tomatic o/ t#e &riorit% gi-en to sig#t t#at we /ind it necessar% to remind oursel-es t#at t#e tactile is an im&ortant dimension in t#e &erce&tion o/ )uilt /orm4 One
#as in mind a w#ole range o/ com&lementar% sensor% &erce&tions w#ic# are registered )% t#e la)ile )od%6 t#e intensit% o/ lig#t, dar!ness, #eat and coldN t#e /eeling o/ #umid;t%N t#e aroma o/
materialN t#e almost &al&a)le &resence o/ masonr% as t#e )uo% senses its own
con/inementN t#e momentum o/ an induced gait and t#e relati-e inertia o/ t#e )od% as it tra-erses t#e /loorN t#e ec#oing resonance o/ our own /oot/all4 Luc#ino Jisconti was well aware o/
t#ese /actors w#en ma!ing t#e /ilm ,he <amned5 /or #e insisted t#at t#e main set o/ t#e Altona mansion s#ould )e &a-ed in real wooden &arKuet4 ;t was #is )elie/ t#at wit#out a solid /loor
under/oot t#e actors would )e inca&a)le o/ assuming a&&ro&riate and con-incing &ostures4
A similar tactile sensiti-it% is e-ident in t#e /inis#ing o/ t#e &u)lic circulation in Al-ar Aalto0s Sa%natsalo Town Hall o/ 1*!". T#e main route leading to t#e second-/loor
council c#am)er is ultimatel% orc#estrated in terms w#ic# are as muc# tactile as t#e% are -isual4 ot onl% is t#e &rinci&al access stair lined in ra!ed )ric!wor!, )ut t#e treads and
risers are also /inis#ed in )ric!4 T#e !inetic im&etus o/ t#e )od% in clim)ing t#e stair is t#us c#ec!ed )% t#e /riction o/ t#e ste&s, w#ic# are Fread0 soon a/ter in contrast to t#e tim)er
/loor o/ t#e council c#am)er itsel/4 T#is c#am)er asserts its #onori/ic status t#roug# sound, smell and te(ture, not to mention t#e s&ring% de/lection o/ t#e /loor under/oot @and a noticea)le
tendenc% to lose one0s )alance on its &olis#ed sur/aceA4 $rom t#is e(am&le it is clear t#at t#e li)erati-e im&ortance o/ t#e tactile resides in t#e /act t#at it can onl% )e decoded in terms o/
e=perience itsel/6 it cannot )e reduced to mere in/ormation, to re&resentation or to t#e sim&le e-ocation o/ a simulacrum su)stituting /or a)sent &resences4
;n t#is wa%, Critical Regionalism see!s to com&lement our normati-e -isual e(&erience )% readdressing t#e tactile range o/ #uman &erce&tions4 ;n so doing, it endea-ors to )alance t#e
&riorit%0 accorded to t#e image and to counter t#e .estern tendenc% to inter&ret t#e en-ironment in e(clusi-el% &ers&ecti-al terms4 According to its et%molog%, &ers&ecti-e means rationaliGed
sig#t or clear seeing, and as suc# it &resu&&oses a conscious su&&ression o/ t#e senses o/ smell, #earing and taste, and a conseKuent distancing /rom a more direct e(&erience o/ t#e en-ironment4
T#is sel/-im&osed limitation relates to t#at w#ic# Heidegger #as called a Floss o/ nearness ;n attem&ting to counter t#is loss, t#e tactile o&&oses itsel/ to t#e scenogra&#ic and t#e drawing o/
-eils o-er t#e sur/ace o/ realit%4 ;ts ca&acit% to arouse t#e im&ulse to touc# returns t#e arc#itect to t#e &oetics o/ construction and to t#e erection o/ wor!s in w#ic# t#e tectonic -alue o/
eac# com&onent de&ends u&on t#e densit% o/ its o)Iect#ood4 T#e tactile and t#e tectonic Iointl% #a-e t#e ca&acit% to transcend t#e mere a&&earance o/ t#e tec#nical in muc# t#e same wa%
as t#e &lace-/orm #as t#e &otential to wit#stand t#e relentless onslaug#t o/ glo)al moderniGation4
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#% re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation
*4 Paul Ricoeur, O8ni-ersal ci-iliGation and national cultures0 L1B<1ED in 7istory and ,ruth5 transl4 C#as4 A4 'el)le%, ort#western 8niJei0Sit% Press, E-anston, ;L, *+?>0 &&4 5<?H<4
2@9 4ennet/ Fra#0ton
54 T#at t#ese are )ut two sides o/ t#e same coin #as &er#a&s )een most dramaticall% demonstrated in t#e Portland Cit%0 Anne( com&leted in Portland, Oregon in *+E5 to t#O designs o/
Mic#ael 2ra-es4 T#e constructional /a)ric o/ t#is )uilding )ears no relation w#atsoe-er to t#e Fre&resentati-e0 scenogra&#% t#at is a&&lied to t#e )uilding )ot# inside and out4
,4 Ricoeur, &4 5<<4
=4 $ernand 1raudel in/orms us t#at t#e term Fculture0 #ardl% e(isted )e/ore t#e )eginning o/ t#e nineteent# centur% w#en, as /ar as Anglo-Sa(on letters are concerned, it alreads /inds itsel/
o&&osed to Fci-iliGation0 in t#e writings o/ Samuel Ta%lor Coleridge H a)o-e all in Coleridge0s On the )onstitution of )hurch and -tate o/ *E,94 T#e noun Fci-iliGation0 #as a somew#at
longer #istor%, /irst a&&earing in *<??, alt#oug# its -er) and &artici&le /orms date to t#e si(teent# and se-enteent# centuries4 T#e use t#at Ricoeur ma!es o/ t#e o&&osition )etween t#ese
two terms relates to t#e wor! o/ twentiet#-centur% 2erman t#in!ers and writers suc# as Os-ald S&engler, $erdinand T`nnies, Al/red .e)er and T#omas Mann4
!. Hanna# Arendt, ,he 7uman )ondition5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+>E, &4 *>=4
?4 Clement 2reen)erg, FA-ant-garde and !itsc#0, *+?+, &4 *5?4
<4 2reen)erg, FModernist &ainting0, *+??, &&4 *9*H54
E4 See C#arles 3enc!s, ,he 6an%ua%e of &ost-(odern Architecture5 RiGGoli, ew Yor!,
*+<<4
+4 See c#4 *? a)o-e, &4 55E4
*94 3err% Mander, $our Ar%uments for the :limination of ,ele.ision5 Morrow Cuill, ew Yor!, *+<E, &4 *,=4
**4 Her)ert Marcuse, 2ne-<imensional (an5 1eacon Press, 1oston, MA, *+?=, &4 *>?4
*54 Ale( TGonis and Liliane Le/ai-re4 FT#e grid and t#e &at#wa%4 An introduction to t#e wor! o/ Dimitris and Susana Antona!a!is0, Architecture in /reece5 *>, At#ens, *+E*,
*<E4
*,4 Ricoeur, &4 5E,4
*=4 Aldo Jan E%c!, $orum5 Amsterdam, *+?54
*>4 Hamilton Harwell Harris, FLi)erati-e and restricti-e regionalism04 Address gi-en to t#e ort#west C#a&ter o/ t#e ALA in Eugene, Oregon in *+>=4
*?4 3oin 8tGon, FPlat/orms and &lateaus6 ;deas o/ a Danis# arc#itect0, Podiac5 *9, Milan, EdiGioni Communita, *+?,, **5H*=4
*<4 3ean 2ottmann, (e%alopolis5 M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+?*4
*E4 Martin Heidegger, F1uilding dwelling, t#in!ing0, in &oetry5 6an%ua%e5 ,hou%ht5 *+<*, &4 *>=4 T#is essa% /irst a&&eared in 2erman in *+>=4
*+4 Arendt, &4 59*4
594 Mel-in .e))er, :=plorations in 0rban -tructure5 8ni-ersit%0 o/ Penns%l-ania Press, P#iladel&#ia, *+?=4
5*4 Ro)ert Jenturi, )omple=ity and )ontradiction in Architecture5 *+??, &4 *,,4
554 Stan/ord Anderson, FModern arc#itecture and industr%, Peter 1e#rens, t#e AE2, and industrial design0, 2ppositions5 5*, *+E9, E,4
5* Li &he 'mergent Rules
)/ar.es Jenc*s
V4 4
Post#odern Poetics and t/e Ne1 R,.es
O/ten in #istor% t#ere is a com)ination o/ continuit% and c#ange w#ic# loo!s &er&le(ing )ecause our -iew o/ )ot# t#e old and t#e new is altered4 T#us, wit# Postmodern Classicism t#e
meanings, -alues and /orms o/ modernism and classicism are simultaneousl% trans/ormed into a #%)rid com)ination4 T#e &resent mode loo!s distur)ing, &artl% )ecause it is )ot# strange and %et
-er% /amiliar4 Pre-ious rules o/ decorum and com&osition are not so muc# disregarded, as e(tended and distorted4 ;ndeed, t#e -er% notion o/ designing wit#in a set o/ rules, w#ic# #as )een
anat#ema since t#e Romantic age, ta!es on new meanings4
ow, rules or canons /or &roduction are seen as &reconditions /or creati-it%, a situation caused &artl% )% t#e ad-ent o/ t#e com&uter, w#ic# ma!es us conscious o/ t#e assum&tions )e#ind a
)uilding4 Anal%tical sc#olars#i& wit#in t#e art world #as also increased t#is consciousness, as students are now /orced to )ecome aware o/ t#e con-entions )e#ind suc# seemingl%
s&ontaneous twentiet#-centur% mo-ements as Primiti-ism and E(&ressionism4 T#e onl% esca&e /rom rule-go-erned art is to su&&ress /rom consciousness t#e canons )e#ind one0s creati-it% H
#ardl% a Com/orting li)eration4 And it0s &racticall% im&ossi)le to remain ignorant o/ t#ese, at least o/ antecedent ones, in an age o/ constant communication and t#eorising4 T#us, consciousness
o/ rules, con-entions and canons is t#rust u&on us4
;o conclude t#is sur-e% o/ Postmodern Classicism O(0e mig#t summarise a /ew o/ t#e more outstanding canons t#at lie )e#ind t#e new art and arc#itecture4 T#ese Canons are not uni-ersall%
#eld )% &ostmodernists and some are contingent u&on t#e momentar% #istorical situation arising a/ter Modernism4 T#e% t#us contrast wit# t#e older notion o/ classical rules in )eing understood
as relati-e rat#er t#an a)solute,
$rom 3enc!s, C4, &ostmodernism5 Academ% Editions, LondOn:RiGGOli ;nternational Pu)lications, ;nc4, ew Yor!, *+E<, &&4 ,5+H,5, ,,>H=+, ,>94
2@1
2@2 )/ar.es Jenc*s ,he :ener%o1ut 4ules 2@8
res&onses to a world o/ /ragmentation, &luralism and in/lation rat#er t#an /ormulae to )e a&&lied indiscriminatel%4 T#e /ollowing list is a selection o/ ele-en o/ t#e most signi/icant4
*4 T#e most o)-ious new con-ention concerns )eaut% and com&osition4 ;n &lace o/ Renaissance #armon% and Modernist integration is t#e new #%)rid o/ dissonant beauty5 or disharmonious
harmony. ;nstead o/ a &er/ectl% /inis#ed totalit% Fw#ere no &art can )e added or su)tracted e(ce&t /or t#e worse0 @Al)ertiA, we /ind t#e Fdi//icult w#ole0 @JenturiA or t#e F/ragmented unit%0 o/
artists li!e t#e Poiriers and arc#itects li!e Hans Hollein4 T#is new em&#asis on com&le(it% and ric#ness &arallels t#e Mannerist em&#asis on diff8cultQ and s!ill, )ut it #as a new social and
meta&#%sical )asis4 $rom a &luralist societ% a new sensi)ilit% is /ormed w#ic# /inds an o-ersim&le #armon% eit#er /alse or unc#allenging4 ;nstead, t#e Iu(ta&osition o/ tastes and world--iews is
a&&reciated as )eing more real t#an t#e integrated languages o/ )ot# E(clusionist Classicism and Hig# Modernism4 T#e new taste /or disIunctions and collisions is a&&arent in suc# &o&ular /ilms
as ,he /ods (ust be )ra8y5 w#ic# alternates /reKuentl% )etween t#e world--iew o/ a scientist, dro&-out Iournalist, 'ala#ari 1us#man and a re-olutionist, %et manages to create /rom t#ese a
co#erent drama4 Signi/icantl% it a&&eals to di//erent tastes and ages4
FDis#armonious #armon%0 also /inds -alidit% in t#e &resent consensus among scientists t#at t#e uni-erse is d%namic and e-ol-ing4 ;n t#e &ast, classical re-i-als #a-e )een associated wit# a
&resumed cosmic #armon%4 Jitru-ius eKuated t#e F&er/ect0 #uman )od% wit# t#e celestial order and t#en Iusti/ied t#e &er/ected order o/ t#e tem&le on t#ese assum&tions4 T#e Renaissance, wit#
its well-&ro&ortioned )uildings and scul&ture, /ollowed t#ese eKuations )etween microcosm and macrocosm4 Toda%, #owe-er, wit# our com&ound and /ragmented -iew o/ a
ewtonian:Einsteinian uni-erse, we #a-e se-eral t#eories o/ t#e macrocosm com&eting /or our acce&tance, none o/ w#ic# sounds w#oll% &lausi)le, com&lete or #armonious4 An% scientist w#o
#as listened to t#e su&&osed origin o/ t#e uni-erse
H t#e noise o/ t#e 1ig 1ang t#at a&&arentl% is still re-er)erating H does not s&ea! onl% o/ Ft#e music o/ t#e s&#eres06 t#e F-iolent uni-erse0 is as good a descri&tion o/ e(&loding su&erno-ae as t#e
eternall% ordered and calm &icture )e#ind classical and C#ristian art o/ t#e &ast4
;ne-ita)l% art and arc#itecture must re&resent t#is &arado(ical -iew, t#e o(%moron o/ Fdis#armonious #armon%0, and it is t#ere/ore not sur&rising t#at we /ind countless /ormal &arado(es in
&ostmodern wor! suc# as Fas%mmetrical s%mmetr%0, Fs%nco&ated &ro&ortion0, F/ragmented &urit%0, Fun/inis#ed w#ole0 and Fdissonant unit%04 O(%moron, or Kuic! &arado(, is itsel/ a t%&ical
&ostmodern tro&e and Fdis#armonious #armon%0 recurs as o/ten in its &oetics as Forganic w#ole0 recurs in t#e aest#etics o/ classicism and Modernism4
<. .
54 As strong a rule as Fdis#armonious #armon%0, and ont '#ic# Iusti/ies it, is
pluralism5 )ot# cultural and &olitical4 As we #a-e seen, t#e /undamental &osition o/ &ostmodernism in t#e ; +<9s was its st%0listic -ariet%0, its cele)ration o/ di//erence, Fot#erness0 and
irreduci)le #eterogeneit%4 $eminist art and ad-ocac% &lanning were two t%&ical unrelated mo-ements w#ic# #el&ed /orm t#e tolerance o/, and taste /or, -ariet%4 ;n arc#itecture, t#e st%listic
counter&art o/ &luralism is radical eclecticism
H t#e mi(ing o/ di//erent languages to engage di//erent taste cultures and de/ine di//erent /unctions according to t#eir a&&ro&riate mood4
3ames Stirling0s addition to t#e Tate 2aller% is undou)tedl% #is in ost di-ergent creation to date, a )uilding w#ic# c#anges sur/ace as it meets di//erent )uildings and de/ines di//erent uses
@5*4 *A4 .#ere it attac#es to t#e classical galler% it continues t#e cornice line and some o/ t#e stonewor!, )ut w#ere it a&&roac#es a &ree(isting )ric! structure it ado&ts some o/ t#is red and w#ite
grammar4 ;ts main entrance is di//erent again, a /ormal grid o/ green mullioned glass w#ic# rea&&ears in anot#er main &u)lic area, t#e reading room4 As i/ t#ese c#anges were not enoug# toA
articulate t#e c#anging /unctions and mood, t#e grammar )ecomes Late-Modern to t#e rear H a st%le suita)le to t#e ser-ice area H and more neutral on t#e ot#er side so as to )e in !ee&ing wit# t#e
)ac! o/ t#e Tate4 To &ull t#is #eterogeneit% toget#er is a grid /rame, &resented as somet#ing analogous to a classical order4 A sKuare wall &attern, li!e t#e Renaissance a&&lication o/ &ilasters,
rea&&ears again and again, inside and outside, to /orm t#e conce&tual ordering s%stem4 1ut it is used in a dissonant, not #armonious wa% H )ro!en into Kuarter r#%t#ms around t#e entrance,
#anging in /ragments o-er t#e reading room, and marc#ing down &art o/ t#e side /aMades @5*45A4 T#us Renaissance #armon% is mi(ed wit# Modernist collage e-en in t#e )ac!ground structure
t#at is su&&osed to uni/% t#e /ragments4 .#ile suc# e(treme eclecticism ma% )e Kuestioned /or suc# a small )uilding,4 it does ser-e to c#aracterise t#e #eterogeneous /unctions, suc# as
accommodating grou&s o/ sc#oolc#ildren, /or w#ic# t#is )uilding was s&eci/icall% designed4 Stirling s&ea!s o/ it as a garden )uilding attac#ed to a )ig #ouse, and t#is #el&s e(&lain t#e
in/ormalit%, t#e lil% &ond, trellis wor! and &ergola4 ;t also underscores w#% t#is eclecticism is radical6 )ecause unli!e wea! eclecticism, w#ic# is more a matter o/ w#im, it is tied to -er% s&eci/ic
/unctions and s%m)olic intentions4 Anot#er moti-e /or t#e #eterogeneit% is its communicational role H t#e idea t#at an eclectic language s&ea!s to a wide and di-ergent audience H somet#ing o/ a
necessit% /or a &u)lic art galler%4
Da-id Salle is an artist w#o ado&ts an analogous a&&roac# in #is di-ided can-ases4 Mi(ing di//erent st%les, as does Stirling, w#ic# -ar% /rom t#e &o&ular and )anal to t#e so&#isticated and
classical, #e ac#ie-es some o/ t#e same wr% clas#es and mutual Cancellations ;n FMidda%0, *+E=, a secretar% am)iguousl% wards o// t#e e//ig% o/ #er )oss as s#e /alls )ac! on to a sleaG% o//ice
/loor4 T#is &otential narrati-e is 3u(ta&osed wit# a Modernist colour /ield &ainting and ot#er signs o/ a)stract art, w#ile t#e con-entions o/ Iournalism, TJ and gra//iti cancel to a degree t#e
classical and Modernist con-entions4 Alt#oug# t#e eclecticism reac#es out to -arious audiences, t#e message it sends is distur)ing and unresol-ed4
Enigmatic allegor% and suggesti-e narrati-e are two &ostmodern genres, as we
2@: )/ar.es Jenc*s ,he :mer%ent 4ules
2@$
5*4*4 53ames Stirling and Mic#ael .il/ord, FClore 2aller%0, addition to t#e Tate 2aller%, London, *+E5H? @P#otogra&#s R4 1r%antA4
#a-e seen, w#ic# tr%0 to ma!e a -irtue o/ am)iguit% and in t#is sense re/lect an o&en, &lural meta&#%sics4 .#en se-eral &ossi)le readings are &resented simultaneousl%, it
is le/t to t#e reader to su&&l% t#e uni/%ing te(t4 T#is also entails /rustration H t#e &ostmodern counter&art to t#e classical canon o/ Fwit##eld grati/ication04 1ot# Stirling0s and Salle0s wor! is
/rustrating in t#e sense t#at it a-oids a #ierarc#% o/ meanings4 One #as to loo! elsew#ere to /ind a clearer e(&ression o/ a uni/ied -iew4
,4 T#e most commonl%-#eld aim o/ &ostmodern arc#itects is to ac#ie-e an urbane urbanism. 8r)an conte(tualism gains near uni-ersal assent4 ew )uildings, according to t#is doctrine, s#ould
)ot# /it into and e(tend t#e ur)an conte(t, reuse suc# constants as t#e street, arcade and &iaGGa, %et ac!nowledge too t#e new tec#nologies and means o/ trans&ort4 T#is dou)le inIunction
amounts to a new rule, as clear and well de/ined as an% tenet o/ Canonic Classicism4 $urt#ermore, t#ere are t#ose suc# as Leon 'rier w#o would argue /or an o&timum relations#i& )etween all
t#e &arts o/ a cit%, w#at ; #a-e called t#e F&ro&er )alance0 )etween essential elements6 &u)lic to &ri-ate, wor! to li-ing, monument to in/ill, s#ort )loc!s to cit% grid, /oreground sKuare to
)ac!ground #ousing4 ;/ one /ocuses on t#is )alance, rat#er t#an an% &articular set o/ dualities, t#en one will ac#ie-e t#e ur)ane ur)anism o/ t#e Roman insulae5 or t#e traditional eig#teent#-
centur% Euro&ean cit%0, or nineteent#-centur% American -illage @5*4,A4 Small )loc!, mi(ed-use &lanning t#us amounts to an ur)an a)solute /or con-i-ial li-ing4 ;n 'rier0s sc#emes
t#e &#%sical and /unctional #ierarc#ies are clear4 T#ere0s no am)iguit%, iron% or Iu(ta&osition #ere, w#ic# is w#% t#e% seem at once so &ower/ul and nostalgic4 T#e ur)ane wa% o/ li/e is sim&l%
)etter t#an is t#e dissociated and o-ercentralised cit%4
=4 Almost as /a-oured as conte(tualism is t#e &ostmodern mo&e o/ anthropomorphism. Almost all o/ t#e new classicists incor&orate ornament and mouldings suggesti-e o/ t#e #uman )od%4
2eo//re% Scott, in t#e Architecture of 7umanism5 *+*=, a&&lauded classicism )ecause it Ftranscri)ed in stone t#e )od%0s /a-oura)le states04 ;ts &ro/iles, as Mic#elangelo em&#asised, could
resem)le sil#ouettes o/ a /aceN its scul&tural mass and c#iaroscuro could ec#o t#e )od%0s muscles4 Suc# arc#itecture #umanises inanimate /orm as we naturall% &roIect our &#%siognom% and
moods on to it4 T#is em&at#etic res&onse is most welcome on large #ousing estates, or in a conte(t w#ic# is /undamentall% alienating or o-er )uilt4 3erem% Di(on, Ro)ert 'rier, Hans Hollein,
Cesar Pelli, 'aGumasa Yamas#ita and C#arles Moore among ot#ers #a-e de-elo&ed t#is ant#ro&omor&#ism, Iust as Mic#ael 2ra-es and ; #a-e tried to ma!e a)stract re&resentations o/ t#e /ace
and )od% in our wor! @5*4=A4 T#e e(&licitness o/ t#e image -aries /rom t#e o)-ious car%atid, or )erm, to t#e #idden /igure, and seems most success/ul w#en com)ining t#ese e(tremes4 At a large
scale t#e /igure is )est incor&orated wit# ot#er moti/s and meanings, so it is not o-er&owering6 in t#e FT#ematic House0, /or instance, #ead, s#oulders, arms, )elt and legs are as muc# arc#es and
windows as t#e% are anatomical &arts A"1.!?. T#e general rule /a-ours a su)liminal ant#ro&omor&#isn_ )ut &romotes an e(&licitness in detail and ornament4 ;n an age w#en arc#itects and
2B: )/ar.es Jenc*s
more accessi)le4 Rules, #owe-er, do not necessaril% a master&iece ma!e, and tend to generate new sets o/ dead-ends, im)alances and ur)an &ro)lems4 Hence t#e am)i-alence o/ our age to
ort#odo(% and t#e romantic im&ulse to c#allenge all canons o/ art and arc#itecture w#ile, at t#e same time, retaining t#em as a necessar% &recondition /or creation6 simultaneousl% &romoting
rules and )rea!ing t#em4 .e are still near t#e )eginning o/ t#e classical &#ase, w#ic# started in t#e late *+<9s, and alt#oug# one cannot &redict its /uture, it is li!el% to dee&en as it s%nt#esiGes
t#e distant and more recent &ast, as it sustains more &ro/oundl% t#e .estern tradition o/ #umanism4 T#e modern world, w#ic# started wit# t#e Renaissance as an economic, social and &olitical
realit%, #as itsel/ integrated as a twent%-/our-#our mar!et-&lace on a muc# more com&le( le-el4 Modern communications, sc#olars#i& and /a)rication met#ods ma!e an% and e-er% st%le eKuall%
&ossi)le, i/ not eKuall% &lausi)le4 E-en more t#an in t#e nineteent# centur%, t#e age o/ eclecticism, we #a-e t#e /reedom to c#oose and &er/ect our con-entions, and t#is c#oice /orces us to loo!
)ot# inwards and outwards to culture as a w#ole4 $or t#e modernist &redicament, o/ten e&itomised in Yeats0s words H FT#ings /all a&art6 t#e centre cannot #old0 H we #a-e t#e dialectical answer6
FT#ings /all toget#er, and t#ere is no centre, )ut connections40 Or, in $4 M4 $orster0s words6 Fconnect, onl% connect
Notes
.#ere /ull details are gi-en in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, man% re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 )ontent5 a )ontemporary $ocus5 *+<=HE=4 Hirsc#orn Museum, .as#ington DC, =H? 3an *+E>N curated )% Howard 4 $o(6 essa%s )% $o(, Miranda McClintic and P#%llis RosenGweig4
54 $or t#ese categories and t#e )est discussion o/ realist &ainting toda% see $ran! H4 2ood%ear 3r, )ontemporary American 4ealism -ince 1*+05 e(#i)ition catalogue and )oo!, ew Yor!
2ra&#ic Societ%, 1oston, MA, *+E*4
,4 Strind)erg0s dualism is discussed in 3ames Mc$arlane0s FT#e mind o/ modernism0, in (odernism 1J*0I1 *#05 eds, Malcolm 1rad)ur% and 3ames Mc$arlane, *+<?N Kuote /rom &4 EE4
=4 $or t#e recent con/erences, e(#i)itions and commissions in-ol-ing t#e colla)oration )etween artists and arc#itects, see )ollaboration5 ed4 1ar)ara Lee Diamonstein, Arc#itectural Press4
55 Li &he 1uc= and the
1ecorated /hed
Ro"ert 'ent,ri
T/e D,c* and t/e Decorated S/ed
Let us ela)orate on t#e decorated s#ed )% com&aring Paul Rudol&#0s Craw/ord Manor wit# our 2uild House @in association wit# Co&e and Li&&incottA4 T#ese two )uildings are com&ara)le in
use, siGe, and date o/ construction6 1ot# are #ig#-rise a&artments /or t#e elderl%, consisting o/ a)out ninet% units, )uilt in t#e mid-*+?9s4 T#eir settings -ar%6 2uild House, alt#oug#
/reestanding, is a si(-stor%, imitation &alaGGo, analogous in structure and materials to t#e surrounding )uildings and continuing, t#roug# its &osition and /orm, t#e street line o/ t#e P#iladel&#ia
gridiron &lan it sits in4 Craw/ord Manor, on t#e ot#er #and, is uneKui-ocall% a soaring tower, uniKue in its Modern, Jille Radieuse world along ew Ha-en0s limited-access, Oa! Street
Connector4
1ut it is t#e contrast in t#e ima%es o/ t#ese )uildings in relation to t#eir s%stems o/ construction t#at we want to em&#asiGe4 T#e s%stem o/ construction and &rogram o/ 2uild
House are ordinar% and con-entional and loo! itN t#e s%stem o/ construction and &rogram o/ Craw/ord Manor are ordinar% and con-entional )ut do not loo! it4
Let us interIect #ere t#at we c#ose Craw/ord Manor /or t#is com&arison not )ecause o/ an% &articular antagonism toward t#at )uilding4 ;t is, in /act, a s!ill/ul )uilding )% a s!ill/ul arc#itect,
and we could easil% #a-e c#osen a muc# more e(treme -ersion o/ w#at we are criticiGing4 1ut in general we c#ose it )ecause it can re&resent esta)lis#ment arc#itecture now @t#at is, it re&resents
t#e great maIorit% o/ w#at %ou see toda% in an% arc#itecture IournalA, and in &articular )ecause it Corres&onds in /undamental wa%s wit# 2uild House4 On t#e ot#er #and, our c#oosing 2uild
House /or com&arison in-ol-es a disad-antage, )ecause t#at )uilding is now /i-e %ears old, and some o/ our later wor! can more e(&licitl% and -i-idl% con-e% our current ideas4 Last, &lease do
not criticiGe us /or &rimaril%
$rom Jenturi, R4, Scott-1rown, P4 and ;Genour, S4, 6earnin% from 6as Ve%as5 ;nstitute o/ Tec#nolog%, Cam)ridge, MA, *+<5, &&4 ?>HE, <9H*, <,H=, E,H=, E?H<, *9?4
2B$
2B@ Ro"ert 'ent,ri ,he <uck and the <ecorated -hed
anal%Ging image6 .e are doing so sim&l% )ecause image is &ertinent to our argument, not )ecause we wis# to den% an interest in or t#e im&ortance o/ &rocess, &rogram, and structure or, indeed,
social issues in arc#itecture or in t#ese twoA )uildings4 Along wit# most arc#itects, we &ro)a)l% s&end +9 &ercent o/ our design time on t#ese ot#er im&ortant su)Iects and less t#an *9 &ercent on
t#e Kuestions (-e are addressing #ereN t#e% are merel% not t#e direct su)Iect o/ t#is inKuir%4
To continue our com&arisons, t#e construction o/ 2uild House is &oured-in-&lace concrete &late wit# curtain walls, &ierced )% dou)le-#ung windows and enclosing t#e interior s&ace
to ma!e rooms4 T#e material is common )ric! H dar!er t#an usual to matc# t#e smog-smudged )ric! o/ t#e neig#)or#ood4 T#e mec#anical s%stems o/ 2uild House are now#ere mani/est in t#e
outside /orms4 T#e t%&ical /loor &lan contains a *+59s-a&artment-#ouse -ariet% o/ units to accommodate &articular needs, -iews, and e(&osuresN t#is distorts t#e e//icient grid o/ columns4 T#e
structure o/ Craw/ord Manor, w#ic# is &oured-in-&lace concrete wit# concrete )loc! /aced wit# a striated &attern, is li!ewise a con-entional /rame su&&orting laid-u& masonr%
walls4 1ut it does not loo! it4 ;t loo!s more ad-anced tec#nologicall% and more &rogressi-e s&atiall%4 ;t loo!s as i/ its su&&orts are s&atial, &er#a&s mec#anical-#ar)oring s#a/ts made o/ a
continuous &lastic material reminiscent o/ b;ton brut wit# t#e striated mar!s o/ -iolentl% #eroic construction &rocess em)ossed in t#eir /orm4 T#e% articulate t#e /lowing interior s&ace, t#eir
structural &urit% ne-er &unctured )% #oles /or windows or distorted )% e(ce&tions in t#e &lan4 ;nterior lig#t is Fmodulated0 )% t#e -oids )etween t#e structure and t#e F/loating0 cantile-ered
)alconies4
T#e arc#itectural elements /or su&&l%ing e(terior lig#t in 2uild House are /ran!l% windows4 .e relied on t#e con-entional met#od o/ doing windows in a )uilding, and we )% no means
t#oug#t t#roug# /rom t#e )eginning t#e su)Iect o/ e(terior lig#t modulation )ut started w#ere someone else #ad le/t o// )e/ore us4 T#e windows loo! /amiliarN t#e% look like5 as well as are5
windows, and in t#is res&ect t#eir use is e(&licitl% s%m)olic4 1ut li!e all e//ecti-e s%m)olic images, t#e% are intended to loo! /amiliar and un/amiliar4 T#e% are t#e con-entional element used
slig#tl% uncon-entionall%4 Li!e t#e su)Iect matter o/ Po& Art, t#e% are common&lace elements made uncommon t#roug# distortion in s#a&e @slig#tA, c#ange in scale @t#e% are muc# )igger t#an
normal dou)le-#ung windowsA, and c#ange in conte(t @dou)le-#ung windows in a &er#a&s #ig#-/as#ion )uildingA4
Orna#ent: Sins and Sy#"o.sD Denotation and
)onnotationD !era.dry and P/ysiono#yD Meanin
and E20ression
A sign on a )uilding carries a denotati-e meaning in t#e e(&licit message o/ its letters and words4 ;t contrasts wit# t#e connotati-e e(&ression o/ t#e ot#er, more arc#itectural elements o/ t#e
)uilding4 A )ig sign, li!e t#at o-er tiR entrance o/ 2uild House, )ig enoug# to )e read /rom &assing cars on S&riiO? 2arden Street, is
2BB
&articularl% ugl% and ordinar% in its e(&licit commercial associations4 ;t is signi/icant t#at t#e sign /or Craw/ord Manor is modest, taste/ul, and not commercial4 ;t is too small to )e seen /rom
/ast-mo-ing cars on t#e Oa! Street Connector4 1ut signs as e(&licit s%m)ols, es&eciall% )ig, commercial-loo!ing signs, are anat#ema in arc#itecture suc# as Craw/ord Manor4 ;ts identi/ication
comes, not t#roug# e(&licit, denotati-e communication, t#roug# literall% s&elling out F; am 2uild House0, )ut t#roug# t#e connotation im&licit in t#e &#%siognom% o/ its &ure arc#itectural /orm,
w#ic# is intended to e(&ress in some wa% #ousing /or t#e elderl%4
.e #a-e )orrowed t#e sim&le literar% distinctions )etween Fdenotati-e0 and Fconnotati-e0 meanings and a&&lied t#em to t#e #eraldic and &#%siognomic element in arc#itecture4 To clari/%
/urt#er, t#e sign sa%ing 28;LD HO8SE denotes meaning t#roug# its wordsN as suc#, it is t#e #eraldic element par e=cellence. T#e c#aracter o/ t#e gra&#ics, #owe-er, connotes
institutional dignit%, w#ile contradictoril%, t#e siGe o/ t#e gra&#ics connotes commercialism4 T#e &osition o/ t#e sign &er#a&s also connotes entering4 T#e w#ite-glaGed )ric! denotes
decoration as a uniKue and ric# a&&liKuL on t#e normal red )ric!4 T#roug# t#e location o/ t#e w#ite areas and stri&es on t#e /aMade, we #a-e tried connotati.ely to suggest /loor le-els
associated wit# &alaces and t#ere)% &alaceli!e scale and monumentalit%4 T#e dou)le-#ung windows denote t#eir /unction, )ut t#eir grou&ing connotes domesticit% and ordinar% meanings4
Denotation indicates s&eci/ic meaningN connotation suggests general meanings4 T#e same element can #a-e )ot# denotati-e and connotati-e meanings, and t#ese ma% )e mutuall%
contradictor%4 2enerall%, to t#e e(tent t#at it is denotati-e in its meaning, an element de&ends on its #eraldic c#aracteristicsN to t#e e(tent t#at Ot is connotati-e, an element de&ends on its
&#%siognomic Kualities4 Modern arc#itecture, and Craw/ord Manor as its e(em&lar, #as tended to s#un t#e #eraldic and denotati-e in arc#itecture and to e(aggerate t#e &#%siognomic and
connotati-e4 Modern arc#itecture uses e(&ressi-e ornament and s#uns @e(&licitA s%m)olic Ornament
V4 4
!eroic and Oriina.D or 3.y and Ordinary
T#e content o/ Craw/ord Manor0s im&licit s%m)olism is w#at we call F#eroic and original04 Alt#oug# t#e su)stance is con-entional and ordinar%, t#e image is #eroic and original4 T#e content o/
t#e e(&licit s%m)olism o/ 2uild House is w#at we call Fugl% and ordinar%04 T#e tec#nologicall% unad-anced )ric!, t#e old-/as#ioned, dou)leO#ung windows, t#e &rett% materials around t#e
entrance, and t#e ugl% antenna not #idden )e#ind t#e &ara&et in t#e acce&ted /as#ion, all are distinctl% Con-entional in image as well as su)stance or, rat#er, ugl% and ordinar%4 @T#e ine-ita)le
&lastic /lowers at #ome in t#ese windows are, rat#er, pretty and ordinar%N t#e% do not ma!e t#is arc#itecture loo! sill% as t#e% would, we t#in!, t#e #eroic and Original windows o/
Craw/ord Manor4A
899 Ro"ert 'ent,ri ,he <uck and the <ecorated -hed
1ut in 2uild House, t#e s%m)olism o/ t#e ordinar% goes /urt#er t#an t#is4 T#e &retensions o/ t#e Fgiant order0 on t#e /ront, t#e s%mmetrical, &alaGGoli!e com&osition wit# its t#ree
monumental stories @as well as its si( real storiesA, to&&ed )% a &iece o/ scul&ture H or almost scul&ture H suggest somet#ing o/ t#e #eroic and original4 ;t is true t#at in t#is case t#e #eroic
and original /aMade is somew#at ironical, )ut it is t#is Iu(ta&osition o/ contrasting s%m)ols H t#e a&&liKuL o/ one order o/ s%m)ols on anot#er H t#at constitutes /or us t#e decorated s#ed4
T#is is w#at ma!es 2uild House an arc#itect0s decorated s#ed H not arc#itecture wit#out arc#itects4
T#e &urest decorated s#ed would )e some /orm o/ con-entional s%stems-)uilding s#elter t#at corres&onds closel% to t#e s&ace, structure, and &rogram reKuirements o/ t#e
arc#itecture, and u&on w#ic# is laid a contrasting H and i/ in t#e nature o/ t#e circumstances, contradictor% H decoration4 ;n 2uild House t#e ornamental-s%m)olic elements are
more or less literall% a&&liKuL6 T#e &lanes and stri&es o/ w#ite )ric! are a&&liKuLN t#e street /aMade t#roug# its disengagement at t#e to& corners im&lies its se&aration /rom
t#e )ul! o/ t#e s#ed at t#e /ront4 @T#is Kualit% also im&lies continuit%, and t#ere/ore unit%, wit# t#e street line o/ /aMades o/ t#e ot#er older, non/reestanding )uildings on eac# side4A T#e
s%m)olism o/ t#e decoration #a&&ens to )e ugl% and ordinar% wit# a das# o/ ironic #eroic and original, and t#e s#ed is straig#t ugl% and ordinar%, t#oug# in its )ric! and windows it is s%m)olic
too4 Alt#oug# t#ere is am&le #istorical &recedent /or t#e decorated s#ed, &resent-da% roadside commercial arc#itecture H t#e e*9,999 stand wit# t#e e*99,999 sign H was t#e
immediate &rotot%&e o/ our decorated s#ed4 And it is in t#e sign o/ 2uild House t#at t#e &urest mani/estation o/ t#e decorated s#ed and t#e most -i-id contrast wit# Craw/ord Manor
lies4
Decoration on t/e S/ed
2uild House #as ornament on itN Craw/ord Manor does not4 T#e ornament on 2uild House is e(&licit4 ;t )ot# rein/orces and contradicts t#e /orm o/ t#e )uilding it adorns4 And it is to some
e(tent s%m)olic4 T#e continuous stri&e o/ w#ite-glaGed )ric! #ig# on t#e /aMade, in com)ination wit# t#e &lane o/ w#ite-glaGed )ric! )elow, di-ides t#e )uilding into t#ree une-en stories6
)asement, &rinci&al stor%, and attic4 ;t contradicts t#e scale o/ t#e si( real and eKual /loors on w#ic# it is im&osed and suggests t#e &ro&ortions o/ a Renaissance &alace4 T#e central w#ite
&anel also en#ances t#e /ocus and scale o/ t#e entrance4 ;t e(tends t#e ground /loor to t#e to& o/ t#e )alcon% o/ t#e second /loor in t#e wa%, and /or t#e same reasons, t#at t#e
increased ela)oration and scale around t#e door o/ a Renaissance &alace or 2ot#ic &ortal does4 T#e e(ce&tional and /at column in an ot#erwise /lat wall sur/ace increases t#e /ocus o/ t#e
entrance, and t#e lu(urious granite and glaGed )ric! en#ance t#e amenit% t#ere, as does t#e -eined mar)le t#at de-elo&ers a&&l% at street le-el to ma!e t#eir a&artment entrances more class% and
renta)le At t#e same time, t#e column0s &osition in t#e middle o/ t#e entrance diminis#@44 its im&ortance4
891
T#e arc#ed window in 2uild House is not structural4 8nli!e t#e more &urel% ornamental elements in t#is )uilding, it re/lects an interior /unction o/ t#e s#ed, t#at is, t#e common acti-ities at
t#e to&4 1ut t#e )ig common room itsel/ is an e(ce&tion to t#e s%stem inside4 On t#e /ront ele-ation, an arc# sits a)o-e a central -ertical stri&e o/ )alcon% -oids, w#ose )ase is t#e ornamental
entrance4 Arc#, )alconies, and )ase toget#er uni/% t#e /aMade and, li!e a giant order @or classic Iu!e)o( /rontA, undermine t#e si( stories to increase t#e scale and monumentalit% o/ t#e /ront4 ;n
turn, t#e giant order is to&&ed )% a /louris#, an unconnected, s%mmetrical tele-ision antenna in gold anodiGed aluminium, w#ic# is )ot# an imitation o/ an a)stract Li&&old scul&ture and a
s%m)ol /or t#e elderl%4 An o&en-armed, &ol%c#romatic, &laster madonna in t#is &osition would #a-e )een more image/ul )ut unsuita)le /or a Cua!er institution t#at esc#ews all outward
s%m)ols Has do Craw/ord Manor and most ort#odo( modern arc#itecture t#at reIect ornament and association in t#e &erce&tion o/ /orms4
<. 4
7istorical and 2ther &recedents: ,owards an old
architecture
!istorica. Sy#"o.is# and Modern Arc/itect,re
T#e /orms o/ modern arc#itecture #a-e )een created )% arc#itects and anal%Ged )% critics largel% in terms o/ t#eir &erce&tual Kualities and at t#e e(&ense o/ t#eir s%m)olic meanings
deri-ed /rom association4 To t#e e(tent t#at t#e Moderns recogniGe t#e s%stems o/ s%m)ols t#at &er-ade our en-ironment, t#e% o/ten re/er to t#e de)asement o/ our s%m)ols4 Alt#oug# largel%
/orgotten )% Modern arc#itects, t#e #istorical &recedent /or s%m)olism in arc#itecture e(ists, and t#e com&le(ities o/ iconogra&#% #a-e continued to )e a maIor &art o/ t#e disci&line o/ art
#istor%4 Earl% Modern arc#itects scorned recollection in arc#itecture4 T#e% reIected eclecticism and st%le as elements o/ arc#itecture as well as an% #istoricism t#at minimiGed t#e
re-olutionar% o-er t#e e-olutionar% c#aracter o/ t#eir almost e(clusi-el% tec#nolog%-)ased arc#itecture4 A second generation o/ Modern arc#itects ac!nowledged onl% t#e Fconstituent /acts0 o/
#istor%, as e(tracted )% Sig/ried 2iedion, w#o a)stracted t#e #istorical )uilding and its &iaGGa as &ure /orm and s&ace in lig#t4 T#ese arc#itects0 &reoccu&ation wit# s&ace as the arc#itectural
Kualit% caused t#em to read t#e )uildings as /orms, t#e &iaGGas as s&ace, and t#e gra&#ics and scul&ture as color, te(ture, and scale4 T#e ensem)le )ecame an a)stract e(&ression in arc#itecture in
t#e decade o/ a)stract e(&ressionism in Painting4 T#e iconogra&#ic /orms and tra&&ings o/ medie-al and Renaissance arc#itecture were reduced to &ol%c#romatic te(ture at t#e ser-ice o/ s&aceN
t#e S%m)olic com&le(ities and contradictions o/ Mannerist arc#itecture were
892 Ro"ert 'ent,ri
,he <uck and the <ecorated -hed
a&&reciated /or t#eir /ormal com&le(ities and contradictionsN neo-Classical arc#itecture was li!ed, not /or its Romantic use o/ association, )ut /or its /ormal sim&licit%4 Arc#itects li!ed t#e backs
o/ nineteent#-centur% railroad stations >literall% t#e s#eds H and tolerated t#e /ronts as irrele-ant, i/ amusing, a)errations o/ #istorical eclecticism4 T#e well-de-elo&ed s%m)ol s%stems )% t#e
commercial artists o/ Madison A-enue t#at constitute t#e s%m)olic am)ience o/ ur)an s&rawl, t#e% did not ac!nowledge4
;n t#e *+>9s and *+?9s, t#ese FA)stract E(&ressionists0 o/ Modern arc#itecture ac!nowledged one dimension o/ t#e )ill townH&iaGGa com&le(6 its F&edestrian scale0 and t#e Fur)an li/e0
engendered )% its arc#itecture4 T#is -iew o/ medie-al ur)anism encouraged t#e megastructural @or megascul&turalDA /antasies H in t#is conte(t #ill towns wit# tec#nological trimmings H and
rein/orced t#e anti-automo)ile )ias o/ t#e modern arc#itect4 1ut t#e com&etition o/ signs and s%m)ols in t#e medie-al cit% at -arious le-els o/ &erce&tion and meaning in )ot# )uilding and
&iaGGa was lost on t#e s&ace-oriented arc#itect4 Per#a&s t#e s%m)ols, )esides )eing /oreign in content, were at a scale and a degree o/ com&le(it% too su)tle /or toda%0s )ruised sensi)ilities and
im&atient &ace4 T#is e(&lains, &er#a&s, t#e ironical /act t#at t#e return to iconogra&#% /or some o/ us arc#itects o/ t#at generation was -ia t#e sensi)ilities o/ t#e Po& artists o/ t#e earl% *+?9s and
-ia t#e duc! and t#e decorated s#ed on Route ??6 /rom Rome to Las Jegas, )ut also )ac! again /rom Las Jegas to Rome4
T/e )at/edra. as D,c* and S/ed
;n iconogra&#ic terms, t#e cat#edral is a decorated s#ed and a duc!4 T#e late 1%Gantine Metro&ole Cat#edral in At#ens is a)surd as a &iece o/ arc#itecture4 ;t iS Fout o/ scale06 ;ts small
siGe does not corres&ond to its com&le( /orm H t#at is, i/ /orni must )e determined &rimaril% )% structure H )ecause t#e s&ace t#at t#e sKuare room encloses could )e s&anned wit#out t#e interior
su&&orts and t#e com&le( roo/ con/iguration o/ dome, drum, and -aults4 Howe-er, it is not a)surd as a duc! H as a domed, 2ree! cross, e-ol-ed structurall% /rom large )uildings in greater cities,
)ut de-elo&ed s%m)olicall% #ere to mean cat#edral4 And t#is duc! is itsel/ decorated wit# an a&&liKuL collage o/ ob9ets trou.;s H #as-relie/s in masonr% H more or less e(&licitl% s%m)olic in
content4
Amiens is a )ill)oard wit# a )uilding )e#ind it4 2ot#ic cat#edrals #a-e )een considered wea! in t#at t#e% did not ac#ie-e an Forganic unit%0 )etween /ront and side4 1ut t#is disIunction is a
natural re/lection o/ an in#erent contradiction in 3 com&le( )uilding t#at, toward t#e cat#edral sKuare, is a relati-el% two-dimensional screen /or &ro&aganda and, in )ac!, is a masonr% s%stems
)uilding4 T#is is t#e re/lection o/ a contradiction )etween image and /unction t#at t#e decorated s#ed o/ten accommodates4 @T#e s#ed )e#ind is also a duc! )ecaus its s#a&e is t#at o/ a
cross4A
898
T#e /aMades o/ t#e great cat#edrals o/ t#e 3le-de-$rance are two-dimensional &lanes at t#e scale o/ t#e w#oleN t#e% were to e-ol-e at t#e to& corners into towers to connect wit# t#e
surrounding countr%side4 1ut in detail t#ese /aMades are )uildings in t#emsel-es, simulating an arc#itecture o/ s&ace in t#e strongl%0 t#ree-dimensional relie/ o/ t#eir scul&ture4 T#e nic#es /or
statues H as Sir 3o#n Summerson #as &ointed out H are %et anot#er le-el o/ arc#itecture wit#in arc#itecture4 1ut t#e im&act o/ t#e /aMade comes /rom t#e immensel% com&le( meaning deri-ed
/rom t#e s%m)olism and e(&licit associations o/ t#e aedicules and t#eir statues and /rom t#eir relati-e &ositions and siGes in t#e #ierarc#ic order o/ t#e !ingdom o/ #ea-en on t#e /aMades4 ;n t#is
orc#estration o/ messages, connotation as &racticed )% modern arc#itects is scarcel% im&ortant4 T#e s#a&e o/ t#e /aMade, in /act, disguises t#e si#ouette o/ na-e and aisles )e#ind, and t#e doors
and t#e rose windows are t#e )arest re/lections o/ t#e arc#itectural com&le( inside4
V4 4
3r"an S0ra1. and t/e Meastr,ct,re
T#e ur)an mani/estations o/ ugl% and ordinar% arc#itecture and t#e decorated s#ed are closer to ur)an s&rawl t#an to t#e megastructure4 .e #a-e e(&lained #ow, /or us, commercial -ernacular
arc#itecture was a -i-id initial source /or s%m)olism in arc#itecture4 .e #a-e descri)ed in t#e Las Jegas stud% t#e -ictor% o/ s%m)ols-in-S&ace o-er /orms-in-s&ace in t#e )rutal automo)ile
landsca&e o/ great distances and #ig# s&eed, w#ere t#e su)tleties o/ &ure arc#itectural s&ace can no longer )e sa-ored4 1ut t#e s%m)olism o/ ur)an s&rawl lies also in its residential arc#itecture,
not onl% in t#e strident, roadside communications o/ t#e commercial stri& @decorated s#ed or duc!A4 Alt#oug# t#e ranc# #ouse, s&lit le-el or ot#erwise, Con/orms in its s&atial con/iguration to
se-eral set &atterns, it is a&&liKuLd wit# -aried t#oug# con/orming ornament, e-o!ing com)inations o/ Colonial, ew Orleans, Regenc%, .estern, $renc# Pro-incial, Modern, and ot#er st%les4
2arden a&artments H es&eciall% t#ose o/ t#e Sout#west H eKuall% are decorated s#eds w#ose &edestrian courts, li!e t#ose o/ motels, are se&arate /rom, )ut close to, t#e automo)ile A com&arison
o/ ur)an s&rawl wit# t#e megastructure is made in Ta)le 554*4
S&rawl cit%0s image is a result o/ &rocess4 ;n t#is res&ect it /ollows t#e canons o/ Modern arc#itecture t#at reKuire /orm to result /rom /unction, structure, and Construction met#ods, t#at is,
/rom t#e &rocesses o/ its ma!ing4 1ut /or our time t#e megastructure is a distortion o/ normal cit% )uilding &rocess /or t#e sa!e inte5r a/ia of image4 Modern arc#itects contradict t#emsel-es
w#en t#e% su&&ort /8nctionalism and t#e megastructure4 T#e% do not recogniGe t#e image o/ t#e
Ta".e 22C1 Com&arison o/ 8r)an S&rawl wit# Megastructure
0rban -prawl
8gl% and ordinar%
De&ends on e(&licit s%m)olism
S%m)ols in s&ace
;mage
Mi(ed media
(e%astructure
Heroic and original
ReIects e(&licit s%m)olism
&rocess cit% w#en t#e% see it on t#e Stri&, )ecause it is )ot# too /amiliar and too di//erent /rom w#at t#e% #a-e )een trained to acce&t4
V4 4
$orms in s&ace
$orm
3.y and Ordinary as Sy#"o. and Sty.e
Pure arc#itecture
1ig signs designed )% commercial artists
Auto en-ironment
Cars
Ta!es t#e &ar!ing lot seriousl% and &astic#es t#e &edestrian
Disne%land
Promoted )% salesmen
$easi)le and )eing )uilt
Po&ular li/e-st%le
Historical st%les
8ses t%&ological models
Process cit%
1roadacre Cit%
Loo!s aw/ul
Arc#itects don0t li!e Twentiet#-centur% communication tec#nolog%
Social realism
E(&edience
E(&edient
Am)iguous ur)an image
Jital mess
1uilding /or men @mar!etsA
T#is %ear0s &ro)lems
Little signs @and onl% i/ a)solutel% necessar%A designed )% Fgra&#ic artists0
Post- and &re-auto en-ironment
Pu)lic trans&ortation
FStraig#t0 arc#itecture wit# serious )ut egocentric aims /or t#e &edestrianN it irres&onsi)l% ignores or tries to F&iaGGa/%0 t#e &ar!ing lot
PiaGGas
Promoted )% e(&erts
Tec#nologicall% /easi)le &er#a&s, )ut sociall% and economicall% un/easi)le
FCorrect0 li/e-st%le
Modern st%le
8ses original creations
;nstant cit%
Jille Radieuse
Ma!es a nice model
Arc#itects li!e
ineteent#-centur% industrial -ision
Science /iction
Tec#nological indulgence
Jisionar%
Traditional ur)an image
FTotal Design0 @and design re-iew )oardsA
1uilding /or Man
T#e old arc#itectural re-olution
T#e image o/ t#e middle-class intelligentsia
Heterogeneous images
T#e di//icult image T#e eas% image
T#e di//icult w#ole T#e eas% w#ole
Artisticall%, t#e use o/ con-entional elements in ordinar% arc#itecture H )e t#e% dum) door!no)s or t#e /amiliar /orms o/ e(isting construction s%stems H e-o!es associations /rom &ast
e(&erience4 Suc# elements ma% )e care/ull% c#osen or t#oug#t/ull% ada&ted /rom e(isting -oca)ularies or standard catalogs rat#er t#an uniKuel% created -ia original data and
artistic intuition4 To design a window, /or instance, %ou start not onl% wit# t#e a)stract /unction o/ modulating diurnal lig#t ra%s to ser-e interior s&ace )ut wit# t#e image o/
window H o/ all t#e windows %ou !now &lus ot#ers %ou /ind out a)out4 T#is a&&roac# is s%m)olicall% and /unctionall% con-entional, )ut it &romotes an arc#itecture o/ meaning,
)roader and ric#er i/ less dramatic t#an t#e arc#itecture o/ e(&ression4
.e #a-e s#own #ow #eroic and original @H\OA arc#itecture deri-es dramatic e(&ression /rom t#e connotati-e meanings o/ its Foriginal0 elements6 ;t gi-es o// a)stract meanings H or rat#er,
e(&ressions H recogniGa)le in t#e &#%siognomic c#aracter o/ t#e arc#itectural elements4 T#e ugl% and ordinar% @8\OA arc#itecture, on t#e ot#er #and, includes denotati-e meanings as well,
deri-ed /rom its /amiliar elementsN t#at is, it suggests more or less concrete meanings -ia association and &ast e(&erience4 T#e F)rutalism0 o/ an H\O /ire station comes /rom its roug# te(tureN
its ci-ic monumentalit% comes /rom its )ig scaleN t#e e(&ression o/ structure and &rogram and Ftrut# to materials0 comes /rom t#e &articular articulations o/ its /orms4 ;ts total image deri-es /rom
t#ese &urel% arc#itectural Kualities transmitted t#roug# a)stract /orms, te(tures, and colors, care/ull% com&osed4 T#e total image o/ our 8\O /ire #ouse H an image im&l%ing ci-ic c#aracter as
well as s&eci/ic use H comes /rom t#e con-entions o/ roadside arc#itecture t#at it /ollowsN /rom t#e decorated /alse /aMade, /rom t#e )analit% t#roug# /amiliarit% o/ t#e standard aluminum sas#
and roll-u& doors, and /rom t#e /lag&ole in /ront H not to mention t#e cons&icuous sign t#at identi/ies it t#roug# s&elling, t#e most denotati-e o/ s%m)ols6 $;RE STAT;O O4 =4 T#ese elements
act as s%m)ols as well as e(&ressi-e arc#itectural a)stractions4 T#e% are not merel% ordinar% )ut re&resent ordinariness s%m)olicall% and st%listicall%N t#e% are enric#ing as well, )ecause t#e%
add a la%er o/ literar% meaning4
Ric#ness can come /rom con-entional arc#itecture4 $or t#ree #undred %ears Euro&ean arc#itecture was -ariations on a Classical norm H a ric# con/ormit%4 1ut
can also come t#roug# an adIusting o/ t#e scale or conte(t o/ /amiliar and Con-entional elements to &roduce unusual meanings4 Po& artists used unusualC Iu(ta&ositions o/ e-er%da% o)Iects
in tense and -i-id &la%s )etween old and new associations to /lout t#e e-er%da% interde&endence o/ conte(t and meaning, gi-ing
,he <uck and the <ecorated -hed
89$
,he <uck and the <ecorated -hed 89=
89< Ro"ert 'ent,ri
us a new inter&retation o/ twentiet#-centur% cultural arti/acts4 T#e /amiliar t#at O a little o// #as a strange and re-ealing &ower4
T#e dou)le-#ung window in 2uild House is /amiliar in /orm )ut unusuall%0 large in siGe and #oriGontal in &ro&ortion, li!e t#e )ig, distorted Cam&)ell Sou& can in And% .ar#ol0s &ainting4
T#is t%&ical window is also Iu(ta&osed wit# a smaller window o/ t#e same /orm and &ro&ortion4 T#e e(act location o/ t#e )igger windo-, on a &arallel &lane )e#ind t#e smaller window tends to
distur) t#e #a)itual &erce&tion o/ distance t#roug# &ers&ecti-eN t#e resultant s%m)olic and o&tical tensions are, we maintain, a means o/ ma!ing )oring arc#itecture interesting Hmore -alid
means t#an t#e irrele-ant articulations o/ toda%0s strident )ut )oring minimegastructutes4
Aainst D,c*sD or 3.y and Ordinary o(er !eroic
and Oriina.D or T/in* Litt.e
.e s#ould not em&#asiGe t#e ironic ric#ness o/ )analit% in toda%0s artistic conte(t at t#e e(&ense o/ discussing its a&&ro&riateness and ine-ita)ilit% on a wider )asis4 .#% do we u&#old t#e
s%m)olism o/ t#e ordinar% -ia t#e decorated s#ed o-er t#e s%m)olism o/ t#e #eroic -ia t#e scul&tural duc!D 1ecause t#is is not t#e time and ours is not t#e en-ironment /or #eroic
communication t#roug# &ure arc#itecture4 Eac# medium #as its da%, and t#e r#etorical en-ironmental statements o/ our time
H ci-ic, commercial, or residential H will come /rom media more &urel% s%m)olic, &er#a&s less static and more ada&ta)le to t#e scale o/ our en-ironment4 T#e iconogra&#% and mi(ed media o/
roadside commercial arc#itecture will &oint t#e wa%, i/ we will loo!4
V4 4 4*
Si.ent->/ite-Ma%ority Arc/itect,re
Man% &eo&le li!e su)ur)ia4 T#is is t#e com&elling reason /or learning /rom Le-ittown4 T#e ultimate iron% is t#at alt#oug# Modern arc#itecture /rom t#e start #as claimed a strong social )asis
/or its &#iloso&#%, Modern arc#itects #a-e wor!ed to !ee& /ormal and social concerns se&arate rat#er t#an toget#er4 ;n dismissiiig Le-ittown, Modern arc#itects, w#o #a-e
c#aracteristicall% &romoted t#e role o/ t#e social sciences in arc#itecture, reIect w#ole sets o/ dominant social &atterns )ecause t#e% do not li!e t#e arc#itectural conseKuences o/ t#ese &atterns4
Con-ersel%, )% de/ining Le-ittown as Fsilent-w#ite-maIorit%0 arc#itecture, t#e% reIect it again )ecause t#e% do not li!e w#at t#e% )elie-e to )e t#e silent w#ite maIorit%0s &olitical -iews4 T#ese
arc#itects reIect t#e -er% #eterogeneit% o/ our societ% t#at ma!es t#e social sciences rele-ant to arc#itecture in t#e /irst &lace4 As E(&e0ts wit# ;deals, w#o &a% li& ser-ice to t#e social sciences,
t#e% )uild /or Man rat#cO t#an /or men H t#is
means, to suit t#emsel-es, t#at is, to suit t#eir own &articular u&&er-middle-class -alues, w#ic# t#e% assign to all man!ind4 Most su)ur)anites reIect t#e limited /ormal -ocalGOularies arc#itects0
-alues &romote, or acce&t t#em twent% %ears later modi/ied )% /#e tract )uilder6 T#e 8sonian #ouse )ecomes t#e ranc# #ouse4 Onl%0 t#e -er% &ooiO -ia &u)lic #ousing, are dominated )%
arc#itects0 -alues4 De-elo&ers )uild /or mar!ets rat#er t#an /or Man and &ro)a)l% do less #arm t#an aut#oritarian arc#itects wculd do i/ t#e% #ad t#e de-elo&ers0 &ower4
One does not #a-e to agree wit# #ard-#at &olitics to su&&ort t#e rig#ts o/ t#e middleOmiddle class to t#eir own arc#itectural aest#etics, and we #a-e /ound t#at Le-ittownOt%Pe aest#etics are
s#ared )% most meiii)ers o/ t#e middle-middle class, )lac! as well as w#ite, li)eral as well as conser-ati-e4 ;/ anal%Ging su)ur)ia0s arc#itecture im&lies t#at one #as let t#e i(on regime
F&enetrate e-en t#e /ield o/ arc#itectural criticism0,
5
t#en t#e /ield o/ ur)an &lanning #as )een in/iltrated )%0 i(onites /oi more t#an ten %ears H )% A)rams, 2ans, .e))er, D%c!man, and
Da-ido//4 $oi our critiKue is not#ing newN t#e social &lanners #a-e )een ma!ing it /or more t#a9 a decade4 1ut in t#is i(on-silent-maIorit% critiKue, es&eciall%0 in its arc#itectural, as o&&osed to
its racial and militar%, dimensions, t#ere is a /ine line )etween li)eialism and old-/as#ioned class sno))er%4
Anot#er 9&-ious &oint is t#at F-isual &ollution0 @usuall% someone else0s #ouse or )usinessA is n&t t#e same order o/ &#enomenon as air and water &ollution4 You can li!e )ill)oards wit#out
a&&ro-ing o/ stri& mining in A&&alac#ia4 T#ere is no Fgood0 wa% to &ollute land, air, or water4 S&rawl and stri& we can learn to do well4 Howe-er, 6ife magaGine, in an editorial entitled FErasing
grown-u& -andalism0, eKuates su)ur)an s&rawl, )ill)oards, wires, and gasoline stations wit# t#e stri& mining t#at lOa> des&oiled too muc# o/ t#e countr%4
,
FJisual &ollution0 seems to ins&ire
edito/ial writers and &#otogra&#ers, w#o -iew it wit# alarm, to &oetic descri&tions C/ it in t#e manner o/ Milton and DorL4 T#eir st%le is o/ten in direct con/lict wit# t#eir o&&ro)rium4 ;/ it is all
)ad, w#% is it so ins&iringD
Notes
*4 Sig/ried 2iOdion, -pace5 ,ime and Architecture5 Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge4 MA, *+==, Part ;4
54 8lric# $ranGen, &ro%ressi.e Architecture5 Letter to t#e Editor, A&ril *+<94 E4
,4 6ife5 + A&ril *+<*, ,=4 6ife1s own language is more gra&#ic4
5, Li Postmodern
Pao.o Porto/esi
A Ne1 Renaissance
Soroaster wants to lose not#ing o/ #umanit%0s &ast, and wants
to t#row e-er%t#ing into t#e cruci)le4 @iETSsCHEA
During t#e last decade, t#e adIecti-e &ostmodern #as made a Iourne% o/ -ar%ing success t#roug# t#e #umanistic disci&lines4 8sed s%stematicall% /or t#e /irst time in *+<* )% ;#a) Hassan in
relation to literature, it t#en made its wa% into t#e social sciences, into semiolog% and &#iloso&#%4 ;n arc#itecture, t#e adIecti-e &ostmodern /ound /ertile cultural ground, &riming a &rocess w#ic#
started out /rom criticism and #istoriogra&#%, and /inall% )ecame t#e uni/%ing la)el o/ a series o/ trends, t#eoretical &ro&ositions and concrete e(&eriences4
;t is wort# our w#ile toda% to re/lect u&on t#e un/oreseea)le /ortune o/ t#is word in arc#itecture, in order to tr% to clear u& man% misunderstandings, and to esta)lis# Iust #ow use/ul it can )e
in relating &arallel &#enomena ta!ing &lace in -er% di//erent areas4 ;n t#e /ield o/ arc#itecture, t#e term #as )een used to designate a &luralit% o/ tendencies directed toward an esca&e /rom t#e
crisis o/ t#e Modern Mo-ement wit# a radical re/usal o/ its logic o/ de-elo&ment4 ;n t#e last se-eral decades, t#is de-elo&ment #ad led to a c#aotic la)%rint#, or to t#e anac#ronistic attem&t to
restore t#e ort#odo(% o/ t#e golden age o/ /unctionalism6 t#e age, o/ course, o/ t#e 1au#aus and ClAM4
T#e &ostmodern #as signalled, t#ere/ore, t#e wa% out o/ a mo-ement t#at #ad /or some time sto&&ed Fmo-ing a#ead0, t#at #ad trans/ormed itsel/ into a gaud% )aGaar o/ in-entions moti-ated
onl% )% &ersonal am)ition and )% t#e ali)i o/ tec#nological e(&erimentation4 T#e critics w#o /irst &ut into /ocus t#e -ast and contradictor% &#enomenon o/ an e(it /rom ort#odo(% tried to control
it )% &utting it into
$rom Portog#esi, P4, &ostmodern5 RiGGoli ;nternational Pu)lications ;nc4, ew Yor!, *+E,, &&4 *9H*,, ?E, <94
89@
&ostmnodern 89B
traditional categories4 T#e% also tried to sim&li/% it and ma!e it more com&re#ensi)leN )ut in t#e end, t#e neutralit%0 o/ a word li!e &ostmodern is tantamount to an a)surd de/inition
)ased on di//erence more t#an on identit%4 .it# regard to didactic sim&li/ication, t#e same critics /inall% surrendered to &luralism and com&le(it%4
C#arles 3enc!s, t#e most a)le o/ t#e announcers o/ t#is new s#ow, &ro&osed t#at its s&eci/icit% can in /act )e gras&ed, since it is t#e &roduct o/ arc#itects &articularl% mind/ul o/ t#e
as&ects o/ arc#itecture understood as a language, as a means o/ communicatiOn6
A Postmodern )uilding is, i/ a s#ort de/inition is needed, one w#ic# s&ea!s on at least two le-els at once6 to ot#er arc#itects and a concerned minorit% w#o care a)out s&eci/icall%
arc#itectural meanings, and to t#e &u)lic at large, or t#e local in#a)itants, w#o care a)out ot#er issues concerned wit# com/ort, traditional )uilding and a wa% o/ li/e4 T#us
Postmodern arc#itecture loo!s #%)rid and, i/ a -isual de/inition is needed, rat#er li!e t#e /ront o/ a classic 2ree! tem&le4 T#e latter is a geometric arc#itecture o/ elegantl% /luted
columns )elow, and a riotous )ill)oard o/ struggling giants a)o-e, a &ediment &ainted in dee& reds and )lues4 T#e arc#itects can read t#e im&licit meta&#ors and su)tle meanings
o/ t#e column drums, w#ereas t#e &u)lic can res&ond toA t#e e(&licit meta&#ors and messages o/ t#e scul&tors4 O/ course e-er%one res&onds somew#at to )ot# codes o/ meaning,
as t#e% do in a Postmodern )uilding, #ut certainl% wit# di//erent intensit% and understanding, and it is t#is discontinuit% in taste cultures w#ic# creates )ot# t#e t#eoretical )ase and
Fdual-coding0 o/ Postmodernism4 @$rom C#arles 3enc!s, ,he 6an%ua%e of &ost-(odern Architecture5 London, Academ% Editions, *+<<A
T#is de/inition certainl% co-ers t#e uni/%ing as&ect o/ man% o/ t#e most signi/icant wor!s realiGed in t#e last decade w#ic# #a-e o-ercome t#e ideological crisis o/ t#e Modern
Mo-ement4 ;t /ails, #owe-er, to satis/% t#e #istorical need o/ relating t#e s#i/t carried out )% arc#itectural culture to t#e &ro/ound c#anges in societ%, and ris!s con/ining t#e
&#enomenon to an area com&letel% wit#in t#e &ri-ate realm o/ t#e arc#itect, t#ere/ore remaining more a &s%c#ological t#an a #istorical-critical de/inition ;t is more correct, in m%
-iew, to tr% to get to t#e s&eci/icit% o/ t#e &#enomenon )% re-ealing t#e su)stantial di//erences wit# modernit%, /rom w#ic# it wis#es to distinguis# itsel/, in w#at are its most t%&ical
as&ects4 And since modernit% Coincides in .estern arc#itectural culture wit# t#e &rogressi-e rigorous detac#ment /rom e-er%t#ing traditional, it s#ould )e &ointed out t#at, in t#e
/ield o/ arc#itecture, t#e &ostmodern means t#at e(&licit, conscious a)olition o/ t#e dam care/ull% )uilt around t#e &ure language ela)orated in .itro on t#e )asis o/ t#e rationalist
statute4 T#i> language is &ut into contact again wit# t#e uni-erse o/ t#e arc#itectural de)ate, .it# t#e entire #istorical series o/ its &ast e(&eriences, wit# no more distinctions )etween
t#e &eriods )e/ore or a/ter t#e /irst industrial re-olution4 .it# t#e )arrier
;
torn down, old and new waters #a-e mi(ed toget#er4 T#e resulting &roduct is )e/og Our e%es, &arado(ical and am)iguous )ut -ital, a &re&arator% moment o/ somet#ing
di//erent t#at can onl% )e imagined6 reintegration in arc#itecture o/ a -ast Kuantit%
819 Pao.o Porto/esi &ostrnodern
o/ -alues, la%ers, semitones, w#ic# t#e #omologation o/ t#e ;nternational St%le #ad un&ardona)l% dis&ersed4
T#e return o/ arc#itecture to t#e wom) o/ its #istor% #as Iust )egun, )ut t#e &ro&ortions o/ t#is o&eration are Kuite di//erent /rom t#ose w#ic# ort#odo( critics su&&ose4 T#is re-ersion to
#istor% would alwa%s )e a la)orator% e(&eriment i/ it were not also t#e most con-incing answer gi-en t#us /ar )% arc#itectural culture to t#e &ro/ound trans/ormations o/ societ% and culture, to
t#e growt# o/ a F&ostmodern condition0 /ollowing /rom t#e de-elo&ment o/ &ost-industrial societ%4 To con-ince oursel-es, a s%nt#etic re-iew o/ t#e #istorical s%m&toms o/ t#is condition s#ould
su//ice4
,he A%e of 'nformation
o tec#nical re-olution #as t#us /ar &roduced suc# great and lasting trans/ormations as t#e Kuanti/ication and ela)oration o/ in/ormation, made &ossi)le )% t#e new electronic tec#nolog%4 Our
age #as seen t#e world o/ t#e mac#ine, wit# its wor!ing s%stems and its r#%t#ms, miss t#e im&act o/ no-elt%4 ;t #as watc#ed a new arti/icial uni-erse mo-e a#ead, com&osed o/ wires and
circuits, w#ic# resem)le more organic material t#an somet#ing reall% mec#anical4 ;n/ormation and communication #a-e t#ere/ore )ecome terms o/ com&arison wit# w#ic# to rede/ine and
reinter&ret t#e role o/ all disci&lines4 And at t#at moment w#en t#e semiotic as&ect o/ arc#itecture and t#at o/ t#e transmission o/ in/ormation, along wit# its &roducti-e and st%listic as&ects, was
&ut into /ocus, it was ine-ita)le t#at t#e constricti-e and uto&ian c#aracter o/ t#e re-olution w#ic# too! &lace )eginning wit# t#e twenties, wit# t#e worldwide di//usion o/ t#e &aradigms o/ t#e
a-ant-garde, would )e e-ident4 ;n /act, renouncing t#e s%stems o/ con-entions t#roug# w#ic# it #ad de-elo&ed uninterru&tedl%, since t#e ancient world @t#e structural &rinci&le o/ t#e order, )ase,
column, ca&ital, tra)eation, and so onA, arc#itecture #ad lost its s&eci/icit% and #ad )ecome, on t#e one #and, an autonomous /igurati-e art, on t#e same le-el as &ainting, or, on t#e ot#er #and,
#ad reduced itsel/ to &ure material &roduction4
Arc#itecture, instead, seen in t#e area o/ t#e di//erent ci-iliGation o/ man, re-eals a muc# more com&le( nature and role4 ;t is an instrument o/ t#e &roduction and transmission o/
communicati-e models, w#ic# #a-e /or a &articular societ% a -alue analogous to t#at o/ laws and ot#er ci-il institutions, models w#ose roots lie in t#e a&&ro&riation and trans/ormation o/ t#e
&laces o/ t#e eart#, and w#ic# #a-e /or centuries &la%ed t#e &art o/ con/irming and de-elo&ing t#e identit% o/ &laces @o/ citiesA and o/ communities4
T#e result o/ t#e disco-er% o/ t#e sudden im&o-eris#ment &roduced iii arc#itecture )% t#e ado&tion o/ tec#nologies and mor&#ologies se&arated /rom &laces and traditions #as )een t#e
reemergence o/ arc#itectonic arc#et%&es as &recious instruments o/ communication4 T#ese arc#et%&es are elementar% institutions o/ t#e language and &ractice o/ arc#itecture t#at li-e on in t#e
dail% li/e and collecti-e memor% o/ man4 T#ese di//er greatl% de&ending Fa t#e &laces w#ere
811
we li-e and w#ere our s&atial e(&eriences were /ormed4 T#e &ostmodern in arc#itecture can t#ere/ore )e read o-erall as a reemergence o/ arc#et%&es, or as a reintegration o/
arc#itectonic con-entions, and t#us as a &remise to t#e creation o/ an architecture of communication5 an arc#itecture o/ t#e image /or a ci-iliGation o/ t#e image4
,he $all of )entered -ystems
Anot#er as&ect o/ t#e &ostmodern condition is t#e &rogressi-e dismantling o/ t#e )ases o/ t#e critical t#eor% o/ )ourgeois societ%4 T#e s#ar& &olarit% o/ soAcial classes, /ait# in t#e
redeeming ca&a)ilities o/ t#e socialiGation o/ t#e means o/ &roduction, and t#e analog% o/ t#e intricate &rocesses o/ industrial societ% in ca&italist and socialist countries #a-e
&laced a &ro/oundl% c#anged realit% on guard against t#e sterilit% o/ t#e dogmatisms and t#e inca&a)ilit% to e(&lore, wit# t#e old tools o/ consecrated and sclerotic t#eories4
;t s#ould not sur&rise us t#at, toget#er wit# t#e muc# more serious and &ro-en ideological sca//olding, e-en t#e Modern Mo-ement is in crisis6 a -aria)le and unde/ined
container, wit#in w#ic# Kuite di//erent and o/ten di-ergent &#enomena were &laced4 T#is was an attem&t to construct a linear /unction o/ arc#itectural &rogress, in
regard to w#ic# it would )e &ossi)le at all times to distinguis# good /rom e-il, decree anne(ations and e(&ulsions as in a &olitical &art%4 T#e Modern Mo-ement &ro&osed to c#ange
societ% /or t#e )etter, a-oiding @according to Le Cor)usierA t#e re-olution, or carr%ing it out, as t#e Russian Constructi-ists )elie-ed4 Among its great tas!s, t#e most im&ortant was
t#at o/ teac#ing man to )ecome modern, to c#ange #is wa% o/ li/e according to a model ca&a)le o/ a-oiding waste4 Toda%, t#is underta!ing #ardl% seems -alid /or a
colonialist &rogram, w#ile t#e real &ro)lem is one o/ understanding w#at &ostmodern man wants, and #ow #e li-es4 He is not an animal to )e &rogrammed in a la)orator%, )ut
an alread% e(isting s&ecies w#ic# #as almost reac#ed maturit%, w#ile arc#itects were still tr%ing to realiGe t#eir o)solete &roIect o/ modernit%4
T#e great intellectual wor! done in t#e &ast twent% %ears on t#e conce&t and structures o/ &ower #as &ut anot#er dri/ting mine )eneat# t#e /ragile and sus&ect structure o/ t#e
Modern Mo-ement4 Se&arating t#e idea o/ &ower /rom t#e relations#i&s o/ wor! and &ro&ert% Fin w#ic#0, as Alain Touraine #as written, Ait seemed to )e totall% incarnated0, e-en t#e
role o/ t#e arc#itectural a-ant-gardes #as )een a)le to )e anal%Ged in di//erent terms, recogniGing its res&onsi)ilities and inadeKuacies, and &utting in crisis t#e t#eor% t#at stri&&ed
t#em o/ res&onsi)ilit%04 T#e% attri)uted all )lame to t#e Fdesign o/ ca&ital04
T#e #istor% o/ arc#itecture o/ t#e &ast t#irt% %0ears could, t#ere/ore, )e written as t#e #istor% o/ a Fwa% out0 o/ t#e Modern Mo-ement according to a direction alread%
e(&erimented )% t#e masters in t#e last %ears o/ t#eir li-es, at t#e )eginning o/ t#e
/i/ties4
T#e crisis o/ t#eoretical legitimation, w#ic# 3ean-$ranMois L%otard calls t#O Fscarce credi)ilit% o/ t#e great 4;cits15 and t#e /act t#at toda% we must con/ront t#e
812
&ro)lem o/ t#e meaning Fwit#out #a-ing t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ res&onding wit# t#e #o&e o/ t#e emanci&ation o/ Man!ind, as in t#e sc#ool o/ t#e Enlig#tenment, o/ t#e S&irit, as in t#e sc#ool o/
2erman ;dealism, or o/ t#e Proletariat, )% means o/ t#e esta)lis#ment o/ a trans&arent societ%0, #as un#inged t#e /undamental &rinci&les o/ arc#itectural modernit%, consisting o/ a series o/
eKuations w#ic# #a-e ne-er )een -eri/ied e(ce&t t#roug# insigni/icant small sam&les4 T#ese are t#e eKuations6
use/ul )eauti/ul, structural trut# f est#etic &restige, and t#e dogmatic assertions o/ t#e /unctionalist statute6 F/orm /ollows /unction0, Farc#itecture must coincide wit# construction0, Fornament is
crime0, and so on4 T#e trut# o/ arc#itecture as a sim&le coincidence o/ a&&earance and su)stance contradicts w#at is greatest and most lasting among t#e arc#itectural institutions, /rom t#e 2ree!
tem&le to t#e cat#edral0 and e-en w#at t#e Modern Mo-ement )uilt under t#e )anner o/ trut# o/ten #as its wort# in an Fa&&earance0 t#at #as little to do wit# constructi-e trut#4 T#e great moral
tale t#at #o&ed to gras& t#e #uman as&ect o/ arc#itecture, t#eoriGing its /unction and Fsincerit%0, )% t#is time #as t#e distant &restige o/ a /a)le4
;n &lace o/ /ait# in t#e great centered designs, and t#e an(ious &ursuits o/ sal-ation, t#e &ostmodern condition is graduall% su)stituting t#e concreteness o/ small circumstantiated struggles
wit# its &recise o)Iecti-es ca&a)le o/ #a-ing a great e//ect )ecause t#e% c#ange s%stems o/ relations4
,he )risis of 4esources and the )ityI)ountry 4elationship
T#e &ostmodern condition #as &ut into crisis e-en t#at disci&line t#at t#e Modern Mo-ement #ad &laced )eside arc#itecture, as a t#eoretical guarantee o/ its socialiGation6 cit% &lanning
understood as t#e science o/ territorial trans/ormations4 $rom t#e time w#en cit% &lanning, a)andoning t#e tradition o/ nineteent#-centur% ur)an r#etoric, #ad )ecome t#at strange mi(ture o/
ine//ectual sociological anal%ses and im&laca)le Goning, t#e cit% seemed to #a-e lost t#e -er% &rinci&le o/ its re&roduction, growing /rom t#e addition o/ /att% or cancerous tissue, lac!ing
essential ur)an /eatures, as in t#e great &eri&#eral areas4
T#e most o)-ious s%m&tom o/ t#e c#ange in direction o/ arc#itectural researc# was a return to t#e stud% o/ t#e cit% as a com&le( &#enomenon in w#ic# )uilding t%&ologies &la% a
role com&ara)le to t#at o/ institutions, and &ro/oundl% condition t#e &roduction and c#ange o/ t#e ur)an /ace4 T#e anal%tical stud% o/ t#e cit% #as s!i&&ed o-er t#e /unctionalist logic o/ t#e
)uilding )loc!, re&ro&osing instead t#e t#eme o/ t#e continuit% o/ t#e ur)an /a)ric, and o/ t#e /undamental im&ortance o/ enclosed s&aces, actual com&onent cells o/ t#e ur)an
en-ironment4 T#e stud% o/ collecti-e )e#a-ior di-ided t#e criterion o/ t#e dismem)erment o/ t#e ur)an #odA0 into its mono/unctioning &arts, t#e standard w#ic# in/orms ideal cities, &ro&osed as
models )% t#e masters o/ modern arc#itecture4
T#e energ% crisis, on t#e ot#er #and, and t#e crisis o/ t#e go-erna)ilit% o/ t#e great metro&olitan administrations, #as /ocused once again on t#e &ro)lem o/ t#e alternati-es to t#e inde/inite
growt# o/ t#e large cities, and oK t#e necessit% o/ correcting t#e relations#i& o/ e(&loitation still c#aracteriGing die cit% in relation
818
to small centers and t#e region4 T#e great m%t# o/ t#e dou)le eKuation cit%
&rogress, de-elo&ment f well-)eing #as gi-en wa% to t#e t#eor% o/ limit and o/ controlled de-elo&ment4 .it# regard to a &ostmodern ur)anism, an institutional re/ormism is )eginning to )e
considered t#at would gi-e new com&etiti-e strengt# to smaller centers t#roug# /ederati-e initiati-es @in ;tal%, a &rocess o/ t#is !ind is going on in t#e Jallo di Diano, under t#e aegis o/ Socialist
administratorsA4 Ecological &ro)lems and t#e energ% crisis #a-e led to t#e sel/-criticism o/ t#e acritical &ro&ensit% toward t#e new tec#nologies t#at #a-e su)stituted old ones, o/ten wit# no
ad-antage w#atsoe-er /or t#e li/e s&an o/ t#e &roduct, t#e a)sor&tion o/ man&ower and est#etic Kualit%4 A c#ange o/ direction is ine-ita)le i/ we do not want /urt#er to aggra-ate economic and
social &ro)lems4 To realiGe t#e im&ortance o/ t#ese &rograms, it is su//icient to re/lect u&on t#e /act t#at t#e energ% consum&tion o/ a &lastic &anel is twent% times t#at needed /or t#e
construction o/ a )ric! wall o/ t#e same area, or t#at t#e &rogressi-e disa&&earance o/ certain trades )ecause o/ t#e a)andonment o/ certain tec#niKues would render us, /or a lac! o/ s!illed
wor!ers, una)le to restore #istoric monuments and ancient cities, w#ose integral &reser-ation seems to #a-e )een, at least on &a&er, one o/ t#e great cultural conKuests o/ our time4
T#e trut# is t#at t#e &ostmodern condition #as re-ersed t#e t#eoretical sca//olding o/ so-called modernit%4 T#ose w#o are amaGed t#at, among t#e most a&&arent results o/ t#e new culture in
its in/anc%, t#ere is also a certain su&er/icial /eeling /or a Freturn to t#e antiKue0, seem to /orget t#at in e-er% serious mi(ture, t#e arti/icial order o/ c#ronolog% is one o/ t#e /irst structures to )e
discussed and t#en dismissed4 3ust as grandc#ildren o/ten resem)le t#eir grand&arents, and certain /eatures o/ t#e /amil% rea&&ear a/ter centuries, t#e world now emerging is searc#ing /reel% in
memor%, )ecause it !nows #ow to /ind its own Fdi//erence0 in t#e remo-ed re&etition and utiliGation o/ t#e entire &ast4 Recentl% in 3a&an, sail)oats #a-e )een )uilt w#ose sails are maneu-ered
not )% #undreds o/ sailors, )ut )% com&licated and e(tremel% /ast electronic de-ices4 T#ese s#i&s, eKui&&ed also wit# con-entional engines, allow /or a great sa-ing in /uel4 Postmodern
arc#itecture, w#ose nai-e mani/estations o/ a &recocious c#ild#ood we see toda%, will &ro)a)l% resem)le t#ese s#i&s t#at #a-e )roug#t t#e imaginar% e-en into t#e world o/ t#e mac#ine4
T/e )risis o? t/e )ity
T#e metro&olis leads toward t#e megalo&olis, w#ic# leads sooner or later to t#e necro&olis4 T#e &ro&#etic Iourne% w#ic# Mum/ord tal!ed a)out t#irt% %ears ago #as not %et ta!en &lace, )ut
continues to terroriGe us4 E-er% so o/ten, t#e mec#anism o/ t#e )ig cities seems to Iam irre&ara)l%0, and t#e g#ost o/ ur)an agon% comes )ac! to #aunt our dreams4 T#en, a )alance, al)eit
&recarious, is recom&osed, as in a s&ell4 Some sc#eme is de-ised, and w#at seemed -er%0 near )egins to mo-e awa%0 again4
T#e last o/ t#e great g#osts, t#e administrati-e and &olitical ungo-erna)ilit% 3/ large ur)an s%stems, is also )eing redimensioned4 Some %ears ago, ew Yor!
Pao.o Porto/esi &ostmodern
81: Pao.o Porto/esi &ostnode rn 81$
re&orted its economic )an!ru&tc%4 Cairo, a&les, and Rome #a-e administrati-e )alances t#at are #ardl% reassuringN )ut in t#e end, a correcti-e is /ound and t#e rendering o/ accounts
de/erred4 ;n realit%, it seems t#at a colossal regulator o/ watts guarantees t#e sur-i-al o/ t#is Fs&lendidl%0 ill institution called t#e large cit%4
;ts /anatics insist t#at t#is is o&&ortune and &ro-idential, )ecause t#e &reser-ation and de-elo&ment o/ #uman ci-iliGation are inse&ara)l% tied to t#e cit%4 S#ould t#e cit% disintegrate, t#e
narrow-minded and conser-ati-e s&irit o/ t#e small town would suddenl% arrest t#e &rodigious critical -igor t#at generated t#e modern world4 T#e )ig cit% is w#ere e(c#anges, meetings,
o&&ortunities /or intellectual growt# and scienti/ic researc# ta!e &lace, w#ere social tensions and intellectual /erment are created and constantl% c#anged4 .#ile it does not necessaril% grant
#a&&iness and serenit%, t#e cit% guarantees t#at intense, ric# and com&le( li/e Ft#at is wort# li-ing04
.#at are t#e true and /alse elements o/ t#is r#etoric o/ ur)an greatness according to w#ic# Kuantit% would )e miraculousl% trans/ormed into Kualit%, and di//iculties would )ecome stimuli /or
t#e li/e o/ t#e intellectD .e could )egin to gi-e some answers to t#is Kuestion, since t#e m%t#ological &#ase o/ t#e modern world is ending4 E-er% da%, we witness t#e colla&se and c#anges o/
t#e great central s%stems wit# w#ic# we deluded oursel-es t#at e-er%t#ing could )e e(&lained4
T#e large cit% is t#e c#ild o/ t#e great &olitical institutions, )eginning wit# t#e ad-ent o/ ca&italism, o/ t#e great &roducti-e organiGations t#at )ene/it /rom &#%sical contiguit%, )ecause in t#is
manner t#e mec#anism o/ t#e mar!et and o/ com&etition is mirrored most directl% in t#e ur)an /a)ric4 T#e large cit% is essentiall% a cit%-/actor%, a cit%-wor!s#o&, w#ere a gigantic in-isi)le
assem)l% line com&els e-er%one to re&eat dail% )ot# t#e ceremon% o/ wor!, and an in/inite series o/ useless acts4 Slow and discontinuous -e#icular tra//ic, &eriodicall% grinding to a maddening
#alt, and t#en graduall% decongested into t#e still o/ t#e nig#t, is t#e eloKuent s%m)ol o/ t#e sacri/ices t#at must )e made so t#at we can enIo% t#e &ri-ileges o/ its /unction as a great de-ourer o/
#uman time and a great mac#ine o/ waste4 .#at will )ecome o/ t#is institution w#ic# #as deri-ed /orce /rom its illness, and w#ic# continues, li!e a siren, to attract its distant admirers wit# /alse
&romisesD T#ere is no dou)t t#at t#e m%t# o/ in/inite de-elo&ment @#%&ot#esiGed in t#e si(ties w#en t#e generaliGation o/ ur)an s%stems li!e t#at o/ To!%o were consideredA is in di//icult%4 T#e
m%t#-antidote o/ Gero growt# was also in-ented4 T#e sal-ation o/ t#e large cit% lies in its controlled growt# and its ties wit# t#e surrounding territor%4 1ut it also lies, &arado(icall%, in a com&lete
alternati-e t#at would ma!e disad-antages accessi)le to a wider range o/ &eo&le and &rogressi-el% wea!en its /orce o/ attraction4
;t is clear, now more t#an e-er, t#at e-en /or t#e large cities, egotism is a dou)le-edged wea&on4 T#e concentration o/ &u)lic /acilities, cultural institutions, &laces /or recreation and scienti/ic
ela)oration #as gi-en t#e metro&olis t#e glor% o/ two centuries, )ut in t#e long run it could #a-e )ad sur&rises in store4 T#e cure /or t#e sic! metro&olis lies &er#a&s in t#e &otential o/ t#e smaller
cit%, in t#e redisco-er% o/ its com&etiti-e role in t#e /ield o/ culture and &roduction4 T#is new &ossi)ilit% #as come u& recentl%, wit# t#e generaliGation o/ t#e means o/ ma4Os
communication t#at increase t#e demand /or ser-ices and collecti-e institutioe -, &recisel% )ecause
t#e ruling culture o/ t#e )ig cit% ma!es its standards accessi)le at t#e le-el o/ t#e image and desire4
Post-industrial societ% @i/ we can ad-ance a #%&ot#esisA will no longer need great con-ulsi-e concentrations and .illes tentaculaires5 Iust as modern industr% no longer needs cat#edrals o/
wor!4 Small cities will once again &la% a role not onl% in t#e consum&tion and &assi-e rece&tion o/ t#e culture o/ t#e metro&olis, #ut also in autonOmOus creation and -alid interlocution4
T#e small centers, w#ere a great &art of t#e world0s &o&ulation still li-es, will )e a)le to /ind a com&etiti-e role in t#eir re/ound autonomous identit%, and in t#e &rocess o/ /ederation w#ic# will
&ermit t#em to de-elo& su//icient /orce to gi-e t#e new territor% communit%0 structures similar to ur)an ones4 A &rocess o/ t#is t%&e, t#e union o/ nineteen neig#)oring towns
into a single town o/ Fur)an /orce0, is ta!ing &lace in ;tal% sout# o/ Salerno in t#e Jallo di Diano, t#roug# t#e initiati-e o/ t#e enlig#tened administrator 2erardo Ritorto4 ;
#a-e made a tec#nical contri)ution to t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#is interesting #%&ot#esis o/ a discontinuous cit%4
;t is )elie-ed t#at &ost-industrial societ% will )e com&letel% /ree /rom totalitarian tem&tations4 T#e &ostmodern culture w#ic# arises /rom t#e new #uman condition &roduced )% t#is
societ% oug#t to de/eat on anot#er le-el e-en ur)an totalitarianism, se&arating t#e &ositi-e -alues o/ t#e )ig cit% /rom its negati-e connotations t#at #a-e s#a&ed a relations#i& o/
e(&loitation and alienating #egemon% )etween t#e culture o/ t#e cit% and t#at o/ t#e region4 $or ;tal%, it would )e t#e redisco-er% o/ a -er% old calling4 T#e old ;tal% o/ t#e courts could
)ecome t#e &ol%centric ;tal% o/ t#e Fsmall cit%04
PART S;B
&olitics
Introduction
;n t#e modern world H t#at is, since t#e eig#teent# centur% H t#e discourse o/ &olitics is /ounded u&on one &ro)lematic relation6 t#e relation )etween t#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness and its O)Iect4
$rom t#is relation all else /ollows, /or w#at is at sta!e in it is t#e -ariet% o/ wa%s in w#ic# #umanit% engages its en-ironment4 A conser-ati-e &olitics is one in w#ic# some Su)Iects arrogate to
t#emsel-es t#e rig#t to regard not onl% an inanimate en-ironment as an O)Iect o-er w#ic# t#e% ma% #old swa%, )ut also ot#er #uman )eings as legitimate O)Iects o-er w#om t#e% #old &ower4
Suc# &ower consolidates t#e ;dentit% o/ t#e dominant Su)Iect in t#is state o/ a//airs4 An emanci&ator% &olitics is one in w#ic# t#is situation is addressed )% an o-ert attention to alterit% as suc#4
;n a radical &olitics, t#e Su)Iect realises #er or #is identit% t#roug# two di//erent means6 /irst, s#e or #e ac!nowledges t#at identit% is &redicated u&on t#e Ot#er, i4e4 u&on ot#er Su)Iects o/
consciousnessN secondl%, s#e or #e Kuestions t#e relation o/ dominance )etween consciousness and t#e in#uman en-ironment4 T#e name /or t#e /irst o/ t#ese radical &ositions is Mar(ismN t#at o/
t#e second, &ost-Mar(ism or &ostmodern Mar(ism4
T#e entire de)ate in t#e &ostmodern on t#e issue o/ &olitics reall% stems /rom wit#in t#e discourse o/ Mar(ism itsel/, a discourse w#ic# is ac!nowledged H e-en )% a conser-ati-e t#in!ing
w#ic# /reKuentl% steals and a)uses its categories H to )e t#e most t#oroug#going e(&lanation o/ &olitics currentl% a-aila)le4 T#is is so e-en at a moment w#en, in t#e wa!e o/ e-ents in Eastern
Euro&e in *+E+, certain conser-ati-es suc# as $rancis $u!u%ama are announcing, in neo-Hegelian /as#ion, t#e Fend o/ #istor%0 @an announcement w#ic#, o/ course, is to some e(tent a rerun o/
t#e Fend o/ ideolog%0 &roclamations o/ Daniel 1ell and ot#ers in t#e ; +>9sA4 T#e so-called Oine-ita)i;it%0 o/ ca&italism in t#ese conser-ati-e &ositions not
ac!nowledges Mar(0s anal%sis )ut also in /act stri-es to learn /rom Mar( in t#e interests o/ an increased ca&italist e//icienc%
T#e most -igorous and -aried &olitical t#oug#t in t#e twentiet# centur% #as, #owe-er, come /rom t#e emanci&ator% &olitical dri-e, in w#ic# t#e issue o/ democrac% #as gi-en &lace to t#at o/
/reedom4 ODemocracs0, a/ter all, is a term so a)used as to #a-e )ecome tri( ialN and t#e e//ect o/ t#is in t#e conser( ItiJC world #as )een not onl% to reduce /reedom )ut also to erode t#e
su)stance o/ democrac% &recisel% in t#ose states O( #ere t#e word is increasingl% claimed as a descri&tion o/ t#e &olitical state o/ a//airs6 democrac% now means increasingl% t#e /reedom to
ma!e a small #ierogl%&#ic mar! on a &iece o/ &a&er on some twent% occasions in a normaO #uman li/etime4 T#is would not )e so )ad i/ t#e #ierogl%&#ic mar! made some
81B
829 &art -i=: &olitics 'ntroduction
su)stanti-e &olitical di//erence, )ut increasingl% t#is is not t#e case in t#e so-called Fdemocracies04 ;n t#e lig#t o/ t#is, /reedom )ecomes a muc# more &ressing issue4 $reedom #as )een
articulated in -arious wa%s6 in t#e e(istentialist terms o/ Sartre in t#e &ostcolonialist terms o/ Said, Amin, $anon and ot#ersN in t#e enormous range o/ /eminist discourses w#ic# #a-e &laced t#e
Kuestions o/ gender and se(ualit% at t#e core o/ contem&orar% &olitical de)ateN in t#e 2reen attitude w#ic# alerts us to t#e /act t#at t#e en-ironment, t#e O)Iect itsel/, #as )een -ictimised )% t#e
#uman Su)IectN and so on in an e-er-increasing -ariet% o/ wa%s4
;n t#e Kuestion o/ t#e relation )etween Su)Iect o/ consciousness and its O)Iecti/ied en-ironment, Mar( made one /undamental mo-e6 #e located t#e #uman )od%, t#e
la)ouring #uman )od%, as t#e mediator )etween t#e two &otentiall% dis&arate realms4 $eminism #as stringentl% modi/ied t#is )% indicating t#at t#is )od% is not itsel/ neutral,
)ut gendered4 T#e structure o/ e(&loitation w#ic# is inscri)ed in ca&italist economics #ad alread% made it clear t#at not all )odies were treated eKuita)l%, o/ courseN and it is /rom t#is t#at
a s&eci/ic class consciousness and class struggle can de-elo&4 1ut w#at #a&&ens w#en e//icienc%, t#e !e% term /or ca&italist &roduction, ena)les t#e reduction o/ la)ourD .#at #a&&ens
w#en tec#nological de-elo&ments reduce t#e amount o/ em&lo%ment &ossi)le in a social /ormationD And w#at #a&&ens w#en structural unem&lo%ment is itsel/ de-elo&ed as a
central &lan! o/ conser-ati-e &olitical ideolog%D T#ese Kuestions are among t#ose w#ic# #a-e initiated t#e &ostmodern &olitical de)ate4
Ric#ard Rort% comes at t#ese Kuestions /rom a &#iloso&#ical &osition grounded in t#e American &ragmatist tradition4 ;n t#e &iece included #ere, #e ma!es a /undamental distinction
)etween a F/oundational0 and an Fanti-/oundational0 &olitical &#iloso&#%N and #e stri-es to #old a &osition w#ic# ta!es t#e )est /rom )ot#4 T#e result is t#at #e argues /or a
Fsolidarit%0 instead o/ a class consciousness, and /or a solidarit% de-oid o/ an% a#istorical &#iloso&#ical or et#ical )ac!-u&4 He descri)es t#is as F&ostmodernist )ourgeois li)eralism0,
t#oug# to man% &eo&le it loo!s -er% li!e an e(cuse /or a Kuietistic acce&tance t#at, as #e #as said elsew#ere, Ft#ere is no alternati-e to ca&italism0, or t#at t#e ric# ort# Atlantic
Fdemocracies0 #a-e esta)lis#ed not a Ftrue0 &olitics )ut a F&ragmaticall% acce&ta)le0 &olitics4 Suc# &ragmatism is, in /act, at t#e root o/ man% o/ t#e neo-conser-ati-e &olitical
stances w#ic# claim to deri-e /rom a &ostmodern attitude4
Rort%0s &ostmodern distrust o/ metanarrati-es, deri-ed /rom L%otard, is sel/-contradictor%, argues Ernesto Laclau6 t#e &rescri&tion to a)andon /oundationalist &#iloso&#% is
itsel/ /oundational4 Laclau suggests t#at it is )etter to consider t#e &ostmodern Fas a moment o/ Fwea!ening0 @suc# as we #a-e seen in L%otard and JattimoA, w#ic# is &er#a&s a
&er/ect counter to Rort%an Fsolidarit%04 Learning /rom a num)er o/ recent H and sometimes con/licting H de-elo&ments )roadl% wit#in Mar(ism, and es&eciall% /rom 2ramsci,
Laclau ad-ocates a less monolit#ic attitude to &olitical struggle t#an t#at &resu&&osed )% a Mar(istHLeninist tradition w#ic# is solidl% /ounded on class4 T#e Fwea!ening0
&roduces a &luralistic attitude in w#ic#, increasingl%, t#e Su)Iect is not considered as a uni/ied and identii0a)le entit% wit#in
one s&eci/ic &ower con/iguration or wit#in one s&eci/ic relation to t#e en-ironmentN rat#er, t#e Su)Iect is #ere increasingl% seen to )e tra-ersed )% all manner o/ di//erent &ower
con/igurations @t#ose o/ gender, se(ualit%, race and nationalit% )eing onl%0 among t#e most o)-iousA4 Class is seen #ere as one determinant among man% in t#e construction o/ &olitical
locatedness /or t#e Su)Iect, (-#ose /reedom or emanci&ation de&ends on a less monolit#ic struggle against a single, identi/ia)le /orce o/ o&&ression, and more u&on a di-ersit% o/
struggles and strategies4
AndrL 2orG, once a mem)er o/ t#e editorial )oard o/ Sartre0s Iournal 6cs ,cinps modernes5 was -itall% in-ol-ed in t#e &olitical struggles o/ *+?E4 ;n common wit# ot#er acti-ists,
suc# as 1a#ro and Co#n-1endit, #owe-er, 2orG )egan a signi/icant &olitical mo-e F/rom red to green04 ;n #is reconsiderations o/ Mar(ism, one t#ing remains alwa%s central6 t#e
reduction o/ time s&ent in wor! in t#e #uman li/es&an4 T#e /undamental reorganisation o/ &olitical li/e is now, /or 2orG, a reorganisation o/ time4 ;n classic Mar(ism, li/e is
organised around, on t#e one #and, a Ocentre0 o/ wor! w#ic# is itsel/ located in a solid ur)an /orum o/ Ft#e cit%0, and a F&eri&#er%0 o/ leisure relegated to t#e Fsu)ur)s0N 2orG
ret#in!s t#is, wit# a new Fcentre0 o/ F/ree Kualit% time0 and a F&eri&#er%0 o/ wor!-time4 ;n s#ort, a &olitics /ounded u&on a s&ace-logic @central polis5 su)-ur)an marginalised
domesticit%A is re&laced )% a &olitics )ased on a time-logic4 1asic to t#is is a Fgreen0 attitude to t#e en-ironment, w#ic# argues /or a less e(&loitati-e attitude to t#e world o/
nature4 One &ro)lem wit# Mar(, according to t#is -iew, is t#at #e was reall% interested onl% in c#anging t#e &ower relations o)taining among Su)Iects, w#ile ta!ing /or
granted t#e continued e(&loitation o/ t#e O)Iecti-e world4 T#is is no longer sustaina)le, argues 2orGN and genuine &olitical emanci&ation will not )e &ossi)le until t#e erosion
o/ suc# an e(&loitati-e attitude to t#e Ot#er t#at is t#e natural en-ironment4 T#is is reminiscent to some e(tent o/ t#e attitude o/ DeleuGe and 2uattari in t#e late * +<9s and
earl% *+E9s, /or w#om t#e eradication o/ /ascism in t#e wide &olitical world was to some e(tent &redicated u&on a similar eradication o/ t#e /ascist attitude w#ic# la% co-ertl%
wit#in an% sel/-determining Su)Iect4 $or /or85 t#e Kuestion o/ emanci&ation and /reedom is /undamentall% tied in wit# an econom% o/ time, in w#ic# t#e Su)Iect will /ind a
di//erent mannero/ en/ranc#isement /rom t#at e(&ected )% classical Mar(ism4
Jirilio #as insisted on t#e relation o/ time to t#e &olitical, most o)-iousl% in #is wor! on s&eed and &olitics4 T#e e//ect o/ s&eed is to c#ange t#e status o/ &olitical li/e and
de)ate4 ;/ we remain loc!ed wit#in a s&ace-logic o/ &olitics, t#en all argument is /undamentall% #inged on one relation6 o-ert a&&earance -ersus co-ert realit%N and all anal%sis
is )ased u&on semiotics in t#e /orm o/ ideolog% critiKue4 1ut, w#ile t#is ma% #old good /or earlier moments in &olitical de)ate, it is no longer -ia)le, /or t#e arena o/ t#e
&olitical #as s#i/ted in our time4 T#e /undamental &olitical relation toda%, argues Jirilio, is t#at )etween a&&earance and disa&&earance, and no longer )etween a&&earance
and realit%4 T#e ancient idea o/ a &olitical /orum #as )een re&laced )% t#e screen, li!e a cinema screen, on w#ic# w#at is &roIected is )ut t#e s#adow-&la% o/ a real w#ic# is in
a constant state o/
822 &art -i=: &olitics
disa&&earing4 Political emanci&ation de&ends u&on strategies /or ma!ing t#e disa&&eared rea&&ear, /or e-o!ing a &resence o/ t#e real t#roug# its constantl% t#reatened a)sence4
$or 1audrillard, t#e real is also trammelled )% its a&&earances and disa&&earances4 At an earl% stage in #is &ost-Mar(ist t#in!ing, in ,he (irror of &roduction5 1audrillard
argued t#at Mar(0s /undamental &olitical categories were t#emsel-es caug#t u& in &recisel% t#e discourse o/ &olitical econom% w#ic# #e wis#ed to o&&ose, e-en to o-ert#row4
Later, #e arri-ed at t#e more general conclusion t#at all Oo&&ositional0 t#in!ing is alwa%s alread% negated )% t#e structure o/ t#e entit% w#ic# it wis#es to o&&ose4 FO&&osition0,
Fcriticism0, is not#ing more t#an an inoculation o/ sorts w#ic# allows t#e dominant &olitical &ower in a social /ormation /urt#er to strengt#en itsel/4 T#is )reeds a &olitical
&essimism @t#oug# not necessaril% a Kuietism, contra certain slo&&% readings o/ selected &arts o/ 1audrillard0s writingsA4 ;/ &olitics is a-aila)le toda%, t#en it is a-aila)le /irst
at t#e le-el o/ re&resentations4 1ut tec#nolog% #as so e(&anded and &er/ected t#e tec#niKues o/ re&resenting Ft#e real0 t#at t#e -er% ontological status o/ t#e real itsel/ #as )een called
into Kuestion4 Here t#ere is room /or a new &olitics4 At t#e )eginning o/ modern Euro&ean &#iloso&#%, Descartes saw t#at #is &#iloso&#ical s%stem was &otentiall% t#warted
and undone )% one t#ing6 t#e ma/in %enie5 an e-il genius w#o was /undamentall% in control o/ re&resentations H e-en simulations H o/ t#e real4 ;t is to t#is Fe-il genius0 t#at
1audrillard turns in #is later wor!N and it o//ers a means o/ o-ercoming t#e Fwinner loses0 logic o/ t#e negation o/ o&&osition4 ;/ t#e /undamental Kuestion o/ t#e &olitical is
t#e relation )etween t#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness and t#e FO# Iectal0 en-ironmentN and i/ all t#in!ing /rom t#e &oint o/ -iew o/ t#e Su)Iect is in some sense st%mied or limited )%
t#is /undamental &olitical structure, t#en, /inall%, t#ere seems to )e onl% one t#ing le/t to do4 ;m&ossi)le t#oug# it ma% seem, it is time to Fseduce0 t#e ma/in %enie )% going o-er to t#e side o/
t#e O)Iect4 T#e world o/ O)Iects is and #as )een indi//erent to t#e c#allenges &osed to it )% t#e Su)Iect6 as 1audrillard #as it, t#e O)Iect Fdoes not answer0 to our demands4
F1ut, )% diso)e%ing laws and t#warting desire, it must answer secretl% to some enigma4 .#at is le/t )ut to go o-er to t#e side o/ t#is enigmaD0
$or some, t#e &ost-Mar(ist &ositions outlined in t#ese articles will a&&ear to )e de/eatist, e-en anti-Mar(istN /or ot#ers, it will a&&ear t#at in t#eir e(treme Kuestioning o/ t#e
&olitical t#ere lies t#e most radical &olitics currentl% a-aila)le, and t#at t#e% t#ere/ore /orm a !ind o/ &olitical a-ant-garde @&er#a&s des&ite t#emsel-esA w#ic# will )e as
radical /or t#e twent%-/irst centur% as Mar( was /or t#e twentiet#4
" < Postmodernist 9ourgeois
Li2eralism
Ric/ard Rorty
Com&laints a)out t#e social irres&onsi)ilit% o/ t#e intellectuals t%&icall% concern t#e intellectual0s tendenc% to marginaliGe #ersel/, to mo-e out /rom one communit% )%
interior identi/ication o/ #ersel/ wit# some ot#er communit% H /or e(am&le, anot#er countr% or #istorical &eriod, an in-isi)le college, or some alienated su)grou& wit#in t#e
larger communit%4 Suc# marginaliGation is, #owe-er, common to intellectuals and to miners4 ;n t#e earl% da%s o/ t#e 8nited Mine .or!ers its mem)ers rig#tl% &ut no /ait# in
t#e surrounding legal and &olitical institutions and were lo%al onl% to eac# ot#er4 ;n t#is res&ect t#e% resem)led t#e literar% and artistic a-ant-garde )etween t#e wars4
;t is not clear t#at t#ose w#o t#us marginaliGe t#emsel-es can )e criticiGed /or social irres&onsi)ilit%4 One cannot )e irres&onsi)le toward a communit% o/ w#ic# one does
not t#in! o/ onesel/ as a mem)er4 Ot#erwise runawa% sla-es and tunnelers under t#e 1erlin .all would )e irres&onsi)le4 ;/ suc# criticism were to ma!e sense t#ere would
#a-e to )e a su&ercommunit% one had to identi/% wit# H #umanit% as suc#4 T#en one could a&&eal to t#e needs o/ t#at communit% w#en )rea!ing wit# one0s /amil% or tri)e or
nation, and suc# grou&s could a&&eal to t#e same t#ing w#en criticiGing t#e irres&onsi)ilit% o/ t#ose w#o )rea! awa%4 Some &eo&le )elie-e t#at t#ere is suc# a communit%4
T#ese are t#e &eo&le w#o t#in! t#ere are suc# t#ings as intrinsic #uman dignit%, intrinsic #uman rig#ts, and an a#istorical distinction )etween t#e demands o/ moralit% and
t#ose o/ &rudence4 Call t#ese &eo&le F'antians04 T#e% are o&&osed )% &eo&le w#o sa% t#at F#umanit%0 is a )iological rat#er t#an a moral notion, t#at t#ere is no #uman dignit%
t#at is not deri-ati-e /rom t#e dignit% o/ some s&eci/ic communit%, and no a&&eal )e%ond t#e relati-e merits o/ -arious actual or &ro&osed communities to im&artial criteria
w#ic# will #el& us weig# t#ose merits4 Call t#ese &eo&le FHegelians04 Muc# o/ contem&orar% social P#iloso&#% in t#e Englis#-s&ea!ing world is a t#ree-cornered de)ate
)etween 'antians @li!e 3o#n Rawls and Ronald Dwor!inA w#o want to !ee& an a#istorical mOralit%&rudence distinction as a )uttress /or t#e institutions and &ractices o/ t#e
$rom 3ournal of &hilosophy5 LBBB, *9 @*+E,A, !J#I*.
828
82: Ric/ard Rorty &ostniodernist Kour%eois 6iberalism ,5>
sur-i-ing democracies, t#ose @li!e t#e &ost-Mar(ist &#iloso&#ical le/t in Euro&e, Ro)erto 8nger, and Alasdair Maclnt%reA w#o want to a)andon t#ese institutions )ot# )ecause t#e%
&resu&&ose a discredited &#iloso&#% and /or ot#er, more concrete, reasons, and t#ose @li!e Mic#ael Oa!es#ott and 3o#n Dewe%A w#o want to &reser-e t#e institutions w#ile
a)andoning t#eir traditional 'antian )ac!u&4 T#ese last two &ositions ta!e o-er Hegel0s criticism o/ 'ant0s conce&tion o/ moral agenc%, w#ile eit#er naturaliGing or Iun!ing t#e rest o/
Hegel4
;/ t#e Hegelians are rig#t, t#en t#ere are no a#istorical criteria /or deciding w#en it is or is not a res&onsi)le act to desert a communit%, an% more t#an /or deciding w#en to c#ange lo-ers or
&ro/essions4 T#e Hegelians see not#ing to )e res&onsi)le to e(ce&t &ersons and actual or &ossi)le #istorical communitiesN so t#e% -iew t#e 'antians0 use o/ Fsocial res&onsi)ilit%0 as
misleading4 $or t#at use suggests not t#e genuine contrast )etween, /or e(am&le, Antigone0s lo%alties to T#e)es and to #er )rot#er, or Alci)iades0 lo%alties to At#ens and to Persia, )ut
an illusor% contrast )etween lo%alt% to a &erson or a #istorical communit% and to somet#ing F#ig#er0 t#an eit#er4 ;t suggests t#at t#ere is a &oint o/ -iew t#at a)stracts /rom an% #istorical
communit% and adIudicates t#e rig#ts o/ communities .is-Q-.is t#ose o/ indi-iduals4
'antians tend to accuse o/ social irres&onsi)ilit% t#ose w#o dou)t t#at t#ere is suc# a &oint o/ -iew4 So w#en Mic#ael .alGer sa%s t#at FA gi-en societ% is Iust i/ its su)stanti-e li/e is li-ed in
444 a wa% /ait#/ul to t#e s#ared understandings o/ t#e mem)ers0, Dwor!in calls t#is -iew Frelati-ism04 F3ustice0, Dwor!in retorts, Fcannot )e le/t to con-ention and anecdote40 Suc#
'antian com&laints can )e de/ended using t#e Hegelian0s own tactics, )% noting t#at t#e -er% American societ% w#ic# .alGer wis#es to commend and to re/orm is one w#ose sel/-image is
)ound u& wit# t#e 'antian -oca)ular% o/ Finaliena)le rig#ts0 and Ft#e dignit% o/ man04 Hegelian de/enders o/ li)eral institutions are in t#e &osition o/ de/ending, on t#e )asis of solidarit% alone, a
societ% w#ic# #as traditionall% as!ed to )e )ased on somet#ing more t#an mere solidarit%4 'antian criticism o/ t#e tradition t#at runs /rom Hegel t#roug# Mar( and ietGsc#e, a tradition
w#ic# insists on t#in!ing o/ moralit% as t#e interest o/ a #istoricall% conditioned communit% rat#er t#an Ft#e comma/l interest o/ #umanit%0, o/ten insists t#at suc# a &#iloso&#ical outloo! is
H i/ one -alues li)eral &ractices and institutions H irres&onsi)le4 Suc# criticism rests on a &rediction t#at suc# &ractices and institutions will not sur-i-e t#e remo-al o/ t#e traditional 'antian
)uttresses, )uttresses w#ic# include an account o/ Frationalit%0 and Fmoralit%0 as transcultural and a#istorical4
; s#all call t#e Hegelian attem&t to de/end t#e institutions and &ractices o/ t#e ric# ort# Atlantic democracies wit#out using suc# )uttresses F&ostmodernist )ourgeois li)eralism04 ; call it
F)ourgeois0 to em&#asiGe t#at most o/ t#e &eo&le ; am tal!ing a)out would #a-e no Kuarrel wit# t#e Mar(ist claim t#at a lot o/ t#ose institutio/lS and &ractices are &ossi)le and
Iusti/ia)le onl% in certain #istorical, and es&eciallY economic, conditions4 ; want to contrast )ourgeois li)eralism, t#e attem&t to /9l/ill t#e #o&es o/ t#e ort# Atlantic )ourgeoisie, wit#
&#iloso&#ical li)eralism, a collection o/ 'antian &rinci&les t#oug#t to Iusti/% us in #%ing t#ose #o&es4
;-_egelians t#in! t#at t#ese &rinci&les are use/ul /or summari8in% t#ese #o&es, )ut not /or Iusti/%ing t#em @a -iew Rawls #imsel/ -erges u&on in #is Dewe% LecturesA4 ; use F&ostmodernist0 in a
sense gi-en to t#is term )% 3ean-$rancois L%otard, w#o sa%s t#at t#e &ostmodern attitude is t#at o/ Fdistrust o/ metanarrati-es0, narrati-es w#ic# descri)e or &redict t#e acti-ities o/ suc# entities
as t#e noumenal sel/ or t#e A)solute S&irit or t#e Proletariat4 T#ese metanarrati-es are stories w#ic# &ur&ort to Iusti/% lo%alt% to, or )rea!s wit#, certain contem&orar% communities, )ut w#ic#
are neit#er #istorical narrati-es a)out w#at t#ese or ot#er communities #a-e done in t#e &ast nor scenarios a)out w#at t#e% mig#t do in t#e /uture4
FPostmodernist )ourgeois li)eralism0 sounds o(%moronic4 T#is is &artl% )ecause, /or local and &er#a&s transitor% reasons, t#e maIorit% o/ t#ose w#o t#in! o/ t#emsel-es as )e%ond
meta&#%sics and metanarrati-es also t#in! o/ t#emsel-es as #a-ing o&ted out o/ t#e )ourgeoisie4 1ut &artl% it is )ecause it is #ard to disentangle )ourgeois li)eral institutions /rom t#e -oca)ular%
t#at t#ese institutions in#erited /rom t#e Enlig#tenment H e4g4 t#e eig#teent#-centur% -oca)ular% o/ natural rig#ts, w#ic# Iudges, and constitutional law%ers suc# as Dwor!in, must use e= officiis.
T#is -oca)ular% is )uilt around a distinction )etween moralit% and &rudence4 ;n w#at /ollows ; want to s#ow #ow t#is -oca)ular%, and in &articular t#is distinction, mig#t )e reinter&reted to suit
t#e needs o/ us &ostmodernist )ourgeois li)erals4 ; #o&e t#ere)% to suggest #ow suc# li)erals mig#t con-ince our societ% t#at lo%alt% to itsel/ is moralit% enoug#, and t#at suc# lo%alt% no longer
needs an a#istorical )ac!u&4 ; t#in! t#e% s#ould tr% to clear t#emsel-es o/ c#arges o/ irres&onsi)ilit% )% con-incing our societ% t#at it need )e res&onsi)le onl% to its own traditions, and not to
t#e moral law as well4
T#e crucial mo-e in t#is reinter&retation is to t#in! o/ t#e moral sel/, t#e em)odiment o/ rationalit%, not as one o/ Rawls0s original c#oosers, some)od% w#o can distinguis# #er sel/ /rom #er
talents and interests and -iews a)out t#e good, )ut as a networ! o/ )elie/s, desires, and emotions wit# not#ing )e#ind it H no su)strate )e#ind t#e attri)utes4 $or &ur&oses o/ moral and &olitical
deli)eration and con-ersation, a &erson Iust is t#at networ!, as /or &ur&oses o/ )allistics s#e is a Point-mass, or /or &ur&oses o/ c#emistr% a lin!age o/ molecules4 S#e is a networ! t#at is
constantl% rewea-ing itsel/ in t#e usual Cuinean manner H t#at is to sa%, not )% re/erence to general criteria @e4g4 Frules o/ meaning0 or Fmoral &rinci&les0A )ut in t#e #it-or-miss wa% in w#ic# cells
readIust t#emsel-es to meet t#e &ressures o/ t#e en-ironment4 On a Cuinean -iew, rational )e#a-ior is Iust ada&ti-e )e#a-ior o/ a sort w#ic# roug#l% &arallels t#e )e#a-ior, in similar
circumstances, o/ t#e ot#er mem)ers o/ some rele-ant communit%4 ;rrationalit%, in )ot# &#%sics and et#ics, is a matter o/ )e#a-ior t#at leads one to a)andon, or )e stri&&ed o/,
mem)ers#i& in SOme suc# communit%4 $or some &ur&oses t#is ada&ti-e )e#a-ior is a&tl% descri)ed as Flearning0 or Fcom&uting0 or Fredistri)ution o/ electrical c#arges in neural tissue0,
and /or ot#ers as Fdeli)eration0 or Oc#oice04 one o/ t#ese -oca)ularies is &ri-ileged O-er against anot#er4
.#at &la%s t#e role o/ F#uman dignit%0 on t#is -iew o/ t#e sel/D T#e answer is well e(&ressed )% Mic#ael Sandel, w#o sa%s t#at we cannot regard oursel-es as 'antian
Ric/ard Rorty &ostmodernist Kour%eois 6iberalism
>9)IectO Fca&a)le o/ constituting meaning on our own0, as Rawlsian c#oosers,
O-it#out great cost to t#ose lo%alties and con-ictions w#ose moral /orce consists &artl% Fo t#e /act t#at li-ing )% t#em is inse&ara)le /rom understanding oursel-es as t#e &articular &eo&le we
are H as mem)ers o/ t#is /amil% or communit% or nation or &eo&le,
a
>
)earers o/ t#is #istor%, as sons and daug#ters o/ t#at re-olution, as citiGens o/ t#is re&u)lic4 *
; would argue t#at t#e moral /orce o/ suc# lo%alties and con-ictions consists u1holl. in t#is /act, and t#at not#ing else #as any moral /orce4 T#ere is no Fground0 /or suc# lo%ilties and
con-ictions sa-e t#e /act t#at t#e )elie/s and desires and emotions w#ic# )uttress t#em o-erla& t#ose o/ lots o/ ot#er mem)ers o/ t#e grou& wit# w#ic# we Identi/% /or &ur&oses o/
moral or &olitical deli)erations, and t#e /urt#er /act t#at t#eOe are distincti.e /eatures o/ t#at grou&, /eatures w#ic# it uses to construct its >Ol/4image t#roug# contrasts wit# ot#er grou&s4
T#is means t#at t#e naturaliGed HeOelian analogue o/ Fintrinsic #uman dignit%0 is t#e com&arati-e dignit% o/ a grou& witlO w#ic# a &erson identi/ies #ersel/4 ations or c#urc#es or mo-ements
are, on t#is -iew, s#ining #istorical e(am&les not )ecause t#e% re/lect ra%s emanating /rom a #ig#er source, )ut )ecause o/ contrast-e//ects H com&arisons wit# ot#er, worse
cotrlmunities4 Persons #a-e dignit% not as an interior luminescence, )ut )ecause t#e% s#ale in suc# contrast-e//ects4 ;t is a corollar% o/ t#is -iew t#at t#e moral Iusti/ication o/ *#e institutions and
&ractices o/ one0s grou& H e4g4 o/ t#e contem&orar%0 )ourgeoiSie H is mostl% a matter o/ #istorical narrati-es @including scenarios a)out w#O4t is li!el% to #a&&en in certain /uture contingenciesA,
rat#er t#an o/ *#iloso&#ical metanarrati-es4 T#e &rinci&al )ac!u& /or #istoriogra&#% is not &#iloso&#% )ut t#e arts, w#ic# ser-e to de-elo& and modi/% a grou&0s sel/-image )%, /or e(am&le,
a&ot#eosiGing its #eroes, dia)oliGing its enemies, mounting dialogues among its mem)ers, and re/ocusing its attention4
A /urt#er corollar% is t#at t#e moralit%H&rudence distinction now a&&ears as a distinction )etween a&&eals to two &arts o/ t#e networ! t#at is t#e sel/ H &arts se&Oirated )% )lurr% and
constantl% s#i/ting )oundaries4 One &art consists o/ t#ose )elItO/> and desires and emotions w#ic# o-erla& wit# t#ose o/ most ot#er mem)ers o/ >&me communit% wit# w#ic#, /or
&ur&oses o/ deli)eration, s#e identi/ies #ersel/, and w#ic# contrast wit# t#ose o/ most mem)ers o/ ot#er communities wit# w#ic# #ers contrasts itsel/4 A &erson a&&eals to moralit% rat#er t#an
&rudence w#en s#e a&&Oals to t#is o-erla&&ing, s#ared &art o/ #ersel/, t#ose )elie/s and desires and emdtions w#ic# &ermit #er to sa% F.E do not do t#is sort o/ t#ing04 Moralit% is, as Qg
<
d/rid
Sellars #as said, a matter o/ Fwe-intentions04 Most moral dilemmas are t#uO re/lections o/ t#e /act t#at most o/ us identi/% wit# a num)er o/ di//erent communities and are eKuall% reluctant to
marginaliGe oursel-es in relation to an%0 o/ t#em4 T#is di-ersit% o/ identi/ications increases wit# education, Iust as t#e num)er o/ communities wit# w#ic# a &erson ma% identi/% increases wit#
ci-iliGation4
;ritrasOcietal tensions, o/ t#e sort w#ic# Dwor!in rig#tl% sa%s riar! our &luralistic societ%, are rarel% resol-ed )% a&&eals to general &rinci&les F4 t#e sort Dwor!in
82=
t#in!s necessar%4 More /reKuentl% t#e% are resol-ed )% a&&eals to w#at #e calls Fcon-ention and anecdote04 T#e &olitical discourse o/ t#e democracies, at its )est, is t#e
e(c#ange o/ w#at .ittgenstein called Freminders /or a &articular &ur&ose Hanecdotes a)out t#e &ast e//ects o/ -arious &ractices and &redictions o/ w#at will #a&&en i/, or unless, some
o/ t#ese are altered4 T#e moral deli)erations o/ t#e &ostmodernist )ourgeois li)eral consists largel% in t#is same sort o/ discourse, a-oiding t#e /ormulation o/ general &rinci&les e(ce&t
w#ere t#e situation ma% reKuire t#is &articular tactic H as w#en one writes a constitution, or rules /or %oung c#ildren to memoriGe4 ;t is use/ul to remem)er t#at t#is -iew o/ moral and
&olitical deli)eration was a common&lace among American intellectuals in t#e da%s w#en Dewe% H a &ostmodernist )e/ore #is time H was t#e reigning American &#iloso&#er, da%s
w#en Flegal realism0 was t#oug#t o/ as desira)le &ragmatism rat#er t#an un&rinci&led su)Iecti-ism4
;t is also use/ul to re/lect on w#% t#is tolerance /or anecdote was re&laced )% a reattac#ment to &rinci&les4 Part o/ t#e e(&lanation, ; t#in!, is t#at most American intellectuals in
Dewe%0s da% still t#oug#t t#eir countr% was a s#ining #istorical e(am&le4 T#e% identi/ied wit# it easil%4 T#e largest single reason /or t#eir loss o/ identi/ication was t#e Jietnam .ar4
T#e .ar caused some intellectuals to marginaliGe t#emsel-es entirel%4 Ot#ers attem&ted to re#a)ilitate 'antian notions in order to sa%, wit# C#oms!%, t#at t#e .ar not merel%
)etra%ed America0s #o&es and interests and sel/-image, )ut was immoral5 one w#ic# we #ad #ad no ri%ht to engage in in t#e /irst &lace4
Dewe% would #a-e t#oug#t suc# attem&ts at /urt#er sel/-castigation &ointless4 T#e% ma% #a-e ser-ed a use/ul cat#artic &ur&ose, )ut t#eir long-run e//ect #as )een to se&arate t#e
intellectuals /rom t#e moral consensus o/ t#e nation rat#er t#an to alter t#at consensus4 $urt#er, Dewe%0s naturaliGed Hegelianism #as more o-erla& wit# t#e )elie/-s%stems o/ t#e
communities we ric# ort# American )ourgeois need to tal! wit# t#an does a naturaliGed 'antianism4 So a re-ersion to t#e Dewe%an outloo! mig#t lea-e us in a )etter &osition to
carr% on w#ate-er con-ersation )etween nations ma% still )e &ossi)le, as well as lea-ing American intellectuals in a )etter &osition to con-erse wit# t#eir /ellow citiGens4
; s#all end )% ta!ing u& two o)Iections to w#at ; #a-e )een sa%ing4 T#e /irst o)Iection is t#at on m% -iew a c#ild /ound wandering in t#e woods, t#e remnant o/ a slaug#tered nation
w#ose tem&les #a-e )een raGed and w#ose )oo!s #a-e )een )urned, #as no s#are in #uman dignit%4 T#is is indeed a conseKuence, )ut it does not /ollow t#at s#e ma% )e treated li!e an
animal4 $or it is &art o/ t#e tradition o/ our communit% t#at t#e #uman stranger /rom w#om all dignit%0 #as )een stri&&ed is to )e ta!en in, to )e reclot#ed wit# dignit%4 T#is 3ewis# and
C#ristian element
in our tradition is grate/ull% in-o!ed )% /ree-loading at#eists li!e m%sel/, w#o would li!e to let di//erences li!e t#at )etween t#e 'antian and t#e Hegelian remain Fmerel%
P#iloso&#ical04 T#e e(istence o/ #ur*-ian rig#ts, in t#e sense in w#ic# it is at issue in t#is meta-et#ical de)ate, #as as muc# or as little rele-ance to our treatment o/ suc# a c#ild as t#e Kuestion o/
t#e e(istence o/ 2od4 ; t#in! )ot# #a-e eKuall% little rele-ance4
,5?
82@ Ric/ard Rorty
T#e second o)Iection is t#at w#at ; #a-e )een calling F&ostmodernism0 is )etter named Frelati-ism0, and t#at relati-ism is sel/-re/uting4 Relati-ism certainl% is sel/-re/uting, )ut t#ere is a
di//erence )etween sa%ing t#at e-er% communit% is as good as e-er% ot#er and sa%ing t#at we #a-e to wor! out /rom t#e networ!s we are, /rom t#e communities wit# w#ic# we &resentl%
identi/%4 Postmodernism is no more relati-istic t#an Hilar% Putnam0s suggestion t#at we sto& tr%ing /or a F2od0s-e%e -iew0 and realiGe t#at F.e can onl% #o&e to &roduce a more rational
conce&tion o/ rationalit% or a )etter conce&tion o/ moralit% i/ we o&erate /rom wit#in our tradition40
5
T#e -iew t#at e-er% tradition is as rational or as moral as e-er% ot#er could )e #eld onl% )% a
god, someone w#o #ad no need to use @)ut onl% to mentionA t#e terms Frational0 or Fmoral0, )ecause s#e #ad no need to inKuire or deli)erate4 Suc# a )eing would #a-e esca&ed /rom #istor% and
con-ersation into contem&lation and metanarrati-e4 To accuse &ostmodernism o/ relati-ism is to tr% to &ut a metanarrati-e in t#e &ostmodernist0s mout#4 One will do t#is i/
one identi/ies F#olding a &#iloso&#ical &osition0 wit# #a-ing a metanarrati-e a-aila)le4 ;/ we insist on suc# a de/inition o/ F&#iloso&#%0, t#en &ostmodernism is &ost-&#iloso&#ical4 1ut it would
)e )etter to c#ange t#e de/inition4
,
otes
*4 6iberalism and the 6imits of 3ustice5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+E5, &4 *<+4 Sandel0s remar!a)le )oo! argues master/ull% t#at Rawls cannot naturaliGe 'ant and still retain t#e
meta-et#ical aut#orit% o/ 'antian F&ractical reason04
54 4eason5 ,ruth and 7istory5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+E*, &4 5*?4
,4 * discuss suc# rede/inition in t#e ;ntroduction to )onse>uences of &ra%matism5 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E5, and t#e issue o/ relati-ism in FHa)ermas and L%otard on
&ostmodemnit%0, /ort#coming in &ra=is 'nternational5 and in FSolidaritL on o)Iecti-itLD0, /ort#coming in )riti>ue.
"! < Politics and the Limits
of "odernit(
Ernesto Lac.a,
T#e t#eme o/ &ostmodernit%, w#ic# /irst a&&eared wit#in aest#etics, #as )een dis&laced to e-er wider areas until it #as )ecome t#e new #oriGon o/ our cultural, &#iloso&#ical, and &olitical
e(&erience4 ;n t#e latter realm, to w#ic# ; s#all #ere limit m% anal%sis, &ostmodemnit% #as ad-anced )% means o/ two con-erging intellectual o&erations w#ose com&le( interwea-ings and
Iu(ta&ositions #a-e, #owe-er, also contri)uted to a large e(tent to o)scuring t#e &ro)lems at #and4 1ot# o&erations s#are, wit#out dou)t, one c#aracteristic6 t#e attem&t to esta)lis# boundaries5
t#at is to sa%, to se&arate an ensem)le o/ #istorical /eatures and &#enomena @&ostmodernA /rom ot#ers also a&&ertaining to t#e &ast and t#at can )e grou&ed under t#e ru)ric o/ modernit%4 ;n )ot#
cases t#e )oundaries o/ modernit% are esta)lis#ed in radicall% di//erent wa%s4 T#e /irst announces a wea!ening o/ t#e meta&#%sical and rationalist &retensions o/ modernit%, )% wa% o/
c#allenging t#e foundational status o/ certain narrati-es4 T#e second c#allenges not t#e ontological status o/ narrati-e as suc#, )ut rat#er t#e current -alidit% of certain narrati-es6 t#ose t#at
L%otard #as called metanarrati-es Emeta-recitsD5 w#ic# uni/ied t#e totalit%0 o/ t#e #istorical e(&erience o/ modernit% @including science as one o/ its essential elementsA wit#in t#e &roIect o/
glo)al, #uman emanci&ation4
;n w#at /ollows, ; s#all consider t#e status o/ metanarrati-es and o//er as )asic t#eses6 @*A t#at t#ere #as )een a radical c#ange in t#e t#oug#t and culture o/ t#e &ast /ew decades @concerning
w#ic# t#ere would )e no incon-enience in considering it as t#e entr% to a sort o/ &ostmodernit%A, w#ic#, #owe-er, &asses neit#er t#roug# a crisis nor, muc# less, to an a)andonment o/
metanarrati-esN @5A t#at t#e -er% idea o/ t#e a)andonment o/ metanarrati-es is logicall% contradictor%, /or it re&roduces wit#in &ostmodern discourse t#e Flogic o/ /oundations0 t#at su&&osedl%
c#aracteriGed modernit%N and @,A t#at t#e decisi-e c#ange relates to t#e new status o/ t#e discursi-e and t#e new language-games &racticed around narrati-es H o/ all SOrts, metanarrati-es
included4 T#e -er% idea o/ a )oundar% )etween modernit%0 and
$rom Ross, A4 @edA, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis^ Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+EE, *+E+, &&4 ?,HE54
82B
889 Ernesto Lac.a, &olitics and the 6imits of (odernity ,,*
&ostmodernit% mar!ed )% t#e outmodedness o/ metanarrati-es &resu&&oses a t#eoretical discourse in w#ic# t#e end o/ somet#ing is t#in!a)le, w#ic# is to sa%0, trans&arent and intellectuall%
gras&a)le4 .#at does it mean /or somet#ing to Fend0D ;t ma% )e concei-ed, in a teleological sense, as t#e attainment o/ its #ig#est /ormN in a dialectical sense, as its trans/ormation into its
contrar%N in t#e mo-ement o/ t#e eternal return, as a moment in t#e &eriodic )ecoming o/ /ormsN or as an anni#ilation t#at mani/ests its radical contingenc%4 T#is is to sa% t#at a discourse is
reKuired t#at can concei-e and construct t#e se&aration H e-en tem&oral se&aration H o/ two entities4 Merel% to &roclaim t#e end o/ somet#ing is an em&t% gesture4
E-en worse, t#e uncritical introduction o/ t#e categor% end into a discourse, to su)stitute an e//ecti-e Fma!ing an end0 /or t#e -oluntarist trans&arenc% o/ a sim&l% announced and &ostulated
end, means to smuggle )ac! in w#at was to #a-e )een Iettisoned4 T#is can #a&&en in two wa%s4 $irst, inso/ar as somet#ing ends, somet#ing radicall% di//erent must commence4 ;n suc# a case, it
is im&ossi)le to a-oid t#e categor% o/ t#e Fnew0 and t#e idea o/ an inno-ati-e -anguard, w#ic# is &recisel% w#at t#e discourse o/ &ostmodernit% &ur&orts to #a-e le/t )e#ind4 On t#e ot#er #and,
to &ostulate t#e outmodedness o/ metanarrati-es @wit#out ta!ing into consideration w#at #a&&ens to ot#er narrati-e s&eciesA is to ac#ie-e rat#er modest intellectual gains in com&arison wit# t#e
o)Iecti-es soug#t4 T#e logic o/ identit%, o/ /ull &resence, is sim&l% dis&laced, /ull% intact, /rom t#e /ield o/ totalit% to t#e /ield o/ multi&licit% o/ atomiGed narrati-es4
;/ t#ere is a sense o/ &ostmodernit%, t#at is, an ensem)le o/ &re-t#eoretical re/erences t#at esta)lis# certain F/amil% resem)lances0 among its di-erse mani/estations, t#is is suggested )% t#e
&rocess o/ erosion and disintegration o/ suc# categories as F/oundation0, Fnew0, Fidentit%0, F-anguard0, and so on4 .#at t#e Fsituation o/ &ostmodernit%0 c#allenges is not so muc# t#e
discrimination and c#oice )etween social and cultural identities )ut t#e status and logic o/ t#e construction o/ t#ose identities4 ConseKuentl%, drawing u& t#e limits o/ modernit% in-ol-es a more
com&le( and e-ol-ing o&eration t#an merel% setting )oundaries4 Postmodemnit%0 cannot )e a sim&le re9ection o/ modernit%N rat#er, it in-ol-es a di//erent modulation o/ its t#emes and
categories, a greater &roli/eration o/ its language-games4
Some o/ t#ese games, w#ic# a-oid concei-ing t#e tradition wit# w#ic# t#e% &la% in terms o/ reIection or a//irmation o/ t#e radical no-elt% o/ t#e &resent, #a-e long )een inscri)ed in t#e
intellectual #istor% o/ t#is centur%4 .#at Heidegger #as called t#e Fde-struction o/ t#e #istor% o/ ontolog%0 is an e(am&le6
T#e answer @to t#e Kuestion o/ 1eingA is not &ro&erl% concei-ed i/ w#at it asserts &ro&ositionall% is Iust &assed along, es&eciall% i/ it gets circulated as a /ree-/loating result, so t#at we merel%
get in/ormed a)out a Fstand &oint0 w#ic# ma% &er#a&s di//er /rom t#e wa% t#is #as #it#erto )een treated4 .#et#er t#e answer is a Fnew0 one remains Kuite a su&er/icial &ro)lem and is o/ no
im&ortance4 ;ts &ositi-e c#aracter must lie in its )eing ancient enoug# /or us to learn to concei-e t#e &ossi)ilities w#ic# t#e Fancients0 #a-e made read% /or us4
T#is e(cludes t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a sim&le reIection4 ;nstead, it attem&ts to trace t#e genealog% o/ t#e &resent, dissol-e t#e a&&arent o)-iousness o/ certain categories t#at are t#e tri-ialiGed and
#ardened sedimentations o/ tradition, and in t#is wa%0 )ring to -iew t#e original &ro)lem to w#ic# t#e% constitute a res&onse4 So, too, in
Heidegger6
;/ t#e Kuestion o/ 1eing is to #a-e its own #istor% made trans&arent, t#en t#is #ardened tradition must )e loosened u&, and t#e concealments w#ic# it #as )roug#t a)out must )e dissol-ed4 .e
understand t#is tas! as one in w#ic# )% ta!ing the >uestion otKeiny as our clue5 we are to destroy t#e traditional content o/ ancient ontolog% until we arri-e at t#ose &rimordial e(&eriences in
w#ic# we ac#ie-ed our /irst wa%s o/ determining t#e nature o/ 1eing H t#e wa%s w#ic# #a-e guided us e-er since4 5
T#is same argument can )e e(tended to t#e most di-erse t#eoretical discourses4 Consider, /or e(am&le, t#e categor% o/ Fclass0 wit#in Mar(ism4 Central to t#e series o/ recent e(c#anges are t#e
/ollowing Kuestions6 ;s it classes or social mo-ements t#at constitute t#e /undamental agents o/ #istorical c#ange in ad-anced industrial societiesD Or, is t#e wor!ing class in t#e &rocess o/
disa&&earingD 1ut t#ese Kuestions are Kuite secondar% )ecause, w#ate-er answers t#e% elicit, t#e% presuppose w#at is /undamental6 t#e o)-iousness and trans&arenc% o/ t#e categor% Fclass04 T#e
Fdestruction0 o/ t#e #istor% o/ Mar(ism, in Heidegger0s sense, in-ol-es s#owing t#at a categor% suc# as Fclass0, /ar /rom )eing o)-ious, is alread% a s%nt#esis o/ determinations, a &articular
res&onse to a more &rimar% Kuestion o/ social agenc%4 1ecause t#e contem&orar% situation &oses t#is &ro)lem again in muc# more com&le( terms t#an were a-aila)le to Mar(, it is necessar% to
understand #is res&onse as a &artial and limited s%nt#esis, w#ile a&&reciating more clearl% t#e original sense o/ #is Kuestions4 T#e sense o/ an intellectual inter-ention emerges onl% w#en it is
&ossi)le to reconstitute t#e s%stem o/ Kuestions t#at it see!s to answer4 On t#e ot#er #and, w#en t#ese Kuestions are ta!en as sim&l% o)-ious, t#eir sense is o)scured, i/ not entirel% lost4 ;t is
&recisel% t#e limitation o/ t#e res&onses t#at !ee&s ali-e t#e sense o/ a Kuestion4
;n s!etc#ing out t#e limits o/ modernit%, we must )e agreed on w#at, in modernit%, is )eing &ut to t#e test4 ;/ we Kuestion t#e s&eci/ic -alues o/ t#e social:&olitical:intellectual &roIect t#at
)egan glo)all% wit# t#e Enlig#tenment, t#e narrati-e o/ its crisis reKuires t#e a//irmation o/ other -aluesN t#is, #owe-er, does not c#ange t#e ontological status o/ t#e categor% o/ .alue as suc#4 ;n
t#is regard, it is im&ortant to &oint out t#at t#e critics o/ modernit% #a-e not e-en tried to introduce di//erent -alues4 .#en t#e t#eorists o/ t#e eig#teent# centur% are &resented as t#e initiators o/
a &roIect o/ Fmaster%0 t#at would e-entuall% lead to Ausc#witG, it is /orgotten t#at Ausc#witG was re&udiated )% a set o/ -alues t#at, in large &art, also Stem /rom t#e eig#teent# centur%4 So, too,
w#en criticism is directed at t#e categor% o/ totalit% im&licit in metanarrati-es, onl% t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ reuniting t#e &artial narrati-es into a glo)al emanci&ator% narrati-e comes under /ireN t#e
categor%-o/ narrati-e0 itsel/ is le/t com&letel% unc#allenged4 ; would li!e to argue t#at it is
882 Ernesto Lac.a, &olitics and the 6imits of (odernity
&recisel% t#e ontolo%ical status o/ t#e central categories o/ t#e discourses o/ modernit%, and not t#eir content5 t#at is at sta!eN t#at t#e erosion o/ t#is status is e(&ressed t#roug# t#e
F&ostmodern0 sensi)ilit%N and t#at t#is erosion, /ar /rom )eing a negati-e &#enomenon, re&resents an enormous am&li/ication o/ t#e content and o&era)ilit% o/ t#e -alues o/ modernit%, ma!ing
it &ossi)le to ground t#em on /oundations muc# more solid t#an t#ose o/ t#e Enlig#tenment &roIect @and its -arious &ositi-ist or HegelianHMar(ist re/ormulationsA4
Lan,ae and Rea.ity
Postmodernit% does not im&l% a chan%e in t#e -alues o/ Enlig#tenment modernit% )ut rat#er a &articular wea!ening o/ t#eir a)solutist c#aracter4 ;t is t#ere/ore necessar% to delimit an anal%tic
terrain /rom w#ose stand&oint t#is wea!ening is t#in!a)le and de/ina)le4 T#is terrain is neit#er ar)itrar% nor /reel% accessi)le to t#e imagination, )ut on t#e contrar% it is t#e #istorical
sedimentation o/ a set o/ traditions w#ose common denominator is t#e colla&se o/ t#e immediac% o/ t#e %i.en. .e ma% t#us &ro&ose t#at t#e intellectual #istor% o/ t#e twentiet# centur% was
constituted on t#e )asis o/ t#ree illusions o/ immediac% @t#e re/erent, t#e &#enomenon, and t#e signA t#at ga-e rise to t#e t#ree intellectual traditions o/ anal%tical &#iloso&#%, &#enomenolog%,
and structuralism4 T#e crisis o/ t#at illusion o/ immediac% did not, #owe-er, result solel% /rom t#e a)andonment o/ t#ose categories )ut rat#er /rom a wea!ening o/ t#eir as&irations to constitute
/ull &resences and /rom t#e ensuing &roli/eration o/ language-games w#ic# it was &ossi)le to de-elo& around t#em4 T#is crisis o/ t#e a)solutist &retensions o/ Ft#e immediate0 is a /itting starting
&oint /or engaging t#ose intellectual o&erations t#at c#aracteriGe t#e s&eci/ic Fwea!ening0 we call &ostmodernit%4 Eac# o/ t#ese t#ree intellectual traditions mig#t ser-e as an eKuall% -alid &oint
o/ de&arture /or our anal%sisN in w#at /ollows, #owe-er, ; s#all )ase m% argument on t#e crisis in structuralism4
As is well !nown, structuralism was constituted around t#e new centralit% it accorded to t#e linguistic model4 ;/ we want to concentrate on t#e crisis o/ Fimmediac%0, w#ic# originall%
&retended to c#aracteriGe t#e notion o/ t#e sign, we s#ould concentrate not so muc# on t#e in-asion o/ new ontic areas )% t#e linguistic model )ut on t#e internal trans/ormation o/ t#e linguistic
model itsel/4 T#e crisis consisted &recisel% in t#e increasing di//icult% o/ de/ining t#e limits o/ language, or4 more accuratel%, o/ de/ining t#e s&eci/ic identit% o/ t#e linguistic o)Iect4
;n t#is res&ect, ; could mention t#ree /undamental stages in t#e structuralist tradition4 T#e /irst is associated wit# Saussure, w#o, as is well !nown, tried to locate t#e s&eci/ic o)Iect o/
linguistics in w#at #e called lan%ue5 an a)straction /rom t#e ensem)le o/ language &#enomena )ased on a set o/ o&&ositions and de/initions, t#e most im&ortant o/ w#ic# are6 lan%ue/ parole5
signi/ier^ signi/ied, s%ntagm:&aradigm4 T#e two )asic &rinci&les t#at o-ersaw t#e constitution o/ t#e lioguistic o)Iect were t#e &ro&ositions t#at t#ere are no &ositi-e terms in language4 O4tii%
di//erences, and
888
t#at language is /orm, not su)stance4 1ot# &rinci&les were central to t#e categor%0 o/ .alue5 w#ic# acKuired increasing im&ortance .is-d-.is si%nification in t#e su)seKuent e-olution o/ t#e
structuralist tradition4
T#e increasing re/inement o/ linguistic /ormalism soon led, #owe-er, to an understanding t#at Saussurean t#eor% was )ased on a set o/ am)iguities t#at could onl% )e
co-ered o-er )% recourse to &rinci&les t#at contradicted its )asic &ostulates4 Ta!e t#e distinction )etween signi/ier and signi/ied6 i/ language is all /orm and not su)stance, and i/ t#ere is
a &er/ect isomor&#ism )etween t#e order o/ t#e signi/ier and t#at o/ t#e signi/ied, #ow is it &ossi)le to esta)lis# t#e di//erence )etween t#e twoD Saussure could onl% do so )% t#e
recourse to t#e idea o/ su)stance, &#onic in one case, conce&tual in t#e ot#er4 As /or t#e distinction )etween lan%ue and parole
H )etween language as collecti-e Ftreasure0 and its use )% eac# indi-idual s&ea!er
H t#is distinction can )e maintained only i/ one assumes a su)Iect e(terior to t#e linguistic s%stem4 ConseKuentl%, one o/ t#e /undamental o&&ositions o/ t#is s%stem was
reKuired to )e e(ternall% de/ined, t#us con/ining linguistic /ormalism wit#in a new limit4 1e%ond t#is &oint it was im&ossi)le to &osit a Flinguistics o/ discourse0, i/ )% discourse
we mean a linguistic unit greater t#an t#e sentence4 Saussure #ad s&o!en o/ semiolog% as a general science o/ signs in social li/e, )ut so long as lan%ue remained anc#ored in t#e
materialit% o/ t#e lin%uistic sign, suc# a &roIect could not &roceed )e%ond a -aguel% meta&#orical and &rogrammatic le-el4
$rom t#is &oint on, &ost-Saussurean structuralism em&#asiGed linguistic /ormalism in its )id to transcend t#e am)iguities and inconsistencies o/ Saussure0s own wor!4
T#is, t#en, is t#e second &#ase, in w#ic# HIelmsle-, /or e(am&le, )ro!e wit# t#e strict isomor&#ism )etween t#e order o/ t#e signi/ier and t#e order o/ t#e signi/ied )%
de/ining units smaller t#an t#e sign, w#ose distincti-e /eatures are no longer isomor&#ic4 ;n t#is manner, #e was a)le to esta)lis# t#e di//erence )etween t#e two orders on
&urel% /ormal grounds4 $urt#ermore, t#e critiKue t#at #ad )een ta!ing &lace, o/ t#e Cartesianism in#erent in t#e categor% o/ t#e su)Iect, made it &ossi)le &rogressi-el% to s#ow
t#at t#e linguistic inter-entions o/ indi-idual s&ea!ers re-eal &atterns and regularities concei-a)le onl% as systems of differences. T#is ena)led t#e linguistic model to )e
e(&anded to t#e /ield o/ discourse4
T#ere was, #owe-er, one /urt#er de-elo&ment4 Once linguistic /ormalism #ad radicall% eradicated su)stance, t#ere was no wa% o/ distinguis#ing )etween t#ose s%stems o/
di//erential &ositions &ro&er to s&eec# and t#e Fe(tralinguistic0 or e(tradiscursI-e0 actions to w#ic# t#e% are lin!ed, /or )ot# s&eec# and actions are di//erential &ositions wit#in
o&erations o/ muc# larger sco&e4 1ut i/ t#is de-elo&ment e(&anded t#e -alue range o/ t#e Flinguistic model0, t#e linguistic o)Iect tended to lose its s&eci/icit%4 ;n t#is second moment o/ t#e
radicaliGation o/ structuralism, t#e sta)le c#aracter o/ t#e relation )etween signi/ier and t#e signi/ied #ad not, #owe-er, )een KuestionedN onl% t#e structural isomor&#ism )etween t#e two #ad
)een )ro!en4 T#e )oundaries o/ linguistics #ad )een e(&anded, )ut t#e immediac% and t#e c#aracteristic o/ /ull &resence o/ its o)Iects were onl% rea//irmed4
.#en t#e &resence and sel/-e-idence o/ t#ese o)Iects #a-e /aded, we can detect t#e transition to a t#ird moment, w#ic#, /ollowing a certain tradition, we can
88: Ernesto Lac.a, &olitics and the 6imits of (odernity 88$
denominate &oststructuralism4 At issue now was t#e /i(ed lin! )etween signi/ier and signi/ied4 T#e Kuasi-Cartesian trans&arenc% t#at structural /ormalism #ad esta)lis#ed )etween t#e &urel%
relational identities o/ t#e linguistic s%stem ser-ed onl% to ma!e t#em more .ulnerable to an% new s%stem o/ relations4 ;n ot#er words, as t#e ideal conditions o/ closure were de/ined more
&recisel%, it was increasingl% more di//icult to #old to t#e closed c#aracter o/ t#e s%stem4 $rom t#is &oint t#e radical Kuestioning o/ t#e immediac% and trans&arenc% o/ t#e sign ta!es &lace, t#e
sundr% -ariants o/ w#ic# are well !nown6 t#e critiKue o/ t#e denotation:connotation distinction in t#e later 1art#es, t#e a//irmation o/ t#e &rimac% o/ t#e signi/ier and t#e increasing centralit% o/
t#e Freal0 .is-d-.is t#e s%m)olic in Lacan, t#e em&#asis on t#e constituti-e c#aracter o/ difference5 and t#e critiKue o/ t#e meta&#%sics O/ &resence in Derrida4
T#e crisis o/ t#e immediac% o/ t#e sign a&&ears to )e dominated )% a dou)le mo-ement6 w#ile t#e signi/ied was e-er less closed wit#in itsel/ and could )e de/ined onl% in
relation to a s&eci/ic conte(t, t#e limits o/ t#at conte(t were increasingl% less well de/ined4 ;n e//ect, t#e -er% logic o/ limit was increasingl% more di//icult to de/ine4 $or Hegel, /or
e(am&le, t#e &erce&tion o/ a limit was t#e &erce&tion o/ w#at is )e%ond itN t#e limit, t#en, lies wit#in t#e concei-a)le4 Structuralism0s radical relationalism would t#us )e su)suma)le under t#e
categor% o/ t#e in/inite regress4 T#is &oint could )e generaliGed6 t#e most di-erse /orms o/ contem&orar% t#oug#t are &ermeated )% t#e relational c#aracter o/ identities in conIunction wit# t#e
im&ossi)ilit% o/ intellectual master% o-er t#e conte(t4 Consider t#e -arious contortions o/ Husserl0s ego:s&lits, and #is e//orts to a//irm t#e transcendental constituti-it% o/ t#e su)Iect6 t#e
wea!ening o/ t#e distinction )etween semantics and &ragmatics in .ittgensteinian and &ost-.ittgenstenian &#iloso&#%N t#e c#aracter o/ 'u#n0s &aradigmsN t#e unresol-ed &ro)lems in t#e
transition /rom epistdm)s to disposit8fs in $oucaultN t#e &ragmatic turn o/ dogmaless em&iricism in Cuine4 Some o/ t#ese e(am&les, es&eciall% Husserl0s, are attem&ts to )rea! t#e
im&asse )% means o/ an essentialist rea//irmation o/ closure4 Howe-er, in t#e maIorit% o/ cases, t#e realiGation o/ t#e o&enness o/ conte(t #as )een t#e &oint o/ de&arture /or a radical anti-
essentialist critiKue4
Let us turn our attention, at t#is &oint, to t#e -arious dimensions o&ened u& )% t#e un/i(ed c#aracter o/ t#e signi/ier:signi/ied relation, t#at is, o/ all identit%4 ;n t#e /irst &lace, its e//ect is
&ol%semic6 i/ a &luralit% o/ signi/ieds is Ioined in an unsta)le /as#ion to certain signi/iers, t#e necessar% result is t#e introduction o/ eKui-ocalit% @in t#e Aristotelian senseA4 1ut i/ one can a//irm
t#at t#is insta)ilit% does not de&end entirel% on t#e eKui-ocalit% o/ t#e signi/ier )ut on t#e conte(ts in w#ic# t#e signi/ier is used, it is no longer a Kuestion o/ e>ui.ocality )ut o/ ambi%uity and
unfi=ity5 iO t#e strict sense o/ t#e terms4 $or e(am&le, w#en ; sa% Fdown t#e #ill0 or Ft#e so/t down on #is c#ee!0,
,
t#e term down is eKui-ocal6 its meaning -aries in relation to di//erent
conte(ts, alt#oug# in eac# conte(t its meaning is &er/ectl% clear4 On t#e ot#er #and, i/ ; s&ea! a)out Fdemocrac%0 in t#e &olitical conte(t o/ .estern Euro&e during t#e Cold .ar %ears, t#e
am)iguit% o/ t#e term &roceeds /rom t#e conte(t itsel/, w#ic# is constituted to some e(tent )% t#e simui0 4neous &resence o/
communist and anticommunist discourses4 T#e term, t#ere/ore, is radicall%0 am)iguous and not sim&l% &ol%semous4 ;t is not a matter o/ its meaning one t#ing in communist discourse and
anot#er in anticommunist discourseN t#is, o/ course, ma% #a&&en, )ut i/ t#at were t#e sole distinguis#ing circumstance, we would )e le/t wit# a &luralit% o/ &er/ectl% well-de/ined conte(ts and,
conseKuentl%, wit# a case o/ sim&le eKui-ocalness4 Somet#ing -er% di//erent, #owe-er, ta!es &lace6 since )ot# discourses are antagonistic and %et o&erate largel% in t#e same argumentati-e
conte(t, t#ere is a loosening o/ t#e relational s%stems t#at constitute t#e identit%0 o/ t#e term4 T#us, t#e term )ecomes a /loating signi/ier4 T#is radical am)iguit%, w#ic# su)-erts t#e /i(it% o/
t#e sign, is &recisel% w#at gi-es t#e conte(t its o&enness4
T#ree conseKuences /ollow /rom t#e a)o-e4 $irst, t#at t#e conce&t o/ discourse is not linguistic )ut &rior to t#e distinction )etween t#e linguistic and e(tralinguistic4 ;/ ; am )uilding a wall
and ; tell someone F#and me a )ric!0 and t#en &lace it on t#e wall, m% /irst act is linguistic and t#e second is )e#a-ioral, )ut it is eas% to &ercei-e t#at t#e% are )ot# connected as &art o/ a total
o&eration, namel%, t#e construction o/ t#e wall4 T#is relational moment wit#in t#e total o&eration is neit#er linguistic nor e(tralinguistic, /or it includes )ot# t%&es o/ actions4 ;/, on t#e ot#er
#and, we t#in! a)out it &ositi-el%, t#e conce&ts t#at a&&re#end it must )e &rior to t#e linguistic:e(tralinguistic distinction4 T#is instance o/ ground is called discourse and is t#ere/ore coterminous
wit# t#e Fsocial04 1ecause e-er% social action #as a meanin%5 it is constituted in t#e /orm o/ discursi-e seKuences t#at articulate linguistic and e(tralinguistic elements4 O
A second conseKuence is t#at t#e relational c#aracter o/ discourse is &recisel% w#at &ermits t#e generaliGation o/ t#e linguistic model wit#in t#e ensem)le o/ social relations4 ;t is not t#at
realit% is language, )ut t#at t#e increasing /ormaliGation o/ t#e linguistic s%stem )roug#t a)out t#e de/inition o/ a set o/ relational logics t#at em)race more t#an t#e linguistic narrowl% de/ined4
T#e act o/ &lacing a )ric! on a wall is not linguistic, )ut its relation to t#e linguistic act o/ &re-iousl% as!ing /or t#e )ric! is a &articular discursi-e relation6 a s%ntagmatic com)ination o/ t#e two
acts4 T#e relational logics o/ t#e social widen considera)l%, w#ic# o&ens u& t#e &at# toward a new conce&tualiGation o/ o)Iecti-it%4
T#e t#ird conseKuence clearl% deri-es /rom t#e two &re-ious ones4 T#e radical relationalism o/ social identities increases t#eir -ulnera)ilit% to new relations and introduces wit#in t#em t#e
e//ects o/ am)iguit% to w#ic# we re/erred a)o-e4
T#ese t#ree conseKuences gi-e us a /ramewor! t#at ma!es &ossi)le an a&&ro(imation to t#e &ostmodern e(&erience4 ;/ somet#ing #as c#aracteriGed t#e discourses o/ modernit%, it is t#eir
&retension intellectuall% to dominate t#e /oundation o/ t#e social, to gi-e a rational conte(t to t#e notion o/ t#e totalit% o/ #istor%, and to )ase in t#e latter t#e &roIect o/ a glo)al #uman
emanci&ation4 As suc#, t#e% #a-e )een discourses a)out essences and /ull% &resent identities )ased in One wa% or anot#er u&on t#e m%t# o/ a trans&arent societ%4 Postmodemnit%, on t#e
Contrar%, )egins w#en t#is /ull% &resent identit% is t#reatened )% an ungras&a)le e(terior t#at introduces a dimension o/ o&acit% and &ragmatism into t#e &retendhd immediac% and trans&arenc%
o/ its categories4 T#is gi-es rise to an un)reac#a)le
88<
Ernesto Lac.a,
a)%ss )etween t#e real @in t#e Lacanian senseA and conce&ts, t#us wea!ening t#O a)solutist &retensions o/ t#e latter4 ;t s#ould )e stressed t#at t#is Fwea!ening0 does not in an% wa% negate t#e
contents o/ t#e &roIect o/ modernit%N it s#ows onl% t#e radical -ulnera)ilit% o/ t#ose contents to a &luralit% o/ conte(ts t#at rede/ine t#em in an un&redicta)le wa%4 Once t#is -ulnera)ilit% is
acce&ted in all its radicalit%, w#at does not necessaril% /ollow is eit#er t#e a)andonment o/ t#e emanci&ator% -alues or a generaliGed s!e&ticism concerning t#em, )ut rat#er, on t#e contrar%, t#e
awareness o/ t#e com&le( strategic-discursi-e o&erations im&lied )% t#eir a//irmation and de/ense4
T#e narration o/ t#e )eginnings o/ &ostmodernit% H as wit# all )eginnings Hin-ol-es a multi&le genealog%4 ;n t#e ne(t section, ; s#all attem&t to trace t#is in relation to a &articular tradition H
Mar(ism H w#ic# constituted )ot# one o/ t#e #ig#est &oints o/ t#e emanci&ator% narrati-es o/ modernit% and one o/ t#eir /irst crises4 .#ence t#e emergence o/ a &ost-Mar(ism or a
&ostmodern Mar(ism resulting /rom t#e new relational conte(ts in w#ic# t#e categories o/ classical Mar(ism were in-ol-ed4 Su)Iect to increasing tensions, t#ese categories )ecame
in-ol-ed in newer and e-er more com&le( language-games4
)a0ita.is#D 3ne(en De(e.o0#entD and !ee#ony
Let us clari/% t#e sense o/ our genealogical KuestionN t#e narrati-e t#at is )eing soug#t does not attem&t to esta)lis# t#e causes o/ a certain &rocess, i/ )% causes Ose mean t#at w#ic# &ossesses all
t#e internal -irtualities t#at )ring a)out an e//ect4 ;/ t#at were t#e case, we would #a-e sim&l% inscri)ed t#e &ast anew onto t#e rationalistic trans&arenc% o/ a conce&tuall% gras&a)le /oundation4
On t#e contrar%, it is rat#er a Kuestion o/ narrating t#e dissolution o/ a /oundation, t#us re-ealing t#e radical contingenc% o/ t#e categories lin!ed to t#at /oundation4 M% intention is re.elatory
rat#er t#an e=planatory.
; s#all )egin wit# a central tenet o/ Mar(ism6 t#at ca&italism e(ists onl% )% dint o/ t#e constant trans/ormation o/ t#e means o/ &roduction and t#e increasing dissolution o/ &ree(isting social
relations4 T#e #istor% o/ ca&italism, t#ere/ore, is, on t#e one #and, t#e #istor% o/ t#e &rogressi-e destruction o/ t#e social relations generated )% it and, on t#e ot#er, t#e #istor% o/ its )order wit#
social /orms e(terior to it4 Actuall%, it is a Kuestion o/ two )orders t#at t#e -er% logic o/ ca&italism must constantl% re-create and rede/ine4 Suc# a situation engenders two conce&tual alternati-es6
eit#er t#e mo-ement o/ t#ese )orders is a &rocess o/ contingent struggle w#ose outcome is largel% indeterminate, or it is Histor% )roug#t to a &redetermined and &redetermina)le end )% a
cunning Reason, w#ic# wor!s on t#e contradictiOii0, o/ t#at Histor%4 ;t is clear t#at a &#iloso&#% o/ #istor% can only )e /ormulated along t#e lines o/ t#e second alternati-e4 And t#ere is little
dou)t t#at classical Mar(isnl /ollowed t#ose lines4 Su//ice it to mention t#e &re/ace to A )ontribution to the )riti>ue of &olitical :conomy.
Let us consider t#is latter alternati-e in relation to tL radicall% relational
<
&olitics and the 6imits of (odernity
88=
c#aracter o/ identit% discussed a)o-e4 ;/ t#e limits o/ t#e s%stem can )e su)-erted )% a realit% e(terior to it, t#en, inso/ar as e-er% identit% is relational, t#e new relations o/ e(teriorit% cannot )ut
trans/orm t#e identities4 ;dentities can remain sta)le onl% in a closed s%stem4 ;s t#ere an% com&ati)ilit%, t#en, )etween t#e idea o/ #istorical agents H &articularl% t#e wor!ing class H as identities
de/ined wit#in t#e ca&italist s%stem, and t#e /act t#at t#e s%stem alwa%s acts u&on a realit%0 e(terior to itD Yes, i/ one acce&ts t#e solution &ut /ort# )% classical Mar(ism6 t#at t#e relation o/
e(teriorit% can )e internally de/ined, since e-er% e(terior relation is destined a priori to succum) as a result o/ ca&italist e(&ansion4 T#e internal logic o/ ca&ital t#us comes to constitute t#e
rational su)strate o/ Histor%, and t#e ad-ent o/ socialism is t#oug#t to )e made &ossi)le onl% )% t#e results o/ t#e internal contradictions o/ ca&italism4
;/ t#is were all, little would )e le/t to sa% and t#e attem&ts to trace wit#in Mar(ist discourses t#e genealog% o/ a &ost-Mar(ism would )e doomed to /ailure4 1ut t#is is not t#e w#ole stor%4 ;n
/act, emergent wit#in Mar(ism are di-erse discourses in w#ic# t#e relation )etween t#e Finternal0 and t#e Fe(ternal0 #as )ecome increasingl% com&le( and #as )egun to deconstruct t#e
categories o/ classical Mar(ism4 T#e language-games &la%ed around t#ese categories )ecame e-er more di//icult and ris!%6
Fclasses0, /or e(am&le, were concei-ed as constituted )% relational com&le(es Kuite remo-ed /rom t#ose originall% attri)uted to t#em4
T#e #istor% o/ Mar(ism #as met wit# se-eral suc# nodal moments o/ am)iguit% and discusi-e &roli/eration4 Howe-er, t#ose &#enomena grou&ed under t#e ru)ric o/ Fune-en and com)ined
de-elo&ment0 must )e singled out /or s&ecial consideration )ecause o/ t#e -ariet% and centralit% o/ t#e e//ects t#e% #a-e &roduced4 ;n a recentl% &u)lis#ed )oo!,
?
; #a-e descri)ed t#e )asic lines
o/ t#e emergence and e(&ansion o/ t#is conce&t o/ une-en and com)ined de-elo&ment, and so ; s#all onl% summariGe its distincti-e /eatures #ere4 At t#e )eginning, t#is conce&t attem&ted onl%
to c#aracteriGe an e(ce&tional conte(t4 T#e Russian )ourgeoisie, #a-ing entered #istor% )elatedl% and conseKuentl% #a-ing )een rendered inca&a)le o/ ta!ing on t#e democratic tas!s o/
o-ert#rowing CGarist a)solutism, ga-e wa% to t#e wor!ing class, w#o assumed t#ese tas!s4 1ut t#e tas!s F&ro&er0 to t#e wor!ing class are socialist and not democratic4 T#ere/ore, #ow does one
de/ine t#e Fe(ce&tionalit%0 o/ One class ta!ing o-er anot#er class0s tas!sD T#e name gi-en to t#is ta!ing o-er was F#egemon%0, )ut t#e nature o/ t#e relation it im&lied was /ar /rom )eing clear4
.as t#e relation )etween t#e wor!ing class and t#e democratic tas!s it too! on internal or e=ternal to its nature as classD And w#at do we ma!e o/ t#e /act t#at t#is une-en de-elo&ment soon
ceased to #a-e an e(ce&tional c#aracterD T#e social u&#ea-als Pro&er to t#e age o/ im&erialism necessitated e-er more com&le( articulator% Practices as a result o/ t#eir o&eration in e-er less
ort#odo( #istorical conte(ts4 Trots!% came to understand une-en and com)ined de-elo&ment as t#e #istorical law O/ our era4 1ut w#at, t#en, is normal de-elo&ment su&&osed to )eD
At t#is &oint ; can return to some o/ t#e &oints made earlier4 E-er% @social or ot#er t%&e o/A identit% is relational and -ulnera)le to t#e su)-ersion o/ an% e(teriorit%4 T#O > im&lies t#at t#e
com)ination o/ tas!s &ro&er to une-en de-elo&ment cannot )ut
88@ Ernesto Lac.a,
&olitics and the 6imits of (odernity
modi/% t#e nature o/ t#e social agents t#at enact t#em4 Suc# was clearl% t#e case iOi t#e emergence, during t#e era o/ &o&ular /ronts, o/ suc# entities as t#e Fmasses0, t#e Fnational0, t#e F&o&ular0,
etc4, e(cluded /rom Mar(ist discourse in t#e #e%da% o/ t#O Second ;nternational4 1ut t#is also im&lied, necessaril%, t#at t#e suturing, /oundational, and meta&#%sical -alue o/ classist categories
#ad )een radicall% Kuestioned4 T#at is, i/ classist identities are su)-erted )% an e(teriorit%, )% new relational and articulator% conte(ts, t#e% cannot )e t#e foundation o/ Histor%4 T#e &ragmatism
and t#e contingenc% &ass /rom t#e tas! to t#e agents, and t#e ground o/ &ossi)ilit% o/ a &#iloso&#% o/ Histor% is dissol-ed4
T#is radical Kuestioning o/ t#e logic o/ /oundations is &recisel% t#e wea!ening e//ect t#at ; and m% colleague C#antal Mou//e /ound to )e intrinsic to &ostmodern e(&erience4 And )%
e(&loring t#ose &oints in t#e Mar(ist tradition in w#ic# t#e wea!ening e//ect o&erates, we can trace t#e genealog% o/ a &ost-Mar(ism4 Let0s *9@*! at two e(am&les6 Sorel and 2ramsci4 Sorel was
clear on two issues6 t#at t#e logic o/ ca&italist de-elo&ment did not mo-e in t#e direction t#at Mar( &redicated, and t#at t#e &artici&ation o/ t#e wor!ing class in t#e democratic &olitical s%stem
led to its integration wit#in t#at s%stem4 T#e /irst &rocess wea!ened t#e logic o/ ca&ital as t#e /oundation o/ Histor%N t#e second &roduced t#e same e//ect o/ wea!ening )% s#owing t#at t#e
social identit% o/ t#e wor!ing class was -ulnera)le to t#e new s%stem o/ relations )% -irtue o/ t#at class0s -er% &olitical &artici&ation4 Sorel0s res&onse to t#is is well !nown6 on t#e one #and, #e
&osited a t#eor% o/ m%t# t#at im&lied a radical relationalism, /or onl% -iolence and t#e total se-erance o/ relations )etween t#e wor!ing class and t#e &olitical s%stem &ermitted a &roletarian
identit%N and on t#e ot#er, t#e a)solute reIection o/ t#e underl%ing rationalit% o/ Histor%, inso/ar as social relations assume structural co#erence onl% w#en &atterned )% m%t#4
2ramsci &resents us wit# an identical relationalism t#at leads, #owe-er, to t#e o&&osite solution4 Sorel reIected all relations o/ e(teriorit% and &ro&osed a &ristine &roletarian identit%4
2ramsci, on t#e contrar%, /ull% e(&lored t#e multi&licit% o/ relational ensem)les w#ic# de-elo&ed in t#e ;tal% o/ #is time, t#us s%stematicall% e(&anding t#e /ield o/ #egemonic relations, )ut as a
result o/ t#at #e #ad to ac!nowledge t#at t#e &olitical su)Iects were not t#e classes )ut w#at #e denominated as collecti-e wills4 .#ere Sorel saw all &artici&ation wit#in t#e &olitical s%stem as a
loss o/ identit%, 2ramsci concei-ed o/ #egemonic articulations as a &rocess o/ creating identities4 1ot# #owe-er, &osited t#e same relational, and ultimatel% ungrounded, c#aracter o/ identities4
;/ we situate t#ese two e(am&les in a )roader #istorical &ers&ecti-e, t#e direction our genealogical e(&loration s#ould ta!e is more easil% discerned4 T#e s%stematiC disco-er% o/ discursi-e
areas in t#e Mar(ist tradition saw t#e emergence o/ new entities and categories t#at, rat#er t#an &rolong t#e )asic conce&ts o/ classical Mar(ism t#roug# t#eir cumulati-e enric#ment, added a
logicall% unintegrata)le supplement to t#em, in t#e manner o/ w#at Derrida #as called t#e Flogic o/ su&&lementarit%0 H t#at #ingeli!e discursi-e &la% t#at renders o&&osition am)iguous4 ; do not
t#in! it is an e(aggeration to argue t#at t#e /undamtctal terminological additions to Mar(ism, /rom Lenin to 2ramsci, constitute suOOlements in t#is -er%
88B
sense4 T#e genealog%0 o/ Mar(ism, t#en, coincides wit# t#e deconstruction o/ its m%t# o/ origins4
T#is m%t# is continuall% nouris#ed )% a multitude o/ o&erations t#at tend to conceal its /issures4 T#ese o&erations /ind t#eir crudest /orm in t#e glorious and in-inci)le Mar(ismHLeninism d
la So-iet, )ut it at least #as t#e -irtue o/ )eing -isi)le, in t#e cons&icuous clumsiness o/ t#e )ureaucratN t#e trahison des clercs s#ows a greater so&#istication, w#ic# o&erates, #owe-er, in t#e
ser-ice o/ concealment4 All o/ Lu!Tcs0s so&#istication is reduced to mediations t#at ma!e t#e #ig#est /orms o/ F)ourgeois0 culture com&ati)le wit# a trans&arent notion o/ class not muc#
di//erent /rom t#at #eld )% a mem)er o/ t#e So-iet Academ% o/ Science4 More recentl%, a #ig#l% ca&a)le grou& o/ 2erman t#eorists wasted a great deal o/ t#eir time, as well as t#at o/ t#eir
readers, in t#e alc#emistic Kuest o/ tr%ing to deri-e t#e conce&t o/ t#e State /rom t#e conce&t o/ Ca&ital4 .#en it comes to the last instance5 t#e con-ictions o/ t#e Fre/ined0 materialist are not
muc# di//erent /rom t#ose o/ t#e -ulgar materialist4 .#at all t#is means is t#at t#e #istor% o/ Mar(ism loses its &luralit%N t#e language-games wit#in t#at #istor% and its relation to our &eriod are
de/ined and codi/ied )e/ore#and4 Mar(ism is acce&ted or reIected in to toB Mar(0s te(ts are not read as one reads te(ts )% $reud, Hegel, or Plato, t#at is, )% Kuestioning t#em /rom t#e
&ers&ecti-e o/ our own &ro)lems and &resent situation4
Rat#er, a /inal re-elation is awaited t#at will allow us to distance oursel-es /rom t#e realit% we li-e and to in#a)it a di//erent #istor%, an illusor% one to )e sure4 1ut w#en we ta!e u& our
current &ro)lems, our engagement wit# t#em is merel% im&ressionistic and &ragmatic4 Most /reKuentl%, t#e ultimate act @;/ ser-ilit% and /ait# in t#e unit% o/ Mar(ism is to a)andon it com&letel%N
)ut t#is ser-es onl% to maintain t#e m%t# o/ its co#erence and unit%4
T#is attitude #as )ecome so generaliGed t#at t#e &receding arguments &ro)a)l% sound a )it outdated4 T#is indi//erence to t#e Mar(ist tradition, #owe-er, leads to an im&ortant loss as regards
t#e constitution o/ a radical &olitics4 ;n t#e /irst &lace, t#ere is an im&o-eris#ment o/ t#e tradition4 ;/ t#e isolated struggles cannot )e inserted wit#in a wider #oriGon t#at FtotaliGes0 an ensem)le
o/ an e(&erience, t#e result is t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ constructing a radical imaginar%4 $urt#ermnore, an a)stract, nondeconstructi-e reIection o/ a tradition in no wa% im&lies going )e%0ond it4 T#is
)rings us )ac! to our original &ro)lem6 to a//irm t#e end o/ somet#ing means not#ing unless we s&eci/% t#e /orm in w#ic# it ends4 1ot# S&inoGa0s &#iloso&#% and Hitlerism #a-e #istoricall%
come to an end in some sense, )ut t#e di//erent /orms in w#ic# we concei-e t#eir end and closure im&inge u&on us, wit# res&ect to not onl% #ow we determine our relation to t#e &ast )ut also
)o(% we de/ine our &resent4
Let us return to our arguments concerning t#e destruction o/ a tradition, in t#e Heideggerian sense4 To set t#e limits o/ an answer is to re-create t#e original meaning o/ t#e Kuestion4 To set
t#e #istorical limits o/ Mar(ism is to reesta)lis# a li-ing dialogue wit# t#at tradition, to endow it (-it# a certain contem&oraneit%
against t#e timelessness t#at its ort#odo( de/enders attri)ute to it4 ;n t#is sense, Post-Mar(ism0 is not an Fe(-Mar(ism0, /or it entails an acti-e in-ol-ement in its
#istor% and in t#e discussion o/ its categories4 1ut t#is in-ol-ement does not im&l%
8:9 Ernesto Lac.a, &olitics and the 6imits of (odcrnih1
a dogmatic a//irmation o/ its unit% and co#erenceN rat#er, it reKuires s&eci/ication o/ its &luralit%4 1% tracing our current &ro)lems wit#in t#e Mar(ist tradition H in t#e writings o/ Lu(em)urg,
1auer, Sorel, or 2ramsci, in w#ic# man% -iolentl% re&ressed intuitions )roug#t a)out deconstructi-e e//ects H it )ecomes &ossi)le to construct a discourse t#at can creati-el% a&&ro&riate t#e &ast4
Historical amnesia is a reci&e /or &aroc#ialism at )est4 At worst it leads to t#e a&&ro&riation o/ one0s struggles )% antagonistic discourses4
Here, #owe-er, it is necessar% to )e more &recise6 i/ we are to reconstruct radical tradition @)ecause t#is is &recisel% w#at t#is is a)outA, not as a necessar% de&arture /rom a &oint o/ origin, )ut
as t#e genealog% o/ t#e &resent, it is clear t#at Mar(ism cannot )e its onl% &oint o/ re/erence4 T#e &luralit% o/ current social struggles, emerging in a radicall% di//erent and more com&le( world
t#an could #a-e )een concei-ed in t#e nineteent# centur%, entails t#e necessit% o/ )rea!ing wit# t#e &ro-incial m%t# o/ t#e Funi-ersal class04 ;/ one can tal! a)out uni-ersalit%, it is onl% in t#e
sense o/ t#e relati-e centralities constructed #egemonicall% and &ragmaticall%4 T#e struggles o/ t#e wor!ing class, o/ women, ga%s, marginal &o&ulations, T#ird .orld masses, must result in t#e
construction o/ t#eir own rea&&ro&riations o/ tradition t#roug# t#eir s&eci/ic genealogical e//orts4 T#is means, o/ course, t#at t#ere is no a priori centralit% determined at t#e le-el o/ structure,
sim&l% )ecause t#ere is no rational /oundation o/ Histor%4 T#e onl% Frationalit%0 t#at Histor% mig#t &ossess is t#e relati-e rationalit% gi-en to it )% t#e struggles and t#e concrete &ragmatic -
#egemonic constructions4 Sorel0s and 2ramsci0s )asic intuitions oug#t to )e radicall% de-elo&ed wit# t#is in mind4 Onl% t#us, )% lowering t#e ontological &retensions o/ Mar(ist categories and
treating t#em not as t#e ground o/ Histor% )ut as &ragmatic and limited s%nt#eses o/ a #istorical realit% t#at su)-erts and sur&asses t#em, will it )e &ossi)le to entertain t#eir current -alidit%4 T#is
&uts us sKuarel% wit#in t#e discussion around &ostmodernit% /rom t#e &oint o/ -iew o/ Mar(ism4 Two central &ro)lems are at sta!e4 T#e /irst is t#at o/ t#e conseKuences o/ t#e colla&se o/ t#e
discourse o/ /oundation /rom t#e &oint o/ -iew o/ a radical &olitical discourse6 does not t#is colla&se lead to &olitical ni#ilism, to t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ gi-ing a /oundation to t#e &olitical &ractice
and critiKueD T#e second re/ers to t#e unit% o/ t#e emanci&ator% &roIect as concei-ed )% t#e Enlig#tenment6 does not t#e &luralit% and dis&ersion o/ t#e current social struggles im&l% its
necessar% a)andonment as a glo)al &roIectD
T/e Process o? Ar,in and )o##on Sense
T#e colla&se o/ t#e m%t# o/ /oundations de&ri-es Histor% and societ% o/ an ultimate meaning, o/ an a)solute &oint o/ de&arture /or &olitical reasoning in t#e sense o/ a Cartesian co%ito. ;n
classical ontological terms, t#is means t#at t#e social is groundlessN i/ we acce&t t#e relational c#aracter o/ all identit%, t#e ideal conditions o/ closure /or a s%stem are ne-er ac#ie-ed and
t#ere/ore all identit% is more or less a /loating signi/ier4 T#is lac! o/ closure modi/ies t#e nature and im&ortance o/
,=*
&olitical argument in two im&ortant senses4 ;n t#e /irst &lace, i/ an ultimate ground is &osited, &olitical argument would consist in disco.erin% t#e action o/ a realit% e(ternal to t#e
argument itsel/4 ;/, #owe-er, t#ere is no ultimate ground, &olitical argument increases in im&ortance )ecause, t#roug# t#e con-iction t#at it can contri)ute, it itsel/ constructs5 to a
certain e(tent, t#e social realit%4 Societ% can t#en )e understood as a -ast argumentati-e te(ture t#roug# w#ic# &eo&le construct t#eir
ow/l realit%4
Howe-er, in a second sense, t#is transition /rom argument as disco-er% to
argument as social construction entails a necessar% modi/ication o/ t#e type of ar%ument. On t#e one #and, i/ we could ta!e as a &oint o/ de&arture a /oundation o/ t#e social o&erating
as co%ito5 t#e argument would )e o/ a logical or algorit#mic t%&e inso/ar as it would constitute a /orum o/ Iudgment )e%ond a&&eal4 .it#out suc# a /orum, #owe-er, t#e argument
would #a-e t#e tendenc% to &ro-e t#e .erisimilitude o/ an argument rat#er t#an its trut#, t#us )ecoming &ragmatic and o&en-ended4 T#is )rings us )ac! to t#e Aristotelian notion o/
phronesis. Let us su&&ose t#at we are tr%ing to determine i/ an enem% is to attac! )% land or )% sea4 Recourse to an algorit#m would )e to no a-ailN we could, #owe-er, reason t#at
one &ossi)ilit% is more likely t#an t#e ot#er4 T#is greater li!eli#ood is, in turn, determined )% ot#er arguments used on ot#er occasions4 T#e ensem)le o/ arguments constitutes t#e
te(ture o/ a grou&0s common sense. And t#is common sense, e(tended in time, is w#at constitutes a tradition @o/ struggle, o/ e(ercise o/ &ower, etc4A4 ow, since t#is tradition is )%
de/inition o&en-ended H t#at is, ungrounded in an% ultimate algorit#mic certaint% H it is res&onsi-e to t#e di-erse argumentati-e &ractices t#at ta!e &lace in societ%4 One argument
answers anot#er, )ut in t#is &rocess o/ counterargumentation, t#e argument itsel/ H t#at is, its own identit% His itsel/ modi/ied in one wa% or anot#er4
Here is t#e )asis /or our answer to t#e /irst Kuestion4 A)andonment o/ t#e m%t# o/ /oundations does not lead to ni#ilism, Iust as uncertaint% as to #ow an enem% will attac! does not
lead to &assi-it%4 ;t leads, rat#er, to a &roli/eration o/ discursi-e inter-entions and arguments t#at are necessar%, )ecause t#ere is no e(tradiscursi-e realit% t#at discourse mig#t sim&l%
re/lect4 ;nasmuc# as argument and discourse Constitute t#e social, t#eir o&en-ended c#aracter )ecomes t#e source o/ a greater acti-ism and a more radical li)ertarianism4 Human!ind,
#a-ing alwa%s )owed to e(ternal /orces H 2od, ature, t#e necessar% laws o/ Histor% H can now, at t#e t#res#old o/ &ostmodernit%, consider itsel/ /or t#e /irst time t#e creator and
COnstructor o/ its own #istor%4 T#e dissolution o/ t#e m%t# o/ /oundations H and t#e concomitant dissolution o/ t#e categor% Fsu)Iect0 H /urt#er radicaliGes t#e emanci&ator%
&ossi)ilities o//ered )% t#e Enlig#tenment and Mar(ism4
Anot#er o)Iection could )e raised to t#is wit#drawal o/ /oundations6 wouldn0t t#is eliminate an% moti-ation /or actionD Are we not t#en in t#e situation, e-o!ed
;
)% Sartre, o/ a c#ooser wit# no moti-e to c#ooseD T#is, #owe-er, is not a -alid o)Iection, /or t#e lac! o/ /oundations leads onl% to t#e a//irmation t#at O#uman0 as
suc# is an em&t% entit%, )ut social agents are ne-er O#umans0 in general4 On t#e
Contrar%, social agents a&&ear in concrete situations and are constituted )% &recise
8:2 Ernesto Lac.a, &olitics and the 6imits of (odernity ,=,
and limited discursi-e networ!s4 ;n t#is sense, lac! o/ grounding does not a)olis# t#e meaning o/ t#eir actsN it onl% a//irms t#eir limits, t#eir /lnitude, and t#eir #istoricit%4
&.o"a. E#anci0ation and E#0ty Sini?iers
; s#all now ta!e u& t#e second &ro)lem o/ w#et#er t#e dis&ersion and &luralit% o/ social struggles dissol-e t#e glo)al c#aracter o/ t#e emanci&ator% &roIect4 To )e sure, one cannot smuggle in
t#e unit% and totalit% o/ a &roIect once one #as reIected its /oundation4 1ut is unit% o/ /oundation t#e onl% /orm o/ totaliGing &ractice in societ%D Are t#ere not also totaliGing e//ects on t#e le-el
o/ w#at we #a-e called &ragmatic #egemonic &racticesD Remem)er t#at an% identit% is am)iguous inso/ar as it is una)le to constitute itsel/ as a &recise di//erence wit#in a closed totalit%4 As
suc#, it )ecomes a /loating signi/ier w#ose degree o/ em&tiness de&ends on t#e distance t#at se&arates it /rom its /i(edness to a s&eci/ic signi/ied4 @Earlier, we used Fdemocrac%0 as an e(am&le o/
suc# a signi/ier4A T#is degree o/ /i(it% o/ a signi/ier -aries in in-erse &ro&ortion to t#e e(tent o/ its circulation in a gi-en discursi-e /ormation4 T#e am)iguit% o/ t#e signi/ier Fdemocrac%0 is a
direct conseKuence o/ its discursi-e centralit%N onl% t#ose signi/lers around w#ic# im&ortant social &ractices ta!e &lace are su)Iect to t#is s%stematic e//ect o/ am)iguit%4 @T#e same argument
could )e made /or t#e Fim&recision0 o/ &o&ulist s%m)ols4A
;n realit%, e//ecti-e am)iguit% does not arise onl% /rom t#e attem&ts to /i( signi/iers to antagonistic discourses, alt#oug# t#is latter case is more interesting to us4 ;t ma% #a-e a multi&licit% o/
sources, and it can )e ascri)ed to t#e &#enomenon o/ s%m)olic re&resentation4 A signi/ier is em&tied w#en it is disengaged /rom a &articular signi/ied and comes to s%m)oliGe a long c#ain o/
eKui-alent signi/leds4 T#is dis&lacement and e(&ansion o/ t#e signi/%ing /unction constitute t#e s%m)ol4
T#e relations#i& )etween a /oundation and w#at it /ounds is Kuite di//erent /rom a s%m)olic re&resentation and t#at w#ic# is s%m)oliGed4 ;n /oundational logic t#ere is a necessar%,
determining relation )etween t#e /ounding agenc% and t#e /ounded entit%N in s%m)olic re&resentation, on t#e ot#er #and, no suc# internal moti-ation e(ists and t#e c#ain o/ eKui-alent signi/ieds
can )e e(tended inde/initel%4 T#e /ormer is a relation o/ delimitation and determination, i4e4 /i(ation4 T#e latter is an o&en-ended #oriGon4
;t is t#e contra&osition )etween /oundation and #oriGon t#at ; t#in! ena)les uS to understand t#e c#ange in t#e ontological status o/ emanci&ator% discourses and, in general, o/
metanarrati-es, in t#e transition /rom modernit% to &ostmodernit-4 A /ormation t#at is uni/ied or totaliGed in relation to a #oriGon is a /ormation wit#out /oundationN it constitutes itsel/ as a unit%
onl% as it delimits itsel/ /rom t#at w#ic# it negates4 T#e discourses o/ eKualit% and rig#ts, /or e(am&le, need not rel% on a common #uman essence as t#eir /oundationN it su//ices to &osit an
egalitarian logic w#ose limits o/ o&eration are gi-en )% t#e concrete argumentati-e &ractices e(isting in a societ%4 A #oriGon, t#en, is an em&t% locus, a &oint in w#ic# societ%
s%m)oliGes its -er% groundlessness, in w#ic# concrete argumentati-e &ractices o&erate o-er a )ac!dro& o/ radical /reedom, or radical contingenc%4 T#e dissolution o/ t#e m%t# o/ /oundations
does not dissol-e t#e &#antom o/ its own a)sence4 T#is a)sence is H at least in t#e last t#ird o/ t#e nineteent# centur% H t#e condition o/ &ossi)ilit% /or a//irming t#e #istorical -alidit% o/ our
&roIects and t#eir radical meta&#%sical contingenc%4 T#is dou)le insertion constitutes t#e #oriGon o/ &ostmodern /reedom, as well as t#e s&eci/ic metanarrati-e o/ O8/ age4
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 Martin Heidegger, Kein% and ,ime5 transl4 3o#n MacKuarrie and Edward Ro)inson, 1asil 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E>, &4 =94
54 'bid.5 &4 ==4
,4 T#e e(am&le is /rom 34 L%ons, 'ntroduction to ,heoretical 6in%uistics5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+?E, &4 ?+4
=4 ;t would not )e correct to argue, gi-en t#e /unctional c#aracter o/ t#e discursi-e, t#at e-er% discursi-e seKuence &resu&&oses languageN t#is is no dou)t true, )ut language in turn also
&resu&&oses -ocal cords4 T#us, rat#er t#an de/ine t#e a)stract conditions o/ e(istence o/ somet#ing, we s#ould de/ine t#e structural totalit% in w#ic# t#ese conditions are articulated4
!. T#at t#ere are, #ere and t#ere, #ints o/ a di//erent &ers&ecti-e in Mar(0s wor! is undenia)leN /or e(am&le, t#e well-!nown letter to Jera Sasulic# on t#e &ossi)ilities o&ened u& )% t#e Russian
&easant communes4 1ut t#e% were onl% #intsN t#ere can )e no dou)t t#at #is t#in!ing mo-ed in t#e o&&osite direction4
?4 Ernesto Laclau and C#antal Mou//e, 7e%emony and -ocialist -trate%y: ,owards a radhal democratic politics5 1*J!.
7. As ; said a)o-e, t#is argumentati-e /a)ric is not solel% -er)alN it is also interlaced wit# non-er)al actions to w#ic# it gi-es rise4 T#us, e-er% non-er)al action #as meaning, and, reci&rocall%,
e-er% -er)al argument #as a &er/ormati-e dimension4
,he )ondition of &ost-(ar=ist (an ,=>
5? w ,he )ondition of
&ost-(ar=ist (an
Andr6 &or7
.it# t#e s&ecialiGation o/ Io)s, t#e di-ision o/ la)our #as made it &ossi)le /or -ast amounts o/ !nowledge to )e em&lo%ed across t#e w#ole o/ societ%4 T#e s&eed wit# w#ic# tec#nolog% #as
ad-anced, t#e &ower o/ t#e &roducti-e mac#iner% and t#e wealt# o/ t#e industrialiGed nations are all a &roduct o/ t#is &rocess4
1ut eac# indi-idual is master o/ onl% a minute /raction o/ t#e e(&anding wealt# o/ !nowledge em&lo%ed4 T#e culture o/ wor! #as /ragmented into t#ousands o/ tin% areas o/ s&ecialiGed !now-
#ow and #as t#us )een cut o// /rom t#e culture o/ e-er%da% li/e4 Occu&ational s!ills &ro-ide neit#er t#e re/erences nor t#e criteria w#ic# would ena)le &eo&le to gi-e meaning to t#e world, direct
its course o/ e-ents and /ind t#eir own direction wit#in it4 De-centred /rom t#emsel-es )% t#e one-dimensional nature o/ t#eir Io)s and !now-#ow, t#eir &#%sical e(istences su)Iected to -iolence,
t#e% are /orced to li-e in an en-ironment w#ic# is )ecoming steadil% more dislocated and /ragmented, -ictims o/ megatec#nological aggression4 T#is world, w#ic# cannot )e integrated )% li-ed
e(&erience, #as not#ing o/ a li/e-worldN rat#er, it is e(&erienced as t#e li/e-world0s &ain/ul a)sence4 E-er%da% li/e #as s&lintered into isolated &oc!ets o/ time and s&ace, a succession o/
e(cessi-e, aggressi-e demands, dead &eriods and &eriods o/ routine acti-it%4 T#is /ragmentation, w#ic# is so resistant to a li-ed e(&erience o/ integration, is re/lected in a @non-Aculture o/
e-er%da% li/e, made u& o/ t#rills, transitor% /as#ions, s&ectacular entertainment and /ragments o/ news4
Histor% #as t#us dismem)ered w#at Mar(0s -ision made w#ole4 Mar( &redicted t#at t#e domination o/ ature )% science would ena)le indi-iduals to de-elo& a totalit% o/ ca&a)ilities within
t#eir wor!, and t#at t#an!s to t#is Grichest de.elopment o/ the indi.idual15 Fthe free self-reali8ation of indi.iduality1 would )ecome a need w#ose satis/action would )e soug#t and /ound outside
wor!, t#an!s to t#e Fgeneral reduction o/ t#e necessar% la)our o/ societ% to a minimum04
T#is reduction to a minimum is alread% in &rogress6 industrial societies &roduce increasing amounts o/ wealt# wit# decreasing amounts o/ la)our4 Yet t#e% #a-e not
$rom 2orG, A4, )riti>ue of :conomic 4eason5 Jerso, London, ; O &&4 +*H*9,4
8::
created a culture o/ wor! w#ic#, #a-ing F/ull%0 e(&anded t#e indi-iduals0 a)ilities, would allow t#em to de-elo& F/reel%0 during t#eir dis&osa)le time H t#roug# -oluntar% co-
o&eration, scienti/ic, artistic, educational and &olitical acti-ities, and so on4 T#ere is no Fsocial su)Iect0 culturall% or &oliticall% ca&a)le o/ /orcing t#roug# a redistri)ution o/ la)our w#ic# would
allow e-er%one to earn t#eir li-ing )% wor!ing, %et allow t#em to wor! less and less and at t#e same time recei-e an increasing income re&resenting t#eir s#are o/ t#e increasing sociall%
&roduced wealt#4
Suc# a redistri)ution is, #owe-er, t#e onl% wa% o/ gi-ing meaning to t#e decrease in t#e -olume o/ sociall% necessar% wor!4 ;t is t#e onl% wa% to &re-ent t#e disintegration o/ societ% and t#e
di-ision o/ t#e wor!ing &o&ulation itsel/ into a num)er o/ occu&ational elites on t#e one #and, and a mass o/ unem&lo%ed or casuall% em&lo%ed &eo&le on t#e ot#er, and an e-en greater num)er
o/ inde/initel% interc#angea)le and re&lacea)le wor!ers in industr% and, more es&eciall%, industrialiGed and com&uteriGed ser-ices, sandwic#ed )etween t#e two4 ;t is t#e onl% wa%, )% reducing
t#e amount e-er%one wor!s, to ma!e s!illed Io)s accessi)le to a greater num)er o/ &eo&leN to ena)le t#ose w#o so desire to acKuire new s!ills and Kuali/ications at an% stage in t#eir li-esN to
reduce t#e &olariGing e//ect wor! #as on t#e wa% o/ li/e, com&ensator% needs and &ersonalit% @or de&ersonaliGationA o/ eac# indi-idual4
;ndeed, as t#e &eriods o/ dis&osa)le time )ecome longer, non-wor!ing time can )ecome somet#ing ot#er t#an t#e o)-erse o/ wor!ing time6 somet#ing ot#er t#an time /or rest, rela(ation and
recu&erationN or /or acti-ities secondar% and com&lementar% to wor!ing li/eN or idleness H w#ic# is )ut t#e o)-erse o/ com&ulsor% #etero-determined wage sla-er%N or entertainment H t#e
counter&art o/ a wor! w#ic#, )% its monoton%, is anaest#etiGing and e(#austing4 As dis&osa)le time increases, it )ecomes )ot# &ossi)le and necessar% to /ind ot#er acti-ities and relations to
structure it, in w#ic# indi-iduals de-elo& t#eir /aculties in ot#er wa%s, acKuire ot#er s!ills and lead a di//erent sort o/ li/e4 ;t is t#en &ossi)le /or our Io)s and wor!&laces to cease to )e our onl%
sources o/ identit% and t#e onl% s&aces in w#ic# socialiGation is &ossi)leN and /or t#e s&#ere o/ non-wor! to cease to )e t#e s&#ere o/ &ri-ate li/e and consumerism4 ;t )ecomes &ossi)le /or new
relations o/ coo&eration, communication and e(c#ange to )e /orged in t#is /ree time and /or a new societal and cultural s&ace, com&osed o/ autonomous acti-ities wit# /reel% c#osen aims, to )e
o&ened u&4 T#ere is, t#en, a &ossi)le e-olution towards a new relation )etween wor!ing time and dis&osa)le time /inall% re-ersing t#e &resent situation6 it allows /or autonomous acti-ities to
)ecome more im&ortant t#an wor!ing li/e, t#e s&#ere o/ /reedom more im&ortant t#an t#e s&#ere o/ necessit%4 T#e wa% we organiGe t#e time we s&end li-ing need no longer )e dictated )% t#e
time we s&end wor!ingN on t#e contrar%, wor! must come to occu&% a su)ordinate &lace wit#in t#e li/e &lan o/ t#e indi-idual4
5
;ndi-iduals will, t#en, )e muc# more e(acting a)out t#e nature, content, goals and organiGation o/ t#eir wor!4 T#e% will no longer acce&t stu&e/%ing wor!0 or su)Iection to o&&ressi-e
sur-eillance and #ierarc#ical structures4 Li)eration from
8:< Andr6 &or7 ,he )ondition of &ost-(ar=ist (an
wor! will #a-e &roduced li)eration within wor!, wit#out as muc# as trans/orming wor! @as Mar( &redictedA into /ree sel/-acti-it% wit# goals o/ its own4 ;n a com&le( societ%,
#eteronom% cannot )e a)olis#ed com&letel%, to )e re&laced )% autonom%4 ;t is &ossi)le, #owe-er, /or tas!s &er/ormed wit#in t#e s&#ere o/ #eteronom% itsel/ to )e res!illed, restructured
and di-ersi/ied H nota)l% @t#oug# not e(clusi-el%A )% allowing indi-iduals to self-mana%e their workin% time H in suc# a wa% as to increase t#e degree o/ autonomy within heteronomy. ;t
would )e wrong, t#ere/ore, to imagine t#ere is a clear-cut se&aration )etween autonomous acti-ities and #eteronomous wor!, t#e realm o/ /reedom and t#e realm o/ necessit%4 T#e
/ormer does indeed #a-e re&ercussions on t#e latter, )ut can ne-er su)sume it entirel%4
T#is -ision o/ a societ% o/ li)erated time, or w#at t#e 2erman Le/t re/ers to as a societ% o/ culture0 ELultur%esellschaftD )% com&arison wit# t#e Fwor!-)ased societ%0
EArbeit%esellschaftD , is consonant wit# t#e ethical content @t#e F/ree sel/-realiGation o/ indi-idualit%0A o/ t#e Mar(ian uto&ia4 Yet t#ere are ne-ert#eless a num)er o/ im&ortant
&#iloso&#ical and &olitical di//erences )etween t#e two4
Mar( )elie-ed t#e /ull de-elo&ment o/ indi-idual ca&acities would accom&an% t#e /ull de-elo&ment o/ &roducti-e /orces and lead necessaril% to a re.olution @in t#e
&#iloso&#ical senseA on two le-els simultaneousl%6
*4 ;ndi-iduals w#o were /ull% de-elo&ed within t#eir wor! would ta!e control o/ t#e latter in order to assert t#emsel-es as de9ure su)Iects o/ w#at t#e% alread% &ossessed de facto. ;n ot#er
words, t#e /reedom #istorical de-elo&ment #ad %i.en t#em, in t#e /orm o/ a set o/ ca&acities, would ta!e &ossession o/ itsel/ )% means o/ refle=i.e re.olution5 t#at is, )% t#e su)Iect &ositing itsel/
as suc#4 T#is is t#e meaning o/ t#e distinction Mar( ma!es )etween t#e full de-elo&ment o/ indi.iduals and t#e free sel/-realiGation o/ indi.idualities in w#at #e terms F#ig#er acti-ities0,
acti-ities #e locates in Fdis&osa)le time04
54 Mar( sees t#is re/le(i-e H and, strictl% s&ea!ing, e(istential H re-olution, t#roug# w#ic# /reedom @indi-idual e(istence endowed wit# t#e means o/ ac#ie-ing autonom%A )ecomes an end
itsel/, as one side o/ a #istorical dialectic w#ose ot#er side is t#e necessit% /or economic re-olution4 As t#e amount o/ necessar% la)our diminis#es, Fla)our in t#e direct /orm VceasesY to )e t#e
great well-s&ring o/ wealt#, la)our time ceases and must cease to )e its measure, and #ence e(c#ange -alue Vmust cease to )e t#e measure o/Y use -alue4444 .it# t#at, &roduction )ased on
e(c#ange -alue )rea!s down0 and t#e F/ree de-elo&ment o/ indi-idualities0, and t#e Freduction o/ t#e necessar% la)our o/ societ% to a minimum0 )ecome t#e goal4
=
;n ot#er words, economic rationalit% @and not Iust ca&italist rationalit%A #as gone as /ar as it can4 ;t #as ne-er #ad an% end-goal ot#er t#an t#e most e//icient &ossi)le use o/ a-aila)le means and
t#e most e//icient &ossi)le organiGa lion o/ s%stems o/ means4 ;t is an essentiall% instrumental /orm o/ rationalit%, O iose end-goal is t#e
8:=
rational /unctioning o/ s%stems o/ means, /or t#e &ur&ose o/ accumulating means @)% &ro/it-ma!ingA w#ic# will &ro-ide /or e-en more e//icient s%stems o/ resources4 ;ts means are t#us its ends
and its ends are means towards ot#er means4 Economic rationalit% economiGes t#e F/actors o/ &roduction0 H essentiall% time and la)our Hin order to re-em&lo% t#em Felsew#ere in t#e econom%0,
wit# t#e aim o/ sa-ing time and la)our, w#ic# are, in t#eir turn, to )e re-em&lo%ed elsew#ere4 Economic rationalit% sa-es la)our in &ursuit o/ an e-er--anis#ing end-goal w#ic# is alwa%s out o/
reac#, and t#is end-goal is ne-er t#e li)eration o/ time itsel/, t#at is, t#e e(tension o/ t#e time we #a-e /or li-ing4 T#e /unction o/ leisure itsel/ is to Fcreate Io)s0, to )e use/ul /or commodit%
&roduction and &ro/ita)le in-estment4
ow, wit# t#e /ull de-elo&ment o/ t#e &roducti-e /orces, t#is d%namic o/ accumulation ceases to )e wor!a)le4 ;nstrumental rationalit% is t#rown into crisis and its /undamental irrationalit%
)ecomes &atent4 T#e crisis can onl% )e resol-ed )% a&&l%ing a new /orm o/ rationalit% to sa-ings in la)our, a /orm o/ rationalit% consistent wit# t#e onl% o)Iecti-e w#ic# can gi-e t#ese sa-ings
an% meaning6 t#at o/ ma!ing time a-aila)le /or t#ese F#ig#er acti-ities0 w#ic# are t#eir own ends unto t#emsel-es, at one wit# t#e mo-ement o/ li/e itsel/4 Suc# acti-ities are no longer ones
w#ic# must )e rationaliGed so t#e% ta!e u& less time4 On t#e contrar%, s&ending time doing t#em, not sa-ing time, )ecomes t#e o)Iecti-e4 T#e acti-it% is its own endN it ser.es no ot#er &ur&ose4
;t is t#us as i/ t#e crisis o/ economic rationalit% were t#e -acant site o/ anot#er /orm o/ rationalit% which will %i.e meanin% to the whole of the de.elopment that precedes it. And t#is ot#er
rationalit% is, in Mar(, none ot#er t#an t#e rationalit% o/ /ull% de-elo&ed indi-iduals generated )% t#e /ull de-elo&ment o/ t#e /orces o/ &roduction, w#o ta!e re/le(i-e &ossession o/
t#emsel-es in order to )ecome t#e su)Iects o/ w#at t#e% are, t#at is, in order to ado&t as t#eir goal t#e /ree sel/-realiGation o/ t#eir indi-idualit%4 According to Mar(, material de-elo&ment t#us
engenders at once its own crisis and t#e #istorical su)Iect w#o will )e ca&a)le o/ o-ercoming it )% re-ealing t#e meaning o/ t#e contradiction concealed wit#in t#is de-elo&ment4
Li)eration within wor! is, /or Mar( and Mar(ists, &articularl% t#ose in wor!ers0 organiGations, t#e necessar% &rereKuisite /or li)eration from wor!N /or it is t#roug# li)eration within wor! t#at
t#e su)Iect ca&a)le o/ desiring li)eration from wor! and o/ gi-ing it a meaning will )e )orn4 Hence t#e su&reme im&ortance Mar(ist aut#ors attri)ute to re&ro/essionaliGed multis!illed wor!ers,
res&onsi)le /or Fso-ereign0 and Com&le( tas!s4 T#e% #a-e a tendenc% to -iew t#ese wor!ers as t#e #istorical su)Iects o/ a &otential rea&&ro&riation )ot# o/ t#e &roducti-e /orces and o/ t#e
de-elo&ment o/ t#e indi-idual )% t#e indi-idual #er- or #imsel/4
ow t#is is o)-iousl% an unsustaina)le uto&ia4 E-en Mar(0s own wor!s re-eal a gross contradiction )etween #is t#eor% and #is e(ce&tionall% astute P#enomenological descri&tions o/ t#e
relation o/ wor!er to mac#iner%6 t#e alienation o/ t#e wor!er /rom t#e means o/ la)our, /rom t#e &roduct and /rom t#e !nowledge em)odied in t#e mac#ine4 ot#ing in t#is descri&tion Iusti/ies
t#e t#e\r% o/ Fattracti-e la)our0 or t#e a&&ro&riation @a&&ro&ria)ilit%A o/ t#e totalit% o/
8:@ Andr6 &or7 ,he )ondition of &ost-(ar=ist (an 8:B
&roducti-e /orces as a result o/ wor!ers de-elo&ing a totalit% o/ ca&a)ilitiesN and t#is is true /or #is earl% writings as muc# as /or /rundrisse and )apital.
Curiousl% enoug# t#e same is true, OiS we #a-e seen, o/ 'ern and Sc#umann4 T#eir researc# indicates a tendenc% towards restructuring and re&ro/essionaliGing t#e tas!s o/ a small minorit%
o/ industrial woi!ers, )ut t#is re&ro/essionaYiGation does not Iusti/% t#e aut#ors0 t#eor% o/ Oso-ereign0 wor!ers wit# /ull% de-elo&ed /aculties4 On t#e contrar%, 'ern and Sc#umann0s
monogra&#s re-eal t#at the de%ree of autonomy within heteronomy enIo%ed )% t#e w&r!ers is what they ha.e to stru%%le for5 Iust as t#e recognition o/ s!ills H t#e sourOe o/ t#e wor!ers0 &ower in
&roduction H #as alwa%s )een somet#ing wor!ers #ad to /ig#t /or4
>
Howe-er, i/ t#is is t#e case, i/ li)eratiOn within wor! @w#ic# is alwa%s &artial and relati-eA is at sta!e in t#e wor!ers0 >OOOggle, t#is means the de.elopment of the forces of production does not
of itself brin% db2ut either this liberation or its historical and social sub9ect. ;n ot#er words, indi-i,d8als do not struggle /or t#is li)eration, and t#e /ull de-elo&ment o/ t#eir /aculties associated
wit# it, )ecause o/ w#at t#e% are alread% but because of what they aspire to be and ha.e not become or not %et )ecome4 And t#e Kuestion o/ w#% t#e% as&ire to ac#ie-e /ree, autonomous sel/-
realiGation will not )e answered as OOng as it is seen /rom t#e &ers&ecti-e ado&ted )% Mar(4 $or #im, t#is Kuestion sim&lY did not arise )ecause #is &#iloso&#% @or anti-&#iloso&#%A too! t#e
/orm o/ an in-erse Hegelianism6 #e saw #istor% as t#e &rocess t#roug# w#ic# meaning too! &ossession o/ t#e real, t#is meaning )eing not s&irit, as it was /or Hegel, )ut t#e /ull% de-elo&ed
indi-idual )ecoming t#e master o/ ature and o/ t#e &rocess )% w#ic# ature was mastered H t#is indi-idual )eing
?
none ot#er t#an t#e 8ni-ersal Prolet&rla/l4
T#is uto&ia is dead6 w#et#er we ta!g 'ronstadt *+59, Moscow *+5E, *+,9, *+,> or *+,<, 1erlin *+,,, Tre)lin!a *+=O, Hiros#ima 1*!5 Paris *+?E, or an% ot#er date as t#e signal o/ its
demise4 Hi>Oor% mig#t end in nuclear winter, or a glo)al C#erno)%l or 1#o&alN it mig#t un/old )% continuall% rein/orcing t#e domination o/ indi-iduals )% increasingl% &ower/ul Oieans o/
dominating atureN or )% de-elo&ing increasingl% )ar)aric /orms o/ -iolence against t#e growing mass o/ t#ose w#o #a-e )een e(cluded, )ot# wit#in t#e industrialiGed world and outside it4 ;/
we a-oid all t#is, it will not )e )ecause #istor% has a di//erent meaning )ut )ecause we will #a-e succeeded in in-esting it wit# one4 I/, t#an!s to t#e li)eration o/ time, t#e /ull de-elo&ment o/
&roducti-e /orces leadS to economic rationalit% @and its crisisA )eing transcended and indi-idualities )eing /reel% de-elo&ed, it will not )e )ecause t#is is t#e meaning o/ #istor% )ut )ecatISe we
will #a-e made #istor% ta!e on t#is meaning4
E-er%t#ing a)out our /reedom #angs in t#e )alance, including t#at /reedom itsel/4 T#e condition o/ &ost-Mar(ist Man *> t#at t#e meaning Mar( read in #istorical de-elo&ment remains /or us
t#e onl% meaning t#at de-elo&ment can #a-e, %et we must &ursue t#is meaning independentlU of the e=istence of a socFi class capable of reali8in% it. ;n ot#er words, t#e onl% eon-economic,
&ost-econoititc goals ca&a)le o/
gi-ing meaning and -alue to sa-ings in time and la)our are ones indi-iduals must disco-er wit#in t#emsel-es4 o #istorical necessit% im&oses on us t#e re/le(i-e re-olution w#ic# t#e de/ining
o/ t#ese goals im&lies4 T#e &olitical will ca&a)le o/ realiGing t#em #as no &re-e(istent social )ase and cannot rest on an% &articular class interest or an% &ast, &resent or /uture tradition or norm4
T#is &olitical will and t#e moral as&irations t#at in/orm it can onl% draw u&on t#emsel-es6 t#eir e(istence &resu&&oses and will #a-e to demonstrate the autonomy of ethics and the autonomy of
politics.
;t is in t#is sense t#at ; &ro&ose to read t#e &rogramme /or t#e reconstruction o/ a Euro&ean Le/t set out in Peter 2lotG0s (anifest. O T#e anal%sis w#ic# ser-es as #is &oint o/ de&arture
a&&ears to )e a !ind o/ counter&oint to t#e )ommunist
(anifesto: t#e t#ird industrial re-olution destro%s traditional )onds o/ solidarit%, )lurs t#e di-iding lines )etween classes, )rea!s down social and /amil% ties and !ee&s &ro&elling societ%
towards indi-idualiGation E'ndi.idualisierun%sschubD. T#is ma% im&l% Fa new social mo)ilit% o/ isolation, a growt# o/ o&&ortunities or t#e destruction o/ an% &ossi)ilit% o/ communit%, a &ossi)le
li)eration /rom t#e man% constraints t#at deri-e /rom wor! or t#e /amil% or e-er%da% culture, )ut also t#e danger o/ a wit#drawal /rom social li/e, t#e destruction o/ solidarit%06
T#e electronic ci-iliGation will eliminate millions o/ Io)s 444 )ut at t#e same time, it could )ring sa-ings not onl% in wor! )ut also in raw materials, energ% and ca&ital4 ;t o//ers us an
o&&ortunit% to go )e%ond a s%stem w#ic# &roduces /or t#e sa!e o/ &roducing, to consign to mac#ines t#e un&leasant, low-status Io)s and to o)tain /or indi-iduals growing amounts o/
disposable time. T#e wor!ers, w#ose li-es toda% are determined )% t#e r#%t#m o/ wor! and /or w#om /ree time is #ardl% more t#an time /or Fre&roduction0 o/ t#eir la)our &ower, /or
recu&eration and /or entertainment, could )ecome to an un&recedented degree so-ereign masters o/ t#eir own li-es @and timeA wit#out #a-ing /irst to go t#roug# a )lood% &rocess o/
re-olution and counterre-olution, w#ic# would gi-e rise to suc# #atred t#at constraints would necessaril% #a-e to )e maintained4S
Howe-er, &olitical action cannot count on an% #omogeneous social )ase to /orcc tec#nolog% to gi-e )irt# to suc# a uto&ia0, nor, more im&ortantl%, on an% large and &ower/ul social )ase suc# as
t#e wor!ing class re&resented in t#e age o/ mass &roduction and mass wor!ers4 T#ose sectors in w#ic# t#e great siGe o/ t#e wor!/orce corres&onded to t#e economic, or e-en strategic,
im&ortance o/ t#e &roduction H t#e &olitical and union )astions o/ t#e traditional Le/t H are all in decline6 mining, t#e steel industr%, s#i&)uilding and t#e #ea-% industries associated wit# it4 T#e
!e% sectors in t#e t#ird industrial re-olution em&lo% relati-el% small wor!/orces, wit# a #ig# &ercentage o/ tec#nical and clerical sta//, wit# no tradition o/ trade-union association or a//iliation to
a &articular &olitical &art%4 FT#e new tec#nologies and t#eir intelligent a&&lication do not lead to t#e re-olutionar% union o/ t#e &au&eriGed wor!ing masses )ut to t#e segmentation and di-ision
o/ t#e wor!ers into Kuasi-classes w#ic#, in accordance wit# t#e di-ersit% o/ t#eir interests, act in a #ig0#l% di//erentiated /as#ion40
8$9 Andr6 &or7 ,he F]58dition of &ostI(ar=ist iVlan 8$1
Political action can onl% )e success/ul i/ it is a)le to6
create FmaIorities0 )% )ringing toget#er grou&s w#ic# #a-e no de/inite social anc#orage4 Admittedl%, wor! will remain an im&ortant /ield o/ acti-it% e(erting its in/luence on
t#e /ormation o/ indi-idual identities4 1ut increasingl% &ower/ul in/luences are suddenl% emerging /rom ot#er Kuarters T#e Kuestion arises6 will t#e Euro&ean la)our mo-ement )e a)le to
maintain its in/luence in t#e centres o/ &roduction and will it )e a)le to e(tend t#is to t#e s&#eres o/ re&roduction and t#e world o/ Fleisure0D .ill t#ere )e a Euro&ean Le/t ca&a)le o/
assi%nin% social %oals to t#e inno-ation &rocessD
+
T#e tas! is clear, )ut Ot#e situation is not ros%6 t#e Le/t will #a-e to &ut toget#er a coalition w#ic# )rings t#e greatest &ossi)le num)er o/ t#e strong Vt#at is, c#ie/l% mem)ers o/ w#at ; #a-e
called t#e Felite o/ wor!ers0Y toget#er in solidarit% wit# t#e wea!, against t#eir own interests4 $or strict materialists w#o see interests as more determining t#an ideals, t#e tas! is a &arado(ical
one and %et it is our tas! toda%40 iS ;t &resu&&oses a F#ig#l% con-incing &roIect and uns#a!ea)le audacit%04 O ;t reKuires, in ot#er words, a cultural &roIect, a -ision o/ t#e /uture, w#ic# H as t#e
socialist &roIect did H trans/orms moral demands and t#e need to %i.e meanin% to the future into &olitical energ%4
T#is amounts to sa%ing t#at t#e autonom% o/ t#e &olitical is t#e necessar% condition /or &olitical action4 T#e latter can no longer )e )ased on t#e interests o/ electoral clienteles, i/ we are to
a-oid a F1al!aniGation0 o/ &olitical li/e w#ic# will /urt#er accelerate t#e decom&osition o/ societ%4 ;t calls /or a &roIect o/ societ% w#ic# transcends t#e sectionaliGation o/ interests )ecause it is
)orne )% a -ision Ha Futo&ia0
H ca&a)le o/ gi-ing meanin% to t#e t#ird industrial re-olution, t#at is, a &ur&ose and an orientation )orn o/ #o&e4 ow a &olitical &roIect w#ic# transcends con/licting interests )% setting
societal goals @and not Iust social onesA necessaril% carries a #ig# degree o/ moral content4 T#is is not to sa% t#at &olitics and moralit% coincide #ere, )ut t#at t#e necessar% autonom% o/ t#e
&olitical &resu&&oses t#e autonom% o/ t#e et#ical im&erati-e i/ it is to call u&on it4
As will #a-e )ecome clear, t#is et#ical im&erati-e H t#e /ree sel/-realiGation o/ indi-idualities t#roug# acti-ities w#ic# #a-e no economic rationalit% H does not coincide wit# an% /orm o/ wor!
or trade &ursuing an economic end4 T#e su)Iects em)od%ing t#is im&erati-e are not created )% sociall% necessar% &roduction or t#e &eri&#eral acti-ities essential to material &roduction4 Almost
all trades and /orms o/ la)our &resu&&ose a /orm o/ s&ecialiGation w#ic#, w#ile not necessaril% )eing eit#er narrow or stu&e/%ing, t#warts rat#er t#an /osters t#e /ull intellectual,
&#%sical, aest#etic, emotional, relational and moral de-elo&ment o/ t#e indi-idual4
e-ert#eless, t#e element o/ autonom% wit#in #eteronom% w#ic# a growing &ercentage o/ occu&ations entail is su//icient /or e(istential autonom% to )e seen as a possibility that is
thwarted )% t#e wa% societ% is organiGed4 T#e limited autonom% wor! and modes o/ socialiGation o//er indi-iduals is su//icient to ma!e a growing num)er o/ t#em aware o/ t#eir &otential
and of the limits of the aionomy conceded from them. T#ese limits #a-e lost t#eir legitimac%6 t#e% cannot )e Iusti/ied )% t#e
urgenc% o/ our material needs 9or )% t#e co#esion o/ our disintegrating societ%4 On t#e contrar%, li-ed /orms o/ communit% relations, solidarit%, mutual aid and -oluntar% co-o&eration
onl% e(ist on t#e margins o/ t#is social s%stem and its t%&e o/ rationalit%, t#an!s to t#e Osutonomous and distinterested initiati-es o/ /reel% associating indi-iduals4 Simila/l%, man% o/
our -ital needs H un&olluted air and water, areas &reser-ed /rom inoiustrial de-elo&ment, /oodstu//s /ree /rom c#emical adulteration, non--iolent care ind so on H can onl% assert
t#emsel-es )% o&&osing t#e rationalit% o/ t#e s%stem, iiO an uneKual and o/ten -iolent struggle against t#e F/unctionaries0 o/ t#e state:industrial megamac#ine4
1ot# limited autonom% wit#in wor! on t#e one #and, and on t#e ot#er t#e disintegration o/ societ%, w#ic# ma!es us loo! /or alternati-e modes o/ socialiGation and communit%
integration, lead to indi-idualiGation and t#e wit#drawal o/ indi-iduals into t#e s&#ere o/ non-wor! acti-ities and li/e outside t#e s%stem4 T#e wit#drawal /rom &olitical &arties, trade
unions and t#e ot#er cum)ersome organiGations w#ic# see! to mono&oliGe F&u)lic a//airs0 is one as&ect o/ t#is mo-ement towards indi-iduali6latiOn4 T#e ot#er is t#e growt# in
&o&ularit% o/ religious, c#arita)le, associati-e and alternati-e H in s#ort, disinterested H acti-ities4
T#e desire /or autonom% /inds its e(&ression in criticism o/ and o&&osition to all /orms of non-legitimiGed #eteroOdeteri/linatiOti and, at t#e same time, in a willingness to
&artici&ate in sel/-organiGed /orrOO ri/ li/e and la)ourN in /orms o/ )e#a-iour in w#ic# ot#er &eo&le are treated as &artrwrs, not su)ordinatesN in t#e &riorit% gi-en to Kualit% o/ li/e
o-er material success and a careerN and in a growing awareness o/ t#e /ragilit% o/ t#e natural /oundation o/ li/r on Eart#4
T#us concludes a re&ort )% t#e SPD0s Commission on $undamental Jalues4 95
T#e commission )ases its /lnOi/lgS on t#e results o/ sur-e%s w#ic# #a-e &ut t#e same Kuestions to re&resentati-e sam&les o/ waged wor!ers o-er t#e &ast twent% %ears4 T#ese
sur-e%s re-eal t#at a ra&idl% growing &ercentage o/ em&lo%ees @a)out #al/ t#e &resent num)er, as o&&ased to 5+ &er cent in *+?5A, es&eciall% t#ose under t#irt% @nearl% two-t#irds, as
o&&osed to ,+ &er cent in *+?5A attac# greater im&ortance to t#eir non-wor!inO acti-ities t#an to t#eir &aid Io)s4 Howe-er, E9 &er cent o/ t#em t#in! t#eir wor!itOg conditions #a-e
im&ro-ed in t#e last ten %earsN nearl% #al/ @)ut more t#an #al/ t#e %oung &eo&le inter-iewedA consider t#eir wor! Finteresting0 )ut do not t#in! it s#ould dominate t#eir li-es4
Sur-e%s in Scandina-ia and 1ritain #a-e made similar /indings, in &articular t#ose Conducted )% R4 E4 Lane, O#) o)ser-es6 FOne li/e-satis/action stud% re-eals t#at satis/action wit#
nonOwor!ing acti-ities contri)utes more to -aria)les in t#e ;nde( o/ .ell-1eing t#an an% ot#er item in t#e Account0, 9, and $4 1loc! and L4 Hirsc##orn, w#o note6 OT#e more time
&eo&le s&end outside o/ t#e &aid la)our /orce, )e/ore, a/ter and during O wor! career, t#e more t#e% /ind t#at (-or! is no
*j
longer a su//icient /ocus /or orgitniGing t#eir li-es40 i= Consum&tion and t#e mone% .#ic# ma!es it &ossi)le, Lane goes on to sa%, onl% #a-e a tenuous lin! wit# /#e
t#ings t#at ma!e &eo&le #a&&%6 autonom%, sel/-esteem, a #a&&% /amil% li/e, t#e
8$2 Andr6 &or7 ,he )ondition of &ost-(ar=ist (an
a)sence o/ con/licts in li/e outside wor!, /riends#i&4 ;n ot#er words, Kualit% o/ li/e de&ends on t#e intensit% o/ #uman )onds and cultural e(c#anges, relations )uilt on /riends#i&, lo-e, )rot#er-
and sister#ood and mutual aid, and not on t#e intensit( o/ commodit% relations, iS 1ut t#is also im&lies t#at sociolo%ical cate%ories can no lon%er e=plain indi.idual beha.iour and
moti.ations. Sociolog% H and t#is is t#e im&lication o/ t#e 1ritis# studies Kuoted a)o-e H #as reac#ed its limits4 ;t is t#e autonom% o/ indi-iduals w#ic# sets t#ese limits4 T#is nascent, as %et
insecure autonom%, co-eted and t#reatened )% t#e cultural industries and leisure moguls4 constitutes t#e em&t% s&ace in w#ic# a renewed Le/t0s societal &roIect will #a-e to )e rooted, i/ t#e Le/t
wants to remain in e(istence4 i?
;n )rie/, t#e /unctionaliGation and tec#niciGation o/ wor! #a-e s#attered t#e unit% o/ li/e and wor!4 E-en )e/ore t#e &resent crisis worsened, wor! #ad ceased to ensure a su//icient degree o/
social integration4 T#e &rogressi-e reduction in t#e amount o/ sociall% necessar% wor! a-aila)le #as accentuated t#is &rocess and aggra-ated t#e disintegration o/ societ%4 .#et#er it ta!es t#e
/orm o/ unem&lo%ment, marginaliGation and lac! o/ Io) securit%, or o/ a general reduction in wor!ing #ours, t#e crisis o/ t#e wor!-)ased societ% @t#at is, )ased on wor! in t#e economic sense o/
t#e wordA /orces indi-iduals to loo! outside wor! /or sources o/ identit% and social )elonging, &ossi)ilities o/ ac#ie-ing &ersonal /ul/ilment, and acti-ities wit# a &ur&ose w#ic# ena)le t#em to
acKuire sel/-esteem and t#e esteem o/ ot#ers4
.or! is set to )ecome one acti-it% among a num)er o/ ot#ers, o/ eKual or greater im&ortance4 T#e et#ic o/ t#e /ree sel/-realiGation o/ indi-idualities, w#ic# Mar( )elie-ed would )e t#e result
o/ a decreasingl% e(acting, increasingl% stimulating wor!ing li/e, toda% reKuires indi-iduals not to identi/% t#emsel-es wit# t#eir wor! )ut to )ecome more detac#ed /rom itN to de-elo& ot#er
interests and situate t#eir &aid wor!, t#eir occu&ation, wit#in a multidimensional -ision o/ t#eir e(istence and o/ societ%4 Acti-ities &er/ormed /or economic ends are to constitute onl% one
dimension o/ e(istence and to )ecome less and less im&ortant4
T#is is &recisel% t#e direction in w#ic# t#e as&irations o/ a signi/icant num)er o/ &eo&le are mo-ing4 T#e crisis o/ t#e &olitical &arties H and t#e rise in &o&ularit% t#e c#urc#es and
#umanitarian associations are currentl% enIo%ing H stem initiall% /rom t#e /ormer0s ina)ilit% to o//er a &ractical and cultural outlet /or t#ese as&irations in w#ic# t#eir &olitical e(&ression could )e
anc#ored4 T#e crisis /acing &olitical &arties is not &rimaril% a crisis of t#e &olitical )ut an indication t#at the political space has been left .acant )% t#e organiGations and a&&aratuses t#at )e#a-e
&rimaril% as mac#ines /or goQerning t#roug# a state a&&aratus w#ic# it is t#eir am)ition to control4 1% contrast, t#e &olitical is &rimaril% located w#ere all nascent &olitical /orces &laced it in
&eriods o/ ongoing c#ange6 t#e la)our mo-ement itsel/, its trade unions and &olitical &arties, grew out o/ cultural and mutual aid associations, t#at is, out o/ stud% and sel/-education aimed at
countering t#e dominant ideas and cultureN out o/ /orms o/ li/e and sel/-organiGation w#ic# /ores#adowed &ossi)le alternati-es to t#e dominant wa% o/ li/e and social organiGation6 a Fconcrete
uto&ia04
8$8
Peter 2lotG /ormulates t#is &re-eminence o/ t#e cultural in times o/ social u&#ea-al well w#en #e writes6 FHow is t#e Le/t to ac#ie-e cultural #egemon% as a &relin,inarQ to ac#ie-ing &olitical
&owerD How is it to /orm /rom t#e initiall% growing di-ersitO o/ indi-idual &olitical critiKues a small num)er o/ ideas w#ic# &eo&le will acce&t, retain and assimilate as &ersonal con-ictionsD0
t<
A new uto&ia is needed i/ we are to sa/eguard w#at t#e et#ical content o/ t#e socialist uto&ia &ro-ided6 t#e uto&ia o/ a societ% o/ /ree time4 T#e emanci&ation o/ indi-iduals, t#eir /ull
de-elo&ment, t#e restructuring o/ societ%, are all to )e ac#ie-ed t#roug# t#e li)eration from wor!4 A reduction in wor!ing #ours will allow indi-iduals to disco-er a new sense o/ securit%, a new
distancing /rom t#e Fnecessities o/ li/e0 and a /orm o/ e(istential autonom% w#ic# will encourage t#em to dem,mnd more autonom% within t#eir wor!, &olitical control o/ its o)Iecti-es and a
social s&ace in w#ic# t#e% can engage in -oluntar% and sel/-organiGed acti-ities4
;
;t is im&ortant to identi/% t#e ontological /oundations o/ a societ% o/ /ree time more &recisel%4 .#%, indeed, o&t /or a reduction in wor!ing #oursD .#% use at least &arts o/ our li)erated time to
ta!e o-er certain ser-ice acti-ities currentl% &ro-ided )% &u)lic or commercial )odies, on a -oluntar%, sel/-organiGed, co-o&erati-e )asisD .#% not instead turn t#e acti-ities &eo&le some#ow or
ot#er traditionall% did /or t#emsel-es into &ro/essional, &aid onesD .#% not get &ro/essional s&ecialists in c#ildminding and mot#ering to loo! a/ter our c#ildren rig#t /rom t#e moment t#e% are
)ornN &ro/essional em&lo%ees in t#e tourist, culture and leisure industries to loo! a/ter our e-er-%ounger &ensionersN &ro/essional #ome-#el&s to loo! a/ter t#e agedN &ro/essional com/orters and
consolers to loo! a/ter t#e d%ingD .#% not ado&t Al/red Sau-%0s &ro&osal and draw u& an in-entor% o/ all our needs and &otential demands, gi-e t#em cas# -alue and create Io)s ca&a)le o/
satis/%ing t#emD .ould t#is not &ro-ide -irtuall% ine(#austi)le Fsources o/ em&lo%ment0D Are not t#e &ossi)ilities o/ increasing our needs and, conseKuentl%, t#e &otential growt# o/ commercial
e(c#anges and em&lo%ment, unlimitedD .#% not admit t#at wor! done in t#e domestic s&#ere @t#e so-called s&#ere o/ re&roductionA is sociall% use/ul, &ro-ide a .age /or it and, as
1arr% 3ones #as &ro&osed, -iew #ousewi-es as &art o/ t#e la)our /orce and #ousewor! as em&lo%ment in t#e F&rimar% sector0, essentiall% concerned wit# t#e endless satis/action o/
endlessl% recurring needs @/or e(am&le, t#e &ro-ision o/ /ood and amusement, tas!s related to se(ual acti-it%, etc4AD O
T#e answer to t#ese Kuestions is not to )e /ound &urel% in &olitical decisions or social and economic e(&edienc%O no more t#an in t#e -alues o/ t#e &re-modern tradition /rom w#ic# Reason
was to li)erate as )% ma!ing us ado&t t#ose solutions w#ic# were most rational and most e(&edient4 Rational in res&ect o/ w#at endsD Are t#ere not, a)o-e and )e%ond in#erited -alues and
&ractical e(&edienc%, ot#er t%&es o/ rationalit% H indeed, limits to all &ossi)le t%&es o/ rationaliGation and socialiGation H consonant wit# t#e ontological multidimensionalit% o/ e(istenceD
8$: Andr6 &or7
Notes
*4 'arl Mar(, /rundrisse5 Harmondswort#, *+<,, &&4 >=*, ?**, <9?4
54 On t#is to&ic, see Os!ar egt, 6ebendi%e Arbeit5 entei%nete Peit5 $ran!/urt am Main,
*+E=, &&4 *?<, *<EN and Peter 2lotG, (anifest f]r eine neue europOische 6inke5 1erlin,
*+E>, &&4 !5 +54
,4 C/4 AndrL 2orG4 $arewell to the Workin% )lass5 *+E5, &&4 +=, *95H= and *9<H+, w#ere ; /ollow Adret A,rat1ailler deu= heures par 9our5 Paris, *+<<A and, more es&eciall%, C#arl%
1o%adIian, in em&#asiGing t#is /act H w#ic# runs counter to t#e argument certain #ast% readers #a-e attri)uted to me, according to w#ic# t#ere would )e a clear-cut o&&osition )etween t#e
two s&#eres4
=4 Mar(, &&4 <9>H?4
!. On t#is to&ic, see t#e e(cellent and still rele-ant article )% Antonio Lettieri, secretar% o/ t#e C2;L, O$actor% and sc#ool0, in AndrL 2orG, ed4, ,he <i.ision of 6abour5 Hassoc!s, *+<?4
?4 C/4 Cots, $arewell to the Workin% )lass5 c#4 *, in w#ic# t#is anal%sis is set out in detail4
<4 Clots, (anifest &assim4
E4 'bid.5 &&4 #I!.
+4 'bid.5 &&4 ,>H?4
*94 'bid.5 &4 ,<4
**4 'bid.5 &4
==
4
*54 Er#ard E&&ler @ed4A, /rundwerte f]r em neues /odesber%er &ro%ramm5 Rein)e! )ei Ham)urg, *+E=, c#4 !5 &articularl% &&4 ***H5?4
*,4 R4 $4 Lane, FMar!et and t#e satis/action o/ #uman wants0, 3ournal of :cnomic 'ssues5
*5 @*+<<A, E*>4
*=4 $4 1loc! and L4 Hirsc##orn, Few &roducti-e /orces and t#e contradictions o/ contem&orar% ca&italism6 A &ost-industrial &ers&ecti-e0, ,heory and -ociety5 < @*+<+A, ,<,4 T#ese Kuotations
are ta!en /rom t#e remar!a)le essa% )% Claus O//e FAr)eit als soGiologisc#e Sc#lussel!ategonieD0, in GArbeits%ese6lschaft1: -trukturprobleme und Pukunftsperspekti.en5 $ran!/urt:ew
Yor!, *+E=4
*>4 All t#is, o/ course, runs counter to t#e idea t#at t#e corres&onding acti-ities must )e &ro/essionaliGed and commercialiGed in order to Fcreate Io)s04
*?4 T#is is t#e essence o/ Alain Touraine0s researc# and t#e reason w#% t#is researc# is located at t#e /rontiers o/ sociolog%, in an area ignored )% &olitical &arties4
*<4 2lotG, <ie Arbeit der Puspit8un%5 1erlin, *+E=, &4 <4
*E4 1arr% 3ones, -leepers5 WakeW ,echnolo%y and the $uture of Work5 Mel)ourne and O(/ord4 *+E,, &&4 !1I".
5< w ,oward a &rinciple
of :.il
Jean -a,dri..ard
Do t#ese /atal strategies e(istD ;t does not a&&ear t#at ; #a-e descri)ed t#em, nor e-en touc#ed u&on t#em4 T#e &ower o/ t#e real o-er t#e imagination is so great t#at suc# a #%&ot#esis a&&ears to
)e no more t#an a dream4 .#ere do %ou get t#e stories %ou tell a)out t#e o)IectD O)Iecti-it% is t#e o&&osite o/ /atalit%4 T#e o)Iect is real, and t#e real is su)Iect to laws, and t#at is t#at4
T#ere it is6 /aced wit# a delirious world, onl% t#e ultimatum o/ realism will do4 .#ic# means t#at i/ %ou wis# to esca&e t#e world0s insanit%, %ou must sacri/ice all o/ its c#arm as well4 1%
increasing its delirium, t#e world #as raised t#e sta!es o/ t#e sacri/ice, )lac!mailed )% realit%4 Toda%, in order to sur-i-e, illusion no longer wor!sN one must draw nearer to t#e nullit% o/ t#e real4
T#ere is &er#a&s one, and onl% one, /atal strateg%6 t#eor%4 And undou)tedl% t#e onl% di//erence )etween a )anal t#eor% and a /atal t#eor% is t#at in t#e /ormer t#e su)Iect alwa%s )elie-es
itsel/ to )e more cle-er t#an t#e o)Iect, w#ile in t#e latter t#e o)Iect is alwa%s ta!en to )e more cle-er, more c%nical, more ingenious t#an t#e su)Iect, w#ic# it awaits at e-er% turn4 T#e
metamor&#oses, tactics, and strategies o/ t#e o)Iect e(ceed t#e su)Iect0s understanding4 T#e o)Iect is neit#er t#e su)Iect0s dou)le nor #is or #er re&ressionN neit#er t#e su)Iect0s /antas% nor
#allucinationN neit#er t#e su)Iect0s mirror nor re/lection6 )ut it #as its own strateg%4 ;t wit##olds one o/ t#e rules o/ t#e game w#ic# is inaccessi)le to t#e su)Iect, not )ecause it is dee&l%
m%sterious, )ut )ecause it is endlessl% ironic4
An o)Iecti-e iron% watc#es o-er us, it is t#e o)Iect0s /ul/illment wit#out regard /or t#e su)Iect, nor /or its alienation4 ;n t#e alienation &#ase, su)Iecti-e iron% is trium&#ant4 Here t#e su)Iect
constitutes an unsol-a)le c#allenge to t#e )lind world t#at surrounds #im4 Su)Iecti-e iron%, ironic su)Iecti-it%, is t#e /inest mani/estation o/ a uni-erse o/ &ro#i)ition, o/ Law and o/ desire4 T#e
su)Iect0s &ower deri-es /rom a &romise o/ /ul/illment, w#ereas t#e realm o/ t#e o)Iect is c#aracteriGed )% w#at is /ul/illed, and /or t#at reason it is a realm we cannot esca&e4
$rom Poster, M4 @edA, -elected Writin%s5 Polit% Press, Cam)ridge:Stan/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, Stan/ord, CA, *+>E, &&4 *+EH59?4
8$$
8$< Jean -a,dri..ard ,oward a &rinciple of :.il 8$=
.e con/use t#e /atal wit# t#e resurgence o/ t#e re&ressed @desire as t#at w#ic# is inesca&a)leA, )ut t#e order o/ /atalit% is antit#etical to t#at o/ re&ression4 ;t is not desire t#at we cannot
esca&e, )ut t#e ironic &resence o/ t#e o)Iect, its indi//erence, and its indi//erent interconnections, its c#allenge, its seduction, its -iolation o/ t#e s%m)olic order @t#ere/ore o/ t#e su)Iect0s
unconscious as well, i/ it #ad oneA4 ;n s#ort, it is t#e &rinci&le o/ E-il we cannot esca&e4
T#e o)Iect diso)e%s our meta&#%sics, w#ic# #as alwa%s attem&ted to distill t#e 2ood and /ilter E-il4 T#e o)Iect is translucent to E-il4 T#is is w#% it a&&ears, maliciousl% and dia)olicall%, to
)e so -oluntaril% coo&erati-e, and to )end willingl%, li!e nature, to w#ate-er law we ma% im&ose, t#us -iolating all legislation4 .#en * re/er to t#e o)Iect, and to its /undamental du&licit%, ; am
re/erring to all o/ us and to our social and &olitical order4 T#e w#ole &ro)lem o/ -oluntar% ser-itude is to )e ree(amined in t#is lig#t, not to resol-e it, )ut to antici&ate t#e enigmaN o)edience is,
in e//ect, a )anal strateg%, w#ic# need not )e e(&lained, /or it secretl% contains, e-er% o)edience secretl% contains, a diso)edience /atal to t#e s%m)olic order4
Herein lies t#e &rinci&le o/ E-il, not in some m%stical agenc% or transcendence, )ut as a concealment o/ t#e s%m)olic order, t#e a)duction, ra&e, concealment and ironic corru&tion o/ t#e
s%m)olic order4 ;t is in t#is wa% t#at t#e o)Iect is translucent to t#e &rinci&le o/ E-il6 as o&&osed to t#e su)Iect, it is a )ad conductor o/ t#e s%m)olic order, %et a good conductor o/ t#e /atal, t#at
is, o/ &ure o)Iecti-it%, so-ereign and irreconcila)le, immanent and enigmatic4
Moreo-er, E-il is not w#at is interestingN it is t#e s&iraling o/ t#e worst t#at is interesting4 T#e &rinci&le o/ E-il is indeed re/lected in t#e su)Iect0s mis/ortune, in #is or #er mirror, )ut t#e
o)Iect desires to )e worst, it claims t#e worst4 T#is re&resents a more radical negati-it%, w#ic# means, i/ all t#ings e-entuall% -iolate t#e s%m)olic order, t#at e-er%t#ing will #a-e )een di-erted
at its origin4
Prior to )eing &roduced, t#e world was seduced4 A strange &recession, w#ic# toda% still weig#s #ea-il% on all realit%4 T#e world was contradicted at its origin6
it is t#ere/ore im&ossi)le e-er to -eri/% it4 egati-it%, w#et#er #istorical or su)Iecti-e, is not#ing6 t#e original di-ersion is trul% dia)olical, e-en in t#oug#t4
T#e -ertigo o/ simulation, t#e Luci/erian ra&ture in t#e eccentricit% o/ t#e origin and t#e end, contrasts wit# t#e 8to&ia o/ t#e Last 3udgement, t#e com&lement o/ original
)a&tism4 .#ic# is w#% gods can onl% li-e and #ide in t#e in#uman, in o)Iects and )easts, in t#e realm o/ silence and o)Iecti-e stu&e/action, and not in t#e #uman realm, t#at o/ language
and su)Iecti-e stu&e/action4 A #uman-god is an a)surdit%4 A god w#o t#rows o// t#e ironic mas! o/ t#e in#uman, w#o a)andons t#e )estial meta&#or and t#e o)Iecti-e metamor&#osis
w#ere, in silence, it em)odied t#e &rinci&le o/ E-il, &ro-iding itsel/ a soul and a /ace, simultaneousl% assumes t#e #%&ocris% o/ #uman &s%c#olog%4
.e must )e Iust as res&ect/ul o/ t#e in#uman as certain cultures, w#ic# we #a-e t#ere/ore la)eled /atalistic4 .e condemn t#em wit#out /urt#er recourse )ecause t#e% o)tained t#eir
commandments on t#e side o/ t#e in#uman, /rom t#e stars or t#e animal god, /rom constellations or a di-init% wit#out image4 A di-init% wit#out
image H w#at a grand idea4 ot#ing could )e more o&&osed to our modern and tec#nical iconolatr%4
Meta&#%sics allows onl% t#e good radiations to /ilter t#roug#N it wants to ma!e t#e world a mirror o/ t#e su)Iect @#a-ing #imsel/ or #ersel/ &assed t#e mirror stageA, a world o/ /orms
distinct /rom its dou)le, /rom its s#adow, /rom its image6 t#at is t#e &rinci&le o/ 2ood4 Here t#e o)Iect is alwa%s t#e /etis#, t#e /alse, t#e feticho5 t#e /actitious, t#e delusion H all t#at
em)odies t#e a)omina)le integration o/ a t#ing and its magical and arti/icial dou)le, and w#ic# no religion o/ t#e trans&arent or o/ t#e mirror will e-er come to resol-e6 t#is is
t#e &rinci&le o/ E-il4
.#en ; s&ea! o/ t#e o)Iect and o/ its /atal strategies ; am s&ea!ing o/ a &erson and o/ #is or #er in#uman strategies4 $or e(am&le, a #uman )eing can /ind a muc# dee&er
)oredom w#ile on -acation t#an in dail% li/e H )oredom intensi/ied )% t#e /act t#at it contains all t#e elements o/ #a&&iness and recreation4 T#e im&ortant &oint is t#at -acation is
&redestined to )oredom, along wit# t#e )itter and trium&#ant &remonition o/ )eing una)le to esca&e it4 How can one imagine t#at &eo&le would re&udiate t#eir e-er%da% li/e in searc# o/ an
alternati-eD On t#e contrar%, t#e% ma!e it t#eir destin%6 )% intensi/%ing it in t#e a&&earances o/ t#e contrar%N )% su)merging t#emsel-es to t#e &oint o/ ecstas%N and )% /i(ating monoton%
in an e-en greater one4 Su&er-)analit% is t#e eKui-alent o/ /atalit%4
;/ we do not understand t#is, we will understand not#ing o/ t#is collecti-e stu&e/action, e-en t#oug# it is a grand act o/ transcendence4 ; am not Io!ing6 &eo&le are not loo!ing to amuse
t#emsel-es, t#e% see! a /atal di-ersion4 ot matter #ow )oring, t#e im&ortant t#ing is to increase )oredomN suc# an increase is sal-ation, it is ecstas%4 ;t can )e t#e ecstatic
am&li/ication o/ Iust a)out an%t#ing4 ;t ma% )e t#e increase o/ o&&ression or a)Iection t#at acts as t#e li)erating ecstas% o/ a)Iection, Iust as t#e a)solute commodit% is t#e
li)erating /orm o/ commodit%4 T#is is t#e onl% solution to t#e &ro)lem o/ F-oluntar% ser-itude0, and moreo-er, t#is is t#e onl% /orm o/ li)eration6 t#e am&li/ication o/ negati-e
conditions4 All /orms t#at tend to ad-ertise a miraculous /reedom are not#ing )ut re-olutionar% #omilies4 T#e logic o/ li)eration, essentiall%, is #eard onl% )% a /ew, and /or t#e most
&art, a /atal logic &re-ails4
T#is will to s&ectacle and illusion, in contrast to e-er% will to !nowledge and &ower, is anot#er /orm o/ /undamental c%nicism4 ;t is ali-e in t#e #earts o/ &eo&le, )ut #aunts
Iust as well t#e &rocesses o/ e-ents4 ;n t#e raw e-ent, in o)Iecti-e in/ormation, and in t#e most secret acts and t#oug#ts, t#ere is somet#ing li!e a dri-e to re-ert to t#e s&ectacle, or to
clima( on stage instead o/ &roducing onesel/ originall%4 To mani/est one0s )eing is necessar%N to )e enra&tured is a)solutel% -ital4
T#ings onl% occur under t#ese e(treme circumstancesN t#at is, not under t#e constraint o/ re&resentation, )ut t#roug# t#e magic o/ t#eir e//ect H onl% #ere do t#e% a&&ear
ingenious, and o//er t#emsel-es t#e lu(ur% o/ e(istence4 Alt#oug# we maintain t#at nature is indi//erent, and it is certainl% so to t#e &assions and enter&rises o/ &eo&le, &er#a&s it isn0t w#en
it ma!es a s&ectacle o/ itsel/ in natural catastro&#es4 Catastro&#e is a &ara)le@DA, w#ic# is t#ere to signi/% t#is &assionko/
8$@ Jean -a,dri..ard foward a &rinciple of :.il 8$B
&assions, a simulating &assiCOO a seducti-e &assion, a di-erting &assion, w#ere t#ings are onl% meaning/ul --l0ten trans/igured )% illusion, )% derision, )% a staging t#at is in no wa%
re&resentationalN onl% meaning/ul in t#eir e(ce&tional /orm, in t#eir eccentricit%, in t#e will tM scorn t#eir causes and e(tinguis# t#emsel-es in t#eir e//ects, and &articularl% in t#eir /orm o/
disa&&earance4 Moralists o/ all times #a-e strictl% condemned t#is e(ce&Oiona; /Orm, )ecause t#ings #ere c%nicall% di-ert /rom t#eir origin and t#eir end, in a distant ec#o o/ t#e original sin4
e-ert#eless, t#is eccentricit% is w#at &rotects us /rom t#e real, and /rom its disastrous conseKuences4 T#e /act t#at t#ings e(tinguis# t#emsel-es in t#e s&ectacle, in a magical and arti/icial
/etis#iSatiOn, is a distortion serious t#in!ers will alwa%s com)at, under t#e 8to&ian )anner o/ e(&unging t#e world in order to deli-er it e(act, intact, and aut#entic on t#e da% o/
t#e Last 3udgement4 1ut t#is is &er#a&s t#e lesser e-il, since 2od !nows w#ere t#e unleas#ing o/ meaning will lead w#en it re/uses to &roduce itsel/ as a&&earance4
E-en re-olution can ta!e &lace onl% i/ t#ere is t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ s&ectacleN w#at &eo&le o/ goodwill de&lore iO t#at t#e media #a-e &ut an end to t#e real e-ent4 1ut i/ we ta!e t#e
e(am&le &/ t#e nuclear t#reat, it ma% )e t#at its distillation in t#e simulated &anic o/ our @lail% li/e, in t#e s&ectacular o)sessions and t#rills t#at /eed our /ear, and not t#e )alance o/ terror
@t#ere is no strategic guarantee in deterrence, nor is t#ere, in /amGt, an% instinct o/ sel/-&reser-ationA, is w#at &rotects us /rom nuclear con/rontation4 .#at &rotects us is t#at in nuclear war t#e
e-ent is li!el% to eliminate t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ t#e s&ectacle4 ,his is why it will not take place. $or #umanit% can acce&t &#%O>ical anni#ilation, )ut cannot agree to sacri/ice t#e s&ectacle @unless it
can /ind a s&ectator in anot#er worldA4 T#e dri-e to s&ectacle is more &ower/ul t#an t#e instilsct o/ &reser-ation, and it is on t#e /ormer t#at we must rel%40
;/ t#e moralit% o/ t#ings is in t#eir sacrosanct use o/ -alue, t#en long li-e t#e immoralit% o/ t#e atom and o/ wea&ons so t#at e-en t#e% are su)Iect to t#e ultimate and c%nical terms o/ t#e
s&ectacle^ Hail t#e secret rule o/ t#e game w#ere)% all t#ings diso)e% t#e s%m)olic law^ .#at will sa-e us is neit#er t#e rational &rinci&le nor use -alue, )ut t#e immoral &rinci&le o/ t#e
s&ectacle, t#e ironic &rinci&le o/ E-il4
To )ecome a)sor)ed in t#iO second outcome is a sort o/ &assion, a sort o/ /atal will4 Li!ewise, no li/e can )e concei-ed wit#out t#e e(istence o/ a second c#ance4 A &ur&ose
in li/e can onl% )O ascertained )% t#e strong certaint% o/ a necessar% return, sooner or later, o/ ce/tain moments or /aces t#at once a&&eared, li!e t#e resurrection o/ )odies, )ut wit#out a Last
3udgement4 T#e% will return, t#e% #a-e onl% tem&oraril% disa&&eared /rom t#e #oriGon o/ our li/e, w#ose traIector%04 s&eci/icall% di-erted )% t#ese e-ents, cur-es su//icientl%, and unconsciousl%,
to &ro-ide t#em wit# t#e o&&ortunit% /or a second e(istence, or a /inal return4 Onl% t#en will t#e% #a-e trul% li-ed4 Onl% t#en will t#e% #a-e )een won or lost4
$rom a certain time, t#ese second e-ents constitute t#e -er% guidelines o/ li/e, w#ere t#ings t#us no longer &ccur )% c#ance4 ;t is t#e /irst e-ent t#at occurs )% c#ance, #a-ing no meaning in
itsel/ and losing itsel/ in t#e )anal nig#t o/ e(&erience4 Onl% )% redou)ling itsel/ dots Mt )ecome an actual e-ent, tlmie)% attaining t#e
c#aracter o/ a da% o/ rec!oni&g H li!e a sign t#at would onl% )e -alid redou)led )% its ascendant4 T#e sign itsel/ is indi//erentN redou)led it )ecomes inelucta)le4
Once certain li/e e-ents #a-e #ad t#eir second c#ance, w#en t#e c%cle #as returned t#em once, and onl% once, t#en t#at li/e is com&leted4 ;/ a li/e is not gi-en t#e
o&&ortunit% o/ a second c#alice, it is /inis#ed )e/ore it #as )egun4
T#e /atal is t#ere somew#ere4 ;n t#is sense, ancient #eresies were rig#t4 E-er%one #as t#e rig#t to a second )irt#, t#e real one, and e-er%one is &redestined, not )% astral
decree, )ut rat#er )% an internal &redestination, one t#at is imminent in our own li-es6 t#e necessar% return o/ certain e-ents4 T#is is w#%, once c#ance is a)olis#ed,
t#e Last 3udgemerlt is unnecessar%4
T#is is w#% t#e t#eor% o/ &redestination is in/initel% su&erior to t#e t#eor% o/ t#e /reedom o/ t#e soul4 Since, i/ one eliminates /rom li/e onl% t#at w#ic# is destined,
)ut not &redestined, e-er%t#ing t#at occurs onl% once is accidental, w#ereas t#at w#ic# is accom&lis#ed a second time )ecomes /atal4 Predestination &ro-ides li/e
wit# t#e intensit% o/ t#ese second g-ents, w#ic# a&&ear to #a-e t#e de&t# o/ a &re-ious li/e4
A /irst encounter #as neit#er /orm nor meaning, it is alwa%s tainted )% misunderstanding and )ancllit%4 $atalit% onl% comes a/ter, )% t#e &resent underta!ings o/ a
&re-ious li/e4 And, in t#is instance, t#ere is a !ind o/ will and energ%, w#ic# no one !nows an%t#ing a)out, and w#ic# is not t#e resurgence o/ a #idden order, not at
all4 ;t is in t#e /ull lig#t o/ da% t#at certain t#ings come to t#eir designated dead end4
;/ t#e stars would rise and set in an% order, e-en t#e s!% would )e meaningless4 T#eir recurrent traIector% males t#e s!% e-ent/ul4 And t#e recurrence o/ certain /atal
e&isodes ma!es li/e e-ent/ul4
ConseKuentl%, i/ t#e o)Iect is ingenious, i/ t#e o)Iect is /atal, w#at is to )e doneD
Does t#e ironic art o/ disa&&earance succeed t#e art o/ sur-i-alD T#e su)Iect #as alwa%s dreamed o/ disa&&ecmrance6 it is t#e con-erse o/ #is or #er dream o/
totaliGationN %et t#e one #as ne-er )een a)le to su&&ress t#e ot#er H Kuite t#e O&&osite4 T#is /ailure current0Y arouses more su)tle &assions4
;s t#e insistent desire o/ /atal strategies t#us at t#e #eart o/ )anal strategiesD
ot#ing can insure us against /atalit%, muc# less &ro-ide us wit# a strateg%4 Also, t#e conIunction o/ t#e two terms is &arado(ical6 #ow can t#ere )e /ate i/ t#ere is
Strateg%D 1ut &recisel%6 t#e enigma is t#at /ate is at t#e #eart o/ e-er% strateg%N t#is is w#at emerges as a /atal strateg% at t#e #eart o/ most )anal strategies4 ;t is t#e
o)Iect w#ose /ate would )e a strateg% H li!e t#e rule o/ some ot#er game4 ;n /act, t#e o)Iect moc!s t#e laws we decOrate ?. wit#4 ;t agrees to a&&ear in our calculations as a
sarcastic -aria)le and to let t#e eKuations -eri/% t#emsel-es4 1ut no one !nows t#e rules o/ t#e game, t#e conditions under w#ic# one acce&ts to &la%, and t#ese ma% c#ange
all o/ a sudden4
o one !nows w#at a stra/eg% is4 T#ere are not enoug# means in t#e world to #a-e t#e ends at our dis&osal4 T#us no one is ca&a)le o/ articulating a /inal &rocess4 2od
#imsel/ is /orced to tinYOer EbricolerD. .#at is interesting is t#e ine(ora)/e logical &rocess t#at emerges w#ere)% t#e o)Iect &la%s t#e -er% game we want it to
8<9 Jean -a,dri..ard 7lor.ard a &rinciple of :.il 8<1
&la%, and in a wa% it dou)les t#e ante4 1% out)idding t#e strategic constraints we #a-e im&osed on it, t#e o)Iect institutes a strateg% wit#out /inalit%, a Fd%namic0 strateg% t#at t#warts t#e
su)Iect0s strateg%N a /atal strateg%, since t#e su)Iect succum)s to t#e transgression o/ #is own o)Iecti-es4
.e are accom&lice to t#e o)Iect0s e(cess o/ /inalit% @it ma% )e t#e e(cess oi meaning, and t#us t#e ina)ilit% to deci&#er a single word, w#ic# is so e//ecti-e at signaling usA4 E-er%
strateg% we in-ent is in t#e #o&e t#at it will un/old une(&ectedl%4 .e in-ent t#e real in t#e #o&e o/ seeing it un/old as a great ruse4 $rom e-er% o)Iect we see! a )lind res&onse t#at
will disru&t our &roIects4 $rom strategOwe e(&ect control, )ut /rom seduction we #o&e /or sur&rise4
Seduction is /atal4 ;t is t#e e//ect o/ a so-ereign o)Iect w#ic# re-creates wit#in us t#e original distur)ance and see!s to sur&rise us4 $atalit% in turn is seducti-e, li!e t#e disco-er%
o/ an un!nown rule o/ t#e game4 Disco-ering a rule o/ t#e game is wonder/ul and it com&ensates in ad-ance /or t#e most )itter losses4
Hence t#e &#enomenon o/ wit4 //* see! a /atal &rogression in language ; con/ront t#e witticism, w#ic# is itsel/ t#e denouement o/ language t#at is immanent in language
@t#is is t#e /atal6 t#e same sign o-erseeing t#e cr%stalliGation and t#e solution o/ a li/e, t#e intricacies and t#e denouement o/ an e-entA4 ;n language t#at #as )ecome &ure o)Iect,
iron% @in $reud0s 3okes and their 4elation to the 0nconscious? is t#e o)Iecti-e /orm o/ t#is denouement4 As in 9okes5 redou)ling and out)idding are alwa%s a s&iritual /orm o/ denouement4
E-er%t#ing must un/old in t#e /atal and s&iritual mode, Iust as e-er%t#ing was entangled in t#e )eginning )% an original di-ersion4
E-en &redestination is a /orm o/ t#e ironic di-ersion o/ /ate, )ut t#en so too is c#ance4 .#at is t#e &oint o/ turning c#ance into an o)Iecti-e &rocess, since it is an ironic &rocessD O/
course it e(ists, )ut in contrast to e-er%t#ing scienti/icN it e(ists as t#e iron% o/ ris!, e-en at t#e le-el o/ t#e molecule4 And o/ course /atalit% e(ists as well, simultaneousl% H t#ere is
no &arado( #ere4 T#e di//erence is t#at t#e iron% o/ /ate is greater t#an t#e iron% o/ c#ance, w#ic# ma!es it more tragic and more seducti-e4
;t is true t#at t#ere is an o)scure and di//icult side to t#is6 to &ass on t#e side o/ t#e o)Iect, to ta!e t#e side o/ t#e o)Iect4 One must loo! /or anot#er rule, anot#er a(iomatic6 t#ere is
not#ing m%stical #ere, no ot#erworldl% delirium o/ a su)Iecti-it%0 entra&&ed and /leeing /orward in a descri&ti-e &aro(%sm4 Sim&l% to outline t#is ot#er logic, to un/old t#ese ot#er
strategies, to lea-e t#e /ield o&en /or o)Iecti-e iron%, is also a c#allenge, &ossi)l% a)surd, and one w#ic# runs t#e ris! o/ w#at it descri)es H )ut t#e ris! is to )e ta!en6
#%&ot#esiGing t#e /atal strateg% can onl% )e /atal as well4
;/ t#ere is moralit%, it is also caug#t in t#e eccentric c%cle o/ its e//ects, it is itsel/ #%&ermoralit%, Iust as t#e real is #%&erreal4 T#is is no longer moral stasis, )ut moral ecstas%4 ;t is in
itsel/ a s&ecial e//ect4
Le-i-Strauss once claimed t#at t#e s%m)olic order #ad wit#drawn to t#e )ene/it o/ #istor%4 Toda%, sa%s Canetti, e-en #istor% #as retreated4 .#at is le/t t#en )ut to &ass
o-er to t#e side o/ t#e o)Iect, to its a//ected and eccentric e//ects, to its /atal e//ects @/atalit% is merel% t#e a)solute /reedom o/ e//ectsAD Semiorr#age4
T#ese da%s w#en all critical radicalism #as )ecome &ointless, w#en all negati-it%0 is resol-ed in a world t#at &retends to )e /ul/illed, w#en critical t#oug#t #as /ound in
socialism a secondar% #ome, w#en t#e e//ect o/ desire #as long since gone, w#at is le/t )ut to return t#ings to t#eir enigmatic ground GeroD T#e enigma #as )een in-erted, #owe-er6
&re-iousl% it was t#e S&#in( w#o &ut to man t#e Kuestion a)out man, one w#ic# Oedi&us is t#oug#t to #a-e resol-ed, one w#ic# all o/ us t#oug#t we resol-ed4 Toda% it is man w#o
&uts to t#e S&#in(, to t#e in#uman, t#e Kuestion o/ t#e in#uman, o/ t#e /atal, o/ t#e world0s indi//erence to our endea-ors and to o)Iecti-e laws4 T#e o)Iect @t#e S&#in(A is more su)tle
and does not answer4 1ut, )% diso)e%ing laws and t#warting desire, it must answer secretl% to some enigma4 .#at is le/t )ut to go o-er to t#e side o/ t#is enigmaD
E-er%t#ing /inall% )oils down to t#is6 let us /or once #%&ot#esiGe t#at t#ere is a /atal and enigmatic )ias in t#e order o/ t#ings4
;n an% case t#ere is somet#ing stu&id a)out our &resent situation4 T#ere is somet#ing stu&id in t#e raw e-ent, to w#ic# destin%, i/ it e(ists, cannot #el& )ut )e sensiti-e4 T#ere is somet#ing
stu&id in t#e current /orms o/ trut# and o)Iecti-it%, /rom w#ic# a su&erior iron% must gi-e us lea-e4 E-er%t#ing is e(&iated in one wa% or anot#er4 E-er%t#ing &roceeds in one wa% or
anot#er4 Trut# onl% com&licates t#ings4
And i/ t#e Last 3udgement consists, as e-er%one !nows, in sa-ing and eternaliGing one moment o/ li/e, and onl% one, /or eac# o/ us, wit# w#om do we s#are t#is ironic endD
Note
*4 O/ course t#is is no longer t#e same s&ectacle situationists denounced as t#e #eig#t o/ alienation and t#e ultimate strateg% o/ ca&ital4 ;t would instead )e t#e o&&osite, /or it is t#e case #ere o/
t#e -ictorious strateg% o/ t#e o)Iect, its mode o/ di-ersion, and not o/ )eing di-erted4 T#is is muc# closer to t#e enc#antment Ef;erieD o/ commodities descri)ed )% 1audelaire4
PART SEJE
$eminism
'ntroduction
According to one reading o/ 1audrillard, /eminism, as an o&&osition to &atriarc#%, would )e &recisel% t#e Finoculation0 u&on w#ic# masculinism t#ri-es and continues to sustain
itsel/4 ;/ t#is is t#e case, t#en &er#a&s t#e most radical t#ing &ossi)le /or /eminism would )e /or women to ado&t t#e &osition o/ t#e O)Iect -ia seduction, t#ere)% seducing
masculinism and t#e &atriarc#al male towards suc# an Fo)Iectal0 condition4 Clearl%, /or man% /eminists, suc# a suggestion is not#ing less t#an outrageous, %et it does ser-e t#e
&ur&ose o/ indicating #ow austere and se-ere t#e Kuestion o/ &ostmodernism mig#t )e /or /eminism4 $or man%, t#e t#eor% and &ractice o/ /eminism #as )een a means &recisel% o/
e(tending t#e successes and critiKuing t#e /ailures o/ a Mar(ist discourse o/ li)erationN and to t#is e(tent /eminism #as o&ened -arious wa%s out o/ t#e deadloc! o/ muc# Mar(ist
t#in!ing
H Iust as &ostmodernism #as also done4 1ut /eminism and &ostmodernism are not alwa%s eas% allies, as t#e essa%s gat#ered #ere s#ow4
One #ig#l% in/luential strand in contem&orar% /eminism is t#at initiall% ad-anced )% 3ulia 'riste-a, w#o re)elled in #er wor! against t#e monolit#ic and totalising &rocedures o/
/ormalist Ft#eor%0, turning instead to t#e #istorical &racticalities and Faccidents0 o/ t#e Fs&ea!ing Su)Iect0 and awa% /rom t#e s%stem o/ linguistics4 T#e totalising im&etus o/ t#e
s%stem o/ linguistics itsel/ H s%stematicit% or, &er#a&s )etter, Ft#eor%0 H is seen as &art o/ t#e masculinist /ramewor! w#ic# disa)les t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a genuine /eminist
emanci&ation4 To t#e e(tent t#at suc# t#in!ing #as #ad an enormous in/luence, so /eminism can )e seen as #a-ing alread% attained to t#e Fanti-/oundationalist0 strand so common
among ad-ocates o/ &ostmodernist &#iloso&#% in general4 Yet i/ one is to )e anti-/oundational #ere, t#en t#e /oundation o/ a &olitics or o/ a general li/e-&ractice )ased u&on t#e
di//erences o/ gender, and 8&on t#e social in/lection o/ t#ose di//erences, also )egins to )e lost4 $eminism, in ado&ting t#e &ostmodern &osition readil%, mig#t also t#ere)%
deconstruct and indeed e-en eradicate itsel/, sawing t#e )ranc# or &edestal u&on w#ic# it sits &recisel% at t#e moment w#en it #as managed, /inall%, to seiGe t#e saw in t#e /irst
&lace4
;t is &recisel% in t#is ground t#at Morris0s &iece included #ere ma!es its argument4 $undamentall%, w#at #as #a&&ened is t#at t#e discourse o/ &ostmodernism #as itsel/ )een
constructed u&on a /oundation w#ic# #as s%stematicall% e(cluded women4 As a result, /eminism is now in-ited to situate itsel/ Fin relation to0 an alread% e(isting &ostmodernism4
1ut )% re#a)ilitating t#e /ounding wor! o/ /eminism in t#e areOro/ cultural de)ate, it )ecomes &ossi)le to re-erse t#ese &riorities and to /rame
8<$
&art -e.en: $eminism 'ntroduction ,?<
8<<
&ostmodernism wit#in a larger de)ate, t#e de)ate around /eminism4 T#e e//ect ot t#is would )e to trans/orm t#e &ostmodern de)ate4 Morris is care/ul to indicate t#at suc# trans/ormation is not
Fsu//icient to, or coe(tensi-e wit#0 t#e necessar% tas!s o/ /eminist struggleN sim&l%, it is a -ital &art o/ suc# struggle, and one w#ic# ena)les /eminism to )e #eard, and not sim&l% to )e
accommodated wit#in an alreadQ e(isting masculinism H or wit#in a silentl% gendered &ostmodernism4
;n recent times a certain tendenc% #as emerged in some cultural discourse to argue t#at /eminism #as )een success/ul, t#at t#e )asic ad-ances #a-e )een made, and t#at t#ere/ore t#e struggle
H li!e t#e &olitical struggle in general H is Fo-er06 t#e so-called Fend o/ #istor%0 is deemed to include t#e Fend o/ women0s #istor%0 as well4 ManQ would dis&ute t#is, in t#e same wa% as t#e% mig#t
dis&ute t#e /act t#at t#e wor! o/ Fmodernit%0 is also com&leteN %et wit#in /eminism, t#e argument t#at muc# remains to )e done and t#at t#e struggle continues in as necessar% a manner as e-er
)e/ore does not necessaril% go #and in #and wit# argument /or t#e continuation o/ &#iloso&#ical modernit%4
$eminists, at least since t#e wor! o/ lrigara%, #a-e )een sus&icious o/ a Funi-ersal reason0, /or t#e% #a-e )een made aware t#at rationalit% can itsel/ )e gendered in suc# a wa% as silentl% to
e(clude women /rom t#e /ield o/ Freasona)le0 )e#a-iour4 $urt#er, /eminism #as o/ten )een made &ro/oundl% aware o/ t#e di//iculties o/ attaining to t#e &osition o/ a #istorical Su)Iect, eit#er as
t#e Su)Iect o/ #istorical agenc% or e-en as t#e Su)Iect o/ consciousness4 2i-en t#ese states o/ a//airs, /eminism mig#t welcome certain as&ects o/ a &ostmodern &#iloso&#%, sus&icious o/
uni-ersals, &ro)lematising t#e Su)Iect, as an attac! )eing made on a di//erent /ront /rom t#at engaged directl% )% /eminism4 T#e inci&ient F&luralism0 o/ &ostmodernism, #owe-er, is not
necessaril% an all%, as Lo-i)ond indicates #ere4 ;n #er stringent anal%sis o/ w#at is at sta!e in suc# &luralism, Lo-i)ond outlines t#e terms o/ a dilemma /or &ostmodernism in regard to its
relation to /eminism6 Feit#er it can concede t#e necessit%, in terms o/ t#e aims o/ /eminism, o/ ]turning t#e world u&side downR
t#ere)% o&ening a door once again to t#e Enlig#tenment idea o/ a total reconstruction o/ societ% on rational lines0, or it can reIect suc# an idea, Ft#ere)% licensing t#e c%nical t#oug#t t#at, #ere as
elsew#ere, ]w#o will do w#at to w#om under t#e new &luralism is de&ressingl% &redicta)leR04
$raser and ic#olson also &onder t#e sometimes /raug#t relations )etween /eminism and an interlo&ing &ostmodernism4 $or t#em, a s&eci/ic tas! is t#e reconciliation o/ an ostensi)l%
logicall% res&ecta)le &#iloso&#ical &osition @o/ an incredulit% towards metanarrati-esA wit# a &olitical demand /or t#e necessit% O/ grounded action @t#e Fsocial-critical &ower o/ /eminism0A4
Against L%otard, t#e% ta!e t#e line t#at it is not necessar% to gi-e u& on t#e anal%sis o/ social macrostructures e-en at a moment w#en one dou)ts a Funi-ersal0 #istor%4 ;t is &er/ectl% &ossi)le to
)e Ft#eoretical0 w#ile attending to t#e local4 Here, a certain &ragmatism a&&ears, and wit# it an ac!nowledgement o/ /alli)ilit%4 Once again, t#ere is a -igorous struggle to retain t#e &ossi)ilit% o/
action under t#e /orm o/ a !ind o/ Fwea!ening04
3ardine0s argument, in t#e c#a&ter /rom /ynesis included #ere, is one w#ic# /undamentall% considers t#e &ostmodern in terms o/ a ret#in!ing o/ modernit%6
s&eci/icall%, s#e o&ens t#e wa% to anal%sis o/ t#e intricate relations among t#e ideological triad trut#Hmodernit%Hwoman, organised around a !e% Kuestion o/ t#e status o/ Fe(&erience0, w#ose
demise in twentiet#-centur% &#iloso&#% is dou)leedged /or /eminism4 T#e current ret#in!ing o/ em&iricism wit#in &ostmodernising discourse is itsel/ #ere &ro&erl% situated wit#in alread%
e(isting /eminist Kuestions and de)ates4
T#e &ieces collected #ere are testimon% to t#e statement )% $raser and ic#olson t#at F$eminism and &ostmodernism #a-e emerged as two o/ t#e most im&ortant &olitical-cultural currents o/
t#e last decade0N t#eir interrelations will continue t#at situation /or decades to come4
$eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostrnodernism 8<B
?@w $eminism5 4eadin%5
&ostmodernism
Mea/an Morris
Some time in t#e earl% *+<9s, a .omen0s $ilm $esti-al in S%dne% tried to screen ell% 'a&lan0s /ilm 6a $ianc;e du pirate AA Very )urious /irl5 *+?+A4 ;t was not a great success4 One reel
turned out to )e unsu)titled and, i/ ; remem)er rig#tl%, t#e reels were screened out o/ order4 At t#e time, t#is seemed li!e an omen against t#e use in /eminist cinema o/ large narrati-e structures
H t#en in Kuestion, in t#eor%, as )eing some#ow intrinsicall% Fmale04 As images o/ a women0s trut#, eloKuent in an% order, t#e /esti-al documentaries and e(&ressi-e e(&erimental s#orts &ro-ed
more resistant to accidents o/ conte(t t#an 'a&lan0s tig#tl% organiGed /iction4
e-ert#eless, 'a&lan0s /ilm made a &ro/ound im&ression on man% women in t#e audience, and ; #a-e ne-er /orgotten it4 ; #a-e also ne-er )een a)le to see it again
H so it #as acKuired in m% memor% t#e a)straction o/ a multi&ur&ose m%t#4 ;t was certainl% a /a)le4 'a&lan0s F/iancLe0 li-ed on t#e edge o/ a -illage wit# #er goods and c#attels, #er goat, and #er
)it o/ #ig#-tec# H a ta&e recorder4 S#e ma!es mone% /rom men, and /rom cleaning4 ;n town, t#e -illagers s&urn #er and /ear #er )ecause o/ #er re&utation and #er s#ar&, insolent tongue4 1ut in
#er #ouse, t#e -illage men con/ide in #er, de&end on #er, trust #er @w#ile allowing increasingl% -icious attac!s on #er esta)lis#mentA4 1ut s#e #as sa-ed t#eir mone%, and wit# #er recorder s#e
#as sa-ed t#eir words4 One da% s#e lea-es6 and as s#e sets o// on t#e road, s#e lea-es )e#ind a -illage listening in #orror not to t#e -oice o/ t#e curious girl, )ut to its o.O most intimate secrets
and con/essions H &la%ing loudl%, in &u)lic, /or all to #ear4
As an allegor% o/ -engeance and li)eration, 6a $ianc;e du pirate could )e read as an im&ro-ement on anot#er te(t &o&ular in t#e ent#usiasticall% uncom&romising am)ience o/ t#e earl%
women0s mo-ement H t#e 1rec#tH.eill song /rom ,he ,hreepenny 2pera5 FPirate 3enn%04 As a cleaning-woman0s dream o/ )eing recogniGed as a &irate Kueen, &ossessing a secret !nowledge
t#at will gi-e #er t#e &ower to #umiliate and destro% e-er%one w#o #as e-er #umiliated #er, FPirate 3enn% was o/ten sa-oured straig#t as a )loodt#irst% declaration o/ /eminist uto&ian desires4
1ut it maintains an am)i-alent edge4 Pirate 3enn%0 is Poll%0s song, an em)edded
$rom Morris, M4, ,he &irate1s $ianc;e5 Jerso, London, *+EE, &&4 i - "#
8<@
/iction o/ a /antas%, and s#e sings it at #er wedding to MacHeat#4 Poll% &resents FPirate 3enn%0 as an Fimitation0 o/ anot#er woman &osed as distant /rom #ersel/4 3enn% li-es in a sKualor t#at
Poll% &retends to transcendN Poll% #as actuall% married
#er )andit, w#ile 3enn%0s is alwa%s a)out to arri-e4 1ut Poll%0s dream o/ action, Iust li!e 3enn%0s, is limited to waiting and watc#ing till #er s#i& comes in Hcommanded )% a masculine sa-iour4
E-en #er act o/ mimesis as 3enn% is se-erel% restricted4 At t#e end o/ t#e song, Mac &u)licl% &raises Poll%0s Fart0 to t#e ot#er men
K )ut t#en tells #er in an undertone, F; don0t li!e %ou &la%-actingN let0s not #a-e an% more o/ it04
'a&lan0s narrati-e did awa% wit# t#e &irate, as well as wit# t#e #eroine0s o&&ressors4 ;t also su)stituted, /or 3enn%0s grim -ision o/ #a-ing e-er%one massacred, a muc# more su)tle /orm o/
&oetic H and &ragmatic H Iustice4 T#e -illage societ% is undone )% t#e )roadcast o/ its own &resu&&ositions, and t#e -illage econom% is wrec!ed )% an intensi/ication o/ its own e(&loitati-e logic4
'a&lan0s /iancLe doesn0t dream o/ waiting /or #er #ero to arri-e on stage in a moment o/ re-olutionar% ra&ture4 S#e ma!es do #ersel/ )% acting criticall% u&on #er e-er%da% conditions o/
e(istence Hto trans/orm #er &osition wit#in t#em4 S#e is not reduced to silence a/ter #er own F&la%-acting04 ;nstead o/ &er/orming anot#er woman, s#e &la%s #ersel/N t#en s#i/ts /rom &er/ormer to
director w#en s#e Fstages0, )% )orrowing and Kuoting in an altered conte(t, t#e -oices o/ #er /ormer masters4 ;t is t#eir e-er%da% conduct t#at is now /ramed as F&la%-acting0 H and a/ter t#e
&er/ormance t#ere can0t )e an% more o/ it in Kuite t#e same old wa%4
;t was onl% some %ears a/ter seeing 6a $ianc;e du pirate t#at it )ecame &ossi)le /or me to t#in! a)out 'a&lan0s ac#ie-ement in Kuite t#ose terms4 At t#e time, t#e discussion was mainl%
a)out Fimages o/ women0, Fdistri)ution o/ gender roles0, and Fre/lection o/ class &osition04 T#ose terms wor!ed -er% well /or de)ating t#e logic o/ t#e /iction, )ut )% eluding @at least as we used
t#emA t#e Kuestion o/ t#e &ractice o/ narration, t#e% encouraged a #ast% Ium& to de)ating @not /or t#e /irst time in t#e #istor% o/ modern aest#eticsA w#et#er suc# F/iction0 was generall%
desirable. Howe-er, wor! )% /eminist writers engaging wit# t#ese issues, and wit# t#e #istor% o/ aest#etics, soon &ro-ided a /ramewor! in w#ic# 'a&lan0s /ilm could )e read not onl% as a /a)le
o/ &olitical action, )ut as a &olitical act o/ trans/orming /a)les @a song /rom ,he ,hreepenny 2pera5 )ut also a store o/ legends a)out witc#es, wic!ed .omen and outcast girlsA4 $or e(am&le,
t#is &assage /rom Anne $readman0s anal%sis o/ 2eorge Sand0s 'ndiana in FSand&a&er06
M% maIor met#odological &resu&&osition will )e t#at an% te(t is a rewriting o/ t#e /ield or /ields o/ its own emergence, t#at to write, to read, or to s&ea! is /irst o/ all to turn ot#er te(ts into
discursi-e material, dis&lacing t#e enunciati-e &osition /rom w#ic# t#ose materials #a-e )een &ro&ounded4 ; mean t#at Fuse0 can alwa%s do somet#ing a little di//erent /rom merel% re&eating
Fusage04 ;n an attem&t to do somet#ing towards s&eci/%ing Fwomen0s writing0, ; s#all su&&ose t#at it is in t#e )usiness o/ trans/orming discursi-e material t#at, in its untrans/ormed state,
lea-es a woman no &lace /rom w#ic# to s&ea!, or not#ing to sa%4 5
8=9 Mea/an Morris 8inism5 4eadin%5 &ostmodern9sn8
$readman goes on to suggest t#at Ft#e &roduction o/ a s&ea!ing-&osition, wit# res&ect to discursi-e material t#at is )ot# gi-en and /oreign0 can )e studied )% a F/eminist /ormalism04 Her own
&a&er, in turn, can )e read in t#is wa%4 $or e(am&le, )% anal%sing t#e no-el 'ndiana as a set o/ r#etorical and generic strategies rewriting t#e material o/ two discourses H t#e stor% o/ Don 3uan,
and t#e m%t# o/ t#e Muse
H $readman is a)le to &roduce a &osition /rom w#ic# t#e F2eorge Sand0 o/ t#e #istor% )oo!s @F&roli( and re&etiti-e w#en s#e is not Iust telling a good stor%, and w#en s#e is, a downrig#t
em)arrassment to t#e modernist critic0A
,
can )e rewritten /or a /eminist literar% history.
So s#e too trans/orms two discourses6 one an essentialist t#eor% o/ Fwomen0s writing0, t#e ot#er a &olemic against F/ormalism04 T#e /ormer, insisting on )iological aut#ors#i& as a source o/
meanings, t#reatens to lea-e a /eminist formalist wit# not#ing to sa%4 ;/ we reIect F/emininit%0 as an a priori o/ /eminist criticism, t#en F#ow @it ma% well )e as!edA could /eminist criticism select
a cor&us o/ women0s writingD0
=
$readman0s res&onse is to sa% t#at t#e woman writer is a gi-en H )ut a gi-en in @and )%A discourse4 F; can read t#at discourse, and rewrite it40 T#is mo-e in turn
allows $readman to trans/orm an o&&osition )etween F#istor%0 and F/orm0 t#at mig#t lea-e a feminist /ormalist no &lace /rom w#ic# to s&ea!4 Since #er rewriting o/ F2eorge Sand0 as a
discursi-e o)Iect in-ol-es a #istor% o/ trans/ormations &roduced in Fsocial conditions o/ some s&eci/icit%0, t#en $readman0s /ormalism could not )e o&&osed to a &olitical &ractice o/ reading and
writing4 On t#e contrar% it would )e one o/ t#e ena)ling conditions /or suc# a &ractice4 ;t is a wa% o/ writing a &olitical #istor%, as well as a t#eor%, o/ #ow c#anges ma% ta!e &lace in &articular
circumstances4
F$ormalism0 is still @li!e F/iancLe0A a discom/iting term,
>
ne-er easil% disentangled /rom memories o/ t#e #istor% o/ its uses4 Man% t#eorists now &re/er to a-oid it, rat#er t#an rewrite it, con/ining
it to t#e museum o/ dead terms sometimes re-isited )% t#ose renewing t#eir own s&ea!ing-&osition as alwa%s alread% F)e%ond04 ;n )eginning t#is introduction )% rereading a /ilm and an essa%
t#at #a-e )een im&ortant to m% wor! o-er se-eral %ears, it would &er#a&s )e easier now to situate )ot# o/ t#em in t#e /ield o/ &ostmodernism, and in recent de)ates a)out a&&ro&riation,
strategies o/ Kuotation, re-ision, mimicr%, and, /or t#at matter, o/ image and discourse piracy @or, more recentl%, F&oac#ing0A4
;ndeed, in reading o-er again t#ose te(ts t#at not onl% made me want to write a)out t#em, )ut c#anged t#e wa%s t#at ; wanted to read, it occurred to me t#at muc# t#e same mo-e o/
relocation Fin0 &ostmodernism could easil% )e im&osed on t#e &roIect o/ Mic#Zle Le Doeu//0s 61'ma%inaire philosophi>ue. Le Doeu//0s essa%0s de-elo& a num)er o/ t#emes a)out /emininit%,
&leasure and &ower, t#e &olitics ot Fst%le0, t#e limitations o/ philosophical Reason, t#e wor! o/ /iguration in discourse, t#e /unction o/ Ot#er-ness in meta-discourse, and t#e com&le(it% o/
#istorical relations )etween a &#iloso&#ical imaginar% and &o&ular culture
?
H t#emes t#at #a-e )ecome !e% re/erence-&oints /or F&ostmodernism0 inso/ar CM t#at term de/ines a &lace /or ma!ing
generaliGations a)out t#e sta!es o/ ot#erwise dis&arate de)ates4
,<*
61'ma%inaire philosophi>ue also de-elo&s a t#eor% o/ Kuotation @and a &ractice o/ reading di//erences )etween &articular acts o/ KuotingA t#at mo-es awa%0 /rom t#e mourning and melanc#olia
associated wit# Kuotation )% Susan Sontag @/or t#e conte(t o/ &#otogra&#%A and 3ean 1audrillard @in #is m%t# o/ t#e simulacrumA4D Her intricate anal%ses o/ #ow t#e act o/ re/erring to a &re-ious
Fimage0 can u1ork in &#iloso&#% to /ormulate, sol-e or )anis# &ro)lems can t#en &ro-ide t#e more use/ul met#odological &recedent /or t#in!ing a)out muc# insistentl% li-el% contem&orar% art
and commercial cinema4 And #er own &ractice o/ essa% writing can )e read as a trans/ormation o/ t#e s&eci/ic discourses s#e addresses in criticism H a su)tle trans/ormation, )ut one no less
su)stantial t#an t#ose &er/ormances o/ a F/eminine0 writing in w#ose &la% s#e declines to &artici&ate4
1ut i/ it would )e eas% to re-&resent Le Doeu//0s wor! in t#is wa% to &roduce a &ostmodern image, it is not so eas% to sa% w#at would )e gained )% ignoring t#e s&eci/icit% o/ its mo-es
)etween t#e #istor% o/ &#iloso&#% on t#e one #and, and t#e discourses o/ /eminism on t#e ot#er4 ;t is #er critical anal%sis o/ t#e /unction o/ images in )ot# o/ t#em, and )etween t#em, t#at ma!es
t#e &olitics o/ #er writing ma!e sense4
;n t#e same wa%, it is signi/icant /or me t#at t#e &recision o/ Anne $readinan0s &roIect is matc#ed )% /ew o/ t#e non-0/ormalist0 t#eories o/ a strategic rewriting o/ cultural materials @/rom
&o& anal%ses o/ )ricolage and recoding to 3ean-$rancois L%otard0s re-ision o/ t#e t#eor% o/ language-gamesA t#at #a-e )een so in/luential in recent %ears4 One &ro)lem now emerging as a result
is t#at as t#e terms o/ suc# anal%ses )ecome commodi/ied to t#e &oint o/ )ecoming dated @Fstrateg%0, F)ricolage0 and Frecoding0 #a-e t#e aura o/ t#e remainder sale a)out t#em now, too old to
sur&rise, too new to seduce CCCED t#e% o//er little resistance to t#e wearing e//ects o/ o-eruse4 .#en an% and e-er% te(t can )e read indi//erentl% as anot#er instance o/ strategic rewriting0, anot#er
illustration o/ an esta)lis#ed general &rinci&le, somet#ing more @and somet#ing more s&eci/icA is needed to argue #ow and w#% a &articular e-ent o/ rewriting mig#t matter4
;n t#is conte(t, it is wort# re-isiting 1art#es0s comment in (ytholo%ies Ft#at a little /ormalism turns one awa% /rom Histor%, )ut t#at a lot )rings one )ac! to it04
T#e #istor% ; want to return to #ere is one in w#ic# t#e Kuestion o/ rewriting discourses0 emerges /rom a &olitical critiKue o/ t#e social &ositioning o/ women4 3ust as a trans/ormation o/ t#e
meaning o/ a woman0s F&la%-acting0 occurs in 'a&lan0s /iction as a solution to a local e(&erience o/ se(ual and class o&&ression Aand as an alternati-e to t#e melanc#ol% romance o/ Pirate
3enn%0s dreamA, so too, ; t#in!, does $readman0s /eminist /ormalism de&end on t#e &olitical &roIects o/ t#e women0s mo-ement /or its insistence t#at we sa% w#at kinds o/ discursi-e c#anges
will matter, w#%, and /or w#om4 ;n t#is wa%, t#e notion o/ a Fte(tual strateg%R cannot )ecome a sort o/ /ree-/loating aest#etic ideal, interc#angea)le wit# an%0 ot#er general conce&t o/ or a -ague
t#ematics o/ Fdoing somet#ing04 On t#e contrar%6 Fstra
action teg%0 #ere
is a -alue t#at not onl% re/ers to and deri-es /rom t#e &olitical discourses o/ /eminism, )ut remains o&en to re-ision by t#em4
So rat#er t#an resituate 6a $ianc;e du pirate and FSand&a&er0 in relation to
8=2 Mea/an Morris $eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostmnodernism
&ostmodernism, ; &re/er initiall% to ma!e a /ramewor! o/ introduction )% relating t#em to eac# ot#er li!e t#is6 )ot# can )e read as F/ormalist0 &ractices in $readman0s senseN )ot# are in t#e
)usiness o/ trans/orming discursi-e material t#at ot#erwise Flea-es a woman no &lace /rom w#ic# to s&ea!, or not#ing to sa%04 1ot# t#ere/ore acti-el% assume t#at t#e mo-ement o/ women to a
&osition o/ &ower in discourse is a &olitical necessit%, and a practical &ro)lem4
;t doesn0t /ollow t#at ; t#in! t#eir met#ods and interests are t#e same4 ;t doesn0t /ollow t#at, in ma!ing connections )etween a narrati-e /ilm a)out a -illage outcast and an academic essa%
a)out reading women0s writing, ; would t#en rus# on to an analog% )etween &rostitutes, witc#es and academic /eminist critics, or con/late a /ilm or an essa% wit# t#e social conditions t#at t#e%
ma% re/er to or discuss4 And it dosen0t /ollow /or one moment t#at ; consider t#e acti-it% o/ Ftrans/orming discursi-e material0 as su//icient to, or coe(tensi-e wit#, t#e tas!s o/ /eminist &olitical
struggle now or in t#e /uture4
1ut it does /ollow t#at ; t#in! suc# acti-it% is &art o/ t#at struggle and, more strongl%, t#at it can )e one o/ t#e ena)ling conditions /or realiGing, securing and renewing its wider &olitical
&roIects4
T#ese Kuali/ications are necessar%, ; t#in!, )ecause at a time o/ in/lationar% r#etoric a)out t#e im&ortance o/ Fcultural0 studies and criticism, it )ecomes all too eas% in reaction to go )ac! to
F)asics0 and declare t#at wor! on women0s writing, a/ter all, #as not#ing to sa% H and no &lace in &olitics4
Most o/ t#e essa%s in t#is -olume E,he &irate1s $ianc;eD were written as an e//ort to &roduce a s&ea!ing-&osition in a &articular &olitical, critical and &u)lis#ing conte(t4 Some, li!e t#e essa%s
on Mar% Dal%, 3ean 1audrillard and )rocodile <undee5 dealt wit# discourses tending to den% all critics @e-en /eminist ones /or Dal%, /eminists in &articular /or 1audrillard and Paul HoganA a
&lace /rom w#ic# to s&ea!, or t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ #a-ing somet#ing to sa%4 ;n eac# case, ; #a-e tried not sim&l% a /ind a wa% to Fanswer )ac!0, )ut to read t#e te(ts in Kuestion s%m&at#eticall% in
order to understand t#em as criticisms o/ t#ose answers t#at m%0 /eminism mig#t automaticall% &ro-ide, and so to use t#em to Kuestion m% oQS0O assum&tions and &ractices in t#e &rocess o/
reading t#eirs4
Some essa%s were written directl% in res&onse to wor! w#ic# is e(&licitl% concerned wit# t#e &ositioning o/ women, and wit# t#in!ing a)out su)Iecti-itYO modes o/ address, and re/erence,
in &articular #istorical conte(ts4 Since t#ese &reoccu&ations are o/ten now considered to )e t#e signs o/ an academic F/eminist t#eor%0, ; want to stress #ere t#e art wor!s o/ L%nn Sil-erman and
Ric#ard Dunn4 1ot# artists as! us to consider our relations#i& to t#e images eac# &ro-ides o/ su)Iecti-it% not as a source o/ meanings, or as an o)Iect o/ Kuests, )ut as an elusi-e reference-point.
Sil-erman0s )oots, recurring /rom image to image across t#e )ottol=l o/ t#e )ottom line, introduce t#e trace o/ a #istor% in t#e m%t#ic s&ace o/ t#e so called Ftimeless land0 o/ t#e @w#iteA
Australian interior4 Dunn0s /ormal &ortraitS construct a set o/ st%liGed &ositions H o/ w#ic# t#e most intriguing, /or me, remains
8=8
t#e image o/ t#e %oung woman @a /iancLe, &er#a&sA /rom t#e /ar rig#t o/ t#e series, gaGing t#roug# /ire at a stor% o/ #er own &ositioning in t#at &lace4 Eac# artist as!s us to anal%se t#e &rocess o/
re&resentation )ot# arri-ing at and de&arting /rom t#at elusi-e re/erence-&oint H and allows us t#en to trans/orm it )% imagining a stor% in turn4
$inall%, ot#er essa%s &ursued a /eminist anal%sis o/ contem&orar% writing ((0#ic#, /rom Howard $el&erin to Roland 1art#es, Susan Sontag and 3ean-$rancois L%0otard, attem&ts to de)ate
&resumed general dilemmas a)out critical Fs&ea!ing0 toda%4 Sometimes t#e /eminism o/ t#e essa%s is an e(&licit and &olemical &osition4 Some times it o&erates im&licitl%, as a set o/ t#eoretical
and &olitical assum&tions a)out t#e Kuestions t#at criticism mig#t as!4 ;n some o/ t#e more recent essa%s a F/eminist s&ea!ing-&osition0 is /ramed as toda% de/ining a recogniGa)le genre in
criticism, w#ic# ma% in turn )egin to im&ose new di//iculties /or t#e /urt#er wor! o/ @/eministA women4
;n none o/ t#ese essa%s, #owe-er, is t#e &roduction o/ a s&ea!ing-&osition understood as a matter o/ in-enting a F&ersonal -oice0 /or Gme1. one o/ t#em is &resented as an instance o/ a
su)Iecti-e or Freader0 res&onse4 On t#e contrar%, ; t#in! t#at &roducing a F&osition0 is a &ro)lem o/ r#etoric, o/ de-elo&ing enunciati-e strategies @or wa%s o/ F&la%-acting0, in MacHeat#0s senseA
&recisel% in relation to t#e cultural and social con-entions t#at ma!e s&ea!ing di//icult or im&ossi)le /or women.
;o stress a relation to t#ose con-entions is to sa% t#at ; t#in! it is im&ortant to t#in! o/ t#e F&roduction o/ a s&ea!ing-&osition0 as a matter o/ strategies o/ re/erence, *9 rat #er t#an sim&l% o/
Ft#e su)Iect0 or e-en Fsu)Iecti-it%04 Se-eral essa%s in t#is -olume e(&lore t#at argument /urt#er4 One o/ t#e reasons t#at ; t#in! it wort# &ursuing is t#at in t#e uncertaint% and con/usion t#at
attends s&eculation a)out t#e relations )etween semiotics, Mar(ism, /eminism and &olitics, t#e one &olemical &osition t#at /or me #as &ro-ed itsel/ Kuite useless is t#at w#ic# insists on retaining
Fin t#e last instance0 an em&iricist conce&tion o/ Gthe re/erent0 as Ft#e t#ing0, as &ri-ileged s%necdoc#e o/ Ft#e real @materialA world04 ];t ma% )e useless /or its own &olitical &ur&oses6 /ew ot#er
t#eories o/ re/erence are Kuite so r#etoricall% -ulnera)le to t#e mega-em&iricism o/ a 3ean 1audrillard disco-ering, on a tri& to Disne%land or on a Kuic! run t#roug# some meta--LritL TJ or
#ig#-tec# 3a&anese -ideos, t#at Ft#e re/erent0, and t#ere/ore Frealit%0, is dead4
T#O onl% ot#er comment ; wis# to ma!e to situate t#e essa%s t#at /ollow Vin ,he &irate1s $ianc;eD is t#at most o/ t#em were written /or /un, or as a Fleisure0 Occu&ation $un, o/ course, can
incor&orate an%0 num)er o/ reasons /or writing Somet#ing H ent#usiasm, amusement, admiration, a sense o/ a c#allenge to learn, )ut also concern, irritation, an(iet% or )emusement, a desire to
con/ront somet#ing )ot#ersome
$rom *+<E to 1*J!5 ; wor!ed &rimaril% as a /ilm re-iewer /or news&a&ers @t#e -ydney (ornin% 7erald5 and t#en ,he Australian $inancial 4e.iew?. .#ile ; also O/ten taug#t &art-time in
se-eral art and media colleges, t#e arduous &#%sical and
Mea/an Morris '161minisnl5 4eadin%5 &ostmnodernism
intellectual conditions o/ a Io) in w#ic# ; mig#t see u& to a doGen /ilms a wee!, and #a-e to /ind Fsomet#ing to sa%0 a)out most o/ t#em, meant t#at w#ile ; #a-e alwa%s understood mass-media
wor! as an ideological &ractice in-ol-ing acts o/ t#eoriGation, t#e acti-it% o/ t#in!ing and writing a)out theories t#at mig#t in/orm m% &ractice #ad to )e c#eris#ed as a #o))%4
T#is e(&erience #as in/luenced m% wor! in a num)er o/ wa%s4 ; )ecame as interested in addressing t#e t#eoretical de)ates t#at circulate in and as &o&ular culture as ; am in academicall%
situated t#eoretical wor! about &o&ular culture4 ;n t#e &rocess, maintaining t#e distinction ;0-e Iust reiterated )etween t#e F&o&ular0 and t#e Facademic0 )ecame increasingl% aw!ward /or an%
&ur&oses o/ generaliGation4 ; ma!e it again #ere onl% in order to sa% t#at ; t#in! some t#eories in wide circulation @li!e t#e Fgut reaction0 t#eor% o/ criticism M or t#e )ig-cinema t#eor% o/ mass
&leasure HCCCNE are still insu//icientl% addressed )% academic wor!4 T#e )asic &remises o/ eac# are so muc# in con/lict t#at t#e /ormer is sim&l% dismissed as wrong0, or ignored as non-t#eoretical4
Yet serious engagement wit# &o&ular culture must e-entuall% acce&t to ta!e issue wit# it and in it, as well as a)out it, and ; t#in! t#is means writing seriousl% a)out &o&ular t#eories as well as
@or e-en rat#er t#anA writing F&o&ular0 s&in-o//s /rom academic t#eories4
Howe-er, man% o/ t#e essa%s in t#is -olume E,he &irate1s $ianc;eD were initiall% written for5 i/ not F/rom0, an academic conte(t4 Ot#ers were notN )ut in neit#er case did t#e !ind o/ critical
res&onse t#at #el&s an% writer to s#i/t #er &osition @or c#ange #er mindA necessaril% come /rom t#e imaginar% addressee ; ma% #a-e inscri)ed as ; wrote t#em4 Per#a&s t#e most demanding and
use/ul criticism an intellectual can recei-e comes /rom t#e !ind o/ Fmi(ed0 &u)lic to )e encountered at e-ents organiGed on t#ematic or &olitical, rat#er t#an &urel% &ro/essional, &rinci&les4 So
t#e e(&erience o/ mo-ing )etween a num)er o/ di//erent social sites o/ de)ate and discussion a)out cultural &olitics #as also le/t me -er% cautious a)out some as&ects o/ recent attem&ts to come
to terms wit# t#e limitations and s&eci/icities o/ Facademic0 &ractice4
On t#e one #and, $oucault0s notion o/ t#e Fs&eci/ic intellectual0, /or e(am&le, #as )een &articularl% use/ul )ot# in allowing institutional struggles to occu&% a /ield o/ e-er%da% li/e0 rat#er t#an
)eing relegated to an Fi-or% tower0 di-orced /rom a Freal world0, and in ma!ing it &ossi)le to criticiGe t#e moment in w#ic# a t#eor% Fmista!es t#e li)eral academ% as t#e collecti-e su)Iect o/ a
uni-ersall% use/ul !nowledge04 O $eminism #as )ot# &ro/ited /rom, and #el&ed to &roduce, t#is !ind o/ reconce&tualiGation o/ academic &olitics4 On t#e ot#er #and, somet#ing slig#tl% di//erent
seems to )e #a&&ening w#en it )ecomes &ossi)le to claim, as Paul Smit# does in an essa% in (en in $eminism5 t#at &oststructuralist /eminist t#eor% F#owe-er ]/eministR it ma%0 )e, and
#owsoe-er ]/eministR is construed H does not e=ist outside the academy1 Amy em&#asisA4 *, Smit# stresses in a note t#at #e is re/erring onl%0 to w#at is !nown Fin t#e academic -ernacular as
/eminist t#eor% @t#e structuralist:&oststructualist -ariet%A04
1ut ; wonder H w#ose academic -ernacularD Man% /eminist t#Irists in-ol-ed in an academic &ractice @Mar% Dal% comes immediatel% to mind )ut one mig#t /ind
8=$
an% num)er in -arious disci&linesA would )e astonis#ed and anno%ed to /ind t#eir wor! eit#er categoriGed as &oststructuralist or consigned to none(istence $urt#ermore, t#is F-ernacular0
eKuation )etween a rei/ied F&oststructuralism0 and an eKuall% rei/ied Ft#eor%0 is not con/ined to t#e academ%4 As one o/ t#e means )% OO#ic# an% &art o/ a /ield o/ acti-it% &romotes itsel/ as
coe(tensi-e wit# t#e w#ole, t#e term Ft#eor%0 can )e used in &recisel% t#at s#ort#and -Oa% @at least in m% cultural conte(t )% administrators and curators and )ureaucrats in t#e -isual and
&er/orming arts, )% Iournalists, )% /ilm-ma!ers
One must )e &assionatel% care/ul #ere, &recisel% )ecause to state t#at a gi(en acti-it% #as Fno e(istence0 outside one0s own immediate s&#ere o/ o&erations is to acce&t and rein/orce as
a)solute, rat#er t#an to c#allenge and trans/orm, &re-ailing local con-entions a)out t#e a-aila)le &laces /rom w#ic# &eo&le @and in t#is case, /eministsA can )e allowed to )e sa%ing somet#ing4 ;/
we e(tend t#e realm o/ t#e Facadem%0 to include a w#ole range o/ acti-ities s#uttling )etween &edagogical institutions and t#e culture industries, t#en we are no longer tal!ing a)out t#e
s&eci/icities and limitations o/ t#e /ormer, )ut rat#er using a -agel% e(&ansi-e meton%m o/ Ft#e institution0 to )lur awa% a num)er o/ Kuestions a)out class and cultural &ractice in s&eci/ic sites
toda%4 .e are, once again, uni-ersaliGing t#e Facadem%0 @and in t#e name o/ onl% one o/ its elementsA4
A res&onse to t#is o)Iection is t#at an incessant Fs#uttling0 @o/ &ersonnel as well as o/ acti-itiesA into ot#er social sites is &recisel% w#at c#aracteriGes a &rimar% /unction o/ t#e academ% in
&ost-industrial societies4 Modern academies im dou)t #a-e alwa%s done t#is6 )ut as t#e% come to act not onl% as training grounds /or a /uture elite dias&ora, )ut also as &re-unem&lo%ment
waiting rooms or as anti-unem&lo%ment t#era&% and F&ersonal im&ro-ement0 centres, t#eir ideological role in mo.in% discourses around )ecomes increasingl% com&le( @in a wa% w#ic# -aries
considera)l%, too, /rom countr% to countr%A4 1ut it is &recisel% w#en we )egin to come to terms wit# t#is de-elo&ment t#at it )ecomes im&ossi)le to claim t#at a gi-en t#eoretical acti-it% Fdoes
not e(ist outside0 t#e academ%4 T#is can onl% #e true in an academ% imagined as wit#out students w#o do not &roceed to )ecome &ro/essors, or wit# students w#o remain untouc#ed )% t#eir own
wor!ing e(&eriences4
$urt#ermore, t#is academ% /unctions in a world wit#out )oo!s#o&s, wit#out Famateur0 readers and writers o/ t#eoretical wor!, wit#out t#eoriGing artists, .it#out t#ose am)iguous Fart-world0
/igures @critics, and es&eciall% curatorsA w#o can /rame artists0 wor! as Ft#eoretical0 w#et#er t#e% wis# it so or not, Os it#out TJ c#atOs#ows and intellectual tal!ing-#eads, wit#out inter-ieQO s,
wit#out media Io!es a)out semiotics and &oststructuralism, wit#out &ri-ate reading grou&s, wit#out &u)lic /orums, wit#out %oung /ilm-sc#ool graduates ma!ing )ot# small /ilm-essa%s and )ig
)loc!)usters, wit#out ot#er t#an academic audiences /or an%0 o/ t#ese, or an%one an%w#ere to go on to ma!e somet#ing di//erent /rom t#em6 it is a world .it#out an% Fdissemination0 o/ ideas,
and /inall% wit#out t#e ram&ant commodi/,cation o/ t#oug#t and /eeling t#at ma!es it &ossi)le to s&ea! o/ FT#eor%0
K in a -ernacular sense H as a &ractice, as a &ro)lem, as a genre, and as a FGone o/ &ossi)le contestation4
8=:
8=< Mea/an Morris $eminism5 4eadin%5 &ost5nodern9sm
; ta!e issue wit# Paul Smit#0s comment in suc# detail )ecause it seems to )e one o/ t#e more care/ul /ormulations o/ a m%t# o/ institutional and discursi-e closure w#ic# ma% emerge /rom
t#e im&ortant academic attem&t to F!now %our limitations0, in Clint Eastwood0s &#rase, )ut w#ic# sometimes ends @as ; #a-e seen it do in /eminist discussion grou&sA wit# a sel/-lacerating and
ultimatel% sel/-de/eating lament )% Ft#eorists0 t#at we @or Ft#e%0A aren0t doing somet#ing else H somet#ing, &er#a&s, wit# more power to c#ange &re-ailing conditions o/ e(istence4
;t0s a reasona)le an(iet%4 .it#out worr%ing a)out t#e disconnections and t#e /ailures o/ intellectual wor!, we cannot trans/orm it &oliticall%4 Yet one o/ t#e most im&ortant conseKuences o/
t#e notion o/ t#e Fs&eci/ic intellectual0 is not to translate Fs&eci/icit%0 as Fcon/inement0, )ut rat#er to )egin to acce&t /irstl% t#at wor! &roduced in an academic conte(t @e-en t#e writings o/
$oucault, e-en &oststructuralist /eminist t#eor%A can )e used and rewritten in un&redicta)le wa%s @and -arious mediaA elsew#ere6 and secondl% t#at t#is mo-ement can run t#e ot#er wa%6
academic t#eoriGation can and s#ould trans/orm its &ractices )% learning /rom t#e e(&eriences, t#e conce&ts, and t#e met#odologies de-elo&ed )% &eo&le in )roader social and &olitical
mo-ements4
T#e relations#i& )etween /eminist t#eor% and t#e -arious women0s mo-ements #as o&erated #istoricall% in t#is two-wa% sense, and ; would add t#at non-academicall% constituted /eminist
grou&s &ro-ided an e(cellent training ground in not deducing &eo&le0s reading #a)its or t#eir intellectual interests /rom t#eir social occu&ations4 ;t is &er#a&s true toda% t#at t#e emergence o/
modes o/ /eminist t#eoriGing in/lected )% F&oststructuralism0 corres&onds )ot# to an intensi/ied discussion o/ /eminism in t#e academies, and to t#e de-elo&ment o/ a more com&le( and indirect
relations#i& )etween t#at discussion, a range o/ )road &olitical struggles in-ol-ing women, and a ra&idl% c#anging, sometimes wea!ened, sense o/ F/eminism0 as a social /orce4 1ut at t#at &oint
it )ecomes crucial not onl% to as!, as Mic#Zle Le Doeu// does o/ t#e wor! o/ Simone de 1eau-oir @or as ; would still wis# to as! o/ t#e wor! o/ Mar% Dal%A, w#at is it t#at #as allowed t#is
&ractice o/ t#eor% to Fd%namiGe0 so man% di-erse women0s mo-ementsDN )ut also to as! #ow social mo-ements now can generate c#anges in @e-en &oststructuralistA /eminist t#eor%, and in our
&ractice o/ /eminist &olitics4
A declaration t#at a certain !ind o/ /eminist t#eor% does not e(ist outside a s&eci/ic institutional s&ace ma% /unction as a wa% o/ den%ing certain women a &lace /rom w#ic# to s&ea!, )ut it
does so #a&#aGardl%, )% t#e !ind o/ accident t#at )e/alls an% generaliGation4 ; s#ould li!e to conclude )% considering a muc# more co#erentl% moti-ated denial @in a structural, not an indi-idual,
sense o/ Fmoti-ation0A t#at occurs w#en it is stated t#at women #a-e #ad not#ing to sa% a)out a &articular to&ic4
;n a num)er o/ recent discussions o/ &ostmodernism, a sense o/ intrigue de-elo&s around a &resumed a)sence H or wit##olding H o/ women0s s&eec# in relation tO w#at #as certainl% )ecome
one o/ t#e )oom discourses o/ t#e l
+
E9s4 $eminists in narticular, in t#is intrigue, #a-e #ad little or not#ing to sa% a)c0it &ostmodernism4
8==
T#is -er% curious do=a emerges /rom te(ts )% male critics re/erring &rimaril% to eac# ot#er commenting on t#e rarit% o/ women0s s&eec#4
;n *+E,, in a te(t commenting on #is own Fremar!a)le o-ersig#t0 in ignoring t#e Kuestion o/ se(ual di//erence in #is &re-ious critical &ractice, Craig Owens noted Ft#e /act t#at /ew women
#a-e engaged in t#e modernism:&ostmodernism de)ate04 ** ;n an essa% /irst &u)lis#ed t#e /ollowing %ear, Andreas Hu%ssen H warml% agreeing wit# Owens t#at /eminist wor! in art, literature
and criticism #as )een Fa measure o/ t#e -italit% and energ%0 o/ &ostmodern culture H none t#e less /ound it Fsomew#at )a//ling t#at /eminist criticism #as so /ar largel% sta%ed awa% /rom t#e
&ostmodernism de)ate w#ic# is considered not to )e &ertinent to /eminist
G is
concerns
1ot# o/ t#ese critics stressed t#e com&le(it% and im&ortance o/ a /eminist
contri)ution to w#at they5 in turn, wis#ed to descri)e as a F&ostmodern0 culture4 Owens in &articular was care/ul to disclaim an% desire to e//ace t#e s&eci/icit% o/ /eminist critiKue, and to insist
t#at #is own &roIect was to consider t#e im&lications o/ an intersection o/ /eminism and &ostmodernism4
More recentl%, #owe-er, 3onat#an Arac stated )aldl% in #is ;ntroduction to &ostmodern8sm and &olitics:
almost no women ha.e fi%ured in the debate5 e-en t#oug# man% anal%sts include current /eminism among t#e /eatures o/ &ostmodernit%4 anc% $raser0s im&ortant /eminist critiKue o/
Ha)ermas @F.#at0s Critical0A stands nearl% alone @see also 'riste-aA, alt#oug# Craig Owens and Andrew Ross #a-e e//ecti-el% situated /eminist wor! )% women in relation to
&ostmodernism4 *?
;n t#e )i)liogra&#% w#ic# concludes Arac0s ;ntroduction, -er% /ew women do /igure )eside $raser and 'riste-a6 /i-e, to )e &recise, out o/ more t#an se-ent% indi-idual and colla)orati-e
aut#orial entries4 One o/ t#e /i-e is Jirginia .ool/4 Anot#er is Hanna# Arendt4 O An% )i)liogra&#%, it is true, must )e e(clusi-e4 T#is one is, w#en it comes to gender, .ery e(clusi-e4
T#e interesting Kuestion, ; t#in!, is not w#et#er /eminists #a-e or #a-e not written a)out &ostmodernism, or w#et#er t#e% s#ould #a-e @/or des&ite t#e F)a//led0 e(&ectation, t#e #o&e, &er#a&s,
o/ e-entual fiancailles5 t#ere is no suggestion #ere t#at /eminism in an% sense needs &ostmodernism as com&lement or su&&lementA4 *E M% Kuestion is rat#er under w#at conditions women0s
wor! can F/igure0 currentl% in suc# a de)ate4 T#ere is general agreement )etween t#e male critics ;0-e cited t#at F/eminist wor! by women1 can /igure w#en a&&ro&riatel% /ramed @Fe//ecti-el%
Situated0A )% w#at #as mainl% )een, a&&arentl%, a man0s discourse4 1ut )% w#at criteria does /eminist wor! )% women come to /igure, or not to /igure, w#en it comes rawOedged, wit#out a
/rameD
Common sense suggests t#at &er#a&s all t#at is meant )% t#ese remar!s is t#at /ew women so /ar #a-e written articles e(&licitl% entitled F$eminism and Postmodernism0N or t#at /ew #a-e
written anal%ses /ocused on t#e standard @maleA
$
Mea/an Morris
8=9
re/erents o/ &resent de)ate H Ha)ermas, L%otard, Rort%, 3ameson, Hu%ssen, $oster, Owens, and so on4 ;/ we acce&t t#at t#is is true @or t#at man% o/ t#e te(ts t#at /ul/il t#ese conditions are Kuite
recentA t#en &er#a&s /eminists #a-e merel% )een )us% doing ot#er t#ings4 ;t would )e #ard to den% t#at in s&ite o/ its #ea-% @i/ lig#tl% ac!nowledgedA )orrowings /rom /eminist t#eor%, its
/reKuent cele)rations o/ Fdi//erence0 and Fs&eci/icit%0, and its critiKues o/ FEnlig#tenment0 &aternalism, &ostmodernism as a &u)lis#ing &#enomenon #as &ulled o// t#e &eculiar /eat o/
reconstituting an o-erw#elmingl% male &ant#eon o/ &ro&er names to /unction as ritual o)Iects o/ academic e(egesis and commentar%4 ;t would )e eas% to s#rug awa% a &resumed /eminist
nonin-ol-ement wit# &ostmodernism as a wise a-oidance )% women o/ a singularl% &onderous, &#allo-centred con-ersation H and to &oint out, wit# Mic#Zle Le Doeu//, t#at t#e &osition o/
/ait#/ul reader to t#e great male &#iloso&#er is one t#at women #a-e good reason to a&&roac# wit# caution4 Man% /eminist criticisms o/ t#eories o/ &ostmodernism #a-e occurred, in /act, in
&assing, in t#e conte(t o/ sa%ing somet#ing else as well4
Yet t#e matter is not Kuite so sim&le4 'f it is true t#at /ew women #a-e e(&licitl% inscri)ed t#eir wor! in relation to &ostmodernism @and ; am sce&tical o/ suc# claims, since t#e% tend to
&resent t#e limits and )iases o/ our local reading #a)its as a satis/actor% sur-e% o/ t#e state o/ t#e worldA, it s#ould also )e true t#at onl% male writers w#o do so inscri)e t#eir wor! t#en come to
F/igure0 in t#e de)ate4
Yet in Arac0s )i)liogra&#%, we /ind numerous /igures w#ose contri)ution could onl% strictl% )e descri)ed as /ormati-e, ena)ling and:or indirect6 Adorno and Hor!#eimer, Derrida, Heidegger,
Lacan, $oucault @not to mention Alt#usser, Perr% Anderson, Lu!/lcs and Ra%mond .illiamsA4 T#eir wor! can onl% )e &art o/ a de)ate a)out &ostmodernism w#en Fe//ecti-el% situated0 in
relation to it )% su)seKuent commentar% and citation4 1ut a /ormati-e or indirect role in &ostmodernism #as )een willingl% accorded, )% men cited )% Arac, to /eminism4 .#% t#en, alongside t#e
names o/ t#ose men, do we not /ind re/erences to @/or e(am&leA t#e closel% and criticall% associated wor! o/ Cat#erine Clement, HLlZne Ci(ous, Luce ;rigara%, S#os#ana $elman, 3ane 2allo&,
Sara# 'o/man, Alice 3ardine, Mic#Zle Le Doue//, 2a%atri C#a!ra-ort% S&i-a!, or 3acKueline RoseD
One could continue t#is line o/ Kuestioning4 $or e(am&le, it mig#t )e argued t#at t#e Fena)ling0 male /igures #a-e at least e(&licitl% t#eoriGed Fmodernit%0, and so &ro-ide t#e )ases /or
t#in!ing &ostmodernit%4 1ut t#en not onl% would m% )rie/ list o/ women recur wit# e-en greater insistence, )ut it would need immediate e(&ansion6 3anet 1ergstrom, Mar% Anne Doane,
EliGa)et# 2rosG, 1ar)ara 3o#nson4 Donna Harawa%, Teresa de Lauretis, Angela McRo))ie, Patricia Mellencain&, Tania Modles!i, anc% '4 Miller, aomi Sc#or, 'aIa Sil-erman, 3udit#
.illiamson CCC @man% o/ w#om #a-e #ad, in /act, Kuite a )it to sa% a)out &ostmodernismA4 $urt#ermore, i/ t#e F&olitics0 in t#e conIuction o/ &ostmodernisnl and &olitics aut#oriGes t#e /iguring
under t#at ru)ric o/ t#e wor! o/ a Perr% Anderson H t#en surel% we mig#t also e(&ect to /ind listed wor!s )% anc%0 Hartsoc!, Carole Pateman, 3uliet Mitc#ell or C#antal Mou//eD
At t#is &oint, #owe-er, it )ecomes di//icult to !ee& restrictiO MD m% own inKuiries
'
1
"
e5ninism5 4eadin%5 &ostmodernisn5
8=B
to t#e names o/ @mostlw w#ite and .esternA women4 ;n t#e /irst and last sentence o/ #is introductor% te(t, Arac in-o!es Ft#e world0 as t#e conte(t o/ criticism4 So (s #% would a )i)liogra&#% o/
F&ostmodernism and politics1 toda%0 still &ri-ilege onl% t#e great names o/ .este,O
9
Mar(ism and t#eir American academic #eirs H at t#e e(&ense o/ new t#eoriG,tiO/ls o/ &olitics and culture )%
sOriters di//erentl% &laced in #istories o/ racism and colonialismD Ras#eed Araeen, Homi '4 1#a)#a, Eduardo 2aleano, Henr% Louis 2ates 3r, 2eeta 'a&ur, Trin# T4 Min#-#a, ell% Ric#ard4
A/ter all, i/ &ostmodOrniSm reall% #as de/ined a use/ul s&#ere /or &olitical de)ate, it is )ecause o/ t#e awareness it can /oster t#at its Fworld0 is /inall% not so small, so clearl% Fma&&ed04
;t is, as a Derridean lnig#t o)ser-e, all a matter o/ )orderlines and /rames4 An%0 )i)liogra&#% F/rames0, Cs it de/ines, its /ield o/ re&resentation4 1ut t#e &arado( o/ t#e /rame does not &reO0ent
us /rom as!ing, in relation to an% instance o/ /raming, w#ere and w#% a line is drawn4 As 3o#n $row #as argued in (ar=ism and literary 7istory5 t#e &arado( 9/ t#e /rame is most use/ul &recisel%
/or /raming a &olitical &roIect o/ wor!ing on Ft#e limits o/ reading04
;n reading t#e limits o/ Arac0s )i)liogra&#%, it )ecomes &articularl% di//icult to determine t#e di//eren\ )etween an act o/ re-&resenting a &resu&&osed #istorical not-/iguring o/ women in
&ostmodernism de)ates, and an act o/ re-producin% t#e not-/iguring, not O9unting, o/ women0s wor!, )% Fsim&le0 omission @writing it out o/ #istor%, )% OriOI/lg its a)sence into #istor%A4
; #a-e a similar di//icult% wit# t#e more sensiti-e comments o/ Owens and Hu%ssen4 .#% do women artists and /eminist t#eorists count as &ostmodernist @and as o)Iects o/ commentar%A /or
Owens, )ut not as Fengaging0 in a de)ateD Doesn0t t#is distinction return *ss &recisel% to t#at di-ision )etween a @/eminiGedA o)Iect-language and a @masculineA meta-language t#at /eminist
t#eor% #as taug#t us to Kuestion /or its &olitical /unction, rat#er t#an /or its e&istemological -alidit%D How can Hu%ssen sim&l% cite and con/irm w#at Owens sa%s, w#ile conceding t#at crucial
as&ects o/ &ostmodernism now would )e Funt#in!a)leR
+
wit#out t#e im&act o/ /eminist t#oug#tD
A/ter all, it is Hu%sseP #imsel/ w#o #as stressed in #is /eminist reading o/ FMass culture as woman6 Mcdernism0s Ot#er0 t#at male aut#ors0 &reoccu&ation wit# imaginar% /emininit% Fca
9
easil% go #and in #and wit# t#e e(clusion o/ real women /rom t#e literar% enter&rise04 59 $ollowing Hu%ssen, t#en, a Fmale0 &ostmodernism could )e seen as rOnOO0ing one o/ t#e inaugural
gestures @in L%otard0s senseA o/ modernism6 inscri)ing its F)a//lement0 )% an imaginar%, Fa)sent0, silent /emininit%, w#ile erasing and OilOnOing t#e wor! o/ real (-omen in t#e #istor% and
&ractice o/ t#e t#eoretical enter&rise4
2i-en t#e &ersistence o/ t#e /igure o/ woman as mass culture @t#e iron% o/ modernismA, it is no aceident t#at a de)ate a)out a &resumed silence and a)sence o/ women #as alread% ta!en &lace
in relation to t#e wor! on &o&ular culture t#at is in turn a com&onent o/ &ostmodernism4
5
0 1ut t#e )a//lement a)out women t#at )esets )ot# is also &er#a&s t#e latest -ersion o/ t#e Fw#% #a-e
t#ere )een no great women artists @mCt#ematicians, scientists ...?@G conundrum H a )adl% &osed
8@9 Mea/an Morris $eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostmnodernism
Kuestion t#at assumes a negati-e res&onse to a &re-ious Kuestion, w#ic# remains, )% de/ault, unas!ed and une(amined4
How can t#is #a&&en againD Again, t#ere are some o)-ious res&onses t#at /eminists mig#t ma!e4 .e could sa% t#at F/eminist t#eor%R #as come to /unction in academic &u)lis#ing as a
limiting categor% to a certain e(tent4 ;t0s now too eas%0 to assume t#at i/ a te(t is la)elled F/eminist0 t#eor%, t#en it can0t &ro&erl% Fcount0 or F/igure0 as an%t#ing else @Fwoman0s s&#ere0, againA4 .e
could ado&t a com&lacent &aranoia, and assume t#at t#e male &ant#eon o/ &ostmodernism is merel% a twilig#t o/ t#e gods H t#e last ruse o/ t#e &atriarc#al 8ni-ersit% tr%ing /or &ower to /i( t#c
meaning, and contain t#e damage, o/ its own decline4 Or we could claim H &ro)a)l% wit# some Iustice, i/ muc# )rutalit% H t#at in s&ite o/ man% r#etorical /louris#es /rom men a)out t#eir
recognition and acce&tance o/ /eminism0s Fcontri)ution0 to cultural and &olitical t#eor%, not -er% man% men #a-e reall% read e(tensi-el%, or !e&t on reading, -er% man% women0s )oo!s and
essa%s H &articularl% t#ose &u)lis#ed o// t#e /ast-trac! o/ &restige Iournals, or in strictl% /eminist conte(ts4 T#e )ottom line o/ an% wor!ing )i)liogra&#% is not, a/ter all, a /rame, )ut a &ractical
&rereKuisite6 %0ou #a-e to !now it to use it4
T#e &ro)lem t#at interests me, #owe-er, is rat#er t#e di//icult% t#at a /eminist critic now /aces in sayin% somet#ing a)out t#is H in tr%ing to &oint out, let alone come to terms wit#, w#at seems
to )e a continued, re&eated, )asic e=clusion o/ women0s wor! /rom a #ig#l% in-ested /ield o/ intellectual and &olitical endea-our4 .#at woman writer wants to sa%, in *+E<, t#at men still aren0t
reading /eminist wor!DN t#at women are )eing Fle/t out again0DN t#us running t#e ris! o/ )eing sus&ected o/ tal!ing a)out #ersel/ @Fi/ s#e writes a)out women0s e(&eriences, es&eciall% t#e
un&leasant ones, declare #er #%sterical or ]con/essionalR0A4
55
;n addressing t#e m%t# o/ a &ostmodernism still waiting /or its women we can /ind an e(am&le o/ a genre, as well as a discourse, w#ic# in its untrans/ormed state lea-es a woman no &lace
/rom w#ic# to s&ea!, or not#ing to sa%4 $or )% resorting to t#e de-ice o/ listing Fe(cluded0 women, (-omen e(cluded /or no o)-ious reason e(ce&t t#at gi-en )% t#e discourse H t#eir gender H ;
#a-e &ositioned m%sel/ in a s&eec#-genre all too /amiliar in e-er%da% li/e, as well as in &antomime, cartoons, and sitcoms6 t#e woman0s com&laint, or na%%in%. One o/ t#e de/ining generic rules
o/ Fnagging0 is unsuccess/ul re&etition o/ t#e same statements4 ;t is unsuccess/ul4 )ecause it )loc!s c#ange6 nagging is a mode o/ re&etition w#ic# /ails to &roduce t#e desired e//ects o/ di//erence
t#at mig#t allow t#e com&laint to end4 ;n t#is it is Kuite close to w#at Anne $readman, in #er anal%sis o/ 'ndiana5 calls t#e lament6 O* &owerless te(t04 @A con-entional comic scenario goes6 s#e
nags, #e sto&s listening4 not#ing c#anges, s#e nags4A Yet t#ere is alwa%s a c#ange o/ sorts im&lied J re&etition6 in t#is case, #er F&lace0 in s&eec# #ecomes, i/ not strictl% none(istent, t#en
insu//era)le H lea-ing /renG% or silence as t#e onl%0 &laces le/t to go4 ;t is an awesome genre, and ; am not sure, ; con/ess, #ow to trans/orm it4
A traditional met#od #as alwa%s )een /or t#e nagger some#ow to lose interest, and so learn to c#ange #er su)Iect @and #er addresseeA4 One oossi)ilit% in t#is conte(t is to /ollow u& Dana
Polan0s suggestion t#at &ostmoc#0O 4iism is a Fmac#ine
8@1
/or &roducing i0
5,
Polan argues t#at as t#e in&ut to t#is mac#ine )egins to determine w#at it is &ossi)le to sa% in its name, so it )ecomes increasingl% di//icult to generate as out&ut an%t#ing non-
re&etiti-e4 Partici&ants in a &ostmodernism de)ate are Fconstrained0 to re/er )ac! to &re-ious in&ut, and to ta!e sides in /amiliar )attles on a mar!ed-out, well-trodden terrain @FHa)ermas -4
L%otard0, /or e(am&l\4 T#e solution to /eminist com&laint mig#t t#en )e a sim&le one H switc# &osition /rom nagger to nagged, t#en switc# o//4
1ut assuming a calculated dea/ness to discussion a)out &ostmodernism is not muc# o/ a solution /or /eminist women4 To c#oose to accept a gi-en constraint is not to c#allenge, o-ercome or
trans/orm an%t#ing4 1esides, one o/ t#e /ascinating &arado(es o/ t#e &ostmodernism mac#ine is &recisel% #ow di//icult it can )e to switc# it o// @or switc# o// to itA4 Man% o/ its )est o&erators
@L%otard and 1audrillard, /or e(am&leA #a-e tried, and /ailed4 As a discourse w#ic# runs on a F&arado(ical concern wit# its own lateness0, as Andrew Ross &oints out @in one o/ t#e /ew essa%s
relating /eminism to &ostmodernism wit#out attri)uting silence to womenA,
5=
&ostmodernism #as so /ar &ro-ed com&ati)le wit#, rat#er t#an -ulnera)le to, -ast Kuantities o/ in&ut a)out its
o)solescence or imminent )rea!down4
A di//erent res&onse wort# ma!ing would )e, it seems to me, to ma!e a genericall% /eminist gesture o/ reclaiming women0s wor!, and women0s names, as a conte(t in w#ic# de)ates a)out
&ostmodernism mig#t /urt#er )e considered, de-elo&ed, trans/ormed @or a)andonedA4
T#e )i)liogra&#% o/ women0s writing at t#e end o/ t#is introduction is &ut /orward in t#at s&irit4 ;t does not &ro&ose to &resent H or to Fe//ecti-el% situate0 H/eminist t#eor% as F&ostmodernist0,
and it certainl% does not &ro&ose to sal-age /eminism for &ostmodernism4 ;t does &resu&&ose t#at since /eminism #as acted as one o/ t#e ena)ling conditions o/ discourse about &ostmodernism,
it is t#ere/ore a&&ro&riate to use /eminist wor! to /rame discussions o/ &ostmodernism, and not t#e ot#er wa% around4 To ma!e t#is gesture o/ c#anging /rames is to &ro&ose at least one
alternati-e to nagging Hand to wasting time waiting and watc#ing /or imaginar% acts o/ &irac%4
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e main 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation
*4 1ertolt 1rec#t, )ollected &lays5 -ol4 5, &art 5, ,he ,hreepenn. 2pera5 Act *, Scene 5,
London, *+<+, &4 554
54 Anne $readman, OSand&a&er0, -outhern 4e.iew5 *?, *@*+E,A, *?54
,4 'bid.5 &4 *<54 -F
=4 'bid.5 &4 *<54
!. $readman0s Fuse0 o/ /ormalism #ere is rigorousl% di//erentiated /rom t#at o/ ort#
8@2 Mea/an Morris
American ew Criticism4 $or #er, /ormalism is Ft#e stud% o/ /orms, inso/ar as /orm is t#e ena)ling condition o/ signi/ication0 @and so, not o&&osed to Fcontent0A4 F$orm0, in turn, is a
t#eoretical o)Iect deri-ed /rom, not &ree(isting, t#e &ractices o/ /ormalism0 and, /ar /rom )eing Frestricted to descri)ing t#e linguistic /orms de&lo%ed in an% te(t0, /ormalist theories o/ te(t /or
$readman are F&ractices o/ di//erentiation w#ic# ta!e as t#eir criteria con-entions or rule-go-erned strategies /or t#e /ormation o/ te(ts04 S#e stresses t#at F/ormalism must in general )e
c#aracterised as t#e &ractice o/ di//erentiation4 Since di//erence is t#e &rimar% ena)ling condition o/ signi/ication, it /ollows t#at /ormalism is not t#e &rinci&le o/ w#at #as )een called t#e
]autonomousR te(t, since ]di//erenceR su&&oses a /ield o/ &ertinent com&arison4 1ut it is t#e case t#at it ta!es as its domain o/ inKuir% @and as its t#eoretical o)IectA not t#e ]indi-idual te(tR,
)ut t#e te(t as indi-iduated40 'bid.5 &4 *?*4
?4 See in &articular Mic#Zle Le Doeu//, FPierre Roussel0s c#iasmas6 $rom imagining !nowledge to t#e learned imagination0, ;\C, + @*+E*:5A, ,+H<94
<4 1ot# Sontag and @more indirectl%A 1audrillard deri-e t#e terms o/ t#eir thematics o/ Kuotation /rom .alter 1enIamin0s wor! ,he 2ri%in of /erman ,ra%ic <rama5 London, *+<<4 eit#er,
#owe-er, retains muc# /rom t#e #istorical &roIect H or situation H o/ t#e )oo!4
E4 Roland 1art#es, (ytholo%ies5 London, *+<5, &4 **54
+4 See Eleanor Dar!, ,he ,imeless 6and5 S%dne%, *+=*4
*94 See Anne $readman, FOn )eing #ere and still doing it0, in P4 1otsman, C4 1urns and P4 Hutc#ings @edsA, ,he $orei%n Kodies &apers5 S%dne%, *+E*N and t#e collection o/ essa%s, Anna
.#iteside and Mic#ael ;ssac#aro// @edsA, 2n 4eferrin% in 6iterature5 ;ndiana, *+E<4
**4 $or a more measured account o/ t#e di//iculties entailed )% t#is tendenc% in moments o/ t#e wor! o/ Terr% Eagleton, see 3o#n $row, (ar=ism and 6iterary 7istory5 Har-ard, *+E?, &&4 1I
!0.
*54 Da-id 1ennett, F.ra&&ing u& &ostmodernism0, ,e=tual &ractice5 *, , @*+E<A, 5>+4
*,4 F$eminist t#eor% o/ t#is sort H and #owe-er ]/eministR it ma% )e, and #owsoe-er ]/eministR is construed H does not e(ist outside t#e academ% and, more s&eci/icall%, is in man% wa%s not
easil% se&ara)le /rom t#e general ]t#eor%R t#at #as wor!ed its wa% into studies in t#e #umanities o-er t#e last ten or twent% %ears40 Paul Smit#, FMen in /eminism6
Men and /eminist t#eor%0, in Alice 3ardine and Paul Smit# @edsA, (en in $eminism5 ew
Yor! and London, *+E<, &4 ,=, &4 5?<, n4 54
*=4 Craig Owens, F$eminists and &ostmodernism0, in Hal $oster @ed4A, ,he Anti-Aesthetic.1 :ssays on postmodern culture5 .as#ington, *+E,, &4 ?*4
*>4 Andreas Hu%ssen, After the /reat <i.ide: (odernism5 mass culture5 postmodernism5 ;ndiana, *+E?, &&4 *+EH+4
*?4 3onat#an Arac @edA, &ostmodernism and &olitics5 Manc#ester, *+E?, &4 (i4 VEm&#asis mine4Y
*<4 T#e ot#ers are Rosalind Coward @as co-aut#or wit# 3o#n EllisAN Sall% Hassan @as coeditor wit# ;#a) HassanAN and Laura 'i&nis, /or one article4
*E4 $or discussions o/ t#e &ro)lems o/ an intersection )etween /eminism and &ost-modernism @and res&onses to Craig Owens0s essa%A, see 1ar)ara Creed, F$rom #ere to modernit%06
$eminism and &ostmodernism0, -creen5 *+E<, =<H?<N and Els&et# Pro)%n, F1odies and
anti-)odies6 $eminism and t#e &ostmodern0, )ultural -tudies5 *, , @*+E<A, ,=+H?94
*+4 After the /reat <i.ide5 &4 5594
$eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostmodernism
8@8
594 'bid.5 &4 =>4
5*4 See &a&ers in Co#n MacCa#e @edA4 7i%h ,heoryW 6ou1 )ulture: Analy8in% p.pitl.ii telet1ision and film5 Manc#ester, *+E?4
554 3oanna Russ, 7ow to -uppress Womens Writin%5 london, *+E,, &4 ??4
5,4 Dana ;0olan, FPostmodernism as mac#ine0, &a&er to t#e Australian Screen Studics Association, S%dne%0, Decem)er *+E?4
5=4 Andrew Ross, FJiennese waltGes0, :nclitic5 E, *H5 @*+E=A, <?4
-i".iora0/y
$or t#e reasons discussed in t#e &receding essa%, ; #a-e included in t#is #i)liogra&#- un;- wor!s signed or cosigned as written )% women4 Since it com)ines entries a)out /eminism, t#eories o/
reading, and &ostmodernism, it is /or &ractical reasons mostl% limited to wor!s ; #a-e drawn on in some wa% /or t#e essa%s in t#is )oo!4 Essa%s &u)lis#ed in ant#ologies are not listed se&aratel% under
t#eir aut#ors0 names4
A)el, EliGa)et# @edA, Writin% and -e=ual <ifference5 1rig#ton, *+E54
Allen, 3udit# and 2rosG, EliGa)et# @edsA, $eminism and the Kody5 Australian $eminist -tudies5 no4 >,*+E<4
Allen, 3udit# and Patton, Paul @edsA, Keyond (ar=ism@ 'nter.entions after (ar=5 S%dne%, *+E,4
At!inson, Ti-2race, Ama8on 2dyssey5 ew Yor!, *+<=4
1ell, Diane, <au%hters of the <reamin%5 Mel)ourne, *+E,4
1ergstrom,3anet, FEnunciation and se(ual di//erence @Part *A0, )amera 2bscura5 ,H= @*+<+A4
1ergstrom, 3anet, FJiolence and enunciation0, )amera 2bscura5 E:+:*9 @*+E5A4
1ergstrom, 3anet, FAndroids and androg%n%0, )amera 2bscura5 1! @*+E?A4
1ernstein, C#er%l, FPer/ormance as news6 otes on an intermedia guerilla art grou&0, in Mic#el 1enamou and C#arles Caramello @edsA, &er9brmance in &ostmodern )ulture5 Milwau!ee, *+<<4
1raidotti, Rosi, $;minisme et philosophic: 6a philosophic contemporaine eomme criti>ue do pou.oir par rapport a 6a pcns;e 3Fministe5 8ni-ersitL de Paris-;, *+E*4
1roo!e-Rose, C#ristine, A 4hetoric of the 0nreal5 Cam)ridge, *+E*4
1rown, Denise Scott, lGenour, Ste-en and Jenturi, Ro)ert, 6earnin% from 6as Ve%as: ,b51 for%otten symbolism of architectural form5 Cam)ridge, MA and London, *+<<4
1runo, 2iuliana, FPostmodernism and Klade 4unner15 2ctober5 =* @*+E<A4
1russ, EliGa)et# .4, Keautiful ,heories: ,he spectacle of discourse in c2ntF1flPp2rdrV crititicism5 1altimore, MD, London, *+E54
1urc#ill, Louise, FEit#er:or6 Peri&eteia o/ an alternati-e in 3ean 1audrillard0s Ke 6a seduction. in AndrL $ran!o-its @ed4A, -educed and Abandoned: ,he Kaudril/ard scene5 S%dne%, *+E=4
Cameron, De)ora#, $eminism and 6in%uistic ,heory5 London, *+E>4
C#ow, Re%, FRereading mandarin duc!s and )utter/lies6 A res&onse to t#e FO&ostmoderiiR condition0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E?H<A4
Ci(ous, HLlZne et al.5 6a Venue a l1;criture5 Paris, *+<<4
Clement, Cat#erine and Ci(ous, HLl#ne, 6a 3eune H1)e5 Paris, *+<>4
Clement, Cat#erine, (iroirs du su9et5 Paris, *+<>4
8@: Mea/an Morris $eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostmoderB8is5n
Clement, Cat#erine, 6es $ils de $reud sontfati%u;s5 Paris, *+<EN ,he Weary -ons of $reud5 London, *+E<4
Clement, Cat#erine, Vies et le%endes de 3ac>ues 6aean5 Paris, *+E*N ,he 6i.es and 6e%ends of 3ac>ues 6acan5 ew Yor!, *+E,4
Collins, $elicit%, FA @sadA song o/ t#e )od%0, -creen5 5E, * @*+E<A4
Cornillon, Susan 'o&&elman, 'ma%es of Women in $iction: $eminist perspecti.es5 O#io,
*+<54
Co-entr%, Jirginia, ,he )ritical <istance: Work with photo%raph?1/ politics/writin%5 S%dne%, *+E?4
Coward, Rosalind, $emale <esire5 London, *+E=4
Coward, Rosalind, and Ellis, 3o#n, 6an%ua%e and (aterialism: <e.elopments in semio'o%F and the theory of the sub9ect5 London, *+<<4
Creed, 1ar)ara, F$rom #ere to modernit%6 $eminism and &ostmodernism0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A4
Dal%, Mar%, Keyond /od the $ather: ,owards a philosophy of women1s 6iberation5 1oston,
MA, *+<,4
Dal%, Mar%, /yn/:colo%y: ,he metaethics of radical feminism5 1oston, MA, *+<E4
Da-idson, Ro)%n, ,racks5 London, *+E94
Del&#%, C#ristine, ,he (ain :nemy: A materialist analysis of women1s oppression5 London,
*+<<4
Doane, Mar% Ann, F.oman0s sta!e6 $ilming t#e /emale )od%,0 2ctober5 *< @*+E*A4
Doane, Mar% Ann, F$ilm and t#e masKuerade6 T#eoriGing t#e /emale s&ectator0, -creen5 5,, 5= @*+E5A4
Doane, Mar% Ann, F.#en t#e direction o/ t#e /orce acting on t#e )od% is c#anged6 T#e mo-ing image0, Wide An%le5 <, *H5 @*+E>A4
Duane, Mar% Ann, ,he <esire to <esire: ,he woman1s film of the 1*0s5 ;ndiana, *+E<4 Du)reuil-1londin, icole, F$eminism and modernism6 Parado(es0, in 1enIamin 1uc#lo# et al.
@edsA, (odernism and (odernity5 o-a Scotia, *+E,4
Duras, Marguerite and 2aut#ier, Ba-iere, 6es &arleuses5 Paris, *+<=4
Ec!er, 2isela @ed4A, $eminist Aesthetics5 London, *+E>4
Eisenstein, Hester and 3ardine, Alice @edsA, ,he $uture of <ifference5 1oston, MA, *+E94
Ellmann, Mar%, ,hinkin% About Women5 London, *+?+4
Ewen, EliGa)et# and Ewen, Stuart, )hannels of <esire: (ass ima%es and the shapin% o3 American consciousness5 ew Yor!, *+<54
$elman, S#os#ana 6a $olie et 6a chose litteraire5 Paris, *+<EN Writin% and (adness5 ;t#aca, Y, *+E?4
$elman, S#os#ana, @edA, 6iterature and &sychoanalysis5 the Muestion of 4eadin%: 2therwise5 Uale $rench -tudies5 nos !!I+5 *+<<4
$elman, S#os#ana, 6e -candale do corps parlant: <on 3uan a.ec Austin ou 6a seduction en deu= lan%ues5 Paris, *+E94
$erguson, $rances, FT#e nuclear su)lime0, <iacritics5 *=, 5 @*+E=O4
$raser, anc%, FT#e $renc# Derrideans6 PoliticiGing deconstruction or deconstructing &olitics0, Heu1 /erman )riti>ue5 ## @*+E=A4
$raser, anc%, F.#at0s critical a)out critical t#eor%D T#e case o/ Ha)ermas and gender0, Heu1 /erman )riti>ue5 #! A1*J!?.
$readman, Anne, FOn )eing #ere and still doing it0, in P4 1otsman, C4 1urns and P4 Hutc#ings @edsA, ,he $orei%n Kodies &apers5 S%dne%, *+E*4
8@$
$readman, Anne, FSand&a&er0, -outhern 4e.iew5 *?, * @*+E,A4
$readman, Anne, FRi//aterra cognita6 A late contri)ution to t#e ]$ormalismR de)ate4 -ub-tance5 =5 @*+E=A4
$readman, Anne, FReading t#e -isual0, $rameu1ork5 ,9H* @*+E?A4
2aines, 3ane, F.#ite &ri-ilege and loo!ing relations6 Race and gender in /eminist film t#eor%4 )ultural )riti>ue5 = @*+E?A4
2allo&, 3ane, 'ntersections: A readin% of -ad51 with Kataille5 Klan6 hot5 and LhF1FFF15k1 e)ras!a, *+E*4
2allo&, 3ane, $eminism and &sychoanalysis: ,he dau%hter1s seduction5 London, *+E54
2allo&, 3ane, 4eadin% 6acan5 ;t#aca, Y:London, *+E>4
2audin, Collette et al.5 $eminist 4eadin%s: $rench te=ts/American conte=ts5 Uale $r51nF h -tudies5 no4 ?5, *+E*4
2ould, Carol C4 and .arto/s!%, Mar( .4 @edsA, Women and &hilosophy: ,oward a theory of liberation5 ew Yor!, *+<?4
2ross, EliGa)et#, FDerrida, ;rigara% and deconstruction0, 6e9tu1ri%ht5 lnteri1i158tioB85 5@*, @*+E?A4
2ross, EliGa)et#, F;rigara% and t#e di-ine0, Local Consum&tion Occasional Pa&er +, S%dne% *+E?4
2rosG, EliGa)et#, FE-er% &icture tells a stor%6 Art and t#eor% re-e(amined0, in 2ar% Sangster @edA4, -i%htin% 4eferences5 S%dne%, *+E<4
2rosG, EliGa)et#, FT#e ]Peo&le o/ t#e 1oo!R6 Re&resentation aiid alterit%0 in Emmanuel Le-inas0, Art [ ,e=t5 5? @*+E<A4
2rosG, EliGa)et# et al. @edsA, $uturYfall: :=cursions into post-modernity5 Sidne%, *+E?4
2unew, SneIa, F$eminist criticism6 Positions and Kuestions0, -outhern 4ei1ieu15 *?, *, @*+E,A4
2unew, SneIa, and Reid, ;an, Hot the Whole -tory5 S%dne%, *+E=4
2use-ic#, Miriam, FPurit% and transgression6 Re/lections on t#e arc#itectural a-antgarde0s reIection o/ !itsc#0, .or!ing Pa&er, Center /or Twentiet# Centur% Studies, 8ni-ersits o/ .isconsin-Milwau!ee,
*+E?4
Harawa%, Donna, FA mani/esto /or c%)orgs6 Science, tec#nolog% and socialist /eminism in the *+E9s0, -ocialist 4e.iew5 E9 @*+E>A4
Hartsoc!, anc% C4 M4, (oney5 -e=5 and &ower: ,ou1ard a feminist hi\tnrieal materialism5 1oston, MA, *+E>4
Hermann, Claudine, 6es Voleuscs de lan%ue5 Paris, *+<?4
Hill, Ernestine, ,he /reat Australian 6oneliness5 Mel)ourne, *+=iA4
Hutc#eon, Linda, .H
t
arcissistic Harrati.e: ,he meta fictional par.ido=5 Ontario, *+E*A4
Hutc#eon, Linda, FA &oetics o/ &ostmodernism0, <iacritic c *,, = @*+E,
Hutc#eon, Linda, A ,heory of &arody: ,he tt1aFhinFs of tu1entieth entur. art forms. ess or! and London, *+E>4
Hutc#eon, Linda, F1eginning to t#eoriGe &ostmodernism0, ,e=tual lFr.5Ftice5 1. * !l
+EO
;rigai a%, Luce, -peculum de l1autre femme5 Paris4 *+<=N -py uhin8 of the 2ther Wo5n.in. ;t#aca, Y, *+E>4
;rigara%, Luce, )e se=y >ui n1en est pas on5 Paris, *+<<N ,his -e= . bi%W1 is .RGot 2ne5 ;t#aca, Y, *+E>4
3aco)us, =ar%0 @edA4, W1omen Writin% and . r8tin% . bout W1oinen5 ; ondon, *+<+4
3ardine, Alice, /.nesis: )onfi%urations of woman and Flod51rnitR , ;t#aca, Y:London, *+E>4
3ardine, Alice and Smit#, Paul, (en in $eminism5 e(- Yor! and London, *+E<4
8@< Mea/an Morris $eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostmodernism
; a%amanne, Laleen ,ind Rodrigo, Ann,s, FTo render t#e )od% ecstatic0, $ade to Klack5 S%dne% College o/ t#e Arts Occasional Pu)lication, *+E>4
3 a%amanne, Laleen, 'a&ur, 2eeta and Rainer, Y-onne, FDiscussing modernit%, ]T#ird .orldR, and ,he (an Who :n.ied Women15 Art [ ,e=t5 5,:= @*+E<A4
3ennings, 'ate, )ome to (e (y (elancholy Kaby5 Mel)ourne, *+<>4
3o#nson, 1ar)ara, ,he )ritical Kif /;rence: :ssays in the contemporary rhetoric of readin%5 1altimore, MD:London, *+E*A4
3o#nson, 1ar)ara, FT#res#olds @i/ di//erence6 Structures o/ address in Sora eale Hurston0, in Henr%0 Louis 2ates @edA, 4ace15 Writin%5 and <ifference5 )ritical 'n >uit?15 *5, *, @l+EOA4
3o#nston, 3ill, /ullilhles ,rat1els5 ew Yor!:London, *+<=4
3ones, L%ndal, FPrediction &iece m+0, Art [ ,e=t5 + @*+E,A4
'a&lan, Cora, -ea )han%es: )ulture and feminism5 London, *+E?4
'ell%, Mar%, FRe--iewing modernist criticism0, -creen5 55, # @*+E*A4
'o/man, Sara#, Hiet8sche et 6a mn)taphore5 Paris, *+<54
'o/man, Sara#, )omment s1en sortir@5 Paris, *+E,4
'o/man, Sara#, A3o m;tier impossible5 Paris, *+E,4
'o/man, Sara#, 61:ni%me de 'a femme5 Paris, *+E9N ,he :ni%ma of Woman5 ;t#aca, Y, *+E>4
'ramarae, C#eris and Treic#ler, Paula A4, A $eminist <ictionary5 1oston, MA:London:Henle%, *+E>4
'rauss, Rosa#ind $4, ,he 2ri%inality of the A.ant-/arde and 2ther (odernist (yths5 Cam)ridge, MA:London, *+E>4
'ristes a, 3ulia, <esire in 6an%ua%e: A semiotic approach to literature and art5 O(/ord, *+E94
'riste-a, 3ulia, ,he Lriste.a 4eader5 ed4 Ton; Moi, O(/ord, *+E?4
de ;4auretis, Teresa, Alice <oesn1t: $eniinism5 seniiotics5 cinema5 ;ndiana, *+E=4
de Lauretis, Teresa, @ed4A, $eminist -tudies/)ritical -tudies5 ;ndiana, *+E?4
de Lauretis, Teresa, ,echnolo%ies of /ender: :ssays on theory5 film and fiction5 ;ndiana4
*+E<4
Lawson, S%l-ia, ,he Archibald &arado=: A stran%e case of authorship5 London:S%dneO, *+E,4
Le Doeu//, Mic#Zle, F.omen and &#iloso&#%0, 4adical &hilosophy5 *< @*+<<A4
Le Doeu//, Mic#Zle, FO&erati-e &#iloso&#%6 Simone de 1eau-oir and e(istentialism0, /o.ernin% the &resent5 '[)5 ? @*+<+A4
Le Doeu//, Mic#Zle, 61'ma%inaire philosophi>ue5 Paris, *+E94
Le Doeu//, Mic#Zle, FPierre Roussel0s c#iasmas0, 6ife5 6abour and 'nsecurity5 '[)5 + @*+E *:5A4
Lewitt, Ji-ienne S#ar!, F.#% Eg%0&tian mods didn0t )ot#er to )leac# t#eir #air or more notes a)out &ar!as and com)s0, Art [ ,e=t5 , @*+E*A4
Less itt, Ji-ienne S#ar!, FT#e end o/ ci( ilisation Part 56 Lo-e among t#e ruins0, Art [ ,e=t. *9 *+E,A4
Li&&ard, ;4uc% , )han%in%: :.ssays in art criticism5 ew Yor!, *+<*4
Llo%d, 2ene(0ie-e, ,he (an of 4eason: G(ale1 and Gfemale1 in Western philosophy5 London, *+E=4
long, EliGa)et#, OReading grou&s and t#e &ostmodern crisis o/ cultural aut#orit%0, )ultur5i/ -tudies5 *4 # @*+E<A4
McRo))ie, Angela, FSettling accounts wit# su)cultures0, -creen :ducat i-n5 ,= @*+E9A4
8@=
McRo))ie, Angela, FT#e &olitics o/ /eminist researc#6 1etween tal!, te(t and action0, $eminist 4e.iew5 *5 @*+E5A4
McRo))ie, Angela, FStrategies o/ -igilance, an inter-iew wit# 2a%atni C#a!ras ort% S&is a!0, Klock5 *9 @*+E>A4
McRo))ie, Angela, FPostmodernism and &o&ular culture0, &ostmodernism5 ;CA Documents =, London, *+E?4
McRo))ie, Angela and a-a, Mica @edsA, /ender and /eneration5 London, *+E=4
Marini, Marcelle, ,erritoires do f;minin a.ec (ar%uerite <uras5 Paris, *+<<4
Mar!s, Elaine and de Courti-ron @edsA, Hew $rench $eminisms5 Am#erst, MA, *+E94
Mellencam&, Patricia, F$ilm #istor% and se(ual economics0, :nclitic5 <, 5 @*+E,A4
Mellencam&, Patricia, FPostmodern TJ6 .egman and Smit#0, Afterima%e5 *,, ! @*+E>
Mellencam&, Patricia, FSituation and simulation0, -creen5 5?, 5 @*+E>A4
Mellencam&, Patricia, F8ncann% /eminism6 T#e e(Kuisite cor&ses o/ Cecilia Condit0, $ramework5 ,5:, @*+E?A4
Mellencam&, Patricia, F;mages o/ language and indiscreet dialogue H ]T#e Man .#o En-ied .omenR0 -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A4
Mellencam&, Patricia, F;4ast seen in t#e streets o/ modernism0, Hawaiian $ilm $esti-al, &u)lication /ort#coming4
Miller, anc% '4 @edA, ,he &oetics of /ender5 ew Yor!, *+E?4
Millett, 'ate, -e=ual &olitics5 London, *+<94
Min#-#a, Trin# T4, FT#e &lural -oid6 1art#es and Asia0, -ub-tance5 ,? @*+E5A4
Min#-#a, Trin# T4 @edA4, ,he 'nappropriate/d 2ther5 <iscourse5 E @*+E?:<A4
Mitc#ell, 3uliet, Woman1s :state5 London, *+<*4
Mitc#ell, 3uliet, &sychoanalysis and $eminism5 London, *+<=4
Mitc#ell, 3uliet, and Oa!le%0, Anne @edsA, ,he 4i%hts and Wron%s of Women5 Harmondswort#, *+<?4
Modles!i, Tania, 6o.in% with a Ven%eance: (ass-produced fantasies for women5 ess Yor!:London, *+E54
Modles!i, Tania, F$emininit% as mas@sAKuerade6 A /eminist a&&roac# to mass culture0, in Co#n MacCa)e @edA, 7i%h ,heory/6ow )ulture5 Manc#ester, *+E?4
Modles!i, Tania @ed4A, -tudies in :ntertainment: )ritical approaches to mass culture5
;ndiana, *+E?4
Moi, Ton;, -e=ual/,e=tual &olitics: $eminist literary theory5 London:e(- Yor!, *+E>4
Montrela%, Mic#ele, 612mbre et le nom5 sot 6a f;mininit)5 Paris, *+<<4
Moore, Catriona and Muec!e, Ste&#en, FRacism and t#e re&resentation o/ A)origines in /ilm0, Australian )ultural -tudies5 5, * @*+E=A4
Morgan, Ro)in @edA, -isterhood is &owerful5 ew Yor!, *+<94
Morgan, Ro)in, (onster5 &risate &rinting, *+<54
Mou//e, C#antal, FRadical democrac%6 Modern or &ostmodern0, in Andrew Ross @ed4 0ni.ersal Abandon@ ,he politics of postmodernism5 Minnesota, *+EE4
Mou//e, C#antal and L4aclau, Ernesto, 7e%emony and -ocialist -trate%y: ,owards a radical democratic politics5 London, *+E>4
Mul-e%, Laura, FJisual &leasure and narratis0e cinema0, -creen5 *?, , @*+<>A4
Pateman, Canole, ,he &roblem of &olitical 2bli%ation5 Cam)ridge, *+E>4
Pateman, Canole, and 2ross, EliGa)et# @edsA, $eminist )hallen%es: -ocial and political theory5 S%dne%:London:1oston, MA, *+E?4 -.
Penle%, Constance, FT#e a-ant-garde and its imaginar%0, )amera 2bscura5 5 @*+<<A4
$eminism5 4eadin%5 &ostmodernis5n 8@B
89@ Mea/an Morris
Penle%, Constance, FTime tra-el, &rimal scene, and t#e critical d%sto&ia0, )amera 2bscur5i
*> @*+E?
Petro, Patrice, FMass culture and t#e /eminine6 T#e ]&laceR o/ tele-ision in /ilm studies0, )inema 3ournal5 "!5 , @*+E?A4
Petro, Patrice, FModernit% and mass culture in .eimar6 Contours o/ a discourse on se(ualits in earl% t#eories o/ &erce&tion and re&resentation0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 =9 @*+EO
Petro, Patrice, 3oyless -treets: Women and melodramatic representation in GX1eim.ii /ermany5 Princeton, 3, *+EE4
Pratt, Mar% Louise, F;nter&reti-e strategies: strategic inter&retations6 On Anglo-American reader-res&onse criticism0, in 3onat#an Anac @edA, &ost-modernism and &olities5 Manc#ester, *+E?4
Pro)%n, EliGa)et#, F1odies and anti-)odies6 $eminism and t#e &ostmodern0, )ultural -tud8eF5
*, # @*+E<A4
Ric#, Adrienne, 2f Woman Korn: (otherhood as e=perience and institution5 London, *+O4
Ric#, Adrienne, 2n 6ies5 -ecrets and -ilence: -elected prose 1*++I1*7J5 London, *+E94
Ric#ard, ell%, F1od% wit#out soul6 On t#e mec#anism o/ Kuotation in t#e &ictorial materialism o/ 3uan Da-ila0, Art [ ,e=t5 *5H*, @*+E=A4
Ric#ard, e;l%, Fotes towards a critical re-e-aluation o/ t#e critiKue o/ t#e a-ant-garde0, Art \ ,e=t5 *? @*+E=A4
Ric#ard, ell%, FLo-e in Kuotes6 On t#e &ainting o/ 3uan Da-ila0, in Paul Ta%lor @ed4 7ysterical ,ears: 3uan <a.ila5 Mel)ourne, *+E>4
Ric#ard, ell%, FMargins and institutions6 Art in C#ile since *+<,0, Art [ ,e=t5 5*@*+E?
Rose, 3acKueline, -e=uality in the $ield of Vision5 London, *+E?4
-an Rossum-2u%on, $rancoise @edA, :criture5 f;mininite5 f;minisme5 4e.ue des sciences humaines5 no4 *?E, *+<<HE4
Ro(-)ot#am, S#eila, 7idden from 7istory5 London, *+<=4
Russ, 3oanna, 7ow to -uppress Women1s Writin%5 Austin, TB, *+E,4
Sc#or, aomi, Kreakin% the )hain: Women5 theory and $rench realist fiction5 Colum)ia,
Y, *+E>4
Sc#or, aomi, 4eadin% in <etail: Aesthetics and the feminine5 ew Yor!:London, *+Ew4
Sc#or, aomi and MaIews!i, Henr% $4 @edsA, $laubert and &ostmodernism5 e)ras!a, *+E=4
S#owalter, Elaine, A 6iterature of ,heir 2wn: Kritish women no.elists from Kronti1 0? 6essin%5 Princeton, 3, *+<<4
S#owalter, Elaine @edA, ,he Hew $eminist )riticsm: :ssays on women5 literature5 theory5 ew Yor!, 1*J!.
Sil-erman, 'aIa, ,he -ub9ect of -emiotics5 ew Yor!:O(/ord, *+E,4
Smoc!, Anne, FLearn to read, s#e said0, 2ctober5 =* @*+E<A4
Solanas, Jalerie, ,he -.). 0. H'. (anifesto5 London, *+E,4
Sontag, Susan, A%ainst 'nterpretation5 ess0 Yor!, *+??4
Sontag, Susan, 2n &hoto%raph?15 London, *+<<4
Sontag, Susan, '5 etcetera5 London, *+<+4
Sontag, Susan, 0nder the -i%n of -aturn5 ew Yor!, *+E*4
S&is0a!, 2a% atni C#a!ra-ort%, FDis&lacement and t#e discourse o/ ssoman0, in Mar! 'nu&/ltc! @ed4A, <isplacement: <errida and after5 ;ndiana, *+E,4
S&i-a!, 2a%atni C#a!ra-ort%, 'n 2ther Worlds: :ssays in cultural politics5 csO Yor!:London, *+E<4
Stanton, Domna C4 @edA, ,he $emale Auto%raph5 ew Yor!, *+E=4
Stein, 2ertrude, 7ow Writin% is Written5 Los Angeles, CA, *+<=4
Stein, 2ertrude, 7ou1 to Write5 Toronto:London, *+<>4
Stern, Lesle%, FT#e )od% as e-idence0, -creen5 "#5 ! @*+E5A4
Suleiman, Susan Ro)in, Authoritarian $ictions: ,he ideolo%ical no.el as a literary %enre5 ew Yor!, *+E,4
Suleiman, Susan Ro)in @edA, ,he $emale Kod?1 in Western )ulture5 Cam)ridge, MA:London, *+E?4
.#iteside, Anna and ;ssac#aro//, Mic#ael @edsA, 2n 4eferrin% in 6iterature5 ;ndiana, *+E0O04 .illiamson, 3udit#, )onsumin% &assions: ,he dynamics of popular culture5 London:ess
Yor!, *+E?4
.ilson, EliGa)et#, Adorned in <reams: $ashion and modernity5 London, *+E>4 .ol//, 3anet, FT#e in-isi)le /laneuse6 .omen and t#e literature o/ modernit%0, ,he $ate of
(odernity5 ,heory )ulture [ -ociety5 5, # @*+E>A4
$eminism and &ostmodernism 8B1
2B w $eminism and
&ostmodernism
Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
T#e term F&ostmodernism0 e(erts an instant /ascination4 $or it suggests t#at Fmodernit%0 is, &arado(icall%, alread% in t#e &astN and conseKuentl% t#at a new /orm o/ consciousness is called /or,
corres&onding to new social conditions4 1ut o/ course it does not tell us w#at t#e distincti-e c#aracter o/ t#ese new conditions, or o/ t#e accom&an%ing consciousness, is su&&osed to )e4
E(&ositions o/ &ostmodernism in t#e conte(t o/ &olitical and cultural t#eor% o/ten ta!e as a negati-e &oint o/ re/erence t#e idea o/ FEnlig#tenment04 ;n t#is &a&er, t#ere/ore, ; &ro&ose to loo!
at some recent e(am&les o/ anti-Enlig#tenment &olemic and to consider t#eir meaning /rom a /eminist &oint o/ -iew4 ; s#all use as source material t#e writings o/ t#ree well-!nown &#iloso&#ers
H 3ean-$rancois L%otard, Alasdair Maclnt%re and Ric#ard Rort%4
T#ese writers are among t#e most /orce/ul e(&onents o/ t#e arguments and -alues w#ic# constitute &ostmodernism wit#in academic &#iloso&#%4 ;ne-ita)l%, t#en, m% res&onse to t#eir wor!
will also )e a res&onse to t#e )igger &icture w#ic# ; s#all trace in it4 1ut t#is does not mean t#at ; )elie-e t#e w#ole o/ &ostmodernism, e-en in its &#iloso&#ical -ariant, to )e wra&&ed u& in t#e
&ages ; #a-e c#osen /or stud%6 w#at /ollows is, in t#e /irst instance, an account o/ a s&eci/ic )it o/ te(tual e(&loration4
M% c#osen te(ts undou)tedl% s#ow certain common &reoccu&ations, o/ w#ic# &er#a&s t#e most stri!ing is an a-ersion to t#e idea o/ uni.ersality. T#e Enlig#tenment &ictured t#e #uman race
as engaged in an e//ort towards uni-ersal moral and intellectual sel/-realisation, and so as t#e su)Iect o/ a uni-ersal #istorical e(&erienceN it also &ostulated a uni-ersal #uman reason in terms o/
w#ic# social arid &olitical tendencies could )e assessed as F&rogressi-e0 or ot#erwise @t#e goal o/ &olitics )eing de/ined as t#e realisation o/ reason in &racticeA4 5 Postmodernism reIects t#is
&icture6 t#at is to sa%, it reIects t#e doctrine o/ t#e unit% o/ reason4 ;t
$rom 1o%ne, R4 and Rattansi, A4 @edsA, &ostmodernism and -ociety5 M0sctnillan Education, 1asingsto!e:St Martin0s Press, ew Yor!, *++9, &&4 *>=E?4
8B9
re/uses to concei-e o/ #umanit% as a unitar% su)Iect stri-ing towards t#e goal o/ &er/ect co#erence @in its common stoc! o/ )elie/sA or o/ &er/ect co#esion and sta)ilit% @in its &olitical &racticeA4
All o/ our t#ree &#iloso&#ers illustrate, in t#eir di//erent wa%s, t#e &ostmodernist ad-ocac% o/ &luralism in morals, &olitics and e&istemolog%4 All are struc! )% t#e t#oug#t t#at Iusti/ication or
Flegitimation0 are practices5 sustained in )eing )% t#e dis&osition o/ &articular, #istorical #uman communities to recognise t#is and not t#at as a good reason /or doing or )elie-ing somet#ingN
and all associate FEnlig#tenment0 wit# a dri-e to esta)lis# communication )etween t#ese local canons o/ rationalit% and to ma!e t#em answera)le to a single standard4 1ut t#is is Iust w#at
&ostmodernist t#in!ers com&lain o/, /or t#e% Kuestion t#e merit o/ consensus as a regulati-e ideal o/ discourse4 T#e &olic% o/ wor!ing /or it seems to t#em to )e o)Iectiona)le on two counts6
/irstl% as )eing #istoricall% outmoded, and secondl% as )eing misguided or sinister in its own rig#t4
T#e /irst claim /reKuentl% a&&ears in t#e s#a&e o/ trium&#alist comments on t#e de/eat o/ re-olutionar% socialism in t#e .est4 Maclnt%re, /or e(am&le, singles out Mar(ism /or s&ecial
mention as an Fe(#austed0 &olitical tradition4 ;n a similar -ein, L%otard argues t#at Fmost &eo&le #a-e lost t#e nostalgia /or t#e lost narrati-e0 @t#at is, /or t#e idea o/ #umanit% as tending towards
a condition o/ uni-ersal
=
emanci&ation, t#e &ros&ect o/ w#ic# endows t#e #istorical &rogress wit# meaningN and #e connects t#e declining in/luence o/ suc# Fgrand narrati-es0 wit# Ft#e
rede&lo%ment o/ ad-anced li)eral ca&italism Va/ter *+?9Y CCC a renewal t#at #as eliminated t#e communist alternati-e and -aloriGed t#e indi-idual enIo%ment o/ goods and ser-ices04
>
T#e second claim, namel% t#at t#e &ursuit o/ ideal consensus is misguided, /inds e(&ression in arguments /or a more acce&ting attitude towards t#e contingenc% and &articularit% o/ our
Flanguage-games04 ;t is not t#at &ostmodernism su)scri)es to t#e -iew t#at w#ate-er is, is sacrosanct6 Kuite t#e re-erse, in /act, in t#e case o/ Runt% and L%otard, w#o &riGe inno-ation /or its own
sa!e4 ;t does, #owe-er, den% t#at t#e re&lacement o/ one Fgame0 )% anot#er can )e e-aluated according to an% a)solute standard @e4g4 as )eing F&rogressi-e0 or t#e re-erse, in t#e sense /i(ed )% a
teleological -iew o/ #istor%A4 T#e t#oug#t is t#at since #istor% #as no direction @or6 since it is no longer &ossi)le to t#in! o/ it as #a-ing a directionA, an% new con/iguration o/ language-games
w#ic# we ma% succeed in su)stituting /or t#e &resent one will )e Iust as Fcontingent0 as its &redecessor H it will )e neit#er more nor less remote /rom Frealising Vuni-ersalY reason in &ractice04
;t is not sur&rising, t#en, to disco-er in t#is literature a leaning towards non-teleological descri&tions o/ discursi-e acti-it%4 Rort% wis#es to trans/er to )on.ersation t#e &restige currentl%
enIo%ed )% FenKuir%0N
?
Maclnt%re0s re/lections on moralit% lead #im to t#e conclusion t#at mytholo%y5 t#e range o/ narrati-e arc#et%&es t#roug# w#ic# a culture instructs its mem)ers in t#eir own
identit%, is
deser-e t#e name o/ Ftrut#0 in somet#ing more t#an a conte(tual or &ro-isional at t#e #eart o/ t#ings04
<
eit#er Fcon-ersatiCn0 nor Fm%t#olog%0 is naturall% 8nderstood as aiming at a single, sta)le re&resentation o/ realit%, one w#ic# would
T
Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
$eminism and &ostmodernism
sense4 And it is t#is negati-e /eature w#ic# /its t#e terms in Kuestion /or t#eir role in e(&ounding a F&ostmodernism o/ t#e intellect04
1ut t#e di-orce o/ intellectual acti-it% /rom t#e &ursuit o/ ideal consensus is too im&ortant a t#eme to )e entrusted to one or two #a&&il% c#osen words4 Runt%, as we s#all see later, e(&licitl%
states t#at a /orm o/ li/e w#ic# no longer as&ires towards a more-t#an-&ro-isional trut# will )e )etter, on )road cultural grounds, t#an one w#ic# continues to do soN w#ile L%otard goes /urt#er
and eKuates t#at as&iration wit# Fterror0,
E
)elie-ing as #e does t#at it leads ine-ita)l% to t#e su&&ression o/ di-ersit% or Fdi//erence04 He e-en calls /or a Fwar on totalit%0 H a reassertion o/ t#e
/amiliar li)eral teac#ing t#at, w#ile it ma% )e a regretta)le necessit% to &lace constraints on li)ert% in t#e name o/ social order, one must not acti-el% see! to )ind toget#er t#e multi&licit% o/
t#oug#t and &ractice into a single Fmoral organism0 or Fsigni/icant w#ole04 O
T#e ro)ust &artisans#i& o/ t#ese te(ts entitles us to t#in! o/ F&ostmodernism0 as a mo.ement de/ining itsel/ )% re/erence to, and in reaction against, modernit%4 T#ere is, admittedl%, no single
wa% in w#ic# our t#ree sources illustrate t#is reaction4 O T#e% are united, t#oug#, in t#eir o&&osition to t#e Enlig#tenment demand t#at w#at e(ists s#ould Iusti/% itsel/ )e/ore a timeless Ftri)unal
o/ reason04 ;n t#eir -iew, Iusti/ication @or legitimationA is alwa%s local and conte(t-relati-eN and t#e su&ersession o/ one local criterion o/ legitimac% )% anot#er is not to )e seen as an
a&&ro(imation towards some ultimate criterion t#at would transcend all local )ias, )ut at most as t#e outcome o/ sel/-Kuestioning on t#e &art o/ a &articular tradition4
T#is -iew o/ legitimation is sometimes &resented as t#e @more attracti-eA ri-al o/ a -iew called FPlatonism04 T#e FPlatonism0 in Kuestion is de/ined )% re/erence to Iust one doctrine ta!en /rom
t#e #istorical Plato6 t#e idea t#at truth goes )e%ond, or Ftranscends0, our current criteria of truth. A recurrent /eature o/ &ostmodernist t#eor% is t#e claim t#at Platonism in t#is sense is o)solete H
t#at is, t#at it is no longer &ossi)le to )elie-e in a transcendent trut# against w#ic# t#e w#ole intellectual ac#ie-ement o/ t#e #uman race to date could )e measured and /ound wanting4 And
&ostmodernist sce&ticism a)out t#is conce&tion o/ trut# e(tends also to t#e distincti-e met#od o/ inKuir% w#ic# Plato en-isaged as our means o/ access to genuine !nowledge4 ;t e(tends, in ot#er
words, to t#e idea o/ #uman t#oug#t as a dialectical &rocess6 one w#ic# would generate a &ositi-e result @a )od% o/ )elie/s w#ic# was &er/ectl% sta)le, )ecause inca&a)le o/ /urt#er correctionA )%
wa% o/ t#e relentless a&&lication o/ a negati-e met#od @t#e met#od o/ #unting down and eliminating internal contradictionA4
According to t#e dialectical -iew o/ !nowledge, t#is &ositi-e result would mar! t#e end o/ inKuir%, t#e &oint at w#ic# t#oug#t would come to rest )ecause t#ere would )e no &ossi)ilit% o/
/urt#er &rogress4 1ut t#is &ros&ect is no longer -iewed wit# uni-ersal ent#usiasmN it #as )ecome contro-ersial4 T#us we are in-ited to see it as a merit o/ &ostmodernist Fcon-ersation0 t#at @in
contrast to dialecticA it aims, not at its own closure, )ut at its own continuation6 it o//ers us t#e &ros&ect o/ a limitless /uture enli-ened at one &oint )% e&isodes o/ agreement, at anot#er )%
Fe(citing and /ruit/ul disagreement0 M
8B8
To t#e &ostmodern rea&&raisal o/ our dealings wit# t#e o)Iecti-e world, or wit# realit%0, t#ere corres&onds a stri!ing de-elo&ment on t#e side o/ t#e moral and cogniti-e sub9ect. Here too
t#ere is some #istorical Iusti/ication /or attac#ing t#e la)el FPlatonist0 to t#e -iew against w#ic# &ostmodernism is in re-olt4 $or in Plato0s 4epublic t#e dialectical &rogress o/ t#eor% towards
&er/ect co#erence is su&&osed to go #and in #and wit# an analogous tendenc% towards co#erence in t#e mind o/ t#e inKuirer4 As t#e &ractice o/ dialectic strengt#ens m% intellectual gras& o/ trut#
and goodness, so ; am to &icture m%sel/ ad-ancing towards &er/ect mental integration6
t#at is, towards a condition in w#ic# no sudden access o/ emotion, no &re-iousl% unconsidered as&ect o/ t#ings, is a)le to distur) t#e ordering o/ m% )elie/s and -alues4
E-er since its in-ention, t#is ideal o/ integrated or Fcentred0 su)Iecti-it% #as )een lin!ed wit# t#at o/ personal freedom. Howe-er, t#e /reedom w#ic# it &romises is not t#e merel% negati-e
state o/ e(em&tion /rom e(ternal constraints H t#e Fli)ert% o/ s&ontaneit%0 w#ic# Hume, /or e(am&le, maintained was t#e onl% sort we could intelligi)l% wis# /or4 ;t is, rat#er, a F&ositi-e li)ert%0
arising /rom t#e &ro&er internal organisation o/ t#e mind4 Positi-e li)ert% @also !nown as Fautonom%0A results /rom t#e ac#ie-ement o/ a state o/ mind in w#ic# t#e decisions or commands issued
)% t#e true su)Iect @t#e su)Iect >ua e(em&lar o/ ideal co#erence and sta)ilit%A cannot )e o-erturned )% recalcitrant im&ulses or F&assions04 *5 To )e /ree in t#is sense is to )e emanci&ated /rom
t#e in/luence o/ )elie/s and desires w#ic# our critical Iudgement condemns as irrational4
T#e logical conclusion o/ t#is line o/ argument is t#at /reedom can )e attri)uted wit#out Kuali/ication onl% to t#ose in w#om t#e &otential /or reason #as )een /ull% realised H t#at is, onl% to a
&er/ectl% rational )eing4 Ot#ers @and t#at means all o/ us, t#oug# we &resuma)l% /all s#ort o/ t#e ideal in -ar%ing degreesA ma% enIo% a su)Iecti-e /eeling o/ /reedom in our actionsN )ut i/ we
continue to de-elo& intellectuall% we are destined, some da%, to &ercei-e @wit# #indsig#tA t#e relati-e un/reedom o/ our current &atterns o/ )e#a-iour4
.e can set down as a /urt#er com&onent o/ t#e Enlig#tenment outloo! t#e #o&e o/ ac#ie-ing &ositi-e li)ert% )% s#a!ing o// all accidental @i4e4 non-rationalA constraints on t#e wa% we t#in!
and act4 T#e classical Fcentred su)Iect0 was /ree )ecause #e was no longer at t#e merc% o/ un&redicta)le )outs o/ &assion or a&&etiteN analogousl%, t#e modern one is /ree in -irtue o/ #is or #er
li)eration /rom t#e in/luence o/ social /orces w#ic# s:#e does not understand, and so cannot resist4 Communism, /or e(am&le, encourages us to wor! towards /reedom in t#is sense
gaining insig#t into t#e ca&italist economic order and t#e ideolog% t#at goes wit# itN /eminism, at least some o/ t#e time, #as in-ited us @womenA to searc# our )e#a-iour and our inner li-es /or
signs o/ adIustment to a (-oman-#ating culture, so t#at we can graduall% o-ercome t#e sel/-#atred induced )% t#at adIustment4 @T#is was t#e idea )e#ind Fconsciousness-raising04A
T#e long marc# towards autonom% )% wa% o/0t#e conKuest o/ our own stu&idit% @or more accuratel%, )% ma!ing oursel-es less susce&ti)le to e(ternal determinationA can )e summed u& in t#e
word Ftranscendence04 ;n t#e moral and &olitical conte(t,
8B2
8B: Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
as in t#e e&istemological one, to Ftranscend0 is to go )e%ond4 T#e &ursuit o/ a /ol! integrated su)Iecti-it% ta!es t#e /orm o/ an attem&t to rise a)o-e our &resent mental limitations4
T#is related idea o/ transcendence #as also attracted #ostile attention in recent %ears4 T#e #ostilit% comes &artl% /rom &ostmodernist critics o/ Enlig#tenment, w#o #a-e rig#tl% o)ser-ed its
connection wit# t#e idea o/ Funi-ersal reason0 @i/ ;0m tr%ing to rise a)o-e t#e limitations o/ a local or partial understanding o/ t#ings, t#en &resuma)l% w#at ;0m aiming at is a /ull% rounded,
im&artial or uni.ersal understandingA4 T#us Maclnt%re s&ea!s in &ositi-el% &atronising terms o/ t#at last word in Enlig#tenment-st%le moral autonom%, t#e ietGsc#ean 0bermensch or Fman
w#o transcends06 *, isolated, sel/-a)sor)ed, Fwanting in res&ect o/ )ot# relations#i&s and acti-ities0, t#is indi-idual clearl% needs #el& /rom a &s%c#iatric social wor!er4
;nterestingl% /or our &ur&oses, t#oug#, criticism o/ transcendence as a moral ideal #as also )egun to )e #eard in /eminist Kuarters4 ;t #as )een argued t#at, /rom t#e outset, .estern &#iloso&#%
#as de-ised one sc#eme o/ imager% a/ter anot#er to con-e%, essentiall%, a single -ision H t#at o/ man5 t#e normal or com&lete re&resentati-e o/ t#e s&ecies, standing out against a )ac!ground o/
mere FnatureR and t#at t#is )ac!ground #as consistentl% )een s%m)olised )% woman or /emininit%4 Plato0s guardians emerge /rom t#e wom)li!e Ca-e o/ Fcommon sense0 into t#e da%lig#t o/
!nowledgeN Hegel0s citiGens attain maturit% )% lea-ing t#e o)scure, &ri-ate world o/ t#e /amil%, o/ w#ic# .oman is t#e &residing genius4 ;n s#ort, t#e &assage /rom nature to /reedom, or /rom
F#eteronom%0 to autonom%, #as )een re&resented in terms o/ an esca&e )% t#e male /rom t#e s#eltered, /eminine surroundings in w#ic# #e )egins #is li/e4 *=
.e #a-e arri-ed at a &oint o/ a&&arent con-ergence )etween /eminism and &ostmodernism H a common coolness towards one o/ t#e !e% elements in t#e Enlig#tenment ideal4 ;t is time now to
c#ange tac! and to consider, in t#e lig#t o/ /eminist concerns, #ow /ar t#ese two tendencies mig#t )e a)le to enter into a /riendl% relations#i&4
II
One o/ t#e /irst t#oug#ts li!el% to occur in t#e course o/ an% #istorical re/lection on /eminism is t#at it is a t%&icall% modern mo-ement4 T#e emergence o/ se(ual eKualit% as a &ractical &olitical
goal can )e seen as one element in t#e com&le( course o/ e-ents )% w#ic# tradition #as gi-en wa%, o-er a matter o/ centuries, to a wa% o/ li/e t#at is dee&l% untraditional H in /act, to Fmodernit%0
in a semi-tec#nical sense o/ t#e word @t#e sense in w#ic# it denotes a #istorical &eriodA4
FModern0 conditions are t#ose created )% tec#nological &rogress and )% t#e e-er-e(&anding commerce o/ nations4 T#e% are t#e !ind o/ conditions w#ic# u&root &eo&le /rom ancient
communities and /orce t#em to negotiate t#cir own sur-i-al in a ca&italist F/ree mar!et04 A !e% te(t in t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#! idea o/ modernit%
$eminism and &ostmodernism
8B$
is Mar( and Engels0s /amous descri&tion o/ t#e c#aos and anarc#% o/ li/e under ca&italism H a descri&tion o//set, #owe-er, )% t#eir &ositi-e -ision o/ t#e old economic order as &regnant wit# a
new one4 O According to t#is -iew, t#e Fcolla&se o/ all /i(ed, /ast-/roGen relations0 creates t#e #istoric o&&ortunit% /or #umanit%, re&resented in t#e /irst instance )% t#e industrial wor!ing class,
to seiGe control o-er its own collecti-e e(istence t#roug# re-olution4 ;n classical Mar(ist terms, t#e ur)an &roletariat #as t#e necessar% Kuali/ications /or t#is role )ecause it is made u& o/
modern #uman )eings H men @and also, t#oug# &ro)lematicall%, womenA
*?
w#o #a-e )een /orci)l% emanci&ated /rom traditional wa%s o/ li/e, and so /rom t#e limited outloo! o/ t#eir &easant
ancestors4 ;t is t#an!s to t#e /ormation o/ suc# a class t#at t#e #orror o/ modernit% also contains a &romise6 sooner or later5 arbitrary authority will cease to e=ist.
An%one w#o is stirred )% t#is &romise is still, to t#at e(tent, wit#in t#e Enlig#tenment #a)it o/ t#oug#t4 T#eir res&onse indicates s%m&at#% wit# t#e Enlig#tenment re/usal to attac# an% moral
or intellectual /orce to tradition as suc#4
ow, it is di//icult to see #ow one could count onesel/ a /eminist and remain indi//erent to t#e modernist &romise o/ social reconstruction4 $rom a /emale &oint o/ -iew, Ftradition0 #as @to &ut
it mildl%A an unen-ia)le #istorical record4 Yet it is in t#e area o/ se(ual relations t#at Ftraditional -alues0 @marriage, #ome owners#i&, w#olesome /amil% li/e, etc4A are &ro-ing #ardest to s#i/t4
Per#a&s no ot#er /eature o/ t#e &re-modern scene #as &ersisted so stu))ornl% as male dominance H t#e class s%stem constructed on t#e )asis o/ )iological se(ual di//erenceN certainl% t#e t#oug#t
o/ a time w#en conce&ts suc# as Fwi/e0 and F#us)and0, wit# all t#e moral atmos&#ere t#e% e-o!e, will )e as o)solete as F-illein0 or Flord o/ t#e manor0 is a&t to set o// a landslide in t#e mind4
Still, i/ we assess wit#out &reIudice t#e im&lications /or gender @; mean, /or masculinit% and /emininit% as cultural constructsA o/ t#e Fmodern0 re&udiation o/ unearned &ri-ilege, we ma% well
conclude t#at t#is de-elo&ment is an integral &art o/ t#e &ac!ageN and i/ so, it will /ollow t#at /eminists #a-e at least as muc# reason as t#e rest o/ t#e world /or regarding t#e F&roIect o/
modernit%0, at t#e &resent time, as incom&lete4 *<
.#at, t#en, are we to ma!e o/ suggestions t#at t#e &roIect #as run out o/ steam and t#at t#e moment #as &assed /or rema!ing societ% on rational, egalitarian linesD ;t would )e onl% natural /or
an%one &laced at t#e s#ar& end o/ one or more o/ t#e e(isting &ower structures @gender, race, ca&italist class ... E to /eel a &ang o/ disa&&ointment at t#is news4 1ut wouldn0t it also )e in order to
/eel suspicion@ How can an%one as! me to sa% good)%e to Femanci&ator% metanarrati-es0 w#en m% own emanci&ation is still suc# a &atc#%, #it-and-miss a//airD
Let us /ocus again on t#e idea o/ Funi-ersal reason0, and on t#e recent Kuestioning o/ t#is idea4 Among /eminists, we noticed, t#e Kuestions #a-e )een &rom&ted )% a sense o/ t#e #istorical
connection )etween rationalist ideals and t#e )elie/ in a hierarchical opposition of Gmind1 and Gnature1 H t#e latter o&&osition in turn )eing associated wit# a contem&t /or Fimmanence0, /initude,
and t#e muddle o/ em)odied e(istence generall% @t#e Flead weig#ts o/ )ecoming0, as Plato &ut itA4 O On t#is anal%sis, t#e Enlig#tenment r#etoric o/ Femanci&ation0, Fautonom%0 and t#e li!e is
8B< Sa"ina Lo(%"ond $eminism and &ostmodern8sm 8B=
com&licit in a /antas% o/ esca&e /rom t#e em)odied conditionN *+ as suc#, it /eeds into one o/ t#e most notorious a)errations o/ Euro&ean culture, and an% &#iloso&#% w#ic# c#allenges it is li!el%
to #a-e considera)le critical /orce4
$eminist t#eor% is, in /act, dee&l% inde)ted to t#e e//orts o/ &#iloso&#% o-er t#e last centur% and more to Fnaturalise0 e&istemolog%, or in ot#er words to re&resent t#e acti-it% we call FinKuir%0
as &art o/ t#e natural #istor% o/ #uman )eings4 $or naturalist or materialist anal%ses
59
o/ t#e institutions o/ !nowledge-&roduction Hsc#ools, uni-ersities, t#e wider Fre&u)lic o/ letters0 H #a-e made
it &ossi)le to e(&ose t#e uneKual &art &la%ed )% di//erent social grou&s in determining standards o/ Iudgement4 ;n t#is wa% t#e% #a-e re-ealed t#e ideological c#aracter o/ -alue-s%stems w#ic#
#a-e &re-iousl% &assed as o)Iecti-e or uni-ersall% -alid @consider, /or e(am&le, t#e growt# o/ sce&ticism a)out academic canons o/ Fgreatness0 in literatureA4 $eminism can )ene/it as muc# as
an% ot#er radical mo-ement /rom t#e realisation t#at our ideas o/ &ersonal, tec#nical or artistic merit, or o/ intelligi)ilit% and cogenc% in argument, do not Fdro& /rom t#e s!%0 )ut are mediated
)% an almost intermina)le &rocess o/ social teac#ing and training4
T#ese ac#ie-ements seem to demonstrate t#e critical &otential o/ a local or &lural conce&tion o/ Freason0, and so to underwrite its claim to t#e con/idence o/ /eminists4 1ut )e/ore we Ium& to
an% conclusions, we #ad )etter loo! more closel% at t#e wa%s in w#ic# &ostmodernist t#eor% &uts t#at conce&tion to wor!4 ;n t#e remainder o/ t#is &a&er, ; s#all introduce t#ree t#emes w#ic#
seem to me to Kuali/% as distincti-el%0 &ostmodernN and in eac# case ; s#all suggest grounds /or dou)ting w#et#er &ostmodernism can )e ado&ted )% /eminism as a t#eoretical all%4 $or ease o/
re/erence ; s#all attac# la)els to m% t#ree &ostmodernist t#emes6 we can call t#em res&ecti-el% Fd%namic &luralism0, FKuiet &luralism0 and F&luralism o/ inclination04
As we )egin our sur-e%, we s#ould )ear in mind t#at t#ere is not#ing in t#e communitanian insig#t per se @; mean, in t#e idea t#at standards o/ Iudgement are #istoricall% and culturall%
conditionedA w#ic# would e(&lain &ostmodernist #ostilit% to t#e -ersion o/ ideal consensus4 One mig#t -er% well )e im&ressed )% t#e &ers&ecti-al c#aracter o/ !nowledge-claims, and %et still
see inKuir% as necessaril% see!ing to )ring all F&ers&ecti-es0 on realit% into communication H to construct a )od% o/ t#oug#t, or a s%stem o/ -alues, accessi)le indi//erentl% /rom an% starting&oint4
T#is, a/ter all, is t#e Fc#eer/ul #o&e0 w#ic# #as animated co#erentist t#eories o/ !nowledge /rom Plato to C4 S4 Peirce and )e%ond,
5*
and it is )% no means o)-ious t#at w#en suc# t#eories ta!e a
naturalist turn t#e% are )ound to renounce t#e 'antian &ostulate o/ a Fs&ecial interest o/ reason0 in &icturing realit% as a single, uni/ied s%stem4
55
;n /act, t#ere is no reason in &rinci&le w#% a
naturalist e&istemolog% s#ould not inter&ret in its own terms H namel%, as re/erring to t#e regulati-e idea o/ a single, uni/ied human culture H 'ant0s meta&#or o/ t#e Fimaginar% &oint0, located
)e%ond t#e limits o/ &ossi)le e(&erience, u&on w#ic# all
5,
lines o/ rational acti-it% a&&ear to con-erge4
To call t#is &oint Fimaginar%0 is sim&l% to record t#e irrele-ance, /rom an e&istemological &oint o/ -iew, o/ worries a)out w#en @i/ e-erA we 4Fan actuall% e(&ect to reac# t#e goal o/ inKuir%4
Continuing /or a moment in a ;R Ontian -ein, we can
sa% t#at alt#oug# t#eor% @li!e moralit%A would no dou)t )e im&ossi)le i/ t#e rele-ant su)Iecti-e Fma(ims0 #ad no general a&&eal to t#e mind, still t#eoretical e//ort @li!e moral e//ortA is
essentiall% non-contractual6 t#at is, %ou are not genuinel% engaged in eit#er i/ %ou ma!e %our contri)ution conditional on an assurance t#at all ot#er contri)utions reKuired to ac#ie-e t#e goal o/
t#e e(ercise will actuall% )e /ort#coming4 .e are t#ere/ore concerned #ere wit# t#e e&istemic eKui-alent o/ an article o/ /ait#, a commitment to &ersist in t#e searc# /or common ground wit#
ot#ers6 in /act, somet#ing w#ic# could not )e relinKuis#ed on &ain o/ sin!ing into F#atred o/ reason and o/ #umanit%04
5=
As soon as t#e rationalist conce&tion o/ inKuir% is re&resented as a matter o/ policy5 #owe-er @an idea alread% im&licit in 'ant0s tal! o/ t#e Finterests0 o/ reasonA, it )ecomes /air game /or
&s%c#ological inter&retation6 t#at is, it can )e seen as e(&ressi-e o/ a certain tem&erament or cast o/ mind4 And it is on t#is &s%c#ological territor% t#at t#e tendenc% ; #a-e called Fd%namic
&luralism0 issues its c#allenge4 L%otard is an a&&ro&riate case-stud% #ere, since #is #istorical t#esis a)out t#e ecli&se o/ Fgrand narrati-es0 de-elo&s itsel/ into a series o/ more or less e(&licit
suggestions on t#e su)Iect o/ &ostmodern mental #ealt#4
As we saw earlier, L%otard )elie-es t#at t#e Enlig#tenment ideal o/ a Fre-isa)le consensus go-erning t#e entire cor&us o/ language-games &la%ed )% a communit%0
5>
#as lost its gri& on t#e
collecti-e imagination4 owada%s, #e t#in!s, t#e main moti-e to intellectual acti-it% is t#e #o&e o/ )ene/iting /rom t#e F&er/ormance ca&a)ilities0 o/ a Fcom&le( conce&tual and material
mac#iner%0, w#ose users, #owe-er, F#a-e at t#eir dis&osal no metalanguage or metanarrati-e in w#ic# to /ormulate t#e /inal goal and correct use o/ t#at mac#iner%04 5? 8nder t#ese conditions,
t#e rationalist demand /or le%itimation o/ a &utati-e )it o/ F!nowledge0 #as )een su&erseded )% a limitless Kuest /or discursi-e no-elt% or F&aralog%0N
5<
conseKuentl%, an% lingering con-iction t#at
t#oug#t #as some o-erarc#ing purpose5 some destination w#ere it could rest, must )e -iewed as a sign o/ im&er/ect ada&tation to &ostmodernit%4 T#e aut#enticall% &ostmodern consciousness is
e(&erimental, com)ati-e, Fse-ereO6 it Fdenies itsel/ t#e solace o/ good /orms, t#e consensus o/ a taste w#ic# would ma!e it &ossi)le to s#are collecti-el% t#e nostalgia /or t#e unattaina)le04 5E
Postmodernism t#en, according to L%otard, is an e(tension o/ modernism in t#at eac# see!s to articulate t#e e(&erience o/ a disorderl%, directionless world H an e(&erience com&ounded o/
&leasure and &ain, conducted in t#e glare o/ #ig#-tec# e(tra-agance w#ic#, li!e t#e 'antian su)lime, stuns t#e imagination4
5+
1ut t#e two &ositions di//er as to w#at sort o/ consciousness would
)e eKual to, or wort#% o/, suc# conditions4 Modernism remains wit#in t#e FEnlig#tenment &roIect0 to t#e e(tent t#at it &ictures t#e cogniti-e master% o/ modernit% as a ste& on t#e road to endin%
it @)% collecti-e reim&osition o/ /orm on c#aos, as in t#e Mar(ist t#eor% o/ re-olutionNA
,9
&ostmodernism, on t#e ot#er #and, would #a-e us &lunge, romanticall%, into t#e maelstrom wit#out
ma!ing it our goal to emerge on terra firma.
How s#ould /eminist readers res&ond to t#e c#arge o/ Fnostalgia0 as directed against rationalist idealsD ;n considering t#is Kuestion, we ma% /ind it #el&/ul to
Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
8B@
GL1
8BB
$en8inism and &ostmodernism
draw on #istorical e-idence6 t#at is, to loo! into t#e /ormation o/ t#e sensi)ilit% e(&ressed in t#e rele-ant &ostmodernist te(ts4 Ta!ing a #int /rom some res&ect/ul comments o/ L%otard0s,
,*
we
can enter more /ull% into t#e anti-Enlig#tenment s&irit )% wa% o/ t#e writings o/ ietGsc#e H &er#a&s t#e sternest o/ all critics o/ Fidealism0 in general, in t#e sense o/ a dis&osition to com&are t#e
real world wit# an ideal one and to /ind it wanting4 ;t is t#is dis&osition w#ic#, in ietGsc#ean terms, constitutes Fni#ilism0 H t#e tendenc% w#ic# #e &ortra%s on a more instituti-e le-el as a
sic!ness transmitted to Euro&ean ci-iliGation t#roug# t#e com)ined im&act o/ Platonism and C#ristianit%4 F;nteresting0 as #umanit% ma% #a-e )ecome )% -irtue o/ t#is sic!ness,
,5
ietGsc#e0s
own t#oug#t ac#ie-es world-#istoric signi/icance @or so #e claimsA )% )ringing us to t#e t#res#old o/ reco-er%, and o/ a &assage into t#e Fsecond innocence o/ godlessness4 1ut t#e Fgodless0
condition is not so easil% attained as man% sel/-st%led /ree-t#in!ers imagine4 FT#e% are /ar /rom )eing free s&irits,0 ietGsc#e comments on t#e &ositi-ists o/ #is own da%, Gfor they still ha.e faith
in truth1B w#ereas a more resolute sce&ticism would rise to t#e disco-er% t#at Fman0s trut#s
G ,,
Vare ultimatel%Y onl% #is irrefutable errors
ietGsc#e0s critiKue o/ trut# ma% seem at /irst sig#t to )e addressed mainl% to ad#erents o/ a /oundational e&istemolog% on em&iricist lines @i4e4 to t#ose w#o )elie-e t#at !nowledge rests on a
/oundation o/ indu)ita)le, )ecause &urel% e(&eriential, &ro&ositionsA4 Ta!ing a )roader -iew, #owe-er, we /ind t#at #e is at least eKuall% de-astating a)out an alternati-e wa% o/ F#a-ing /ait# in
trut#0, namel% t#at em)odied in t#e &ractice o/ dialectics and @)% im&licationA in modern co#erentist t#eories o/ !nowledge4 ;n /act, ietGsc#e discerns in t#e met#od o/ argument in-ented )%
Socrates and Plato t#e &s%c#ological !e% to all su)seKuent mani/estations o/ rationalism4 $or t#e Socratic #a)it o/ t#oug#t is one w#ic# assumes t#e &ossi)ilit%, and desira)ilit%, o/ eliminatin%
conflict t#roug# t#e gradual con-ergence o/ all &arties on a single, sta)le &oint o/ -iew4 As suc#, it #as alwa%s #ad a &le)eian taint H /or t#e elimination o/ con/lict, ietGsc#e o)ser-es, is a goal
a&t to a&&eal, a)o-e all, to t#ose w#o can e(&ect to )e worsted in con/lict6 in ot#er words, to t#e wea!6
.#ere-er aut#orit% is still &art o/ acce&ted usage and one does not Fgi-e reasons0 )ut commands, t#e dialectician is a !ind o/ )u//oon4 CCC One c#ooses dialectics onl% w#en one #as no ot#er
e(&edient4 ... Dialectics can )e onl% a last-ditc# wea&on in t#e #ands o/ t#ose w#o #a-e no ot#er wea&on le/t4 CCC T#at is w#% t#e 3ews were dialecticians4
Rationalism, in ietGsc#e0s -iew, remains true to its origin in t#e will-to-&ower o/ t#e dis&ossessed6 its lineage is )etra%ed )% its wis# to trans&ose con/lict /rom t#e arena o/ )lows @or o/
s#owmans#i&A into t#at o/ rule-go-erned argument, w#ere t#e &#%sical or social underdog #as a #o&e o/ winning4 T#is wis# mar!s it out as a natural all% o/ t#e democratic mo-ements o/ t#e
modern world4 $or t#e aim o/ t#ese mo-ements is to su)-ert t#e social conditions w#ic# ietGsc#e would regard as necessar% to t#e e(&ression o/ a Fnatural order o/ ran!0N t#at is, t#eO aim to
eliminate -arious sorts o/ class relations#i&, and #ence -arious /orms O4 / e(&loitation or
dis&ossession4 @;n anot#er idiom6 t#e% see! to c#aractenise, e-er more nigorou
*
YR a social order in w#ic# t#e willing &artici&ation o/ all rational &ersons can )e e(&ected
I a F!ingdom o/ ends0 wit# eac# traditional im&ediment to mem)ers#i&, >O#O#er in terms o/ class, religion, race or se(, successi-el% &ro-o!ing resistance and Ot;ng swe&t awa%4A ;n s#ort, t#en,
trut# as a regulati-e ideal is t#e creation o/ a
t#eir sinister F /or
in/erior t%&e o/ mind4 ;t is t#e ressentiment o/ t#e ra))le H geniil0
ma!ing t#e Fnaturall% good0 /eel )ad a)out t#emsel-es H w#ic# gi-es rise O t#is
ideal4 $or as soon as #umanit% allows itsel/ to )e caug#t u& in t#e F&ursuit o/ O*tit#, it sli&s into t#e wa% o/ de/ining intellectual .irtue in terms o/ contrasting FO< in-ented )% t#e ra))le as an
instrument o/ &s%c#ological war/are against i#eir F)etters06 t#e -ice o/ contradictin% oneself5 or o/ )eing committed @unwittingl%0 **9 dou)t, )ut t#is onl% adds to t#e intimidator% &ower o/ t#e
dialectical met#o3O to t#e assertion o/ &ro&ositions related as FP0 and Fnot-P04 @otice t#e danirO o/ ietGsc#e0s suggestion t#at sel/-contradiction is not a /ault in an% a)solute or eternal sense6 #e
insists t#at it was human bein%s5 and a &articular categor% o/ #uman Oti/lgs at t#at, w#o #it u&on co#erence as a criterion o/ -alue in asse,SilO1 t#oug#t-&rocesses4A
ietGsc#e, too, dreams o/ o-ercoming Fmodernit%0 in all its anarc#ic uglit*tSSO 1ut, in #is -iew, t#is will )e ac#ie-ed, not t#roug# a realisation o/
enment &olitical am)itions, )ut t#roug# a reco.ery /rom t#e Fsic!ness o/ Enlig#tenment ideals H trut#, reason, moralit% @t#e modern successors to M<9dA4 ietGsc#e concurs in drawing toget#er under
t#e #eading o/ Fmodernit%0 al
*
t#e egalitarian tendencies o/ t#e last /ew centuries in Euro&e H li)eralism, socialisni an /eminism ali!e4 He sees /eminism, in ot#er words, as one com&onent o/ t#e
- call
rationalist &olitical &rogramme4 And in /act t#is is a -iew w#ic# man% /eminists
at
&ro)a)l% s#are4 O ;t is a -iew w#ic# can )e summed u& )% sa%ing t#at /eminisi/0
least in its uto&ian moods @as o&&osed to its angr% and &ugnacious ones, w#ic# o/ course are eKuall% essential to itA, as&ires to end the war between men and 1F01Fen and to re&lace it wit#
communicati-e trans&arenc%, or trut#/ulness4 4 /or
ow, it is well !nown t#at an% e(&ression o/ moral re-ulsion against war iS0
ietGsc#e, a Fs%m&tom o/ declining li/e0N
,?
)ut t#ere is, &er#a&s, no )ranc# 0t1 li/e in w#ic# rationalism and &aci/ism are more o//ensi-e to #im t#an in t#a
t
o/ se(ualit%4 O T#e /orce o/ #is
con-iction on t#is &oint suggests to ietGsc#t an intimate, e-en a Kuasi-conce&tual, connection )etween t#e idea o/ an emancip3ti2ii from reason5 on one #and, and t#at o/ an end to feminism5 on
t#e ot#er4 /#is connection is mediated )% #is conce&t o/ .irility5 t#e Kualit% su&&osedl% e(&ressed in a lo-e o/ Fdanger, war and ad-entures0 H a re/usal Fto com&romise, to )e ca&tutedO reconciled
and castrated04 ,E
.e must understand t#is statement not onl% in its o)-ious, literal, sense )ut also in an e&istemological one4 ;n a world wit#out trut# H a world in w#ic# t#e contrast )etween Frealit%0 and
Fa&&earance0 #as )een a)olis#ed H t#e inter&retatiot0 o/
is itsel/ a /ield /or in-ention, /or ha8ard1fn% one0s own e(&ressi-e gesJPOes e(&erience
or acts wit#out see!ing /or t#em t#e sa/et% o/ con/irmation @i4e4 o/ incor&oratiO/l into a s#ared and sta)le )od% o/ t#eor%A4 T#e cogniti-e acti-it% o/ a /uture, and
:99 Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
)etter, #umanit% will in-ol-e not t#e su&&ression o/ indi-idualit% and sensualit% @t#c F/alse &ri-ate sel/0 o/ t#e co#erentist regimeA, )ut rat#er t#eir su)ordination to a commanding will4
Hence/ort#, m% dear &#iloso&#ers, let us )e on our guard against t#e dangerous old conce&tual /iction t#at &osited a F&ure will-less, &ainless, timeless !nowing su)Iect0N let us guard against
t#e snares o/ suc# contradictor% conce&ts as F&ure reason0, Fa)solute s&iritualit%0, F!nowledge in itsel/06 t#ese alwa%s demand t#at we s#ould t#in! o/ an e%e t#at is com&letel% unt#in!a)le, an
e%e turned in no &articular direction, in w#ic# t#e acti-e and inter&reting /orces, t#roug# w#ic# alone seeing )ecomes seeing somethin%5 are su&&osed to )e lac!ingN t#ese alwa%s demand o/
t#e e%e an a)surdit% and a nonsense4 T#ere is only a &ers&ecti-e seeing, only a &ers&ecti-e !nowingN and t#e more a//ects we allow to s&ea! a)out one t#ing, t#e more e%es, di//erent e%es, we
can use to o)ser-e one t#ing, t#e more com&lete will our Fconce&t0 o/ t#is t#ing, our o)Iecti-it%0, )e4 1ut to eliminate t#e will altoget#er, to sus&end eac# and e-er% a//ect, su&&osing we were
ca&a)le o/ t#is H w#at would t#at mean )ut to castrate t#e intellectD O
Consistentl% wit# t#e idea t#at to attem&t an im&ersonal or Fsel/less0 -iew o/ realit% would )e to Fcastrate0 t#e intellect, ietGsc#e elsew#ere descri)es #is wor! in general as F#ostile CCC to t#e
w#ole o/ Euro&ean feminism @or idealism, i/ VweY &re/er t#at wordA0,
=9
and s&ea!s o/ #is F/ait# t#at Euro&e will )ecome more -irile04 =* F$eminism0, t#en, occurs in ietGsc#e0s writing not onl%
as t#e name o/ a contem&orar% &olitical mo-ement @t#oug# o/ course #e #as a good deal to sa% a)out women0s emanci&ation on t#e le-el o/ indignant common&laceA,
=5
)ut also as a s#ort#and
term /or t#e mental im&otence im&licit @or so #e )elie-esA in t#e )ondage o/ t#oug#t to regulati-e ideals suc# as trut#, realit% and goodness4 T#oug#t is emasculated5 ietGsc#e argues, in so /ar
as it consents to )e Fdrawn alo/t0 Aa 'a 2oet#eA )% t#e e-er-receding goal o/ a &er/ectl% sta)le condition in w#ic# it could /ind &eace4
M% moti-e in introducing ietGsc#e into t#e discussion #as not )een &urel%0 negati-e4 ; #a-e no wis# to ridicule #is account o/ t#e &s%c#ological meaning o/ e&istemological and &olitical
rationalism H #is inter&retation o/ t#e rationalist enter&rise in terms o/ a desire /or t#e elimination o/ con/lict and o/ ar)itrar% relations o/ command4 ; wis#, sim&l%, to suggest t#at we ta!e
seriousl% ietGsc#e0s own understanding o/ #is wor! as a contri)ution to t#e o-ercoming o/ F/eminism0N and t#at we maintain, as /eminists, a suita)l% critical attitude to t#e rea&&earance in
contem&orar% &#iloso&#% o/ one o/ ietGsc#e0s central t#emes H t#at o/ t#e su&ersession o/ Fmodernit%0 )% a harder5 less wim&is# /orm o/ su)Iecti-it%4
; must stress t#at to &oint out t#e &#allic or Fmasculine &rotest0 c#aracter o/ ietGsc#e0s &#iloso&#%, and o/ &ostmodernist t#eor% in its more o-ertl% ietGsc#eai, moods, is not meant to )e
a &relude to arguing t#at t#e -alues des&ised )% t#is tradition deser-e to )e restored to a &osition o/ #onour because t#e% are F/eminine0 and, as suc#, good4 ; do not mean to suggest t#at we
s#ould turn to ietGsc#e /or an understanding o/ w#at is F/eminine0, an% more t#an t1 ot#er &ur-e%ors o/ t#e dominant ideolog% o/ gender4 ;nstead, m% suggestion i0 t#at in reading
$eminism and &ostmodernism
:91
&ostmodernist t#eor% we s#ould )e on t#e watc# /or signs o/ indulgence in a certain collecti-e fantasy o/ masculine agenc% or identit%4 Turning u&on t#e ietGsc#eans t#eir own &re/erred
genealogical met#od, we mig#t as!6 who t#in!s it is so #umiliating to )e caug#t out in an attitude o/ Fnostalgia /or lost unit%0, or o/ longing /or a world o/ #uman su)Iects su//icientl% Fcentred0 to
s&ea! to and understand one anot#erD ]
III
; #a-e )een arguing /or a sce&tical res&onse to t#e !ind o/ &ostmodernist &osition w#ic# ; la)elled Fd%namic &luralism04 T#is &osition, ; #a-e suggested, is in/ormed )% an irrationalism w#ose
#istorical origin lies in reactionar% distaste /or modernist social mo-ements, and s&eci/icall% /or t#e mo-ement towards se(ual eKualit%4 ; turn now to t#e second o/ m% t#ree &ostmodernist
t#emes, namel% FKuiet &luralism04 Our concern #ere will )e wit# t#e &ostmodern Fredisco-er%0 o/ t#e local and customar%
I a societal counter&art, &er#a&s, o/ t#e re-i-al o/ -ernacular arc#itecture4
;t ma% a&&ear, at /irst glance, t#at t#ere is a world o/ di//erence )etween ietGsc#e0s own -ision o/ a radical renunciation o/ t#e FSocratic0 or trut#-orientated wa% o/ li/e, and on t#e ot#er
#and t#e &ostmodernist &ro&osal t#at we scra& t#e Enlig#tenment &roIect o/ absolute legitimation @t#e attem&t, /or e(am&le, to create a societ% t#at could not )e /aulted )% an% rational )eingA4
And wit# t#is di//erence in -iew, it ma% )e o)Iected t#at t#e disco-er% o/ ietGsc#ean ec#oes in t#e r#etoric o/ &ostmodernist t#eor% is o/ no more t#an marginal &#iloso&#ical interest4 $or to
read t#at t#eor% as an u&dated ietGsc#eanism @t#e o)Iection will runA is to miss its central &oint4 Postmodernism does not condemn t#e &ursuit o/ trut# or -irtue wit#in local5 self-contained
discursi-e communities H t#e Kuest /or Ftrut#0 as distinct /rom FTrut#0, as Runt% mig#t &ut it, or o/ F-irtue0 as distinct /rom FJirtue0 @t#e latter meaning t#e e(cellence o/ a #uman )eing sim&l%
>ua #uman and wit#out re/erence to an% &articular social roleA4 ;t reser-es its criticism /or t#e idea t#at we s#ould e-aluate t#e acti-it% o/ eac# o/ t#ese communities )% a uni-ersal standard Ht#at
we s#ould tr% to ma!e t#em all Fcommensura)le04
.e must recognise t#at &ostmodernist t#eor% /reel% concedes t#e a)ilit% o/ local Flanguage-games0 H natural science, moral traditions, etc4 H to re/lect on t#emsel-es and to &ass Iudgements o/
-alue on &articular Fmo-es0 made or contem&lated )% &artici&ants4 @T#at is to sa%, t#e% can as! H according to t#e concession H Kuestions suc# as F;s t#is a -alid contri)ution to scienti/ic t#eor%D0
or F;s t#is sort o/ conduct consistent wit# t#e recei-ed moral ideals o/ our communit%D0A T#us, /or L%otard, Ft#e stri!ing /eature o/ &ostmodern scienti/ic !nowledge is t#at t#e discourse on t#e
rules t#at -alidate it is @e(&licitl%A immanent to it0,
=>
w#ile Maclnt%re, an(ious to stress t#at a re-i-al o/ -irtue-centred et#ical t#eor% need not )e o&&osed to de)ate and inno-ation, claims t#at Fa
#ealt#% VmoralY F/radition is sustained )% its own internal arguments and con/licts04
=?
T#is concession is c#ie/l% interesting, #owe-er, /or t#e Kuestion it raises6 #ow are
:92
$
Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
we to draw an% &rinci&led distinction )etween t#e re9ection of :nli%htenment rationalism and t#e re9ection of le%itimation as such@ T#e concession is, a/ter all, a -er% signi/icant oneN /or #a-ing
)een told t#at intellectual traditions incor&orate a ca&acit% /or critical re/lection, we mig#t well su&&ose t#at t#e /orces o/ Enlig#tenment #ad ca&tured t#e #ig# ground in t#e current argument4 ;/
discursi-e communities are ca&a)le o/ sel/-criticism in &rinci&le, we mig#t as!, t#en w#o is to dictate #ow /ar t#e% s#all ta!e itD .on0t t#ere alwa%s )e room /or more, so long as any intelligi)le
criticism can )e addressed to t#e moral or cogniti-e order under w#ic# we li-eD And w#at is t#is limitless commitment to t#e dialectical re-ision o/ t#eor% and &ractice, i/ not &recisel% t#e
Enlig#tenment commitment to #aul u& e-er%t#ing in li/e )e/ore t#e tri)unal o/ reasonD
=<
T#e li!el% re&l% to t#is c#allenge is t#at, alt#oug# &ostmodernism ma% indeed )e at a loss /or an% /ormal, a priori wa% o/ determining #ow /ar critical re/lection can go, t#ere is no real cause /or
em)arrassment #ere4 $or t#e Kuestion is, in an% case, )est understood in a &ractical, or e(istential, sense H t#at is, as Iust one among man% Kuestions calling /or deli)erate collecti-e c#oice, and
cons&icuous onl% /or its unusual generalit%4 Rort% &uts t#e &oint succinctl%6
T#e &ragmatist Ve4g4 Runt% #imsel/Y is )etting t#at w#at succeeds t#e Fscienti/ic0, &ositi-ist culture t#at t#e Enlig#tenment &roduced will )e better ... VT#is successor culture would )e oneY in
w#ic# neit#er t#e &riests nor t#e &#%sicists nor t#e &oets nor t#e Part% were t#oug#t o/ as a more Frational0 or more Fscienti/ic0 or Fdee&er0 t#an one anot#er4 CCC T#ere would still )e #ero
wors#i& in suc# a culture, )ut it would not )e wors#i& o/ #eroes as c#ildren o/ t#e gods, as mar!ed o// /rom t#e rest o/ man!ind )% closeness to t#e immortal4 ;t would sim&l% )e admiration
o/ e(ce&tional men and women w#o were -er% good at doing t#e Kuite di-erse !inds o/ t#ings t#e% did4
=E
Maclnt%re0s com&laint against w#at #e calls Fli)eral indi-idualist modernit%0, and against t#e Fmodern sel/0 corres&onding to it, also rests on cultural considerations4 T#e distinguis#ing mar! o/
t#is Fsel/0 is t#at it stands in a &urel% e(ternal relation to t#e -arious roles it ma%, /rom time to time, ta!e onN t#at is, none o/ t#e acti-ities in w#ic# it ma% )ecome in-ol-ed enters so dee&l% into
it t#at to )e se-ered /rom it would undermine its integrit%4 O T#e &rice &aid /or t#is radical emanci&ation /rom tradition is illustrated, as we #a-e seen, )% t#e sad /ate o/ t#e ietGsc#ean
0bermensch5 w#om Maclnt%re uses as a /oil to set o// t#e attractions o/ a re-i-ed Aristotelianism4 And t#e &ractical im&lication o/ #is own Aristotelian &rogramme is t#at we s#ould call a #alt
to t#e &ursuit o/ moral and &olitical Ftranscendence0 and Fde-ote oursel-es to t#e construction o/ local /orms o/ communit% wit#in w#ic# ci-ilit% and t#e intellectual and moral li/e can )e
sustained04 O As /or L%otard, we #a-e alread% noticed #is use o/ t#e word Fterror0 to c#aracterise t#e idea o/ inKuir%0 as a uni/ied dialectical &rocess aiming, ultimatel%, at its own com&letion or
closure4
1ut, des&ite t#e -alua)le reminder issued )% &ostmodernism t#at t#ere is no suc# t#ing as a F&ure reason0 dissociated /rom an% )asis in local cust,*n, ; do not t#in! /eminists s#ould )e
undul% im&ressed )% t#e t#eor% in t#is mndi#ed -ersion eit#er4
$entinism and &ostmodt1rnis5n
:98
; t#in! we #a-e reason to )e war%, not onl% o/ t#e unKuali/ied ietGsc#ean -ision o/ an end to legitimation, )ut also o/ t#e suggestion t#at it would some#ow )e F)etter0 i/ legitimation
e(ercises were carried out in a sel/-consciousl% &aroc#ial s&irit4 $or i/ /eminism as&ires to )e somet#ing more t#an a re/ormist mo-ement, t#en it is )ound sooner or later to /ind itsel/
calling t#e &aris# )oundaries into Kuestion4
To un&ac! t#is meta&#or a little6 /eminists need to !now, and &ostmodetnist t#eor% /ails to e(&lain, #ow we can ac#ie-e a t#oroug#going re-ision o/ t#e rintp1 o/ social scri&ts,
narrati-e arc#et%&es, wa%s o/ li/e, wa%s o/ earning a li-ing, etc4, a-aila)le to indi-idual women and men4 Consider, /or e(am&le, suc# mind-)oggling, %et urgentl% necessar%
underta!ings as t#e glo)al redistri)ution o/ wealt# and resources, t#e reallocation o/ wor! and leisure, t#e &re-ention o/ war and en-ironmental destruction4 .ell, no dou)t we s#all )e
told t#at t#ere is somet#ing pass; in t#e -er% #a)it o/ mind w#ic# can still /rame t#is !ind o/ classicall% #umanist agenda, gi-en t#e alleged Fe(#austion0 o/ all our &olitical traditions
@Maclnt%reA and t#e e(tinction o/ an% s#ared Fnostalgia /or t#e unattaina)le0 @L%otardA4 1ut, on t#e ot#er #and, i/ t#ere can )e no s%stematic &olitical a&&roac# to Kuestions o/ wealt#,
&ower and la)our, #ow can t#ere )e an% e//ecti-e c#allenge to a social order w#ic# distri)utes its )ene/its and )urdens in a s%stematicall% uneKual wa% )etween t#e se(esD T#us, alt#oug# it is
courteous o/ Runt% to include women along s-it# men in t#e class o/ Fe(&ert-rulers0 w#o will re&lace t#e Platonic &#iloso&#er-rulers in #is &ragmatist uto&ia, it remains a m%ster% #ow
we can #o&e to ac#ie-e an eKual se(ual di-ision o/ &ower unless we are Fallowed0 @)% e&istemolog% and &olitical t#eor%A to address t#e structural causes o/ e(isting se(ual ine>uality.
1ut t#is would mean an assault on e-er% social norm or institution w#ic# rests on )iologistic assum&tions a)out male and /emale Fnature0 H on e-er%t#ing in our /amiliar wa% o/ li/e
w#ic# can )e traced to t#e entrenc#ed /unctionalist notion t#at w#at women are for is to re&roduce and nurture t#e s&ecies4 And t#is, in turn, is /ar /rom )eing t#e sort o/ &rogramme
t#at could coe(ist wit# a mee!, non-inter-entionist attitude towards t#e current in-entor% o/ social Froles0 or s&ecialised /unctions4 So &ostmodernism seems to /ace a dilemma6 eit#er
it can concede t#e necessit%, in terms o/ t#e aims o/ /eminism,
>*
o/ Fturning t#e world u&side down0 in t#e wa% Iust outlined H t#ere)% o&ening a door once again to t#e Enlig#tenment
idea o/ a total reconstruction o/ societ% on rational linesN or it can dogmaticall% rea//irm t#e arguments alread% mars#alled against t#at idea H t#ere)% licensing t#e c%nical t#oug#t t#at,
#ere as elsew#ere, Fw#o will do w#at to w#om under t#e new &luralism is de&ressingl%0 &redicta)le04 >5
Maclnt%re0s discussion contains &lent% o/ e-idence, at a more intuiti-e le-el, /or t#e reactionar% im&lications o/ t#e &ro&osed return to customar% et#ics4 ;t is not t#at #is &ortra%al
o/ Fm%t#olog%0 as a source o/ moral insig#t and guidance is so -er% wide o/ t#e mar! &#enomenologicall%4 .#o would den% t#e communal c#aracter o/ t#e ideas on w#ic# we draw
w#en we set a)out t#e itmsginati-e construction o/ our own li-es as meaning/ul and uni/ied c#ains o/ e-entsD To )e sure, Fm%t#0 in t#is sense &ro-ides us wit# a more -i-id conce&tion
o/ our own e(&erience, it lea-es us less
:9: Sa"ina Lo(i"ond $eminism and &ostmodernism
)ored and more in control4 1ut a closer loo! at t#e wor!ings o/ t#e &rocess is less t#an reassuring /rom t#e &oint o/ -iew o/ se(ual &olitics4 Maclnt%re &ictures it as /ollows6
; can onl% answer t#e Kuestion F.#at am ; to doD0 i/ ; can answer t#e &rior Kuestion FO/ w#at stor% or stories do ; /ind m%sel/ a &artD0 .e enter #uman societ% ... wit# one or more im&uted
c#aracters H roles into w#ic# we #a-e )een dra/ted H and we #a-e to learn w#at t#e% are in order to )e a)le to understand #ow ot#ers res&ond to us and #ow our res&onses to t#em are a&t to )e
construed4 ;t is t#roug# #earing stories a)out wic!ed ste&mot#ers, lost c#ildren, good )ut misguided !ings, wol-es t#at suc!le twin )o%s, %oungest sons w#o recei-e no in#eritance )ut must
ma!e t#eir own wa% in t#e world, and eldest sons w#o waste t#eir in#eritance on riotous li-ing and must go and li-e wit# t#e swine, t#at c#ildren learn or mislearn )ot# w#at a c#ild and
w#at a &arent is, w#at t#e cast o/ c#aracters ma% )e in t#e drama into w#ic# t#e% #a-e )een )orn and w#at t#e wa%s o/ t#e world are4
>,
T#is &assage, i/ seriousl% intended, con-e%s t#e suggestion t#at t#e cornerstones o/ our m%t#ical re&ertoire are t#e 1i)le, 2rimm0s $air% Tales, and t#e 2ree! and Latin classicsN and i/ t#at were
t#e case, all good li)erals would )e )ound to as! t#emsel-es w#et#er t#e /emale #al/ o/ t#e &o&ulation can reasona)l% )e as!ed to &iece itsel/ toget#er out o/ t#e semiotic /allout /rom t#ese
sources4 @;s it a coincidence t#at t#e onl% /emale role in Maclnt%re0s long list, /or a #uman )eing at an% rate, is t#at o/ a Fwic!ed ste&mot#er0DA 1ut, o/ course, t#e realit% is e-en #ars#er4 $or our
effecti.e m%t#olog%, t#e one w#ic# actuall% determines t#e customar% et#ics o/ t#e @&ostAmodern world, in-ites us to inter&ret oursel-es and our neig#)ours in terms o/ a rat#er more to&ical
range o/ Fim&uted c#aracters06 good mot#ers, )ad mot#ers, rut#less career women, gorgeous @dum)A )londes, ordinar% #ousewi-es, women w#o are no better than they should be5 loon% les)ian
/eminists co-ered wit# )adges CCC an%one w#o e-er reads a news&a&er or watc#es TJ can continue t#e list4
.e mig#t wonder w#et#er it is /air to &lace suc# a gloom% construction on t#e Fnarrati-e0 model o/ &ersonal identit%4 .#% s#ould it not )e &ossi)le to reclaim some o/ t#e a-aila)le roles and
turn t#em, in a s&irit o/ su)-ersion, towards &rogressi-e endsD Aren0t most, or at an% rate some5 &olitical cultures o/ t#e late twentiet# centur% su//icientl% -ariegated to su&&l% alternati-e stor%-
lines to &eo&le o/ a critical turn o/ mind @t#e tireless acti-ist, etc4AD
1ut Maclnt%re seems to #a-e &re-em&ted t#is mo-e4 $or, alt#oug# #e mentions t#e F&rotestor0 as one o/ t#e Fstoc! c#aracterVsY in t#e modern social drama0,
>=
#e consigns t#is t%&e @along wit#
t#e Faest#ete0 and t#e F)ureaucrat0A to a !ind o/ lim)o in#a)ited )% t#ose w#o #a-e sta!ed t#eir sel/#ood on an illusion4 T#ese distincti-el% modern social roles, #e suggests, can con/er onl% a
&seudo-identit% on t#eir )earers, since t#e% all draw in one wa% or anot#er on moral /ictions s&awned )% t#e Enlig#tenmentN in regard to t#e F&rotestor0 t#e rele-ant /iction is t#at o/ natural
ri%hts5
!!
t#e de/ence o/ w#ic# Maclnt%re a&&arentl% sees as constituti-e O/ o&&ositional &olitics4 An% idea t#at F&rotest0 mig#t generate a su)stanti-e conce&tion
:9$
o/ &ersonal -irtue, and #ence a -ia)le &ostmodern li/e-&attern, must t#ere/ore #e a)andoned4
o dou)t it is correct to see /eminism as standing in a &redominantl% negati-e relation to t#e culture /rom w#ic# it s&rings4 To use Maclnt%re0s idiom, no /eminist can )e content wit# t#e
range o/ Fli/e-stories0 currentl% on o//er to girls and won,enN on t#e ot#er #and, i/ we set our /aces against t#at &articular set o/ m%t#ological suggestions, t#is does not im&l% t#at we oug#t to
loo! /orward wit# an% eagerness to some &utati-e neo-Anistotelian regime o/ Fmoralit% and ci-ilit%04 >? @;n /act, t#e -er% words !indle an o)scure desire to commit social ma%#em4A
.e are not, #owe-er, under an% o)ligation to acce&t t#e #ac!ne%ed c#aractenisation o/ radical &olitics in terms o/ F&rotest04 .e can &oint instead to a &ositi-e aim w#ic# /eminism #as in
common wit# ot#er mo-ements o/ li)eration Han aim w#ic#, &arado(icall%, Kuali/ies t#ese mo-ements as more genuinel% Aristotelian t#an Maclnt%re #imsel/4 $or t#e% are all concerned wit# t#e
s&eci/ication and construction o/ a life worthy of human bein%s: t#e -er% Kuestion under w#ic# Aristotle #imsel/ ta!es t#at o/ t#e indi-idual Fgood li/e0 to )e su)sumed4 O ;nterestingl%, t#is is t#e
Kuestion at w#ic# Maclnt%re )aul!sN or rat#er, #is moral e&istemolog% re-erses t#e direction o/ Aristotle0s )% treating t#e indi-idual enter&rise as a source o/ insig#t into t#e collecti-e one6
;n w#at does t#e unit% o/ an indi-idual li/e consistD T#e answer is t#at its unit% is t#e unit% o/ a narrati-e em)odied in a single li/e4 To as! F.#at is t#e good /or meD0 is to as! #ow )est ;
mig#t li-e out t#at unit% and )ring it to com&letion4 To as! F.#at is t#e good /or manD0 is to as! w#at all answers to t#e /ormer Kuestion must #a-e in commonA
E
T#e e//ect o/ t#is re-ersal is to )ar t#e wa% to &olitical theory and to /orce t#e as&iring t#eorist )ac! into t#e ideologicall% saturated /ield o/ Fm%t#olog%0 H i4e4 )ac! to a c#oice )etween t#e
-arious narrati-e arc#et%&es /urnis#ed )% e(isting societ%4 ;ronicall%, t#en, it turns out t#at des&ite #is use o/ ietGsc#e as an o)Iect lesson in t#e &erils o/ ram&ant indi-idualism, Maclnt%re0s
moti-es are not so -er% di//erent /rom ietGsc#e0s own H at an% rate, in t#ose relati-el% unmeta&#%sical moments w#en t#e latter is &ondering t#e Fimmense stu&idit% o/ modern ideas04 O
I(
$inall%, it remains to consider t#e t#ird o/ m% &ostmodernist t#emes, t#e F&luralism o/ inclination0 ; o//er t#is @admittedl% rat#er ma!es#i/tA term as a means o/ con/erring some &ositi-e c#aracter
on a de-elo&ment w#ic# #as alread% )een mentioned under its negati-e as&ect H namel%, t#e reaction against rationalist ideals o/ &ositi-e li)ert% and o/ t#e /ull% integrated #Oiman su)Iect4
;t would )e )e%ond t#e sco&e o/ t#is &a&er to re-iew t#e arguments /or &icturing su)Iecti-it% in general as Fdecentred0 or Fin &rocess06 t#ese arguments #a-e, in an%
:9< Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
case, )een clearl% e(&ounded /or t#e )ene/it o/ Anglo&#one readers )% linguistic, literar% and cultural t#eorists4 ?9 or can ; o//er an% general a&&raisal o/ t#e F&#iloso&#% o/ desire0 as a &ossi)le
successor to t#e #istorical-materialist tradition @; mean, in ins&iring resistance to agencies o/ &olitical and social controlA4 .e can, #owe-er, ta!e ad-antage o/ t#e /act t#at t#ese strains o/ anti-
Enlig#tenment t#in!ing #a-e alread% )egun to ma!e t#eir mar! on t#e !ind o/ cultural commentar% &roduced )% 1ritis# /eminists and socialists4 ?*
$eminism #as alwa%s gi-en a central im&ortance to t#e &olitics o/ &ersonal c#oice and taste, and it is t#ere/ore signi/icant t#at o-er t#e last /ew %ears t#e mo-ement #as made large
concessions, in its treatment o/ t#ese matters, to t#e anti-rationalist mood o/ t#e times4 Per#a&s t#e most im&ortant trend #as )een a loss o/ con/idence in t#e idea o/ false consciousness: in ot#er
words, in t#e t#oug#t t#at our s&ontaneous aest#etic and emotional res&onses mig#t reKuire criticism in t#e lig#t o/ a /eminist anal%sis o/ se(ual relations#i&s4
To reIect F/alse consciousness0 is to ta!e a large ste& towards a)andoning t#e &olitics o/ Enlig#tenment modernism4 $or it means reIecting t#e -iew t#at &ersonal autonom% is to )e reac#ed )%
wa% o/ a &rogressi-e transcendence o/ earlier, less adeKuate cogniti-e structures6 in our case, t#e transcendence o/ less adeKuate le-els o/ insig#t into t#e o&eration o/ male &ower4
Man% /eminist writers now seem to #old t#at we s#all )e )etter eKui&&ed to t#in! a)out t#e &olitics o/ &ersonal li/e i/ we &ut t#e Enlig#tenment )e#ind us4 ;n/luential in t#is res&ect #as )een
EliGa)et# .ilson0s )oo! Adorned in <reams: $ashion and modernity @*+E>A, w#ic# de&lores t#e Frational dress0 tendenc% wit#in /eminism and a//irms F/as#ion0 as a @&otentiall%A o&&ositional
medium o/ e(&ression6
Sociall% determined we ma% )e Vwrites .ilsonY, )ut we consistentl% searc# /or cre-ices in culture t#at o&en to us moments o/ /reedom4 Precisel% )ecause /as#ion is at one le-el a game ... it
can )e &la%ed /or &leasure4 ?5
T#e same t#eme #as )een ta!en u& )% Iournalist SuGanne Moore, w#o #as written in de/ence o/ women0s gloss% magaGines6
.e are wa!ing u& to t#e im&ortance o/ /antas%, &leasure and st%le, and to awareness t#at a &olitics t#at e(cludes t#em will ne-er )e trul% &o&ular4 ... .e cannot Iust &ull &leasure into t#e
correct ideological s&ace t#roug# &olitical intention alone4 T#e idea t#at we e-en could results /rom an air o/ moral elitism &re-alent on t#e le/t and unwittingl% a)sor)ed )% /eminism4 ?,
And more recentl%, 1renda Polan o/ ,he /uardian #as mounted t#e /ollowing attac! on /eminists w#o reIect standard notions o/ #ow women oug#t to loo!6
T#e &uritans w#ose criticism distur)s me most are women w#o are sel/-rig#teous in
t#eir es&ousal o/ t#e )elie/ t#at lac! o/ arti/ice eKuals -irtue4 Aggressi0-c lac! o/ arti/ice declares a re/usal to &lease, to c#arm, to )e eas% on t#e e%t ;t is an awesome
1"eBninis5n and &ostniodernisni :9=
arroganceN a declaration t#at no im&ro-ement is necessar%, t#at t#e aest#etic consensus is mista!en and t#ose su)scri)e to it /ools4 A"! August *+EEA
;n all t#ese te(ts t#e idea o/ pleasure is &rominent H eit#er our own, or, in Polan0s cruder -ersion o/ t#e argument, t#e &leasure we gi-e ot#ers @t#ere)%0 Iusti/%ing our own e(istence and,
&resuma)l%, gaining somet#ing o/ t#e narcissistic satis/action traditionall% allowed to womenA4 T#e word F&leasure0, at all e-ents, is a&t to #e )roug#t out wit# a /louris#, as i/ it clinc#ed t#e case
/or seeing &rogressi-e or creati-e &ossi)ilities in somet#ing &re-iousl% -iewed wit# sus&icion4 T#e suggestion is t#at /eminists #a-e #armed t#eir cause, t#e% #a-e put people of9f5 )% t#eir
gratuitous asceticism a)out ma!e-u&, /rill% !nic!ers and t#e li!e4 1ut t#is in-ites t#e o)Iection6 w#oe-er wants to claim t#at con-entional /emininit%, e-en at its most a)Iect, cannot )e
pleasurable /or womenDM ot long ago, it would #a-e )een widel% acce&ted as sel/-e-ident t#at i/ /or e(am&le ; /ind t#at )u%ing new clot#es #el&s me to sta-e o// )oredom or sadness, t#at is
not an argument in /a-our o/ s#o&&ing )ut a starting-&oint /or re/lection on m% ot#erwise unsatis/ied needs4 ;/ t#is is no longer common ground among /eminists, it0s argua)le t#at t#e c#ange is
indicati-e not so muc# o/ an ad-ance in wisdom or #umanit% as o/ a recourse to t#e consolations o/ t#e &owerless H or rat#er, t#e consolations o/ t#ose w#o #a-e more &urc#asing &ower t#an
&ower to in/luence t#e course o/ t#eir common li/e4
T#ere is, o/ course, somet#ing rig#t in &ostmodernist warnings against insisting too muc# on Fideological soundness0, w#et#er /rom onesel/ or H still worse H /rom ot#ers4 o dou)t t#ere are
&it/alls #ereN0 arrogance and sel/-dece&tion are t#e most o)-ious4 ;t would )e sensi)le, t#ere/ore, to concede t#at t#ere is no /uture in tr%ing to con/orm on t#eoretical grounds to a de/inition o/
&leasure w#ic# is #o&elessl% remote /rom our current ca&acities /or actuall% enIo%ing li/e4 1ut i/ we acce&t t#at c#anges in t#ese ca&acities can )e emanci&ating H t#at t#e% #old out a &ros&ect o/
re&airing some o/ t#e damage done to us in turning us out as women H t#en we are alread% committed to t#e idea t#at #ow t#ings stand wit# a &erson in res&ect o/ #er &owers o/ enIo%ment is a
matter /or &olitical e-aluation4 And in t#at case, t#e occasional moralism or Fmoral elitism0 o/ radical mo-ements will #a-e to )e understood as a -ice o/ e(cess, rat#er t#an as a s%m&tom o/
/undamental .rong#eadedness6 t#e danger lies, in ot#er words, not in wis#ing to )ring our @/elt, em&iricalA desires into line wit# our rational understanding, )ut in tac!ling t#e Io) in a #am-
/isted wa% t#at is doomed to &ro-o!e disgust and reaction4
Again, t#e &ostmodernist cele)ration o/ &leasure sometimes wins a tric! )% a&&ealing to t#e role o/ immediate /eeling in su)-erting &s%c#ic order4 ?> T#e idea o/ su)Iecti-it% as sociall% @or
discursi-el%A constructed, and t#us as in#erentl%0 /luid and &ro-isional, o&ens u& a world o/ &ossi)ilities #ere4 ?? 1ut i/ /eminism disowns altoget#er t#e im&ulse to Fenlig#ten0, it will )e at a loss to
s&ea! t#e wis# to ma!e t#ese &ossi)ilities real4 Su)Iecti-it% can )e as /luid as %ou &lease, )ut t#is insig#t Honce decou&led /rom t#e /eminist am)ition to rec1onstruct sensi)ilit% in t#e interest o/
women Hwill no longer )e o/ an% s&eci/icall% &olitical interest4 ;ts &olitical signi/icance lies in t#e im&lication t#at contrar% to a&&earances @to t#e nig#tmaris#
:9@ Sa"ina Lo(%"and $ern inisn8 and &ostmodernism :9B
uni/ormit%, gi-e or ta!e routine -ariations in Fst%le0, o/ t#e cultural re&resentation o/ genderA, we can rema!e oursel-es as )etter H more autonomous, less &at#etic H&eo&le6 F)etter0 )% our own
&resent lig#ts, o/ course, )ut t#at is sim&l% a condition o/ engagement in cogniti-e acti-it%4 Did an%one e(&ect /eminist t#eor% to wi&e out o-ernig#t e-er% trace o/ t#e m%t#olog% w#ic# is,
se(uall% s&ea!ing, at t#e #eart o/ t#ingsD And i/ not, isn0t t#e &resent surge o/ ent#usiasm /or F&leasure0 reall% t#e sign o/ a terri)le &essimismD ?<
T#e alternati-e to t#is !ind o/ &essimism, ; suggest, is t#at /eminists s#ould continue to t#in! o/ t#eir e//orts as directed not sim&l% towards -arious local &olitical &rogrammes, )ut ultimatel%
towards a glo)al one H t#e a)olition o/ t#e se( class s%stem, and o/ t#e /orms o/ inner li/e t#at )elong wit# it4 T#is &rogramme is Fglo)al0 not Iust in t#e sense t#at it addresses itsel/ to e-er%
corner o/ t#e &lanet, )ut also in t#e sense t#at its aims e-entuall% con-erge wit# t#ose o/ all ot#er egalitarian or li)erationist mo-ements4 @;t would )e ar)itrar% to wor! /or se=ual eKualit% unless
one )elie-ed t#at #uman societ% was dis/igured )% ineKualit% as such.?
;/ t#is is a con-incing o-erall c#aracterisation o/ /eminism, it /ollows t#at t#e mo-ement s#ould &ersist in seeing itsel/ as a com&onent or o//s#oot o/ Enlig#tenment modernism, rat#er t#an as
one more Fe(citing0 /eature @or cluster o/ /eaturesA in a &ostmodern social landsca&e4 .#at does not /ollow is t#at it would )e desira)le /or t#e women0s mo-ement H eit#er world-wide, or in an%
one countr%
H to )e !e&t in order )% some central aut#orit% @t#e Ftotalitarian0 s&ectre w#ic# &ostmodernists, in common wit# old-/as#ioned Cold .arriors, are /ond o/ in-o!ingA4 ;/, /or e(am&le, Euro&ean
and:or ort# American /eminism is alleged )% )lac! women to s#are in t#e racism o/ t#e surrounding culture, t#en t#eir com&laint rig#tl% creates a new &olitical agenda H a new set o/ &ointers
towards t#e goal o/ a genuinel% F#eterogeneous &u)lic li/e0N
?E
and t#is sort o/ de-elo&ment certainl% ma!es t#e mo-ement @em&iricall% s&ea!ingA less uni/ied t#an )e/ore4 1ut it does not
&reIudice t#e ideal unit% o/ /eminism4 ?+ ;nstead, it calls attention to a certain res&ect in w#ic# /eminism #as /allen s#ort o/ its own idealised sel/-image as an occu&ant o/ t#e Funi-ersal
stand&oint0 @in contrast, sa%, to t#e traditional H male-dominated H Le/tA4 ;t is not Fli)eral guilt0, or conscientiousness in t#e a)stract, w#ic# gi-es accusations o/ racism t#eir urgenc%6 it is t#e
)ac!ground commitment o/ /eminism to t#e elimination o/ @sel/-interestedA cogniti-e distortion4
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 S&eci/icall%, ; s#all draw on L%otand, ,he &ostmodern )ondition: A report on knowled%e @#erea/ter &()?B Maclnt%re, After Virtue: A study in moral theory5 *+E* @#erea/ter AV?B Runt%,
&hilosophy and the (irror of Hature5 *+E9 @#erea/ter &h(H? and FPragmatism and &#iloso&#%0 in #is )onse>uences of &ra%matiF15i5 *+E5, re&rinted
;
in 'ennet# 1a%nes, 3ames 1o#man and T#omas McCart#% @edsA, After &hilosophy: :nd or transformation@5 M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+E<4
O)-iousl% t#e attem&t to ca&ture an% com&le( argument in a )rie/ sur-es is lia)le to lead to some o-ersim&li/ication, and in &articular it s#ould )e noticed t#,it Runt% in &h(H re/ers to t#e
Enlig#tenment se&aration o/ science /rom t#eolog% and &olitics is our most &recious cultural #eritage0 @&4 ###?. T#e main moti-e o/ #is #oo!, )oss c0 en4 is to -oice a F#o&e t#at t#e cultural s&ace
le/t )% t#e demise o/ e&istemolog% Vi4e4 @i/ t#e commitment to rendering all discourse commensura)leY will not )e /illed0 @&4 ,* O, ,ind t#is identi/ies #im /or our &ur&oses as an anti-Enlig#tenment
t#eorist4
T#e t#emes o/ After Virtue are de-elo&ed /urt#er in Maclnt%re0s more recent #oo!, Whose 3ustice@ Which 4ationality@ 8ni-ersit%0 o/ otre Dame Press, otre Dame, ;, *+EE4
54 $or an e(&ression o/ t#is !ind o/ intellectual monism, c/4 'ant, Pre/ace to ,he (etaphysical &rinciples of 4i%ht @in ,he (etaphysical &rinciples of Virtue5 transl4 3ames Ellington, *+?=, &4 !?:
Finasmuc# as t#ere can )e onl% one #uman reason, so li!ewise t#ere cannot )e man% &#iloso&#iesN t#at is, onl% one true s%stem o/ &#iloso&#%0 )ased on &rinci&les is &ossi)le, #owe-er
-ariousl% and o/ten contradictoril% men ma% )ase &#iloso&#iGed o-er one and t#e same &ro&osition04
,4 AV5 &45==4
=4 &()5 &4 =*4
!. 'bid.5 &4 ,E4
?4 &h(H5 &4 ,*E4
7. AV5 &4 59*4
E4 &()5 &4 E54
+4 $or Fmoral organism0, c/4 $4 H4 1radle%, :thical -tudies5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+?5, &4 *<<N and /or Fsigni/icant w#ole0, c/4 H4 H4 3oac#im, ,he Hature of1 ,ruth5 2reenwood Press,
.est&ort, CT, *+9?, re&u)l4 *+?+, &&4 ?E if.
*94 L%otard, /or e(am&le, sees in t#e &ostmodern e(&erience t#e Ftrut#0 o/ t#e modern one @t#e /ormer, #e sa%s, is part o/ t#e latter and in#erits /rom it t#e ma(im t#at Fall t#at #as )een recei-ed
CCC must )e sus&ected0 A&()5 &4 <+AN Maclnt%re0s &osition )% contrast seems more a!in to t#at o/ &ostmodernists in t#e /ield o/ art and design, w#ere t#e distinguis#ing mar! o/ t#e sc#ool #as
)een /ound in a certain relation to t#e &ast Hrea&&ro&niation o/ traditional /orms o/ e(&ression, com)ined, #owe-er, wit# a #istonic4il !nowingness acKuired in t#e &assage t#roug#
modernit% @c/4 C#arles 3enc!s, Wh.it is &ostmodernism@5 *+E?, Academ% Editions, London, &4 l;lY
**4 &h(H5 &4 ,*E4
*54 $or t#is c#aractenisation o/ F&ositi-e0 and Fnegati-e0 li)ert%, c/4 ;saia# 1erlin, ]$sso conce&ts o/ li)ert%0, in #is $our :ssays on 6iberty5 O(/ord 8nisersit% Press, O(/ord4
*+?+4
*,4 AJ, &4 5,+4
*=4 $or t#is reading o/ 4epublic J;;, c/4 Luce lnigara%, -peculum of the 2ther FX oman5 transl4 2illian C4 2ill, Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+E>, &&4 5=, i/4N and /or a /uller reconstruction o/
t#e idea o/ masculinit% as transcendence, c/4 2enes ies e Llo%d, ,he (an o3 4eason: G(ale1 and Gfemale1 in Western philosophy5 8ni( ersit( o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E=4
*>4 Mar( and Engels, FMani/esto o/ t#e Communis@Part%0, in 'arl Mar(, ,he 4e.olutions of 1JJ: &olitical writin%s5 -ol4*, ed4 Da-id $ern)ac#, Penguin:L1, Harmondswont#,
:19
T
Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
*+<,, &4 <96 FConstant re-olutioniGing o/ t#e means o/ &roduction, uninterru&ted distur)ance o/ all social conditions, e-erlasting uncertaint% and agitation distinguis# t#e )ourgeois e&oc# /rom all
earlier ones4 All /i(ed, /ast-/roGen relations, wit# t#eir train o/ ancient and ( enera)le &reIudices and o&inions, are swe&t awa%, all new-/ormed ones )ecome antiKuated )e/ore t#e% can
ossi/%4 All t#at is solid melts into air, all t#at is #ol% is &ro/aned
Mars#all 1erman &ursues t#is anal%sis in de&t# in All ,hat is -olid (elts into Air: ,he e=perience of modernity5 Simon \ Sc#uster, ew Yor!, *+E5, c#4 54
*?4 $or a re-iew o/ t#e &ro)lems #ere, c/4 Alison M4 3aggar, $eminist &olitics and 7umaB8 Hature5 Rowman \ Allan#eld, Lan#am, MD, *+E,, c#4 =4 More &olemical discussions o/ t#e
s#ortcomings o/ ort#odo( Mar(ist a&&roac#es to t#e Fwoman Kuestion0 can )e /ound in C#ristine Del&#%, FT#e main enem%0, in #er )lose to 7ome: A materialist analysis of women1s
oppression @transl4 and ed4 Diana Leonard, Hutc#inson, London, *+E=A and in Heidi Hartmann, FT#e un#a&&% marriage o/ Mar(ism and /eminism6
Towards a more &rogressi-e union0, in L%dia Sargent @edA, ,he 0nhappy (arria%e of
(ar=ism and $eminism: A debate on class and patriarchy5 Pluto Press, London, *+E*4
*<4 See c#4 ! a)o-e4
*E4 4epublic J;;, >*+a)4
*+4 T#e e(&osure o/ t#is /antas% #as )een one o/ t#e concerns o/ /eminist writing on &ornogra&#%6 c/4 Susan 2ri//in, &orno%raphy and -ilence: )ulture1s re.en%e a%ainst nature5 Har&er \ Row,
ew Yor!, *+E*4
594 Faturalist or materialist06 t#ere e(ists in t#e t#eor% o/ !nowledge a s&ectrum o/ &ositions &rom&ted )% t#e /ailure o/ t#e Cartesian Kuest /or certaint%4 At one end o/ t#e s&ectrum
H t#e F&ositi-ist0 end, so to s&ea! H we #a-e, /or e(am&le, .4 J4 Cuine0s -ision o/ Fe&istemolog%, or somet#ing li!e it, sim&l% /all VingY into &lace as a c#a&ter o/ &s%c#olog% and #ence o/ natural science0,
and #is &rogrammatic statement t#at F.e are a/ter an understanding o/ science as an institution or &rocess in t#e world0 @c/4 FE&istemolog% naturaliGed0 in #is 2ntolo%ical 4elati.ity and
2ther :ssays5 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+?+, &&4 E5, E=AN at t#e ot#er, Fcritical0, end we #a-e a -ariet% o/ -iews w#ic# ta!e t#e latter &rogramme in a &olitical sense and
searc# out t#e #idden &ower relations underl%ing not onl% @naturalA science, )ut e-er%t#ing else to w#ic# t#e #onori/ic title o/ F!nowledge0 is assigned4 FE&istemic naturalism0 can /unction as
an um)rella term co-ering t#is w#ole s&ectrum o/ &ositionsN Fe&istemic materialism0 is &ro)a)l% )est reser-ed /or a su)set o/ t#em, namel% t#ose w#ic# see! to a&&l% t#e Mar(ist met#od o/
#istorical materialism to t#e &rocesses in Kuestion4 @1ut Mar(ism does not e(#aust t#e su)-ersi-e o&tions, w#ic# indeed can no longer )e summed u& wit#out residue under t#e #eading o/
FcritiKue0 H s-itness t#e wor! o/ ietGsc#e and $oucault4A
5*4 $or Peirce0s &osition, c/4 FHow to ma!e our ideas clear0, in #is )ollected &apers5 -ol4 J, Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+,=, &4 5?E6 Fall t#e /ollowers o/ science are animated
)% a c#eer/ul #o&e t#at t#e &rocess o/ in-estigation, i/ onl% &us#ed /ar enoug#, will gi-e one certain solution to eac# Kuestion to w#ic# t#e% a&&l% it4 ... T#is great #o&e is em)odied in t#e conce&tion o/ trut# and
realit%40
554 )riti>ue of &ure 4eason5 A?=E:1?<?4
5,4 'bid.5 A?==:1?<54
5=4 Plato, &haedo E+d4
"!. &()5 &4 ?>4
5?4 'bid.5 &4 >54
$en8inisn8 and &os tmodernis5n
5<4 'bid.5 &&4 ?>H?4 T#is t#eme is ec#oed )% Runt%0s account o/ t#e moti-e /orces o/ &oste&istemological discourse, w#ic# includes a re/erence to Findi-idual men o/ genius (s #o t#in! o/ somet#ing new0
A&h(H15 &4 5?=A4
5E4 &()5 &4 E*4
5+4 'bid.5 &4 <<N c/4 'ant, )riti>ue of Aesthetic 3ud%ement5 O5,4
,94 C/4 Perr% Anderson, FModernit% and re-olution0, Hew 6e9i 4e.ieu15 *==, **, H a &assage w#ic#, incidentall%, contains a use/ul correcti-e to t#e tendenc% to con/use eliminatin% contradiction wit#
suppressin% dt9iference. @$or a more e(tended re&l% to t#e c#arge t#at discourse aiming at @uni-ersalA trut# necessaril% see!s to Funi/% coerciscl% a multi&licit% o/ stand&oints0, c/4 Peter Dews, 6o%ics of
<isinte%ration: &o\tstru55 tur.il8st thou%ht and the claims of critical theory5 *+E<, &&4 559 i/4N t#e s-ords Kuoted a&&ear on &4 5554A
,*4 &()5 &4 ,+4 $or reasons o/ s&ace ; #a-e omitted an% discussion o/ L%otard0s cons&icuous di.er%ence /rom ietGsc#e in claiming t#at FIustice as a -alue is neit#er Outmoded nor sus&ect0 @&4 ??A4 ; do not
t#in! t#is need &re-ent us /rom getting to gri&s wit# #is oserall argument, since t#e idea t#at Iustice oug#t to )e sal-aged recei-es s0er% &er/unctor% attention in &() in com&arison wit# t#e
idea t#at uni-ersalit% oug#t to )e Iettisoncd4
,54 C/4 ietGsc#e, ,he /enealo%?1 of (orals5 Random House, e(- Yor!, *+?+ @#erea/ter /(?5 Essa% ;;, O*?4
,,4 /(5 Essa% ;ll, O5> @transl4 .alter 'au//mann, *+?+AN ,he /as1 -cu1nce5 Random House, ew Yor!, *+<= @#erea/ter CSA, O5?> @transl4 'aui/mann, *+<=A4
,=4 ,wili%ht of the 'dols5 FT#e &ro)lem o/ Socrates0, O? @transl4 R4 34 Hollingdale, *+?EA, Penguin, Harmondswort#4
,>4 FMan%0, not all6 o)-iousl% t#is conce&tion rides roug#s#od o-er t#e claims o/ a F/eminism o/ di//erence04 ; )elie-e t#at re/lection on se(ual di//erence can )e )ot# intellectuall% and &oliticall% ena)ling, )ut
incline ultimatel% towards t#e -iew t#at F2lori/ication o/ t#e /eminine c#aracter im&lies t#e #umiliation o/ all w#o )ear it0 @T#eodor Adorno, (inima (oralia5 *+<=, &4 +?A4 Howe-er, ;
cannot argue t#e &oint #ere4
,?4 C/4 /(5 bc. cit. @'au//mann, &4 *>=A6 FA &redominance o/ mandarins als-a%s means somet#ing is wrongN so do t#e ad-ent o/ democrac%0, international courts in &lace o/ war, eKual rig#ts /or
women, t#e religion o/ &it%, and w#ate-er ot#er s%m&toms o/ declining li/e t#ere are40
o-er against reniindets HT#is /eature o/ #is t#oug#t s#ould )e !e&t clearl% in -ies-
#owe-er -alid H t#at ietGsc#e is not a crude &ro&#et o/ aggression, nor #is Fwiii to &ower0 eKui-alent to )loodlust @c/4 2illian Rose, <ialectic of Hihilism: &oststru6 turalism and law5
1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E=, &&4 599 i/A4 Ho dou)t it was -ulgar o/ t#e ;talian $uturists to )a))le a)out Fwar, t#e sole #%giene 444F, #ut t#e /act remains t#at /or ietGsc#e it is, in t#e end, a sign o/ s&iritual
&o-ert% to regard war, inIur% and e(&loitation as detracting /rom t#e &er/ection o/ t#e world4
,<4 $4 ietGsc#e, :cce 7omo5 Random House, ess Yor!, *+?+, F.#% ; write suc# good )oo!s0, F!5 transl4 'au//mann6 FHas m% de/inition o/ lo-e )een #eardD ;t is t#e onl% one wort#%0 o/ a &#iloso&#%4 Lo-e H in
its means, wanN at )ottom, t#e deadls #atred oi/ t#e se(es4
,E4 CS, O,O0 transl4 'au//mannA4
,+4 )(5 Essa% ;;;, O*5 @tnansl4 'au//mannA4
=94 $4 ietGsc#e, <aybreak5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, Pre/ace, O= @transl4 Hollingdale, *+E5A4
:12 Sa"ina Lo(i"ond $eminism and &ostmodernisni
=*4 )-5 O,?5N and c/4 )(5 :ssay ''' ad fin.5 w#ere t#e statement t#at Fmoralit% will graduall% &eris# now0 re/ers to t#e same #istorical &ros&ect4
=54 C/4 $4 ietGsc#e, Keyond /ood and :.il5 Harmondswort#, Penguin, *+<,, O5,*H+4
=,4 ;n t#e neo-ietGsc#ean discourse o/ t#e &resent da%, t#e t#eme o/ F#ostilit% to /eminism0 is, not sur&risingl%, re&ressed4 1ut t#is re&ressed material #as a wa% o/ returning in conte(ts w#ere
t#e Enlig#tenment &roIect o/ legitimation is u& /or criticism4 An e(am&le is su&&lied )% Jincent Descom)es, e(&ounding t#e -iew0s o/ L%otard in (odern $rench &hilosophy5 transl4 L4 Scott-
$o( and 34 M4 Harding, Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E9, &4 *E56 Fin more general terms, no sooner do we )ecome aware t#at trut# is onl% t#e e(&reSsioAti o/ a will to trut# t#an ss0e
must /ace t#e /act t#at t#is ]trut#R )etra%s a timid reIection o/ t#e world in as muc# as it is not a ]true worldR @sta)le, ordered and IustA04 otice t#e taunt6 a timid reIection^ T#is is t#e same r#etoric )%
means o/ w#ic# ietGsc#e see!s to &ut t#e Enlig#tenment on t#e de/ensi-e H a r#etoric w#ic# associates t#e trut#-orientated #a)it o/ t#oug#t wit# Fcastration0 @in t#e &s%c#oanal%tic senseA4
==4 Certainl%, t#e idea o/ t#e outsider or Fnomad0 @t#e indi-idual w#o gets )%, morall% s&ea!ing, wit#out an% #ome )aseA #as its own &at#os, and e-en H in a rationalist conte(t
H its own Iusti/ication @we #a-e to den% oursel-es false com/orts in order not to )e di-erted /rom t#e Kuest /or true ones, i4e4 /or a )etter worldA4 1ut as t#e )adge o/ a sel/-constituting elite H a
ietGsc#ean Faristocrac% o/ t#e s&irit0 H it is merel% t#e /li& side o/ t#e )ourgeois order4 T#e nomad is t#e Fot#er0 o/ t#e relia)le &ater/amiliasN #e is t#e Funtamed0 male w#o #as esca&ed /rom
t#e tra& o/ domesticit% @c/4 2illes DeleuGe0s Fterri)le mot#ers, terri)le sisters and wi-es06 Hiet8sche and &hilosophy5 At#lone Press, London, transl4 Hug# Tomlinson, *+E,, &4 *E<A4 T#is cultural clic#e is
)eginning to attract some well-deser-ed /eminist criticism6 c/4 De)ora# Cameron and EliGa)et# $raGer, ,he 6ust to Lill: A feminist in.esti%ation of se=ual murder5 O(/ord, Polit% Press, *+E<, es&4 &&4 >5
H?+N *>>H?54 @1ar)ara E#renreic#0s ,he 7earts of (en: American dreams and the fli%ht from commitment5 ew Yor!, Dou)leda%, *+E,, also contains rele-ant material4A
!. &()5 &4 >=4
=?4 AV5 &4 5=54
=<4 ;t is sometimes suggested t#at t#is !ind o/ Flegitimation /rom wit#in0 could not ser-e to !ee& t#e Enlig#tenment &roIect in )eing, since its internalit% to t#e discourse on w#ic# it o&erates &re-ents it /rom )eing a
%enuine legitimation at all4 T#is seems to )e t#e reasoning o/ ;%otard, w#o also sa%s o/ @&ostmodernA science t#at it is Gincapable o/ legitimating itsel/, as s&eculation assumed t#at it VscienceY
could0 A&( )5 &4 =9, em&#asis addedA4 1ut t#is comment would )e entirel% out o/ &lace, were it not /or an @une(amined assum&tion t#at an% Flegitimation0 wort#%0 o/ t#e name reKuires access to an
absolutels1 transcendent standard o/ -alidit%, i4e4 to somet#ing e(em&t /rom t#e /inite and &ro-isional c#aracter attac#ing to all #uman discourse4 @A related assum&tion can )e seen at wor! in t#e attem&t to
discredit Enlig#tenment modernism )% attac#ing /etis#istiL ca&ital letters toA t#e regulati-e ideas it in-o!es6 FReason0, FTrut#0, etc4A
=E4 FPragmatism and &#iloso&#%0, in 1a%0nes4 #o#man and McCart#%, A31ter &hilosophy5 &&4 !!I+.
=+4 C/4 AV5 &4,94
>94 'bid.5 &4 5=>N em&#asis added4
:D8
>*4 And o/ course t#ose o/ socialism tooA, t#oug# it seems desira)le to streamline t#e argument #ere4
>54 C/4 Cameron and $naGen, ,he 6ust to Lill5 &4 *<>4 @;n its original conte(t t#is remar! re/ers to a F&luralism0 o/ se(ual &ractice4A
!#. AV5 &4 59*4
!. 'bid.5 &4 5,E4
!!. 'bid.5 &&4 ?EH+4
!+. 'bid.5 &4 5==4
!7. Aristotle, Hicomachean :thics5 ;, 5 @et#ics is a )ranc# o/ &oliticsA4
!J. AV5 &459,4
!*. C/4 Keyond /ood and :.il5 O5,+N ot#er rele-ant &assages are )-5 O,>? and ,u1il8%ht of the 'dols5 FE(&editions 444F, O,+4 Maclnt%re is o/ course aware o/ t#e contentiousness o/ #is all-t#ings-
considered &ortra%al o/ ietGsc#e as an Aufkldrer5 )ut decides to )raGen it out AAV5 &4 5=*AN #owe-er, in -iew o/ ietGsc#e0s clear &erce&tion o/ #is oss0n ss0or! as a logical de-elo&ment o/
t#e 'antian FcritiKue o/ reason0, ; am uncon-inced t#at Maclnt%re succeeds in locating an% /law in t#e sel/-consciousness o/ #is @ietGsc#e0sA te(ts4
As a &ostscri&t to t#e /oregoing discussion, ; can warml% endorse t#ese words o/ Se%la 1en#a)i) and Drucilla Cornell in t#eir ;ntroduction to 1en#a)i) and Cornell @edsA,
$eminism as )riti>ue5 *+E<, &&4 *5H*,6 FDes&ite man% common elements in t#eir critiKue o/ t#e li)eral conce&t o/ t#e sel/, /eminist and communitanian &ers&ecti( es di//er6
w#ereas communitanians em&#asiGe t#e situatedness o/ t#e disem)edded sel/ in a networ! o/ relations and narrati-es, /eminists also )egin wit# t#e situated sel/ )ut -iew t#e
rene%otiation o/ our &s%c#ose(ual identities, and t#eir autonomous reconstitution )s indi-iduals as essential to women0s and #uman li)eration40
?94 C/4 /or e(am&le De)ora# Cameron, $eminism and 6in%uistic ,heory5 Macmillan, London, *+E>, c#4 <N Ton; Moi, -e=ual/ ,e=tual &olitics: $eminist literary theory5 *+E>, &&4 ++ i/4N
3acKueline Rose, -e=uality in the $ield of Vision5 Jerso, ;ondon, *+E?, es&4 ;ntroductionN C#ris .eedon, $eminist &ractice and &oststructuralist ,heory5 1lac!s-ell, O(/ord, *+E<, c)s
=,>4
?*4 $or a non-/eminist statement o/ t#e case against F&olitical correctness0 in t#e s&#ere o/ taste, c/4 Ro)ert Elms in Hew -ocialist5 Ma% *+E?4 Curiousl%, sonse o/ Elms0s Fdesigner
socialist0 claims in t#is article #a-e a -er% Platonist ring @Ft#ere is no di( ide )etween /orm and content, t#e% are )ot# a re/lection o/ eac# ot#er4 2ood t#ings loo! good 444F B #ut in #is mout# t#ese
claims are /ar /rom )earing a nationalist meaning, since Elms assumes, in de/iance o/ an% FPlatonist0 tradition, t#at s-#at looks %ood is more !now a)le t#an ss0#at is %ood H t#at, in /act,
a&&earances outweig# t#eor% in t#e ma!ing o/ &olitical -alue-I udgements4
?54 EliGa)et# .ilson, Adorned in <reams5 Jirago, London, *+E>, &4 5==4 otice t#at m #er c#a&ter on F$eminism and /as#ion0 .ilson does not limit #ersel/ to a sim&le critiKue o/
&uritanism, )ut closes s-it# a strong &rescni&tis0e message6 FT#e &rogressi-e &roIect is not to searc# /or some aest#eticall% &leasing /orm o/ utilitarian dress4 ton t#at s-ould #e to a)andon t#e
mediumN rat#er s-e should use dress to e(&ress and e(&lore our more daring as&irations0 @&4 5=<N em&#asis addedA4
?,4 FPermitted &leasures0, in Women1s 4e.iew5 August *+E? @order o/ e(cer&ts re-ersed
?=4 C/4 Cat#anine A4 Mac'innon0s descri&tion o/ se(ism as Fa &olitical ineKualit% t#at is
;
:1: Sa"ina Lo(i"ond
se(uall% enIo%ed, i/ uneKuall% so0 @in #en $eminism 0nmodified: <iscourses on life and law5 Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, (A5 *+E<, &4 <A4
?>4 Moore @FPennitted &leasures0A tells us t#at F$emininit% is not indeli)l% stam&ed on to us, )ut continuall%0 in a &rocess o/ re-creating itsel/40 1ut t#is does not deter #er /rom writing o/ Ft#e
earl% se-enties, Vw#enY some s-omen were des&eratel%0 tr%ing to #a-e t#e rig#t !ind o/ se(ual /antas% t#at didn0t actuall% in-ols0e an% o/ t#e t#ings t#at ma!e se( e(citing04 Des&ite t#e
&la%/ul tone, t#ese words clearl%0 im&l% t#at we know what it is t#at Fma!es se( e(citing04 .ell, do w0e !now0D ;t is too eas% to sa% t#at i/ %ou are interested in Fse(0 t#en %ou can0t #el&
!nowing4 On one les0el t#at is no dou)t trueN )ut strategicall%, a more /ruit/ul &rinci&le /or /eminists @and ot#er o&&onents o/ &atriarc#%A would )e to assume t#at we still #a-e e-er%t#ing to
learn4
??4 T#ese are t#e &ossi)ilities ; once tried to ca&ture in terms o/ Cuine0s notion o/ a F&ull toward o)Iecti-it%06 w#at t#is &#rase suggests is t#at we can &ull t#e ot#er wa%, i4e4 t#at t#ere can )e a
conscious, &oliticall% moti-ated resistance to t#e &rocesses o/ socialisation @c/4 Sa)ina Lo-i#ond, 4ealism and ima%ination in :thics5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E,, &&4 >E if.5 *+=A4
?<4 Terr% Eagleton0s words a)out t#e Fc#aracteristic &ost-structuralist )lend o/ &essimism and eu&#oria0 @FCa&italism, modernism and &ostmodernism0, ?=A seem -er% muc# to t#e &oint as a
comment on t#e &olitics o/ Fcre-ices0 and Fmoments04
?E4 C/4 O= o/ lnis Marion Young, F;m&artialit% and t#e ci-il &u)lic6 Some im&lications o/ /eminist critiKues o/ moral and &olitical t#eor%R in S4 1en#a)i) and D4 Cornell @edsA, $eminism as
)riti>ue5 Polit%, O(/ord, *+E<4 As s#ould )e clear )% now, ; am un&ersuaded )% t#e -iew o/ FEnlig#tenment0 w#ic# &rom&ts Young0s statement t#at Fs-e cannot en-ision suc# a renewal o/
&u)lic li/e as a reco-er% o/ Enlig#tenment ideals0 @&4 <,A4
?+4 T#at is, it does not constitute an argument against concei-ing o/ /eminism as essentiall% a single mo-ement @)ecause constituted )% a single aim H t#e aim o/ ending se(ual o&&ressionA4
89 w -ocial )riticism without &hilosophy.^ An encounter
between feminism and
postmodernism
Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son
;
'
$eminism and &ostmodernism #a-e emerged as two o/ t#e most im&ortant &olitical-cultural currents o/ t#e last decade4 So /ar, #owe-er, t#e% #a-e !e&t an uneas% distance /rom one anot#er4
;ndeed, so great #as )een t#eir mutual wariness t#at t#ere #a-e )een remar!a)l% /ew e(tended discussions o/ t#e relations )etween t#em @e(ce&tions are6 $la(, *+E?N Harding, *+E?a, *+E?)N
Harawa%, *+E,N 3ardine, *+E>N L%otard, *+<EN Owens, *+E,A4
;nitial reticences aside, t#ere are good reasons /or e(&loring t#e relations )etween /eminism and &ostmodernism4 1ot# #a-e o//ered dee& and /ar-reac#ing criticisms o/ t#e Finstitution o/
&#iloso&#%04 1ot# #a-e ela)orated critical &ers&ecti-es on t#e relation o/ &#iloso&#% to t#e larger culture4 And, most central to t#e concerns o/ t#is essa%, )ot# #a-e soug#t to de-elo& new
&aradigms o/ social criticism w#ic# doA not rel% on traditional &#iloso&#ical under&innings4 Ot#er di//erences notwit#standing, one 4 could sa% t#at, during t#e last decade, /eminists and
&ostmodernists #a-e wor!ed inde&endentl% on a common ne(us o/ &ro)lems6 t#e% #a-e tried to ret#in! t#e relation )etween &#iloso&#% and social criticism so as to de-elo& &aradigms o/ Fcriticism
wit#out &#iloso&#%04
On t#e ot#er #and, t#e twoA tendencies #a-e &roceeded, so to s&ea!, /rom o&&osite directions Postmodernists #a-e /ocused &rimaril% on t#e &#iloso&#% side o/ t#e &ro)lem4 T#e% #a-e )egun
)% ela)orating anti-/oundational meta&#iloso&#ical &ers&ecti-es and /rom t#ere #a-e gone to toA draw conclusions a)out t#e s#a&e and c#aracter o/ social criticism4 $or /eminists, on t#e ot#er
#and, t#e Kuestion o/ &#iloso&#% #as alwa%s )een su)ordinate to an interest in social criticism4 So t#e% #a-e )egun )% de-elo&ing critical &olitical &ers&ecti(0es and /rom t#ere #a-e gone on to draw
conclusions a)out t#e status o/ &#iloso&#%4 As a result o/ t#is di//erence in em&#asis and direction, t#e two tendencies #a-e ended u& wit# com&lementar% strengt#s and wea!nesses4
Postmodernists o//er so&#isticated and &ersuasi-e
$rom ,heory5 )ulture and -ociety5 !5 "I# @*+EEA, ,<,H+=4
:1$
:1< Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son -ocial )riticism without &hilosophy
criticisms o/ /oundationalism and essentialism, )ut t#eir conce&tions o/ social criticism tend to )e anaemic4 $eminists o//er ro)ust conce&tions o/ social criticism, )ut t#e% tend, at times, to la&se
into /oundationalism and essentialism4
T#us, eac# o/ t#e two &ers&ecti-es suggests some im&ortant criticisms o/ t#e ot#er4 A &ostmodernist re/lection on /eminist t#eor% re-eals disa)ling -estiges o/ essentialism, w#ile a /eminist
re/lection on &ostmodernism re-eals androcentnism and &olitical nai-ete4
;t /ollows t#at an encounter )etween /eminism and &ostmodernism will initiall% )e a trading o/ criticisms4 1ut t#ere is no reason to su&&ose t#at t#is is w#ere matters must end4 ;n /act, eac#
o/ t#ese tendencies #as muc# to learn /rom t#e ot#erN eac# is in &ossession o/ -alua)le resources w#ic# can #el& remed% t#e de/iciencies o/ t#e ot#er4 T#us, t#e ultimate sta!e o/ an encounter
)etween /eminism and &ostmodernism is t#e &ros&ect o/ a &ers&ecti-e w#ic# integrates t#eir res&ecti-e strengt#s w#ile eliminating t#eir res&ecti-e wea!nesses4 ;t is t#e &ros&ect o/ a
&ostmodernist /eminism4
;n w#at /ollows, we aim to contri)ute to t#e de-elo&ment o/ suc# a &ers&ecti-e )% staging t#e initial, critical &#ase o/ t#e encounter4 ;n section *, we e(amine t#e wa%s in w#ic# one
e(em&lar% &ostmodernist, 3ean-$rancois L%otard, #as soug#t to deri-e new &aradigms o/ social criticism /rom a critiKue o/ t#e institution o/ &#iloso&#%4 .e argue t#at t#e conce&tion o/ social
criticism so deri-ed is too restricted to &ermit an adeKuate critical gras& o/ gender dominance and su)ordination4 .e identi/% some internal tensions in L%otard0s argumentsN and we suggest
some alternati-e /ormulations w#ic# could allow /or more ro)ust /orms o/ criticism wit#out sacri/icing t#e commitment to anti-/oundationalism4 ;n section 5, we e(amine some re&resentati-e
genres o/ /eminist social criticism4 .e argue t#at, in man% cases, /eminist critics continue tacitl% to rel% on t#e sorts o/ &#iloso&#ical under&innings w#ic# t#eir own commitments, li!e t#ose o/
&ostmodernists, oug#t, in &rinci&le, to rule out4 And we identi/% some &oints at w#ic# suc# under&innings could )e a)andoned wit#out an% sacri/ice o/ social-critical /orce4 $inall%, in a )rie/
conclusion, we consider t#e &ros&ects /or a &ostmodernist /eminism4 .e discuss some reKuirements w#ic# constrain t#e de-elo&ment o/ suc# a &ers&ecti-e and we identi/% some &ertinent
conce&tual resources and critical strategies4
I Post#odernis#
Postmodernists see!, inter alia5 to de-elo& conce&tions o/ social criticism w#ic# do not rel% on traditional &#iloso&#ical under&innings4 T#e t%&ical starting &oint /or t#eir e//orts is a re/lection
on t#e condition o/ &#iloso&#% toda%4 .riters li!e Ric#ard Rort% and 3ean-$rancois L%otard )egin )%0 arguing t#at P#iloso&#% wit# a ca&ital FP0 is no longer a -ia)le or credi)le enter&rise4
$rom #ere, t#e% go on to claim t#at &#iloso&#%, and, )% e(tension, t#eor% more generall%, can no longer /unction to %round &olitics and social criticism4 .it# t#e demise o/ /oundationalism
comes t#e demise o/ t#e -iew t#at casts &#iloso&#% in t#e role o/ found. F discourse .is-Q-.is
:1=
social criticism4 T#at Fmodern0 conce&tion must gi-e wa% to a new F&ostmodern0 one in w#ic# criticism /loats /ree o/ an% uni-ersalist t#eoretical ground4 o longer anc#ored &#iloso&#icall%, t#e
-er% s#a&e or c#aracter o/ social criticism c#angesN it )ecomes more &ragmatic, ad hoc5 conte(tual and local4 And wit# t#is c#ange comes a corres&onding c#ange in t#e social role and &olitical
/unction o/ intellectuals4
T#us, in t#e &ostmodern re/lection on t#e relations#i& )etween &#iloso&#%- and social criticism, t#e term F&#iloso&#%0 undergoes an e(&licit de-aluationN it is cut down to siGe, i/ not
eliminated altoget#er4 Yet, e-en as t#is de-aluation is argued e(&licitl%, t#e term F&#iloso&#%0 retains an im&licit structural &ri-ilege4 ;t is t#e c#anged condition o/ &#iloso&#% w#ic# determines
t#e c#anged c#aracters o/ social criticism and o/ engaged intellectual &ractice4 ;n t#e new &ostmodern eKuation, t#en, &#iloso&#% is t#e inde&endent -aria)le w#ile social criticism and &olitical
&ractice are de&endent -aria)les4 T#e -iew o/ t#eor% w#ic# emerges is not determined )% considering t#e needs o/ contem&orar% criticism and engagement, ;t is determined, rat#er, )%
considering t#e contem&orar% status o/ &#iloso&#%4 As we #o&e to s#ow, t#is wa% o/ &roceeding #as im&ortant conseKuences, not all o/ Fw#ic# are &ositi-e4 Among t#e results is a certain
underdescni&tion and &remature /oreclosure o/ &ossi)ilities /or social criticism and engaged intellectual &ractice4 T#is limitation o/ &ostmodern t#oug#t will )e a&&arent w#en we consider its
results in t#e lig#t o/ t#e needs o/ contem&orar% /eminist t#eor% and &ractice4
Let us consider as an e(am&le t#e &ostmodernism o/ 3ean-$rancois L%otard, since it is genuinel% e(em&lar% o/ t#e larger tendenc%4 L%otard is one o/ t#e /ew social t#in!ers widel% considered
&ostmodern w#o actuall% uses t#e termN indeed, it (-as #e #imsel/ w#o introduced it into current discussions o/ &#iloso&#%, &olitics, societ%0 and social t#eor%4 His )oo! ,he &ostmodern
)ondition #as )ecome t#e locus classicus /or contem&orar% de)ates, and it re/lects in an es&eciall% acute /orm t#e c#aracteristic concerns and tensions o/ t#e mo-ement @L%otard, *+E=aA4
$or L%otard, &ostmodernism designates a general condition o/ contem&orar%0 .estern ci-iliGation4 T#e &ostmodern condition is one in w#ic# Fgrand narrati-es o/ legitimation0 are no longer
credi)le4 1% Fgrand narrati-es0 #e means, in t#e /irst instance, o-erarc#ing &#iloso&#ies o/ #istor% li!e t#e Enlig#tenment stor% o/ t#e gradual )ut stead% &rogress o/ reason and /reedom, Hegel0s
dialectic o/ S&irit coming to !now itsel/, and, most im&ortantl%, Mar(0s drama o/ t#e /orward marc# o/ #uman &roducti-e ca&acities -ia class con/lict culminating in &roletarian re-olution4 $or
L%otard, t#ese Fmetanarrati-es0 instantiate a s&eci/icall% modern a&&roac# to t#e &ro)lem o/ legitimation4 Eac# situates /irst-order discursi-e &ractices o/ inKuir% and &olitics wit#in a )roader
totaliGing metadiscourse w#ic# legitimates t#em4 T#e metadiscourse narrates a stor% a)out t#e w#ole o/ #uman #istor% w#ic# &ur&orts to guarantee t#at t#e F&ragmatics0 o/ t#e modern sciences
and o/ modern &olitical &rocesses, t#at is, t#e norms and rules w#ic# go-ern t#ese &ractices, determining w#at counts as a (-arranted mo-e wit#in t#em, are t#emsel-es legitimate4 T#e stor%
guarantees t#at some sciences and some &oliticO#a-e t#e ri%ht &ragmatics and, so, are t#e ri%ht &ractices4
.e s#ould not )e misled )% L%otard0s /ocus on narrati-e &#iloso&#ies o/ #istor%04
:1@
Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son
;n #is conce&tion o/ legitimating metanarrati-e, t#e stress &ro&erl% )elongs on t#e Fmeta0 and not t#e Fnarrati-e04 $or w#at most interests #im a)out t#e Enlig#tenment, Hegelian and Mar(ist
stories is w#at t#e% s#are wit# ot#er, non-narrati-e /orms o/ &#iloso&#%4 Li!e a#istorical e&istemologies and moral t#eories, t#e% aim to s#ow t#at s&eci/ic /irst-order discursi-e &ractices are
well-/ormed and ca&a)le o/ %ielding true and Iust results4 FTrue0 and FIust0 #ere mean somet#ing more t#an results reac#ed )% ad#ering scru&ulousl% to t#e constituti-e rules o/ some gi-en
scienti/ic and &olitical games4 T#e% mean, rat#er, results w#ic# corres&ond to Trut# and 3ustice as t#e% reall% are in t#emsel-es inde&endentl% o/ contingent, #istorical, social &ractices4 T#us, in
L%otard0s -iew, a metanarrati-e is meta in a -er% strong sense4 ;t &ur&orts to )e a &ri-ileged discourse ca&a)le o/ situating, c#aracteriGing and e-aluating all ot#er discourses, )ut not itsel/
in/ected )% t#e #istonicit% and contingenc% w#ic# render /irst-order discourses &otentiall% distorted and in need o/ legitimaton4
;n ,he &ostmodern )ondition5 L%otard argues t#at metanarrati-es, w#et#er &#iloso&#ies o/ #istor% or non-narrati-e /oundational &#iloso&#ies, are merel% modern and dL&assL4 .e can no
longer )elie-e, #e claims, in t#e a-aila)ilit% o/ a &ri-ileged metadiscourse ca&a)le o/ ca&turing once and /or all t#e trut# o/ e-er% /irst-order discourse4 T#e claim to meta status does not stand
u&4 A so-called metadiscourse is in /act sim&l% one more discourse among ot#ers4 ;t /ollows /or L%otard t#at legitimation, )ot# e&istemic and &olitical, can no longer reside in &#iloso&#ical
metanarrati-es4 .#ere, t#en, #e as!s, does legitimation reside in t#e &ostmodern eraD
Muc# o/ ,he &us tmodern )ondition is de-oted to s!etc#ing an answer to t#is Kuestion4 T#e answer, in )rie/, is t#at in t#e &ostmodern era legitimation )ecomes &lural, local and immanent4
;n t#is era, t#ere will necessaril% )e man% discourses o/ legitimation dis&ersed among t#e &luralit% o/ /irst-order discursi-e &ractices4 $or e(am&le, scientists no longer loo! to &rescri&ti-e
&#iloso&#ies o/ science to warrant t#eir &rocedures o/ inKuir%4 Rat#er, t#e% t#emsel-es &ro)lematiGe, modi/% and warrant t#e constituti-e norms o/ t#eir own &ractice e-en as t#e% engage in it4
;nstead o/ #o-ering a)o-e, legitimation descends to t#e le-el o/ &ractice and )ecomes immanent in it4 T#ere are no s&ecial tri)unals set a&art /rom t#e sites w#ere inKuir% is &racticed4 Rat#er,
&ractitioners assume res&onsi)ilit% /or legitimiGing t#eir own &ractice4
L%otard intimates t#at somet#ing similar is or s#ould )e #a&&ening wit# res&ect to &olitical legitimation4 .e cannot #a-e and do not need a single, o-erarc#ing t#eor% o/ Iustice4 .#at is
reKuired, rat#er, is a FIustice o/ multi&licities0 @L%otard, l
+E
=aN see also6 L%otard and T#L)aud, *+E<N L%otard, *+E=)A4 .#at L%otand means )% t#is is not w#oll% clear4 On one le-el, #e can )e
read as o//ering a normati-e -ision in w#ic# t#e good societ% consists in a decentraliGed &luralit% o/ democratic, sel/-managing grou&s and institutions w#ose mem)ers &ro)lematiGe t#e norms
o/ t#eir &ractice and ta!e res&onsi)ilit% /or modi/%ing t#em as situations reKuire4 1ut &arado(icall%, on anot#er le-el, #e can )e read as ruling out t#e sort
$
-ocial )riticism without &hilosophy
:1B
o/ larger-scale, normati-e &olitical t#eoriGing w#ic#, /rom a Fmodern0 &ers&ecti-e at least, would )e reKuired to legitimate suc# a -ision4 ;n an% case, #is Iustice o/ multi&licities
conce&tion &recludes one /amiliar, and argua)l% essential, genre o/ &olitical t#eor%6 identi/ication and critiKue o/ macrostructures o/ ineKualit% and inIustice w#ic# cut across t#e
)oundaries se&arating relati-el%0 discrete &ractices and institutions4 T#ere is no &lace in L%otard0s uni-erse /or critiKue o/ &er-asi-e a(es o/ strati/ication, /or critiKue o/ )road-)ased
relations o/ dominance and su)ordination along lines li!e gender, race and class4
L%otard0s sus&icion o/ t#e large e(tends to #istorical narrati-e and social t#eor% as well4 Here, #is c#ie/ target is Mar(ism, t#e one metanarrati-e in $rance wit# enoug# lingering
credi)ilit% to )e wort# arguing against4 T#e &ro)lem wit# Mar(ism, in #is -iew, is two/old4 On t#e one #and, t#e Mar(ian stor% is too )ig, since it s&ans -irtuall% t#e w#ole o/ #uman
#istor%4 On t#e ot#er #and, t#e Mar(ian stor% is too t#eoretical, since it relies on a theory o/ social &ractice and social relations w#ic# claims to e=plain #istorical c#ange4 At one le-el,
L%otard sim&l% reIects t#e s&eci/ics o/ t#is t#eor%4 He claims t#at t#e Mar(ian conce&tion o/ &ractice as &roduction occludes t#e di-ersit% and &luralit% o/ #uman &ractices4 And t#e
Mar(ian conce&tion o/ ca&italist societ% as a totalit% tra-ersed )% one maIor di-ision and contradiction occludes t#e di-ersit% and &luralit% o/ contem&orar% societal di//erences and
o&&ositions4 1ut L%otard does not conclude t#at suc# de/iciencies can and s#ould )e remedied )% a )etter social t#eor%4 Rat#er, #e reIects t#e &roIect o/ social t#eor% tout court.
Once again, L%otard0s &osition s am)iguous, since #is reIection o/ social t#eor% de&ends on a t#eoretical &ers&ecti-e o/ sorts o/ its own4 He o//ers a F&ostmodern0 conce&tion o/
socialit% and social identit%, a conce&tion o/ w#at #e calls Ft#e social )ond04 .#at #olds a societ% toget#er, #e claims, is not a common consciousness or institutional su)structure4 Rat#er,
t#e social )ond is a wea-e o/ crisscrossing t#reads o/ discursi-e &ractices, no single one o/ w#ic# runs continuousl% t#roug#out t#e w#ole4 ;ndi-iduals are t#e nodes or F&osts0 w#ere suc#
&ractices intersect and, so, t#e% &artici&ate in man% simultaneousl%4 ;t /ollows t#at social identities are com&le( and #eterogeneous4 T#e% cannot )e ma&&ed onto one anot#er, nor onto
t#e social totalit%4 ;ndeed, strictl% s&ea!ing, t#ere is no social totalit% and a fortiori no &ossi)ilit% o/ a totaliGing social t#eor%4
T#us, L%otard insists t#at t#e /ield o/ t#e social is #eterogeneous and nontotaliGa)le4 As a result, #e rules out t#e sort o/ critical social t#eor% w#ic# em&lo%s general categories li!e
gender, race and class4 $rom #is &ers&ecti-e, suc# categories are too reducti-e o/ t#e com&le(it% o/ social identities to )e use/ul4 And t#ere is a&&arentl% not#ing to )e gained, in #is
-iew, )% situating an account o/ t#e /luidit% and di-ersit% of discursi-e &ractices in t#e conte(t o/ a critical anal%sis o/ large-scale institutions and social structures4
T#us, L%otard0s &ostmodern conce&tion o/ criticism wit#out &#iloso&#% rules out se-eral recogniGa)le genres o/ social criticism4O4 $rom t#e &remise t#at criticism
cannot )e grounded )% a /oundationalist &#iloso&#ical metanarrati-e, #e in/ers t#e
:29 Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son
-ocial )riticism without &hilosophy
illegitimac% o/ large #istorical stories, normati-e t#eories o/ Iustice and social-
t#eoretical accounts o/ macrostructures w#ic# institutionaliGe ineKualit%4 .#at, t#en, does &ostmodern social criticism loo! li!eD
L%otard tries to /as#ion some new genres o/ social criticism /rom t#e discursi-e
resources t#at remain4 C#ie/ among t#ese is smallis#, localiGed narrati-e4 He see!s
to -indicate suc# narrati-e against )ot# modern totaliGing metanarrati-e and t#e
scmentism t#at is #ostile to all narrati-e4 One genre o/ &ostmodern social criticism
t#en, consists in relati-el% discrete, local stories a)out t#e emergence, trans/ormation and disa&&earance o/ -arious discursi-e &ractices treated in isolation /rom one anot#er4 Suc# stories mig#t
resem)le t#ose told )% Mic#el $oucault, t#oug# wit#out t#e attem&ts to discern larger s%nc#ronic &atterns and connections t#at $oucault @*+<+A sometimes made4 And li!e Mic#ael .alGer
@*+E,A, L%otard seems to assume t#at &ractitioners would narrate suc# stories w#en see!ing toA &ersuade one anot#er to modi/% t#e &ragmatics or constituti-e norms o/ t#eir &ractice4
T#is genre o/ social criticism is not t#e w#ole &ostmodern stor%, #owe-er4 $or it casts critiKue as strictl% local, ad hoc and ameliorati-e, t#us su&&osing a &olitical diagnosis according to
w#ic# t#ere are not large-scale, s%stemic &ro)lems w#ic# resist local, ad hoc5 ameliorati-e initiati-es4 Yet L%otard recogniGes t#at &ostmodern societ% does contain at least one un/a-oura)le
structural tendenc% w#ic# reKuires a more coordinated res&onse4 T#is is t#e tendenc% to uni-ersaliGe instrumental reason, to su)Iect all discursi-e &ractices indiscriminatel% to t#e single criterion
o/ e//icienc% or F&er/ormati-it%04 ;n L%otard0s -iew, t#is t#reatens t#e autonom% and integrit% o/ science and &olitics, since t#ese &ractices are not &ro&erl% su)ordinated to &er/ormati-e
standards4 ;t would &er-ert and distort t#em, t#ere)% destro%ing t#e di-ersit% o/ discursi-e /orms4
T#us, e-en as #e argues e(&licitl% against it, L%otard &osits t#e need /or a genre o/ social criticism w#ic# transcends local mininarrati-e4 And des&ite #is strictures against large, totaliGing
stories, #e narrates a /airl% tall tale a)out a large-scale social trend4 Moreo-er, t#e logic o/ t#is stor%, and o/ t#e genre o/ criticism to w#ic# it )elongs, calls /or Iudgements, w#ic# are not strictl%
&ractice-immanent4 L%otard0s stor% &resu&&ose t#e legitimac% and integrit% o/ t#e scienti/ic and &olitical &ractices allegedl% t#reatened )% F&er/ormati-it%04 ;t su&&oses t#at one can distinguis#
c#anges or de-elo&ments w#ic# are internal to t#ese &ractices /rom e(ternall% induced distortions4 1ut t#is dri-es L%otard to ma!e normati-e Iudgements a)out t#e -alue and c#aracter o/ t#e
t#reatened &ractices4 T#ese Iudgements are not strictl% immanent in t#e &ractices Iudged4 Rat#er, t#e% are Fmeta&ractical04
T#us, L%otard0s -iew o/ &ostmodern social criticism is neit#er entirel% sel/-consistent not entirel% &ersuasi-e4 He goes too Kuic!l% /rom t#e &remise t#at P#iloso&#% cannot ground social
criticism to t#e conclusion t#at criticism itsel/ must )e local, ad hoc and non-t#eoretical4 As a result, #e t#rows out t#e )a)%0 o/ large #istorical narrati-e wit# t#e )at#water o/ &#iloso&#ical
metanarrati-e and t#e )a)% o/ social-t#eoretical anal%sis o/ large-scale ineKualities wit# t0ne )at#water o/ reducti-e Mar(ian class t#eor%4 Moreo-er, t#ese allegedl% il;cOtimate )a)ies do
:21
not in /act remain e(cluded4 T#e% return li!e t#e re&ressed wit#in t#e
-er% genres o/ &ostmodern social criticism wit# w#ic# L%otard intends
to re&lace t#em4
.e )egan t#is discussion )% noting t#at &ostmodernists orient t#eir
re/lections on t#e c#aracter o/ &ostmodern social criticism )% t#e
/alling star o/ /oundationalist &#iloso&#%4 T#e% &osit t#at, wit#
&#iloso&#% no longer a)le credi)l% to ground social criticism, criticism
itsel/ must )e local, ad hoc and unt#eoretical4 T#us, /rom t#e critiKue
o/ /oundationalism, t#e% in/er t#e illegitimac% o/ se-eral genres o/
social criticism4 $or L%otard, t#e illegitimate genres include large-scale
#istorical narrati-e and social-t#eoretical anal%ses o/ &er-asi-e
relations o/ dominance and su)ordination4
Su&&ose, #owe-er, one were to c#oose anot#er starting &oint /or
re/lecting on &ost/oundational social criticism4 Su&&ose one )egan, not
wit# t#e condition o/ P#iloso&#%, )ut wit# t#e nature o/ t#e social
o)Iect one wis#ed to criticiGe4 Su&&ose, /urt#er, t#at one de/ined t#at
o)Iect as t#e su)ordination o/ women to and )% men4 T#en, we su)mit,
it would )e a&&arent t#at man% o/ t#e genres reIected )%
&ostmodernists are necessar% /or social criticism4 $or a &#enomenon as
&er-asi-e and multi/aceted as male dominance sim&l% cannot )e
adeKuatel% gras&ed wit# t#e meagre critical resources to w#ic# t#e%
would limit us4 On t#e contrar%, e//ecti-e criticism o/ t#is &#enomenon
reKuires an arra% o/ di//erent met#ods and genres4 ;t reKuires as a
minimum large narrati-es a)out c#anges in social organiGation and
ideolog%, em&irical and social-t#eoretical anal%ses o/ macrostructures
and institutions, interactionist anal%ses o/ t#e micro-&olitics o/
e-er%da% li/e, critical#ermeneutical and institutional anal%ses o/
cultural &roduction, #istoricall% and culturall% s&eci/ic sociologies o/
gender T#e list could go on4
Clearl%, not all o/ t#ese a&&roac#es are local and Funt#eoretical04
1ut all are nonet#eless essential to /eminist social criticism4 Moreo-er,
all can, in &rinci&le, )e concei-ed in wa%s t#at do not ta!e us )ac! to
/oundationalism e-en t#oug#, as we argue in t#e ne(t section, man%
/eminists #a-e so /ar not w#oll% succeeded in a-oiding t#at tra&4
2 Fe#inis#
$eminists, li!e &ostmodernists, #a-e soug#t to de-elo& new &aradigms
o/ social criticism w#ic# do not rel% on traditional &#iloso&#ical
under&innings4 T#e% #a-e criticiGed modern /oundationalist
e&istemologies and moral and &olitical t#eories, e(&osing t#e
contingent, &artial and #istoricall% situated c#aracter o/ w#at #a-e
&assed in t#e mainstream /or necessar%, uni-ersal and a#istonical
trut#s4 And t#e% #a-e called into Kuestion t#e dominant &#iloso&#ical
&roIect o/ see!ing o)Iecti-it% in t#e guise o/ a F2od0s-e%e -iew0 w#ic#
transcends an% situation or &ers&ecti-e @see, /or e(am&le, Harding and
Hinti!!a, *+E,A4
Howe-er, i/ &ostmodernists #a-e )een drawn to suc# -iews )% a
concern wit# t#e
status o/ &#iloso&#%, /eminists #a-e )een led to t#em )% t#e demands
o/ &olitical
&ractice4 T#is &ractical interest #as sa-ed /eminist t#eor% /rom man% o/
t#e mista!es
a
:22
Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son
o/ &ostmodernism6 women w#ose t#eoriGing was to ser-e t#e struggle against se(ism were not a)out to a)andon &ower/ul &olitical tools merel% as a result o/ intramural de)ates in &ro/essional
&#iloso&#%4
Yet e-en as t#e im&erati-es o/ &olitical &ractice #a-e sa-ed /eminist t#eor% /rom one set o/ di//iculties, t#e% #a-e tended at times to incline it toward anot#er4 Practical im&erati-es #a-e led
some /eminists to ado&t modes o/ t#eoriGing w#ic# resem)le t#e sorts o/ &#iloso&#ical metannarati-e rig#tl% criticiGed )% &ostmodernists4 To )e sure, t#e /eminist t#eories we #a-e in mind #ere
are not F&ure0 metanarrati-esN t#e% are not a#istonical normati-e t#eories a)out t#e transcultural nature o/ rationalit% or Iustice4 Rat#er, t#e% are -er% large social t#eories, t#eories o/ #istor%,
societ%, culture and &s%c#olog% w#ic# claim, /or e(am&le, to identi/%-causes and:or constitute /eatures o/ se(ism t#at o&erate cross-culturall%4 T#us, t#ese social t#eories &ur&ort to )e em&irical
rat#er t#an &#iloso&#ical4 1ut, as we #o&e to s#ow, t#e% are actuall% FKuasi-metanarrati-es04 T#e% tacitl% &resu&&ose some commonl% #eld )ut unwarranted and essentialist assum&tions a)out
t#e nature o/ #uman )eings and t#e conditions /or social li/e4 ;n addition, t#e% assume met#ods and:or conce&ts w#ic# are unin/lected )% tem&oralit% or #istonicit% and w#ic# t#ere/ore /unction
de facto as &ermanent, neutral matrices /or inKuir%4 Suc# t#eories, t#en, s#are some o/ t#e essentialist and a#istorical /eatures o/ metanarratl-es6 t#e% are insu//icientl% attenti-e to #istorical and
cultural di-ersit%0N and t#e% /alsel% uni-ersaliGe /eatures o/ t#e t#eorist0s own era, societ%, culture, class, se(ual orientation, and:or et#nic or racial grou&4
On t#e ot#er #and, t#e &ractical e(igencies inclining /eminists to &roduce Kuasimetanarrati-es #a-e )% no means #eld undis&uted swa%4 Rat#er, t#e% #a-e #ad toA coe(ist, o/ten uneasil%, wit#
countere(igencies w#ic# #a-e wor!ed to o&&osite e//ect, /or e(am&le, &olitical &ressures to ac!nowledge di//erences among women4 ;n general, t#en, t#e recent #istor% o/ /eminist social t#eor%
re/lects a tug o/ war )etween /orces w#ic# #a-e encouraged and /orces w#ic# #a-e discouraged metanarrati-e-li!e modes o/ t#eoriGing4 .e can illustrate t#is d%namic )% loo!ing at a /ew
im&ortant turning &oints in t#is #istor%4
.#en, in t#e *+?9s, women in t#e new le/t )egan to e(tend &rior tal! a)out Fwomen0s rig#ts0 into t#e mOre encom&assing discussion o/ Fwomen0s li)eration0, t#e% encountered t#e /ear and
#ostilit% o/ t#eir male comrades and t#e use ot Mar(ist &olitical t#eor% as a su&&ort /or t#ese reactions4 Man% men o/ t#e new le/t argued t#at gender issues were secondar% )ecause su)suma)le
under more )asic modes o/ o&&ression, namel%, class and race4
;n res&onse to t#is &ractical-&olitical &ro)lem, radical /eminists suc# as S#ulamit# $irestone @*+<9A resorted to an ingenious tactical manoeu-re6 $irestone in-o!ed )iological di//erences
)etween women and men to e(&lain se(ism4 T#is ena)led #er to turn t#e ta)les on #er Mar(ist comrades )% claiming t#at gender con/lict was t#e most )asic /orm o/ #uman con/lict and t#e
source o/ all ot#er /orms, including class con/lict4 Here, $irestone drew on t#e &er-asi-e tendenc% wit#in modenmi culture to locate t#e roots o/ gender di//erences in )iolog%4 Her cou& was to
use )iologism to
T
-ocial )riticism u-1ithout &hilosophy
:28
esta)lis# t#e &rimac% o/ t#e struggle against male domination rat#er t#an to Iusti/% acKuiescence to it4
T#e tric!, o/ course, is &ro)lematic /rom a &ostmodernist &ers&ecti-e in t#at a&&eals to )iolog% to e(&lain social &#enomena are essentialist and monocausO,l T#e%0 are essentialist inso/ar as
t#e% &roIect onto all women and men Kualities w#ic# de-elo& under #istoricall% s&eci/ic social conditions4 T#e% are monocausal inso/ar as t#e% loo! to one set o/ c#aracteristics, suc# as
women0s &#%siolog% or men0s #ormones, to e(&lain women0s o&&ression in all cultures4 T#ese &ro)lems are onl% com&ounded w#en a&&eals to )iolog% are used in conIunction wit# t#e du)ious
claim t#at women0s o&&ression is t#e cause o/ all ot#er /orms o/ o&&ression4
Moreo-er, as Mar(ists and /eminist ant#ro&ologists )egan insisting in t#e earl% *+<9s, a&&eals to )iolog% do not allow us to understand t#e enormous di-ersit% o/ /orms w#ic# )ot# gender
and se(ism assume in di//erent cultures4 And in /act, it s-as not long )e/ore most /eminist social t#eorists came to a&&reciate t#at accounting /or t#e di-ersit% o/ t#e /orms o/ se(ism was as
im&ortant as accounting /or its de&t# and autonom%4 2a%le Ru)in @*+<>6 *?9A a&tl% descri)ed t#is dual reKuirement as t#e need to /ormulate t#eor% w#ic# could account /or t#e o&&ression o/
women in its Fendless -ariet% and monotonous similarit%04 How were /eminists to de-elo& a social t#eor% adeKuate to )ot# demandsD
One a&&roac# w#ic# seemed &romising was suggested )% Mic#elle Sim)alist Rosaldo and ot#er contri)utors to t#e in/luential *+<= ant#ro&olog% collection Woman5 )ulture and -ociety.
T#e% argued t#at common to all !nown societies was some t%&e o/ se&aration )etween a Fdomestic s&#ere0 and a F&u)lic s&#ere0, t#e /ormer associated wit# women and t#e latter wit# men4
1ecause in most societies to date women #a-e s&ent a good &art o/ t#eir li-es )earing and raising c#ildren, t#eir li-es #a-e )een more )ound to Ft#e domestic s&#ere04 Men, on t#e ot#er #and,
#a-e #ad )ot# t#e time and t#e mo)ilit% to engage in t#ose out-o/-t#e-#ome acti-ities w#ic# generate &olitical structures4 T#us, as Rosaldo @*+<=A argued, w#ile in man% societies women
&ossess some or e-en a great deal o/ &ower, women s &ower is alwa%s -iewed as illegitimate, disru&ti-e and wit#out aut#orit%4
T#is a&&roac# seemed to allow /or )ot# di-ersit% and u)iKuit% in t#e mani/estations o/ se(ism4 A -er% general identi/ication o/ women wit# t#e domestic and o/ men wit# t#e e(tra-domestic
could accommodate a great deal o/ cultural -ariation )ot# in social structures and in gender roles4 At t#e same time, it could ma!e com&re#ensi)le t#e a&&arent u)iKuit% o/ t#e assum&tion o/
women0s in/eriorit% a)o-e and )e%ond suc# -ariation4 T#is #%&ot#esis was also com&ati)le wit# t#e idea t#at t#e e(tent o/ women0s o&&ression di//ered in di//erent societies4 ;t could e(&lain
suc# di//erences )% correlating t#e e(tent o/ gender ineKualit% in a societ% wit# t#e e(tent and rigidit% o/ t#e se&aration )etween its domestic and &u)lic s&#eres4 ;n s#ort, t#e domestic:&u)lic
t#eorists seemed to #a-e generated an e(&lanation ca&a)le o/ satis/%ing a -ariet% o/ con/licting demands4
Howe-er, t#is e(&lanation turned out to )e &ro)lematic in wa%s reminiscent o/ $irestone0s account4 Alt#oug# t#e t#eor% /ocused on di//erences )etween men0s and
:2:
Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son
women0s s&#eres o/ acti-it% rat#er t#an on di//erences )etween men0s and women0s )iolog%, it was essentialist and monocausal nonet#eless4 ;t &osited t#e e(istence o/ a domestic s&#ere0
in all societies and t#ere)% assumed t#at women0s acti-ities were )asicall% similar in content and signi/icance across cultures4 @An analogous assum&tion a)out men0s
acti-ities la% )e#ind t#e &ostulation o/ a uni-ersal F&u)lic s&#ere04A ;n e//ect, t#e t#eor% /alsel% generaliGed to all societies a #istoricall% s&eci/ic conIunction o/ &ro&erties6
women0s res&onsi)ilit% /or earl% c#ild-rearing, women0s tendenc% to s&end more time in t#e geogra&#ical s&ace o/ t#e #ome, women0s lesser &artici&ation in t#e a//airs o/ t#e
communit%, a cultural ascri&tion o/ tri-ialit% to domestic wor!, and a cultural ascri&tion o/ in/eriorit% to women4 T#e t#eor% t#us /ailed to a&&reciate t#at, w#ile eac#
indi-idual &ro&ert% ma% )e true o/ man% societies, t#e conIunction is not true o/ most4 5
One source o/ di//icult% in t#ese earl% /eminist social t#eories was t#e &resum&tion o/ an o-erl% grandiose and totaliGing conce&tion o/ t#eor%4 T#eor% was understood as t#e searc#
/or t#e one !e% /actor w#ic# would e(&lain se(ism cross-culturall% and illuminate all o/ social li/e4 ;n t#is sense, to t#eoriGe was )% de/inition to &roduce a Kuasi-metanarrati-e4
Since t#e late *+<9s, /eminist social t#eorists #a-e largel% ceased s&ea!ing o/ )iological determinants or a cross-cultural domestic:&u)lic se&aration4 Man%, moreo-er, #a-e
gi-en u& t#e assum&tion o/ monocausalit%4 e-ert#eless, some /eminist social t#eorists #a-e continued im&licitl% to su&&ose a Kuasi-metanarrati-e conce&tion o/ t#eor%4
T#e% #a-e continued to t#eoriGe in terms o/ a &utati-el%0 unitar%, &rimar%, culturall% uni-ersal t%&e o/ acti-it% associated wit# women, generall% an acti-it% concei-ed as
Fdomestic0 and located in Ft#e /amil%04
One in/luential e(am&le is t#e anal%sis o/ Fmot#ering0 de-elo&ed )% anc% C#odorow @*+<EA4 Setting #ersel/ to e(&lain t#e internal, &s%c#ological, d%namics w#ic# #a-e
led man% women willingl% to re&roduce social di-isions associated wit# /emale in/eriorit%, C#odorow &osited a cross-cultural acti-it%, mot#ering, as t#e rele-ant o)Iect o/
in-estigation4 Her Kuestion t#us )ecame6 #ow is mot#ering as a /emale-associated acti-it% re&roduced o-er timeD How does mot#ering &roduce a new generation o/ women
wit# t#e &s%c#ological inclination to mot#er and a new generation o/ men not so inclinedD T#e answer s#e o//ered was in terms o/ Fgender identit%06 /emale mot#ering &roduces
women w#ose dee& sense o/ sel/ is Frelational0 and men w#ose dee& sense o/ sel/ is not4
C#odorow0s t#eor% #as struc! man% /eminists as a &ersuasi-e account o/ some a&&arentl% o)ser-a)le &s%c#ic di//erences )etween men and women4 Yet t#e t#eor% #as clear
metanarrati-e o-ertones4 ;t &osits t#e e(istence o/ a single acti-it%-, Fmot#ering0, w#ic#, w#ile di//ering in s&eci/ics in di//erent societies, ne-ert#eless constitutes enoug# o/ a
natural !ind to warrant one la)el4 ;t sti&ulates t#at t#is )asicall% unitar% acti-it% gi-es rise to two distinct sorts o/ dee& sel-es, one relati-el% common across cultures to
women, t#e ot#er relati-el% common across cultures to men4 And it claims t#at t#e di//erence t#us generated )etween F/eminine and masculine gender identit%0 causes a -ariet% o/
su&&osedl% \oss-cultural social
$
-ocial )riticism without &hilosophy
:2$
&#enomena, including t#e continuation o/ /emale mot#ering, male contem&t /or women and &ro)lems in #eterose(ual relations#i&s4
$rom a &ostmodern &ers&ecti-e, all o/ t#ese assum&tions are &ro)lematic )ecause essentialist4 1ut t#e second one, concerning Fgender identit%0, warrants s&ecial scrutin%, gi-en its &olitical
im&lications4 Consider t#at C#odorow0s use o/ t#e notion o/ gender identit% &resu&&oses t#ree maIor &remises4 One is t#e &s%c#oanal%tic &remise t#at e-er%one #as a dee& sense o/ sel/ w#ic# is
constituted in earl%0 c#ild#ood t#roug# one0s interactions (-it# one0s &rimar% &arent and w#ic# remains relati-el% constant t#erea/ter4 Anot#er is t#e &remise t#at t#is Fdee& sel/0 di//ers
signi/icantl%0 /or men and /or women )ut is roug#l% similar among women, on t#e one #and, and among men, on t#e ot#er #and, )ot# across cultures and wit#in cultures across lines o/ class,
race and et#nicit%4 T#e t#ird &remise is t#at t#is dee& sel/ colours e-er%t#ing one doesN t#ere are no actions, #owe-er tri-ial, w#ic# do not )ear traces o/ one0s masculine or /eminine gender
identit%4
One can a&&reciate t#e &olitical e(igencies w#ic# made t#is conIunction o/ &remises attracti-e4 ;t ga-e sc#olarl% su)stance to t#e idea o/ t#e &er-asi-eness o/ se(ism4 ;/ masculinit% and
/emininit% constitute our )asic and e-er-&resent sense o/ sel/, t#en it is not sur&rising t#at t#e mani/estations o/ se(ism are s%stemic4 Moreo-er, man% /eminists #ad alread% sensed t#at t#e
conce&t o/ Fse(-role socialiGation0, an idea C#odorow e(&licitl% criticiGed, ignored t#e de&t# and intracta)ilit% o/ male dominance4 1% im&l%ing t#at measures suc# as c#anging images in sc#ool
te(t)oo!s or allowing )o%s to &la% wit# dolls would )e su//icient to )ring a)out eKualit% )etween t#e se(es, t#is conce&t seemed to tri-ialiGe and co-o&t t#e message o/ /eminism4 $inall%,
C#odorow0s de&t#-&s%c#ological a&&roac# ga-e a sc#olarl% sanction to t#e idea o/ sister#ood4 ;t seemed to legitimate t#e claim t#at t#e ties w#ic# )ind women are dee& and
su)stanti-el% )ased4
eedless to sa%, we #a-e no wis# to Kuarrel wit# t#e claim o/ t#e de&t# and &er-asi-eness o/ se(ism, nor wit# t#e idea o/ sister#ood4 1ut we do wis# to c#allenge C#odorow0s wa% o/
legitimating t#em4 T#e idea o/ a cross-cultural, dee& sense o/ sel/, s&eci/ied di//erentl% /or women and men, )ecomes &ro)lematic w#en gi-en an% s&eci/ic content4 C#odorow states t#at women
e-er%w#ere di//er /rom men in t#eir greater concern wit# Frelational interaction04 1ut w#at does s#e mean )% t#is termD Certainl% not an% and e-er% !ind o/ #uman interaction, since men #a-e
o/ten )een more concerned t#an women wit# some !inds o/ interactions, /or e(am&le, t#ose w#ic# #a-e to do wit# t#e aggrandiGement o/ &ower and wealt#4 O/ course, it is true t#at man%
women in modern .estern societies #a-e )een e(&ected to e(#i)it strong concern wit# t#ose t%&es o/ interactions associated wit# intimac%, /riends#i& and lo-e, interactions w#ic# dominate one
meaning o/ t#e late-twentiet#-centur% conce&t o/ Frelations#i&04 1ut surel% t#is meaning &resu&&oses a notion o/ &ri-ate li/e s&eci/ic to modern .estern societies o/ t#e last two centuries4 ;s it
&ossi)le t#at C#odorow0s t#eor% rests on an eKui-ocation on t#e term Frelations#i&0D
,
EKuall% trou)ling are t#e a&onias t#is t#eor% ge0Onerates /or &olitical &ractice4 .#ile Fgender identit%0 gi-es su)stance to t#e idea o/ sister#ood, it does so at t#e cost o/
:2< Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son -ocial )riticism without &hilosophy :2=
re&ressing di//erences among sisters4 Alt#oug# t#e t#eor% allows /or some di//erences among women o/ di//erent classes, races, se(ual orientations and et#nic grou&s, it construes t#ese as
su)sidiar% to more )asic similarities4 1ut it is &recisel% as a conseKuence o/ t#e reKuest to understand suc# di//erences as secondar% t#at man% women #a-e denied an allegiance to
/eminism4
.e #a-e dwelt at lengt# on C#odorow )ecause o/ t#e great in/luence #er wor! #as enIo%ed4 1ut s#e is not t#e onl% recent /eminist social t#eorist w#o #as constructed a Kuasi-metanarrati-e
around a &utati-el% cross-cultural /emale-associated acti-it%4 On t#e contrar%, t#eorists li!e Ann $erguson and anc% $ol)re @*+E*A, anc% Hartsoc! @*+E,A and Cat#arine Mac'innon @*+E5A
#a-e done somet#ing analogous wit# Fse(-a//ecti-e &roduction0, Fre&roduction0 and Fse(ualit%0 res&ecti-el%4 Eac# claims to #a-e identi/ied a )asic !ind o/ #uman &ractice /ound in all societies
w#ic# #as cross-cultural e(&lanator% &ower4 ;n eac# case, t#e &ractice in Kuestion is associated wit# a )iological or Kuasi-)iological need and is construed as /unctionall%
necessar% to t#e re&roduction o/ societ%4 /t is not t#e sort o/ t#ing, t#en, w#ose #istorical origins need )e in-estigated4
T#e di//icult% #ere is t#at categories li!e se(ualit%, mot#ering, re&roduction and se(-a//ecti-e &roduction grou& toget#er &#enomena w#ic# are not necessaril% conIoined in
all societies, w#ile se&arating o// /rom one anot#er &#enomena w#ic# are not necessaril% se&arated4 As a matter o/ /act, it is dou)t/ul w#et#er t#ese categories #a-e an% determinate
cross-cultural content4 T#us, /or a t#eorist to use suc# categories to construct a uni-ersalistic social t#eor% is to ris! &roIecting t#e sociall% dominant conIunctions and dis&ersions o/ #er own
societ% onto ot#ers, t#ere)% distorting im&ortant /eatures o/ )ot#4 Social t#eorists would do )etter /irst to construct genealogies o/ t#e cate%ories o/ se(ualit%, re&roduction and mot#ering
)e/ore assuming t#eir uni-ersal signi/icance4
Since around *+E9, man% /eminist sc#olars #a-e come to a)andon t#e &roIect o/ grand social t#eor%4 T#e% #a-e sto&&ed loo!ing /or the causes o/ se(ism and #a-e turned to more concrete
inKuir% wit# more limited aims4 One reason /or t#is s#i/t is t#e growing legitimac% o/ /eminist sc#olars#i&4 T#e institutionaliGation o/ .omen0s Studies in t#e 8S #as meant a dramatic increase
in t#e siGe o/ t#e communit% o/ /eminist inKuiries, a muc# greater di-ision o/ sc#olarl% la)or and a large and growing /und o/ concrete in/ormation4 As a result, /eminist sc#olars #a-e come to
regard t#is enter&rise more collecti-el%, more li!e a &uGGle w#ose -arious &ieces are )eing /illed in )% man% di//erent &eo&le t#an a construction to )e com&leted )% a single grand t#eoretical
stro!e4 ;n s#ort, /eminist sc#olars#i& #as attained its maturit%4
E-en in t#is &#ase, #owe-er, traces o/ %out#/ul Kuasi-metanarrati-es remain4 Some t#eorists w#o #a-e ceased loo!ing /or the causes o/ se(ism still rel% oil essentialist categories li!e Fgender
identit%04 T#is is es&eciall% true o/ t#ose sc#olars w#o #a-e soug#t to de-elo& Fg%nocentric0 alternati-es to mainstream androcenti0iC &ers&ecti-es, )ut #a-e not /ull% a)andoned t#e uni-ersalist
&retensions o/ t#e latter4
Consider, as an e(am&le, t#e wor! o/ Carol 2illigan @*+E5A4 8nli!e most o/ t#e t#eorists we #a-e considered so /ar, 2illigan #as not soug#t to - -(&lain t#e origins
or nature o/ cross-cultural se(ism4 Rat#er, s#e set #ersel/ t#e more limited tas! o/ e(&osing and redressing androcentric )ias in t#e model o/ moral de-elo&ment o/ &s%c#ologist
Lawrence 'o#l)erg4 T#us, s#e argued t#at it is illegitimate to e-aluate t#e moral de-elo&ment o/ women and girls )% re/erence to a standard drawn e(clusi-el% /rom t#e
e(&erience o/ men and )o%s4 And s#e &ro&osed to e(amine women0s moral discourse on its own terms in order to unco-er its immanent standards o/ adeKuac%4
2illigan0s wor! #as )een rig#tl% regarded as im&ortant and inno-ati-e4 ;t c#allenged mainstream &s%c#olog%0s &ersistent occlusion o/ women0s li-es and e(&eriences and its insistent
)ut /alse claims to uni-ersalit%4 Yet inso/ar as 2illigan0s c#allenge in-ol-ed t#e construction o/ an alternati-e F/eminine0 model o/ moral de-elo&ment, #er &osition was
am)iguous4 On t#e one #and, )% &ro-iding a countere(am&le to 'o#l)erg0s model, s#e cast dou)t on t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ an% single uni-ersalist de-elo&mental sc#ema4 On t#e
ot#er #and, )% constructing a /emale countermodel, s#e in-ited t#e same c#arge o/ /alse generaliGation s#e #ad #ersel/ raised against 'o#l)erg, t#oug# now /rom ot#er
&ers&ecti-es suc# as class, se(ual orientation, race and et#nicit%4 2illigan0s @*+E56 5A disclaimers notwit#standing, to t#e e(tent t#at s#e descri)ed women0s moral de-elo&ment in
terms o/ a di//erent -oiceN to t#e e(tent t#at s#e did not s&eci/% w#ic# women, under w#ic# s&eci/ic #istorical circumstances #a-e s&o!en wit# t#e -oice in KuestionN and to t#e
e(tent t#at s#e grounded #er anal%sis in t#e e(&licitl% cross-cultural /ramewor! o/ anc% C#odorow, #er model remained essentialist4 /t &er&etuated in a newer, more localiGed /as#ion
traces o/ &re-ious, more grandiose Kuasi-metanarrati-es4
T#us, -estiges o/ essentialism #a-e continued to &lague /eminist sc#olars#i& e-en des&ite t#e decline o/ grand t#eoriGing4 ;n man% cases, including 2illigan0s, t#is
re&resents t#e continuing su)terranean in/luence o/ t#ose -er% mainstream modes o/ t#oug#t and inKuir% wit# w#ic# /eminists #a-e wis#ed to )rea!4
On t#e ot#er #and, t#e &ractice o/ /eminist &olitics in t#e *+E9s #as generated a new set o/ &ressures w#ic# #a-e wor!ed against metanarrati-es4 ;n recent %ears, &oor
and wor!ing-class women, women o/ color and les)ians #a-e /inall% won a wider #earing /or t#eir o)Iections to /eminist t#eories w#ic# /ail to illuminate t#eir li-es and address
t#eir &ro)lems4 T#e% #a-e e(&osed t#e earlier Kuasimetanarrati-es, wit# t#eir assum&tions o/ uni-ersal /emale de&endence and con/inement to Ft#e domestic s&#ere0, as /alse
e(tra&olations /rom t#e e(&erience o/ t#e w#ite, middle-class, #eterose(ual women w#o dominated t#e )eginnings o/ t#e second wa-e4 $or e(am&le, writers li!e 1ell Hoo!s @*+E=A, 2loria
3ose&# @*+E*A, Audre Lord @*+E*A, Maria Lugones and EliGa)et# S&elman @*+E,N *+E9H*A #a-e unmas!ed t#e im&licit re/erence to w#ite Anglo women in man% classic /eminist te(tsN
li!ewise, Adrienne Ric# @*+E9A and Maril%n $r%e @*+E,A #a-e e(&osed t#e
#eterose(ist )ias o/ muc# mainstream /eminist t#eor%4 T#us, as t#e class, se(ual, racial and et#nic awareness o/ t#e mo-ement #as altered, so #as t#e &re/erred conce&tion o/ t#eor%4 ;t #as
)ecome clear t#at Ku,Ossi-metanarrati-es #am&er rat#er t#an &romote sister#ood, since t#e% elide di//erences among women and among t#e /orms o/ se(ism to w#ic# di//erent women
are di//erentiall% su)Iect4 Li!ewise, it is
:2@ Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son -ocial )riticism without &hilosophy
increasingl% a&&arent t#at suc# t#eories #inder alliances wit# ot#er &rogressi-e mo-ements, since t#e%0 tend to occlude a(es o/ domination ot#er t#an gender4 ;n sum, t#ere is growing
interest among /eminists in modes o/ t#eoriGing w#ic# are attenti-e to di//erences and to cultural and #istorical s&eci/icit%4
;n general, t#en, /eminist sc#olars#i& o/ t#e *+E9s e-inces some con/licting tendencies4 On t#e one #and, t#ere is decreasing interest in grand social t#eories as sc#olars#i& #as )ecome more
localiGed, issue-oriented and e(&licitl% /alli)ilistic4 On t#e ot#er #and, essentialist -estiges &ersist in t#e continued use o/ a#istorical categories li!e Fgender identit%0 wit#out re/lection as to #ow,
w#en and w#% suc# categories originated and were modi/ied o-er time4 T#is tension is s%m&tomaticall% e(&ressed in t#e current /ascination, on t#e &art o/ 8S /eminists, wit#
$renc# &s%c#oanal%tic /eminisms6 t#e latter &ro&ositionall% decr% essentialism e-en as t#e% &er/ormati-el% enact it @Ci(ous, *+E*N Ci(ous and Clement, *+E?N ;rigara%, *+E>a, *+E>)N 'riste-a,
*+E9, *+E*N see also critical discussions )% 3ones, *+E>N Moi, *+E>A4 More generall%, /eminist sc#olars#i& #as remained insu//icientl% attenti-e to t#e theoretical &rereKuisites o/
dealing wit# di-ersit%, des&ite wides&read commitment to acce&ting it &oliticall%4
1% criticiGing lingering essentialism in contem&orar% /eminist t#eor%, we #o&e to encourage suc# t#eor% to )ecome more consistentl% &ostmodern4 T#is is not, #owe-er, to recommend
merel% any /orm o/ &ostmodernism4 On t#e contrar%, as we #a-e s#own, t#e -ersion de-elo&ed )% 3ean-$rancois L%otard o//ers a wea! and inadeKuate conce&tion o/ social
criticism wit#out &#iloso&#%4 ;t rules out genres o/ criticism, suc# as large #istorical narrati-e and #istoricall% situated social t#eor%, w#ic# /eminists rig#tl% regard as indis&ensa)le4 1ut it
does not /ollow /rom L%otard0s s#ortcomings t#at criticism wit#out &#iloso&#% is in &rinci&le incom&ati)le wit# criticism wit# social /orce4 Rat#er, as we argue ne(t, a ro)ust,
&ostmodern-/eminist &aradigm o/ social criticism wit#out &#iloso&#% is &ossi)le4
8 To1ard a Post#odern Fe#inis#
How can we com)ine a &ostmodernist incredulit% toward metanarrati-es wit# t#e social-critical &ower o/ /eminismD How can we concei-e a -ersion o/ criticism wit#out &#iloso&#%
w#ic# is ro)ust enoug# to #andle t#e toug# Io) o/ anal%Ging se(ism in all its Fendless -ariet% and monotonous similarit%0D
A /irst ste& is to recogniGe, contra L%otard, t#at &ostmodern critiKue need /orswear neit#er large #istorical narrati-es nor anal%ses o/ societal macrostructures4 T#is &oint is
im&ortant /or /eminists, since se(ism #as a long #istor% and is dee&l% and &er-asi-el% em)edded in contem&orar% societies4 T#us, &ostmodern /eminists need not a)andon t#e large t#eoretical
tools needed to address large &olitical &ro)lems4 T#ere is not#ing inconsistent in t#e idea o/ &ostmodern t#eor%4
Howe-er, i/ &ostmodern-/eminist critiKue must remain Ft#eoretical0, not Iust an%0 !ind o/ t#eor% will do4 Rat#er, t#eor% #ere would )e e(&licitl% #istorical, attuned to t#e cultural
s&eci/icit% o/ di//erent societies and &eriods, and 4(O t#at o/ di//erent
:2B
grou&s wit#in societies and &eriods4 T#us, t#e categories o/ &ostmodern-/eminist t#eor% would )e in/lected )% tem&oralit%, wit# #istoricall% s&eci/ic institutional categories li!e Ft#e modern,
restricted, male-#eaded, nuclear /amil%0 ta!ing &recedence o-er a#istorical, /unctionalist categories li!e Fre&roduction0 and mot#ering04 .#ere categories o/ t#e latter sort were not
esc#ewed altoget#er, t#e% would )e genealogiGed, t#at is, /ramed )% a #istorical narrati-e and rendered tem&orall% and culturall% s&eci/ic4
Moreo-er, &ostmodern-/eminist t#eor% would )e non-uni-ersalist4 .#en its /ocus )ecame cross-cultural or transe&oc#al, its mode o/ attention would )e com&arati-ist rat#er t#an
uni-ersaliGing, attuned to c#anges and contrasts instead o/ to Fco-ering laws04 $inall%, &ostmodern-/eminist t#eor% would dis&ense wit# t#e idea o/ a su)Iect o/ #istor%4 ;t
would re&lace unitar% notions o/ Fwoman0 and F/eminine gender identit%0 wit# &lural and com&le(l% constructed conce&tions o/ social identit%, treating gender as one rele-ant strand
among ot#ers, attending also to class, race, et#nicit%, age and se(ual orientation4
;n general, &ostmodern-/eminist t#eor% would )e &ragmatic and /alli)ilistic4 ;t would tailor its met#ods and categories to t#e s&eci/ic tas! at #and, using multi&le categories w#en a&&ro&riate
and /orswearing t#e meta&#%sical com/ort o/ a single F/eminist met#od0 or F/eminist e&istemolog%04 ;n s#ort, t#is t#eor% would loo! more li!e a ta&estr% com&osed o/ t#reads o/
man% di//erent #ues t#an one wo-en in a single color4
T#e most im&ortant ad-antage o/ t#is sort o/ t#eor% would )e its use/ulness /or contem&orar% /eminist &olitical &ractice4 Suc# &ractice is increasingl% a matter o/ alliances
rat#er t#an one o/ unit% around a uni-ersall% s#ared interest or identit%4 ;t recogniGes t#at t#e di-ersit% o/ women0s needs and e(&eriences means t#at no single solution, on
issues li!e c#ild care, social securit% and #ousing, can )e adeKuate /or all4 T#us, t#e underl%ing &remise o/ t#is &ractice is t#at w#ile some women s#are some common interests and /ace
some common enemies, suc# commonalities are )% no means uni-ersalN rat#er, t#e% are interlaced wit# di//erences, e-en wit# con/licts4 T#is, t#en, is a &ractice made u& o/ a
&atc#wor! o/ o-erla&&ing alliances, not one circumscni)a)le )% an essential de/inition4 One mig#t )est s&ea! o/ it in t#e &lural as t#e &ractice o/ F/eminisms04 ;n a sense, t#is
&ractice is in ad-ance o/ muc# contem&orar% /eminist t#eor%4 ;t is alread% im&licitl% &ostmodern4 ;t would /ind its most a&&ro&riate and use/ul t#eoretical e(&ression in a
&ostmodern-/eminist /orm o/ critical inKuir%4 Suc# inKuir% would )e t#e t#eoretical counter&art o/ a )roader, ric#er, more com&le( and mutila%ered /eminist solidarit%, t#e sort o/
solidarit% w#ic# is essential /or o-ercoming t#e o&&ression o/ women in its Fendless -ariet% and monotonous similarit%04
Notes
.e are grate/ul /or t#e #el&/ul suggestions o/ man% &eo&le, es&eciall% 3onat#an Arac, Ann $erguson, Maril%n $r%e, anc% Hartsoc!, Alison 3aggar, 1etel Lang, T#omas McCart#%,
:89 Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son -ocial )riticism without &hilosophy :81
'arsten Stru#l, ;ris Young, T#omas .arten)urg and t#e mem)ers o/ SO$PH;A4 .e are also grate/ul /or word-&rocessing #el& /rom Marina Rosiene4
*4 ;t s#ould )e noted t#at, /or L%otard, t#e c#oice o/ P#iloso&#% as a starting &oint is itsel/ determined )% a meta&olitical commitment, namel%, to anti-totalitarianism4 He assumes, erroneousl% in
our -iew, t#at totaliGing social and &olitical t#eor% necessaril% e-entuates in totalitarian societies4 T#us, t#e F&ractical intent0 w#ic# su)tends L%otard0s &ri-ileging o/ &#iloso&#% @and is in
turn attenuated )% t#e latterA is anti-Mar(ism4 .#et#er it s#ould also )e c#aracteriGed as Fneo-li)eralism0 is a Kuestion too com&licated to )e e(&lored #ere4
54 T#ese and related &ro)lems were soon a&&arent to man% o/ t#e domestic:&u)lic t#eorists t#emsel-es4 See Rosaldo0s @*+E9A sel/-criticism4 A more recent discussion, w#ic# &oints out t#e
circularit% o/ t#e t#eor%, a&&ears in S%l-ia ;4 Yanagisa!o and 3ane $4 Collier
@*+EEA4
,4 A similar am)iguit% attends C#odorow0s discussion o/ Ft#e /amil%04 ;n res&onse to critics w#o o)Iect t#at #er &s%c#oanal%tic em&#asis ignores social structures, C#odorow #as rig#tl% insisted
t#at t#e /amil% is itsel/ a social structure, one /reKuentl% slig#ted in social e(&lanations4 Yet s#e generall% does not discuss /amilies as #istoricall% s&eci/ic soci,il institutions w#ose s&eci/ic
relations wit# ot#er institutions can )e anal%Ged4 Rat#er, s#e tends to in-o!e Ft#e /amil%0 in a -er% a)stract and general sense de/ined onl% as t#e locus o/ /emale mot#ering4
-i".iora0/y
C#odorow, anc% @*+<EA ,he 4eproduction of (otherin%: &sychoanalysis and the sociulo%F of %ender. 1er!ele%6 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press4
Ci(ous, HLlZne @*+E*A FT#e laug# o/ Medusa04 Translated )% '4 Co#en and P4 Co#en in $4 Mar!s and ;4 de Courti-ron @edsA, Hew $rench $eminisms. ew Yor!6 Sc#oc!en 1oo!s4
Ci(ous, HLlZne and Clement, Cat#erine @*+E?A ,he Hewly Korn Woman. Minnea&olis6
8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press4
$erguson, Ann and $ol)re, anc% @*+E*A FT#e un#a&&% marriage o/ &atriarc#% and ca&italism0, in L4 Sargent @edA, Women and 4e.olution. 1oston, MA6 Sout# End Press4
$irestone, S#ulamit# @*+<9A ,he <ialectic of -e=. ew Yor!6 1antam4
$la(, 3ane @*+E?A F2ender as a social &ro)lem6 ;n and /or /eminist t#eor%04 Americaii -tudies3Amerika -tud ien5 3une4
$oucault, Mic#el @*+<+A <iscipline and &unish: ,he birth of the prison. Translated )% Al4in S#eridan4 ew Yor!6 Jintage 1oo!s4
$r%e, Maril%n @*+E,A ,he &olitics of 4eality: :ssays in feminist theory. Trumans)urg, Y6
T#e Crossing Press4
2illigan, Carol @*+E5A 'n a <tffrrent Joice6 &sycholo%ical theory and women1s det1elopmt1nt. Cam)ridge, MA6 Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press4
Harawa%, Donna @*+E,A OA mani/esto /or c%0)orgs6 Science, tec#nolog% and socialist /eminism in t#e *+E9s04 -ocialist 4e.iew E96 ?>H*9<4
Harding, Sandra @*+E?aA ,he -cience Muestin in $eminism. ;t#aca, Y6 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press4
Harding, Sandra @*+E?)A FT#e insta)ilit% o/ t#e anal%tical categories o/ /eminist t#eor%04 -i%ns: 3ournal of Women in )ulture and -ociety **@=A6 ?=>H?=4
Harding, Sandra and Hinti!!a, Merrill 14 @edsA @*+E,A <isco.erin% 4eality: $eminist perspecti.es on epistemolo%y5 metaphysics5 methodolo%y and philosophy Ff sFtence.
Dordrec#t6 D4 Reidel4
Hartsoc!, anc% A1*J#? (oney5 -e= and &ower: ,oward a fF1minist historical materialism. ew Yor!6 Longman4
Hoo!s, 1ell @*+E=A $eminist ,heory: $rom mar%in to center. 1oston, MA6 Sout# End Press4
;rigara%, Luce @*+E>aA -peculum of the 2ther Woman. ;t#aca, Y6 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press4
;rigara%, Luce @*+E>)A ,his -e= Which is Hot 2ne. ;t#aca, Y6 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press4
3ardine, Alice A4 @*+E>A /ynesis: )onfi%urations of women and modernity. ;t#aca, Y6
Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press4
3ones, Ann Rosalind @*+E>A F.riting t#e )od%6 Toward an understanding o/ l0ecriture /eminine0, in $4 S#owalter @ed4A, ,he Hew $eminist )riticism: :ssays on women5 literature and theory. ew Yor!6
Pant#eon 1oo!s4
3ose&#, 2loria @*+E*A OT#e incom&ati)le menage # trois6 Mar(ism, /eminism and racism0, in L4 Sargent @edA, Women and 4e.olution. 1oston, MA6 Sout# End Press4
'riste-a, 3ulia @*+E9A <esire in 6an%ua%e: A semiotic approach to literature and art5 L4 S4 RoudieG @ed4A, ew Yor!6 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press4
'riste-a, 3ulia @*+E*A F.omen0s time04 Translated )% A4 3ardine and H4 1la!e4 -i%ns: 3ournal of Women in )ulture and -ociety <@*A6 *,H,>4
Lord, Audre@*+E*A FAn o&en letter to Mar% Dal%0, inC4 Moraga and C4 AnGaldua@edsA, ,his Krid%e )alled (y Kack: Writin%s by radical women of color. .atertown, MA6
Perse&#one Press4
Lugones, Maria C4 and S&elman, EliGa)et# J4 @*+E,A FHa-e we got a t#eor% /or %ou^ $eminist t#eor%, cultural im&erialism and t#e demand /or t#e women0s -oice04 7ypatia5 Women1s -tudies
'nternational $orum ?@?A6 ><EHE*4
L%otard, 3ean-$rancois @*+<EA FSome o/ t#e t#ings at sta!e in women0s struggles04 Translated )% D4 34 Clar!e, .4 .ood#ull and 34 Mowitt4 -ub--tance 594
L%otard, 3ean-$rancois @*+E=aA ,he &ostmodern )ondition: A report on knou1led%e. Translated )% C4 1ennington and 14 Massumi4 Minnea&olis6 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press4
L%otard, 3ean-$rancois @*+E=)A FT#e di//erend04 Translated )% C4 Jan Den A)#eele4 <iacritics $all6 =H*=4
L%otard, 3ean-$rancois and T#e)aud, 3ean-Lou& @*+E<A 3ust /amin%. Minnea&olis6
8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press4
Mac'innon, Cat#arine A4 @*+E5A F$eminism, Mar(ism, met#od, and t#e state6 An agenda /or t#eor%04 -i%ns: 3ournal of Women in )ulture and -ociety 7A#?: !1!I.
Moi, Ton; @*+E>A -e=ual/,e=tual &olitics: $eminist literary theory. London6 Met#uen4 Owens, Craig @*+E,A FT#e discourse o/ ot#ers6 $eminists and &ostmodernism0, in H4 $oster
@edA, ,he Anti-Aesthetic: :ssays on postmodern culture. Port Townsend, .A6 1a% Press4
Ric#, Adrienne @*+E9A FCom&ulsor% #eterose(ualit% and les)ian e(istence04 -i%ns: 3ournal of Women in )ulture and -ociety !A?: ?,*H?94
Rosaldo, Mic#elle Sim)alist @*+<=A F.oman, culture and societ%6 a t#eoretical o-ersiew0, in M4 S4 Rosaldo and L4 Lam&#ere @edsA, .omano )ulture and -ociety. Stan/ord, CA6
Stan/ord 8ni-ersit% Press4
:82 Nancy Fraser and Linda Nic/o.son
Rosaldo, Mic#elle Sim)alist @*+E9A FT#e use and a)use o/ ant#ro&olog%6 Re/lections on /eminism and cross-cultural understanding04 -i%ns: 3ournal of Women in )ulture and -ociety !A#?: ,E+H=*<4
Ru)in, Ca%le @*+<>A FT#e tra//ic in women0, in R4 R4 Reiter @ed4A, ,oward an Anthropolo%y of Women. ew Yor!6 Mont#l% Re-iew Press4
S&elman, EliGa)et# @*+E9H*A FT#eories o/ race and gender4 T#e erasure o/ 1lac! women04 Muest !A?: ,?H?54
.alGer, Mic#ael @*+E,A -pheres of 3ustice: A defense of pluralism and e>uality. ew Yor!6
1asic 1oo!s4
Yanagisa!o, S%l-ia 34 and Collier, 3ane $4 @*+EEA FToward a uni/ied anal%sis o/ gender and !ins#i&0, in 34 $4 Collier and S4 34 Yanagisa!o @edsA, /ender and Linship: ,oward a unified analysis.
Stan/ord, CA6 Stan/ord 8ni-ersit% Press4
81 D ,he <emise of :=perience..
$iction as stran%er than truth@
A.ice Jardine
A la)%rint#ian man ne-er loo!s /or t#e trut#, )ut onl% /or #is
Aniadne4
;ETSSCHE
Trut# is not an un-eiling w#ic# destro%s t#e secret, )ut t#e
re-elation w#ic# does it Iustice4
.A;TER 1E3AM;
T#e ancient &ro)lem o/ t#e relations#i& )etween w#at in e-er%da% language we call Fe(&erience0 o/ Frealit%0 and w#at we t#en decide to call F!nowledge0 a)out it @let alone !nowing t#e Ftrut#0
a)out itA #as resur/aced wit# a -engeance in t#e twentiet# centur%4 Radical critics o/ dominant .estern culture #a-e )een urgentl% concerned, since at least t#e turn o/ t#e centur%, wit# t#e
&ro)lem o/ #ow to continue criticism in a modern world w#ere it is understood not onl% t#at w#at is )eing criticiGed is alread% an ideological, s%m)olic construction, )ut also t#at it is t#ere/ore
alread% a lie, So t#en, w#ere mig#t )e /ound t#e trut#D $rom t#e arts, es&eciall% modernist and &ostmodernist /iction, to t#e &#iloso&#ies, a dee& dissatis/action wit# science #as led to a radical
ree-aluation o/ t#e relations#i&s )etween w#at .alter 1enIamin called Fdirect, li-ed e(&erience0 E:rlebnis5 Fs#oc!0Y as o&&osed to retros&ecti-e, F&ri-ileged, inward e(&erience0 E:rfahrun%5
Faura0Y 4 T#at t#e relations#i& )etween t#e two is no longer o)-iousN t#at, in an% case, it can no longer )e seen as re/lecti-e, natural, or unmediated, is now certain4 As 2illes DeleuGe #as
e(&lained, we are tal!ing a)out an era o/ generaliGed anti-Platonism, w#ere it is no longer onl% models and t#eir co&ies t#at are &ut into &la%, &ri-ilegedN )ut also t#e simulacrum5 traditionall%
seen as /alse, )ad, and ugl% )ecause it does not resem)le enoug# t#e Original or its co&ies4
;n /act, FOne de/ines modernit% )% t#e &otenC% o/ t#e simulacrum.1
"
T#e &ower
$rom 3ardine, A4, /ynesis: )onfi%urations of woman and modernity5 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+E>, &&4 1!I!!.
:8: A.ice Jardine ,he <emise of :=perience :8$
and /ull im&lications o/ t#is statement are onl% slowl% )ecoming more tangi)le to t#ose still t#in!ing in a &s%c#ologiGed and re&resentational mode @and almost e-er%one isA, es&eciall% wit#
regard to t#eir own e(&erience4 $or e(am&le, media and com&uter tec#nolog% are no longer so limited in sco&e6 most o/ us can at least )egin to glim&se t#e wa%s in w#ic# t#e com&onents o/
Four li-es0 #a-e alread% )een imagined, re&eated, erased, s&liced to ot#er Fli-es0N wa%s w#ic# are not onl% out o/ our own control, )ut under no One0s control at all, e(ce&t &er#a&s t#at o/
tec#nolog% itsel/4
;n $renc# t#oug#t o-er t#e &ast t#irt% %ears, t#e Kuestion o/ e(actl% #ow Fe(&erience0, F!nowledge0, and Ftrut#0 are so out o/ !ilter /or modernit% #as not )een swe&t aside as it #as tended to
)e in Anglo-American t#eor%4 O T#e e//ort to ret#in! and e(&eriment wit# t#e wa%s in w#ic# realit%, as imaginar% and s%m)olic construction, can toda% )e e(&erienced, !nown, and /inall%
c#anged #as )een constant4 T#is #as entailed, /or t#e most &art, t#e attem&t to mo-e )e%ond mec#anistic cause:e//ect t#eories )ased in re/lectionN t#is #as )een done )% &ri-ileging di//erent
!inds o/ Fcultural cement06 ideolog%, t#e unconscious, language and t#ere/ore writing4 ;n e//ect, /or man% contem&orar% t#eorists and writers, to )e radical in our culture ma% reKuire new !inds
o/ mental acro)atics6 /or e(am&le, to )e radical ma% no longer )e to wor! /or t#e side t#at is Frig#t0, s&ea!s t#e Ftrut#0 is most FIust04 ;t ma% in /act )e to wor! rat#er /or t#e &seudos5 /or Ft#e
#ig#est &ower o/ /alse#ood0N
=
it ma% )e to o&t /or o-erw#elming /alse#ood, t#ere)% con/using and /inall% destro%ing t#e o&&ressi-e s%stem o/ re&resentation w#ic# would #a-e us )elie-e not
onl% in its su)s%stems o/ models @t#e real, t#e /irstA -ersus simulacra @t#e unreal, inaut#enticA, good -ersus )ad, true -ersus /alseN )ut would also #a-e us )elie-e in a world ultimatel% o)sessed
wit# sel/-destruction4
;t is, in /act, most li!el% o)-ious )% now to t#e reader t#at, /ollowing our writers, lost in t#e /olds o/ t#e /a)ricated and delegitimiGed narrati-es t#at surround us, disarmed o/ t#e co%ito and
t#e dialectics o/ re&resentation, an% Kuestion o/ Ftrut#0 in and /or modernit% can onl% )e a tentati-e one4 ;t will t#ere/ore onl% concern us #ere to t#e e(tent t#at a certain de/inition o/ trut#, )ased
in a #ig#l% &ersonal, naturaliGed Frealit%0, is not onl% intrinsic to )ut also t#e last line o/ de/ense /or /eminism as #ermeneutic4 $eminism, w#ile in/inite in its -ariations, is /inall% rooted in t#e
)elie/ t#at women0s trut#-in-e(&erience-and-realit% is and #as alwa%s )een di//erent /rom men0s and t#at it as well as its arti/acts and &roductions #as e conseKuentl% )een de-alued and alwa%s
alread% delegitimiGed in &artriarc#al culture4 $eminists tend to see t#e /act t#at Man, men, are e(&eriencing a /orm o/ delegitimation toda% eit#er as a &ositi-e ste& toward dem%sti/%ing t#e
&olitics o/ male se(ualit% in &atriarc#% or as not#ing ot#er t#an anot#er com&le( ruse o/ &atriarc#al reason4 As wit# t#e ot#er Kuestions in t#is stud%, it is not certain t#at t#e c#oice is t#at clear-
cut4
;t is certainl% not clear i/ we loo! closel% at t#e writers in $rance ret#in!ing trut#-in-modernit%4 T#eir maIor )attle, in t#e wa!e o/ Heidegger, ietGsc#e, and $reud, #as )een to unra-el t#e
illusion t#at some !ind o/ uni-ersal tru
*
# e(ists w#ic# can )e &ro-en )% some so-called uni-ersal e(&erience4 T#is stand against t#e #istoricall%
solid alliance )etween trut# and e(&erience #as )een a stand against #umanism Ha &ositi-e ste& /or women in most wa%s, )ut wit# a twist4 $or t#ese writers, trut#, t#ere/ore, can eKual neit#er
Fe(&erience0 nor Frealit%0 as t#ose words #a-e )een &#iloso&#icall% understood in t#e .est since Plato H and t#ere/ore an% discourse rooting itsel/ in eit#er one is, in trut#, an ancient, uselessl%
re&etitious /iction4
T#e #istor% o/ uni-ersal trut# is t#e #istor% o/ meta&#%sics and its attendant de/initions o/ t#e 2ood and t#e Moral6 /rom Plato0s esse .erurn to Aristotle0s eikosB /rom t#e t#eological propositio
o/ t#e Middle Ages to Positi-ist 6o%icB /rom Hegel0s Absolute to t#e P#enomenological :=perience. Heidegger, closest to t#e writers we are concerned wit#, was to &lace maIor em&#asis on t#is
long, common #istor%4 His )est-!nown anal%sis o/ meta&#%sical trut# as Al;theia @t#e un-eiledA, t#at o/ Plato0s m%t# o/ t#e ca-e, ma!es clear t#e continuit% in .estern de/initions o/ t#e Trut#6
t#e un-eiling, )ringing to lig#t o/ t#at w#ic# #ad )een lost, #idden, -eiled, )adl% Fre&resented04 Trut# in t#e .est #as alwa%s )een de/ined as Fe(actitude o/ re&resentation0 in w#ic# Fman t#in!s
e-er%t#ing according to ]ideasR and a&&reciates all realit% according to -alues04
>
T#e stri&&ing o/ -eils, t#e ascendant Fstri&tease toward t#e ;dea0, ordered )% Man-in-command, is w#at
Heidegger tells us #as led to t#e twentiet# centur%0s dominantl% &ragmatic, w#en not im&erialistic, &osture toward !nowledge, as well as to a conIunction )etween t#e mo-ement toward &ure
;dea and t#e Foug#t to0 o/ teleolog%, /uturit%, and o)ligation4 According to Heidegger, i/ we are to sur-i-e t#e twentiet# centur%, Man can no longer )e t#e o&ener o/ trut#0 )ut must /ind a wa% to
)ecome t#e o&ening for it4 Heidegger will e-entuall% turn to t#e &oets to /ind t#at Fwa%04
1e/ore Heidegger, ietGsc#e and $reud #ad alread% s&read enormous dou)t a)out our a)ilit% to reac# Trut# t#roug# t#e ascendanc% o/ Iudgment4 $or ietGsc#e, trut# is Man0s oldest
illusion4 E-en more im&ortant, w#% is it t#at Man #as so /reKuentl% desired t#e Trut#D F.#% not rather untrut#D And uncertaint%D E-en ignoranceD0
?
T#e s#oc! o/ recognition t#at .estern Trut#,
and t#e .estern desire /or Trut#, #a-e )een a terri)le error is w#at ietGsc#e lea-es /or t#e twentiet# centur% to gain t#e #ard wa%4
$reud regards trut#, o/ course, as e-en more di//icult to locate, untena)le-as-Iudgment, and it is in #is wor! t#at trut# /inds its /irst concrete dis&lacements, awa% /rom e(&erience, awa% /rom
realit%6 F;t #as not )een &ossi)le to demonstrate in ot#er connections t#at t#e #uman intellect #as a &articularl% /ine /lair /or t#e trut#4 .e #a-e rat#er /ound, on t#e contrar%, t#at our intellect
-er% easil% goes astra% wit#out an% warning, and t#at not#ing is more easil% )elie-ed )% us t#an w#at, wit#out re/erence to t#e trut#, comes to meet our wis#/ul illusions40
<
$or &s%c#oanal%sis,
trut# can consist onl% o/ &arcels o/ Ftrut#0 /rom t#e &ast w#ic# return to us de/ormed, disconnectedN t#e% return /rom and t#roug# t#e unconscious into t#e /ictions o/ our &resent li-es4 ;/,
t#ere/ore, &s%c#oanal%sis as a science is to #a-e an% trut#--alue, it is /rom t#is recognition t#at we can #a-e no access to t#e trut#s o/ our illusions e(ce&t t#roug# an understanding o/ t#e logic
o/ t#e unconscious4
Trut# as -eiled4 Trut# as error4 Trut# as &artial and dela%ed, as t#at w#ic# we do not want to !now4 .it# t#ose t#reads, t#e t#eorists o/, and in, modernit% )egan
:8< A.ice Jardine ,he <emise of :=perience
to wea-e new intellectual &atterns, searc#ing /or t#e &otential s&aces o/ a Ftrut#0 t#at would )e neit#er true nor /alseN /or a Ftrut#0 t#at would )e in-.rai-semblable5 im&lausi)le, im&ro)a)le,
incredi)le, t#ere)% ma!ing .rai-semb6ance t#e code word /or our meta&#%sical #eritage4 E .#ile t#is &roIect is certainl% not /oreign to twentiet#-centur% Anglo-American e(&lorations in logic
@e4g4 1ertrand RussellA, it #as /ound its most radical directions and su&&ort in &ost-e(istential $rance4
; s#all not /ollow in detail t#e )attles )etween Lacanian &s%c#oanal%sis and ietGsc#ean &#iloso&#ies o-er t#e sta!es and status o/ Ftrut#0 /or modernit%4 O 1ut it is interesting to note t#ose
&oints on w#ic# &s%c#oanal%sis and &#iloso&#% in $rance would seem to agree6 t#at @*A trut# and /alse#ood #a-e )een and must continue to )e ta!en out o/ o&&ositionN @5A realit% de/ined as
re&resentation can no longer &la% t#e maIor &art in re/ormulating a new a&&roac# to Ftrut#0 i/ we are to a-oid t#e re&etitious -iolence o/ moralistic t#in!ingN @,A no one can tell t#e trut#
H at least not all o/ itN and /inall%, @=A #ence/ort#, Ftrut#0 can onl% )e t#oug#t t#roug# t#at w#ic# su)-erts itN t#e Freal0 /or LacanN G;criture1 /or DerridaN and t#e F)ecoming o/ di//erence0 /or
DeleuGe4 *9
T#is series o/ dou)t-/ull de)ates around t#e &ossi)le &ositions o/ Ftrut#0 /or modernit% largel% centers around t#e &ro)lem o/ F/iction0, )ot# written and oral, e-en as t#is latter distinction is
alread% )eing )ro!en down4 O T#e meta&#%sical o&&osition o/ /iction -ersus trut# ma!es no more senseN )ut to call it nonsense onl% t#rows us )ac! to anot#er o&&osition4 ;s /iction @coded as
suc#, as a written te(tA a !e% to trut#D Or is an% trut# alwa%s alread% a /iction @written or ot#erwiseAD T#is de)ate o)-iousl% #as im&ortant conseKuences /or an% literar%, cultural and &olitical
criticism concerned wit# #ow to situate te(ts as a /orce /or c#ange in t#e Frealit%0 o/ t#e world H es&eciall% since t#ese te(ts #a-e caug#t u& wit# &s%c#oanal%sis and &#iloso&#% in $rance4 $or
Ftrut#0 is traditionall% Fto )e rig#t0N in $renc#, it is to #a-e reason Ea.oir raisonD. Traditionall%, w#ere reason is lost, t#ings are wrong, insane4 A cultural critic w#o Iudges a /iction as not true
Iudges it as )eing )e%ond reason
H w#ic# is all it e-er set out to )e in t#e traditional sc#eme o/ t#ings4 To Iudge a te(t as wrong, as not #a-ing reason, is not to disru&t an%t#ing, )ut is instead, in
i5
a terri)le twist, to con/irm t#e -ia)ilit% o/ t#e original meta&#%sical o&&osition4
Clearl%, traditional acts o/ literar% criticism )ased in t#is !ind o/ Iudgment are #ence/ort# seen to )e caug#t in a strange, mutuall% congratulator% relations#i& wit# t#e te(t t#e% are Iudging4 *,
;n an% case, according to our writers, t#e true can no longer )e lin!ed to traditional notions o/ e(&erience-in-t#e-world, t#ose notions #a-ing reac#ed t#eir #ig#est &oint in Hegel0s de/inition
o/ e(&erience as discourse within a su)Iect conscious-o/-#imsel/6 G'nasmuch as the new true ob9ect issues from it5 t#is dialectical mo-ement w#ic# consciousness e(ercises on itsel/ and w#ic# a//ects
)ot# its !nowledge and its o)Iect, is &recisel% w#at is called e=perience E:rfahrun%D *= E(&erience in t#is sense can onl% )e an appropriation o/ t#e Freal0, t#us trans/orming it into Frealit%0 )% and
/or t#e Cartesian Su)Iect4 T#e &#enomenolog% o/
:8=
e(istentialism, /or e(am&le, came to )e seen in Euro&e as t#e last ant#ro&ological s%stem o/ t#oug#t to #a-e attem&ted to )ridge t#e ga& )etween t#e percipio and t#e co%ito: t#e /act t#at we li.e in
one world w#ere we can see onl% F/ragments0 w#ile we think in anot#er world according to t#e !nowledge t#at we can o)tain a)out t#e w#ole t#at we can ne-er see4 T#e &#enomenologists
attem&ted to /ound t#e co%ito in t#e perc8pio in order to understand #ow meaning comes to )e and t#en Iudge t#at meaning according to moral standards4 1ut ultimatel%, t#at transcendental
gesture accounts /or t#eir sole reliance on t#e et#ic o/ pra=is: t#e onl% &ossi)le trut# non1 is t#at trut# )ased in t#e li-ing &resent H /or me H in t#e immediac% o/ true e(&erience4
;t is clear t#at t#is Fme0 around w#ic# t#e world turns was to )ecome totall% unacce&ta)le to &ost-e(istential $rance4 T#e conce&t o/ e(&erience was radicall% dis&laced6 Fe(&erience0 came to
)e t#oug#t o/ as t#at &rocess w#ic# e(ceeds master%, as t#e Fsilence0 o/ discourse, as t#at w#ic# distur)s t#e su)Iect-&resent-toOitsel/ *> T#e em&#asis #as )een &laced on t#at w#ic# continuall%
undermines an% credulit% or )elie/ )ased in e(erienc-l)#
Peon%OtoOeOtenOe(&ressedin=anguage6 on ideolog%,
desire, t#e unconscious, /iction as anti-!nowledge4 $or t#e t#eorists o/ modernit%, onl% an em&iricist could )elie-e t#at language e(&resses-wit#out-losso/4realit% t#at it can /ait#/ull% translate
e(&erience, t#at it ma!es no difference.
Em&iricism H t#e Fscience o/ e(&erience0 H is o/ course, t#at doctrine w#ic# #olds t#at all !nowledge originates in direct e(&erience o/ w#at is commonl% called realit%, wit#out t#eor%, and
undistur)ed )% language4 T#at is, w#ere language is su&er/luous to li/e4
.#ate-er t#e /undamentall% em&irical /oundations o/ &s%c#oanal%sis in &ractice @t#at is, as )ased in -isionA, Lacan0s entire Freturn to $reud0 was in reaction against em&iricism6 em&iricism
was seen )% Lacan as )eing at t#e -er% roots o/ Anglo-American conser-ati-e, normati-e, recu&erati-e &s%c#ologies @suc# as )e#a-iorismA4 T#e onl% &ossi)le &lace /or Fe(&erience0, according
to Lacan, is in t#e e(&eriential and e(&erimental language o/ t#e Fanal%tical e(&erience0 as analogous to /iction4
T#e &#iloso&#ers, #owe-er, did not /ind it Kuite so eas%, or &roducti-e, to reIect em&iricism so Kuic!l%4 ;n /act, em&iricism is in some wa%s &osited )% t#em as a )eginning /rom w#ic# to
Kuestion &#iloso&#% most radicall% H as its o&&osite4
$or e(am&le, in Derrida0s wor!, e(&erience #as alwa%s eKualed &resence, trans&arenc%, egotism, meaning, and, t#ere/ore, -iolence4 *? Li!e an% ot#er meta&#%sical common&lace, #owe-er,
e(&erience cannot sim&l% )e done awa% wit# or denied, )ut must )e used under erasure )ecause o/ its relations#i& to t#e #istor% o/ &#iloso&#% as a non&#iloso&#%, an anti-&#iloso&#%4 *<
Em&iricism is &#iloso&#icall% inca&a)le o/ Iusti/%ing itsel/6 F1ut t#is inca&acitation, w#en resolutel% assumed, contests t#e resolution and co#erence o/ t#e logos @&#iloso&#%A at its root, instead
o/ letting itsel/ )e Kuestioned )% t#e logos4 T#ere/ore, not#ing can so &ro/oundl% solicit t#e 2ree! logos H &#iloso&#% H t#an t#is irru&tion o/ t#e totall%-ot#erN and not#ing can to suc# an e(tent
reawa!en t#e logos to its origin as to its mortalit%, its ot#er40
*E
As t#e Ot#er o/ &#iloso&#%, em&iricism constitutes a &oint o/ de&arture, e(or)itant in its e(tenionit%, /or Derridean deconstruction
H
:8@ A.ice Jardine ,he <emise of :=perience
until t#e -er% conce&t o/ em&iricism itsel/ )egins to sel/-destruct4 FTo e=ceed t#e meta&#%sical or) is an attem&t to get out o/ t#e or)it EorbitaD 5 to t#in! t#e entiret% o/ t#e classical conce&tual
o&&ositions, &articularl% t#e one wit#in w#ic# t#e -alue o/ em&iricism is #eld4 444 T#e o&ening o/ t#e Kuestion, t#e de&arture /rom t#e closure o/ a sel/-e-idence, t#e &utting into dou)t o/ a s%stem
o/ o&&ositions, all t#ese mo-ements necessaril% #a-e t#e /orm o/ em&iricism and o/ erranc%4 444 .e must )egin where.er we are O*+ T#ose moments w#en t#e Derridean strateg% o&ens t#e te(t to
so-called em&irical e-ents H )iogra&#%, #istorical anecdotes, and so on H are, /rom t#eir )eginnings, t#e most radical moments t#e reader can e(&erience in &#iloso&#% H t#e o&enings toward t#e
writing t#at can )egin to s&lit o&en an% closed &#iloso&#ical s%stem4
Li!e Derrida, DeleuGe sees em&iricism as an anti-&#iloso&#%4 8nli!e Derrida, #owe-er, DeleuGe does not &ut em&irical e(&erience under erasure )ut, wit# a non-sel/-re/le(i-el% e(or)itant
lea&, e(&lodes it )e%ond an% &ossi)le or at least an% )elie-a)le re&resentation o/ Frealit%06 em&iricism is not DeleuGe0s &#iloso&#ical doctrine, )ut #is ode to Anglo-American &#iloso&#% and
literature4 $or #im, em&iricism o&erates against t#e conce&t o/ Ft#e &rinci&le0, t#e &rinci&les o/ &#iloso&#%, t#roug# a insistence on Fli/e0 and t#e wa%s it can /orce s%stems to t#eir )rea!ing
&oint6 Fi/ one sees somet#ing t#ere w#ic# tra-erses li/e, )ut w#ic# t#in!ing /inds re&ugnant, in t#at case t#in!ing must )e /orced to t#in! it, to ma!e o/ it t#in!ing0s &oint o/ #allucination, an
e(&erimentation w#ic# does -iolence to t#in!ing , , ,FOo ;t is ultimatel% DeleuGe0s Fesca&e lines0 awa% /rom /ounding &rinci&les t#at &ro-ide new &at#wa%s /or t#is necessar%
#allucinationN new wa%s towards becomin% H t#e onl% wa%s DeleuGe would ris! c#anging w#at is @&#iloso&#%A4
$aced wit# t#is demise o/ Fconscious e(&erience0 in t#e world, t#e /eminist reader will &er#a&s /ind some more Kuestions4
S#e will most certainl% welcome t#e demise o/ Trut# H Man0s Trut#4 S#e will agree t#at t#e dream o/ un-eiling t#e Trut#-in-its-entiret%, so as to s#ine in its -eracit%, #as turned into a
nig#tmare @created )% menAN t#at, in /act, it is Man0s apocalypse @et%mologicall% to dis-co-er, un-co-er, to re-eal t#e secretA4 5* 1ut, on t#e ot#er #and, s#e will also understand t#at it is not
enoug# to oppose Man0s Trut#N t#e -er% conce&tual s%stems t#at #a-e &osited it must )e undermined4 And, /inall%, s#e will )egin to recogniGe t#at man% o/ t#ose conce&tual s%stems are intrinsic
to /eminist t#in!ing w#et#er or not o&enl% declared6 s%stems o/ de/ining t#e sel/, &erce&tion, Iudgment, and, t#ere/ore, moralit%4 55
FMoralit%0 is &er#a&s t#at w#ic# most stu))ornl% ad#eres to Trut#-in-Iudgment4 .#at is true is also good4 .#at is /alse is )ad4 :thics H t#e disci&line de-oted to deciding w#at is good and )ad
H will )e one o/ t#e /irst systems to )e reIected as an institution, a/ter $reud and ietGsc#e, )% &s%c#oanal%sis and &#iloso&#% in $rance4 $or Lacan, &s%c#oanal%sis must )ecome allergic to an%
/orm o/ et#ics H /or to indulge in moralit% @or in an% /orm o/ social re/ormationA is to /all &re% to @AmericanA normaliGing &edagog%4 5, $or t#e &#iloso&#ers, et#ics is inse&ara)le /rom t#e
#istor% o/ &#iloso&#%4 1ot# 2ree! and C#ristian, et#ics P t#e language o/ &riests4 ;/ DeleuGians #a-e /or t#e most &art a-oided t#e &ro)lenO, creating an et#ic
:8B
/or e-er% new occasion, Derrideans #a-e recentl% )een a )it more sensiti-e to t#e necessit% o/ necessit%6 FT#ere is t#ere/ore a dut% H or, i/ %ou wis#, a dut% is )eing decided u&on, a dut% w#ic# is
final in e-er% sense o/ t#e e(&ression, t#e dut% o/ t#e Kuestion, o/ t#e maintenance o/ t#e Kuestion o/ t#e ends, or t#e Kuestion o/ t#e end
F5= 2i-en t#at
o/ &#iloso&#%4 T#at is t#e answer, ethos means heim5 at #ome, as in
Plato0s ca-ern, t#e &oint ma% )e not to to rus# out o/ t#e ca-ern wit# e-er%one else, )ut rat#er to sta%, to render it strange, uncann% H to de-elo& an ethos unheiu8lich )% Kuestioning t#e writing on
t#e walls o/ t#e ca-e itsel/4 5>
T#e true5 t#en, is to )e t#oug#t strangel% )% modernit%, outside o/ t#e meta&#%sical categories o/ o&&osition H or )etween t#em4 T#is a&&roac# in-ol-es, /irst and /oremost, a relinKuis#ing o/
master%, indeed a -aloriGation o/ nonmaster%4 And, as we !now, a lac! o/ master% #as, #istoricall%, alwa%s connoted t#e /eminine4 5? Secondl%, t#e true5 to )e isolated in t#ose &rocesses anterior
to or, in some cases, )e%ond t#e Trut# as &roduced )% t#e techn;5 is t#at w#ic# can ne-er )e seen, w#ic# ne-er &resents itsel/ as suc# )ut rat#er ca&tures, &oints, wit#draws, #ides itsel/ in its
-eils6 and t#at true is seen as )eing Fwoman0 H t#e Fnontrut#0 or &artial true0 o/ Trut#4 Or, /or ot#ers, Fwoman0 is &recisel% t#at element w#ic# distur)s e-en t#at &resu&&osition @Trut# as
castratedA4
.#ate-er t#e strange intricacies o/ t#ese new wanderings t#roug# t#e demise o/ Trut#-in-E(&erience, Fwoman0 is t#at element most discursi.ely present. 3ulia 'riste-a #as called t#is new
element in modernit% a .r;el Ha !ind o/ Fs#e-trut#06
.e can toda% &ercei-e, )% listening to t#e discourses t#at s&ea! to us as contem&oraries as well as to t#e a&&roac#es w#ic# tr% to s&ea! o/ t#e source and &rogression o/ t#ose discourses, t#at
t#e great u&#ea-al o/ s&ea!ing )eings toda% can )e summariGed in t#is wa%6 t#e truth E.;rit;D w#ic# t#e% are see!ing @w#ic# t#e% are tr%ing to tellA, is t#e real EreelD H FJreel0 t#en4 An
o)sessi-e /ear since t#e )eginning o/ time, t#is e(&erience is )ecoming toda%, i/ not one o/ t#e masses, at least massi-e, weig#t%N e-en more so )ecause no common code is t#ere to neutraliGe
it )% Iusti/%ing it4 444 T#e ancient Kuestion returns6 #ow to render t#e -rLel more li!el%, more re&resenta)le E.raisemblableD D5<
T#e onl% wa%, o/ course, to render t#is F-rLel0 .raisen8blable5 seemingl% true, is to &ut it into discourse in new wa%s6 #ence t#e %ynesis w#ose &otential s&aces we #a-e #ad to outline so
sc#ematicall% #ere4 T#e demise o/ t#e Su)Iect, o/ t#e Dialectic, and o/ Trut# #as le/t modernit% wit# a .oid t#at it is -aguel% aware must )e s&o!en di//erentl% and strangel%6 as woman, t#roug#
g%nesis4
.#at can )e t#e /eminist0s res&onse to t#ese mani/estations o/ g%nesis and its Strange )od%D ;s not #er /irst im&ulse to den% itD H to c#arge t#at t#ese F&rocesses )e%ond re&resentation0 are
)ut &art o/ a new ruse in-ented )% Man to a-oid, once again, #is own trut# and e(&erienceD 1ut, on t#e ot#er #and, in order to demonstrate t#at, are we not Iust as o)liged, as /eminists, to &ut t#e
signi/ier woman into circulation, oursel-es to engage in g%nesisD0.#ose ruse is it then@ And w#ose %ynes is@
;t is too eas% to &ut g%nesis down to Fidealism0 as some#ow o&&osed to /eminism,
::9 A.ice Jardine ,he <emise of :=perience ==*
a true Fmaterialism04 As long as we do not e(&loie t#e )oundaries o/ and &ossi)le common s&aces )etween modernit% and /eminisn=N as long as we do not recogniGe new !inds o/ arti/icial,
s%m)olic constructions o/ t#e su)Iect, re&resentation, and @es&eciall%A e(&erience, we will )e engaging in w#at are ultimatel% conser-ati-e and dated &olemics, not radical t#eor% and &ractice4 ;t
)ecomes &articularl% tem&ting at times o/ e(treme &olitical crisis to a)andon t#is c#allenge o/ our centur% and re-ert to a Fnatural -iew o/ t#ings06 realit% is w#at ; see, #ear, and touc#4 ot#ing
could )e more reactionar% H or &ointless H in &ostmodei/l culture4 As 3ane 2allo& #as so succinctl% &ut it, F1elie/ in sim&le re/erentialit% is not onl% un&oetic )ut also ultimatel% &oliticall%
conser-ati-e, )ecause it can&ot recogniGe t#at t#e realit% to w#ic# it a&&eals is a traditional ideological construction, w#et#er one terms it &#allomor&#ic, or meta&#%sical, or )ourgeois, or
somet#ing else4 T#e &olitics o/ e(&erience is ine-ita)l% a conser-ati-e &olitics O&r it cannot #el& )ut conser-e traditional ideological constructs w#ic# are not recogniGed as suc# )ut are ta!en /or
t#e ]realR40
5E
To Kuestion #ow t#oug#t-in-modernit% and /eminism itsel/ ma% )ot# )e inscri)ing woman as t#e ultimate trut# o/ and / 9r modernit% is, /or t#e /eminist toda%, to ris! )ecoming entangled in
#er own a&OcalYP>e4
1ut t#en, t#at is a ris! intrinsic to modernit% itsel/ H and ; t#in! it is a ris! wort# ta!ing4
To do so, #owe-er, /eminists must take t#e ris!, must Fdi-e into t#e wrec!0 o/ .estern culture rat#er t#an &us# it aside6
.e are, ; am, %ou are
)% cowardice or courage t#e one w#o /ind our waY )ac! to t#is scene
carr%ing a !ni/e, a camera a )oo! o/ m%t#s
in w#ic#
5+
our names do not a&&ear
Notes
1C See in &articular 1enIamin0s )harles Kaudelaire: A lyri) poet in the era of hi%h capitalism5 transl4 Harr% So#n, ew Le/t 1oo!s, London, *+<,-
54 See Cilles DeleuGe, FSimulacre et &#iloso&#ie antiKue0O in 6o%i>ue du sens5 &4 ,9?4
#. Marcelin Ple%net #as &ut it t#is wa%6 FOur e(&erience remains t#e ca&ti-e o/ a !nowledge w#ic# is no longer reall% our e(&erienceN our !nowledOe is em)arrassed )% an e(&erience w#ic#
#as not %et )ecome !nowledge40 FLa le-ee de ;0iiOter&rLtation des signes0, in Art et litterature5 Editions do Seuil, Paris, *+<<4
=4 DeleuGe, 6o%i>ue du sens5 &4 ,9,
!. Martin Heidegger, FLa doctrine de Platon sur ;a -#rOtO0, in Mue\s-.ons ''5 &&4 *=,H=,
*?54 T#e reader will also want to re/er to FOn t#e essence o/ trut#0 in :=istence and
Kein%B as well as to FLogos0 and FAl#t#eia0 in :arly /reek ,hinkin%5 transl4 Da-id $arrell
'rell and $ran! A4 Ca&uGGi, Har&er \ Row, ew Yor!, *+<>4
?4 ietGsc#e, Keyond /ood and :.il5 transl4 Helen Simmern, Macmillan, ew Yor!4
*+5=, &4 !.
<4 $reud, (oses and (onotheism5 transl4 3ames Strac#e-, Hogart#, London, *+0-l4 &4 *5+4
E4 $rom a &s%c#oanal%tic &ers&ecti-e, 3ean-Mic#el Ri)ettes #as maintained t#It .raisemblance5 e(actitude o/ re&resentation, is also &articularl% male5 )elonging as it does to an o)sessional
rat#er t#an #%sterical econom%4 FLe &#allus @Jrai:sein)lant: -raisem)lance du te(te o)sessionnelA0, in $olle .)rit)5 ed4 3ulia 'riste-a, Editions du Seuil, Paris, *+<+, &&4 **?H<94
+4 $or an introduction to some o/ t#e Kuestions in-ol-ed, see 1ar)ara 3o#nson0s OT#e /rame o/ re/erence6 Poe, Lacan, Derrida04 $or an o-er-iew o/ t#e &olemic )etween Lacan and Derrida,
also see S&i-a!0s introduction to Derrida, 2f /ran8mato/o%y5 es&4 &&4 l(iiiHl(-ii4
*94 On Ftrut#0 in Lacan, one would want to loo! es&eciall% at #is FAu-de$t do ]Princi&e de realiteR0 and FLa science et ;a -erite0, in :critsB t#e o&ening &ages o/ ,)l).ision5 Editions do Seuil,
Paris, *+<,N FRadio&#onie0 @on t#e semblant?5 -cilicet5 5:,, Editions du Seuil, Paris, n4d4N and FLe sa-oir et la -erite0, in :ncore. $or an o-er-iew o/ t#e &ro)lems o/ 'a .;rit;5 'a .raisemblance5
and 'c sem b/ant in &s%c#oanal%sis, ; #a-e /ound t#e collection o/ essa%s in $olle .)rit) @ed4 'riste-aA -er% use/ul4 On t#e &osition @;/ Ftrut#0 in Derrida, )esides FT#e &ur-e%or o/ trut#0, see
es&eciall% &ositions5 transl4 Alan 1ass, &&4 ***H*,, n4 ==N and -purs/:perons. ;n DeleuGe, c/4, e4g46 <ifference et r)p)tition5 &&4 *+EH5*<N and Hiet8sche5 &&4 *9EH**4
T#e contem&orar% &olemic surrounding trut# and /iction is o)-iousl% not limited to t#ese writers4 C/4, /or e(am&le, 1art#es0s earl% )riti>ue et .)rit)5 Editions do Seuil, Paris, *+??4
**4 T#e Derridean wearing-awa% o/ )ot# t#e common and t#e uncommon distinctions )etween s&eec# and writing owes muc# to $reud4 T#e reader mig#t want to re/er to aomi Sc#or, FLe
detail c#eG $reud0, 6itt;rature5 ,< @*+E@*A /or a reading, in t#e wa!e o/ Derrida, o/ #ow, in $reud, t#e detail in a written te(t is seen as a disseminator o/ /iction w#ile, orall%, it is re-elator%
o/ trut#4
*54 To )egin unra-eling t#is &ro)lematic more slowl%, one mig#t start wit# $oucault and Derrida0s &olemic o-er Descartes6 $oucault, (adness and )i.ili8ation5 trails
*
4 Ric#ard Howard, Mentor,
ew Yor!, *+?<N Derrida, OCognito and t#e #istor%0 o/ madness0, in Writin% and <ifferenceB $oucault, OMon cor&s, cc &a&ier, cc /eu0, a&&endi( to t#e second edition o/ $olie et d)raison. Also
o/ im&ort is S#os#ana $elman0s 6a $olie )t 6a chose litteraire5 w#ere insanit% is t#e literar% su)stance4
*,4 Anglo-American /eminist criticism is &articularl% &rone to distinctions )etween Trut# and $alse#ood, Rig#t and .rong, Sane and ;nsane H or Honest% and Dis#onest%4 $or e(am&le6 G,he
/reat )ats by is a dis#onest )oo! )ecause t#e culture /rom w#ic# it deri-es and w#ic# it re/lects is radicall% dis#onest0 @$etterle%, ,he 4esistin% 4eader5 &4 +=A4
*=4 Hegel, &henomenolo%y of -pirit5 transl4 A4 J4 Miller, Clarendon, O(/ord, *+<<, &4 !!. T#e reader mig#t want to re/er to Heidegger, 7.e%et7s )oncept of :=perience5 Har&er \ Row, ew Yor!,
*+<94
*>4 T#e reader #as &ro)a)l% alread% recogniGed t#e &resence #ere o/ 2eorges 1ataille6 see
::2 A.ice Jardine
61:=p)rience int)rieure5 2allimard, Paris, *+<9H,4 On 1ataille0s notion o/ e(&erience, see 'riste-a0s FL0e(&#rience et ;a &ratiKue0, in &olylo%ue5 and Derrida0s F$rom restricted to general
econom%0, in Writin% and <ifference.
*?4 C/4 Derrida, Writin% and <ifference5 &&4 *,5H,N *>5N 2f /rammatolo%y5 &&4 ?9H*N and &ositions5 transl4 Alan 1ass, &4 ,94
*<4 Derrida, 2f /rammatolo%y5 &4 ?94
*E4 Writin% and <ifference5 &4 *>54
*+4 2f /rarnmatolo%y5 &4 *?54
594 DeleuGe and Parnet, <ialo%ues5 &&4 ?EH<54
5*4 See Derrida on t#e FA&ocal%&se06 FD0un ton a&ocal%&tiKue ado&tL naguere en &#iloso&#ic0, in 6es $ins de l1homme5 &&4 ==>HE<4
554 T#e relations#i& o/ /eminism to moral and moralistic t#in!ing #as recentl% )ecome t#e site o/ new /eminist Kuestions in $rance, es&eciall% t#roug# t#e wor! o/ t#e stud% grou& FLe Se(isme
Ordinaire0 o/ 6es ,emps modernes. $or an introduction to t#e &ro)lem, see t#e issue o/ 6es )ahiers du )4l$ F3ouir0, 5? @Marc# *+E,A, es&4 $ranMoise Petitot, F;nter-dire0, E+H+54 T#at t#e
Kuestion o/ /eminism0s relations#i& to traditional moralit% #as not )een adeKuatel% &osed in t#is countr% is e-idenced )% internal s&lits in t#e women0s mo-ement o-er S:M, &ornogra&#%,
censors#i&, etc4
5,4 See, /or e(am&le, FLa direction de ;a cure04 Lacan #imsel/ dela%ed t#e &u)lication o/ #is :thi>ue de 'a psychoanalyse @&u)lis#ed in a F&irate edition0A /or /ear it would )e &ositi-iGed4
5=4 6es $ins de l1homme5 &4 *?+4
"!. 'bid.5 &4 *<54
5?4 C/4, /or e(am&le, 2il)ert and 2u)ar0s (adwoman in the Attic5 &4 *94
5<4 'riste-a, $olle .erite5 &4 **4 T#e neologism, .reel5 suggests t#e words .rai @trut#A, r)eW @realA and c/'c @s#eA4
5E4 3ane 2allo&, GMuand nos l).res s1ecri.ent: ;rigara%0s )od% &olitic0, 4omantic 4e.iew5 <=,
*@*+E,A, E,4
5+4 $rom Adrienne Ric#0s FDi-ing into t#e wrec!0, in <i.in% into the Wreck5 &oems
1*71 I1*7"5 .4 .4 orton \ Com&an%, ;nc4, ew Yor!, *+<,4
&eriphery and &ostmodernism
'ntroduction
T#at mode o/ t#in!ing w#ic# would set u& Fcentre0 against F&eri&#er%0 in a )i&olar structural o&&osition is unremittingl% modernist4 ;t is also Iust suc# an O&&osition w#ic# ena)les t#e &ower
relations in im&erialism and colonialism4 .#en t#e nort#western ti& o/ Euro&e designated itsel/ as t#e centre o/ FEnlig#tenment0 in t#e eig#teent# centur%, it did so in t#e secure !nowledge t#at
an Funenlig#tened &eri&#er%0 was t#ere)% constructedN and t#e im&erialist e(&ansion t#at went #and in #and wit# t#e de-elo&ment o/ Enlig#tenment &#iloso&#% was not Iust a mercantile a//air,
/or it also #ad a series o/ conce&tual com&onents4 To )e Fenlig#tened0, )% de/inition, is im&licitl% to construct an idea o/ onesel/ as a Su)Iect-in-timeN one #as a &resent, c#aracterised )% lig#t,
w#ic# is distinguis#ed /rom somet#ing dar! which is necessarily prior to t#e moment o/ enlig#tenment4 A s&eci/ic model o/ #istorical narrati-e is t#ere)% &ut in &lace4 ;t is t#is narrati-e w#ic# is
e(&orted &artl% Fin return /or0 t#e mercantile e(&loitation o/ a world w#ic# is now deemed to )e in need of colonisation4 T#is situation also &roduces a Fworld #istor%0, a single narrati-e w#ic#
leads ine(ora)l% to a delineation o/ t#e condition o/ t#e im&erialist &owers as t#e most ad-anced @somew#at a!in to Rort%0s &ragmatism, discussed a)o-eA4 T#e &olitics o/ im&erialism and
colonialism is t#us a &olitics w#ic# is /ounded not Iust u&on geogra&#% )ut also u&on a series o/ tem&oral /actors, and most signi/icantl% u&on a Kuestion o/ Fs&eed06 t#e coloniser &osits #ersel/
or #imsel/ as Fad-anced0 H in ad-ance o/ a colonised, w#o is t#ere)% stigmatised as Ftard%0 or Fund
erde-elo&ed04 T#e coloniser t#us comes F/irst0, w#ile t#e tard% colonised comes
mas a &oor second or, more usuall% t#ese da%s, a FT#ird0 world4
T#is all &resu&&oses t#at t#e -arious regions o/ t#e world are all directed towards t#e same Fde-elo&ed0 end, t#at t#e% all /igure in one uni-ocal and unilinear #istor%0, t#e #istor% o/ t#e
colonising &ower4 T#e &ostmodern, #owe-er, is dee&l% sus&icious
suc# a Funi-ersal #istor%0 or metanarrati-e, &re/erring attention to t#e #eterogeneities o/ t#e Flocal0 o-er t#e #omogeneous uni-ersal4 ;n a certain sense, t#e discourse o/ &ostmodernism H
alt#oug# it is a discourse esta)lis#ed in a Eurocentred F$irst0 world H is t#e discourse of t#e &eri&#er%, a discourse (-#ic# im&erialism #ad strenuousl% silenced )ut w#ic# is now made a-aila)le4
;t alerts t#e erstw#ile centre to t#e &ossi)ilit% t#at t#ere is not one world, )ut rat#er man% worlds all )eing lised at di//erent s&eeds, according to di//erent r#%t#ms, &roducing contradictor%
#istories4 ;t distur)s t#e centre0s notion t#at its own mode o/ com&re#ension o/ t#e world is satis/actor%, /or it releases a num)er o/ worlds w#ic#, strictl% s&ea!ing, sim&l% cannot )e understood
in t#e languages and discourse o/ t#e im&erialist central &ower4 ;t does w#at t#e &eri&#er% #as alwa%s silentl% and &owerlessl% done6
it decentres t#e centre4
E-en i/ we were to consider t#e &ostmodern in its )land c#ronological sense, t#e
::$
::< &art :i%ht: &eriphery and &ostmodernism
Kuestion o/ t#e &eri&#eral would arise4 $or i/ we were to ad-ocate a &ostmodernism in certain cultures, we would )e as!ing t#ose cultures to mo-e /rom t#eir F&re modern0 condition straig#t to
&ostmodernism wit#out t#e inter-ening &ro)lematic o/ modernism itsel/4 ;t is, o/ course, &recisel% t#e discourse o/ modernism w#ic# ma!es t#e &eri&#eral a &oor tard% underde-elo&ed de-iation
o/ a normati-e Fmodernised0 centre in t#e /irst &lace4 All t#e more -ital, t#ere/ore H and &er#a&s es&eciall% /or t#e world stigmatised as F&eri&#eral0 H t#at t#e &ostmodern, as a necessar%
reconsideration o/ modernism itsel/, &roceeds a&ace4
T#e essa%s gat#ered #ere address some o/ t#e &ressing issues in t#is Kuestion4 During indicates t#at H as gugi, /or e(am&le, is &ro/oundl% aware H t#e Kuestion o/ language is at t#e core o/ a
&ost-colonialist e(&erience4 During ma!es a distinction )etween &ost-colonised and &ost-coloniser6 t#e /ormer Fidenti/% wit# t#e culture destro%ed )% im&erialism and its tongue0N t#e latter
Fcannot Iettison t#e culture and tongues o/ t#e im&erialist nations04 O/ten, o/ course, t#e tongue o/ t#e im&erialist nation is one o/ t#e dominant tongues in t#e contem&orar% world econom%, so it
is all t#e more di//icult to sur-i-e in t#at world i/ one s#uns its tongue altoget#er4 1ut t#is is &recisel% t#e &ostmodern &ro)lem6 li-ing F)etween0 t#e language o/ t#e o&&ressor and t#e occluded
language o/ t#e indigene6 #ow can one locate onesel/ as a linguistic or #istorical Su)Iect at allD T#e &ro)lem #ere a//licting t#e -ictim o/ im&erialism is t#e F&ostmodern0 one o/ a linguistic loss
o/ /oundations, wit# t#e concomitant &ro)lem o/ a loss o/ a s%stem or t#eor% o/ uni-ersal Iustice &recisel% at t#e moment w#en Iustice is most &ressingl% reKuired and demanded4
ell% Ric#ard draws attention to t#e ina&&ro&riateness o/ a Euro&ean &#iloso&#%0 o/ modernisation w#en it is trans&lanted into t#e terrain o/ Latin America4 1enedict Anderson #as argued
t#at t#e conce&t o/ a national identit% is intimatel% lin!ed to t#e de-elo&ment o/ &rint cultureN and Ric#ard modi/ies t#is #ere in t#e suggestion t#at modernit% itsel/ is esta)lis#ed wit# t#e
dominance o/ &rint4 T#e &ostmodern c#allenges t#e securit% o/ t#e su&&osedl% uni-alent signN )ut as Ric#ard &oints out, t#is is w#at Latin American narrati-es t#emsel-es Ft%&icall%0 do4 T#e
#eterogeneit%, &luralit% or contradictor% nature o/ Latin American s&ace @o/ a geogra&#% w#ic# is not sim&l% nationalA &roduced t#e e//ect o/ &ostmodernism &rior to its descri&tions in Euro&ean
discourse4 1ut it would )e a mista!e to acce&t t#is )asic deconstruction o/ centre and &eri&#er% as t#e w#ole stor%N /or t#en it would )egin to a&&ear t#at Latin American culture e(ists H
conce&tuall%, at least H as a Iusti/ication o/ and legitimation o/ t#e Euro&ean discourse on &ostmodernism4 Ric#ard indicates t#at a /urt#er stage, t#e rewriting o/ modernit% itsel/, is reKuired to
a-oid w#at would amount to a continuation o/ im&erialism )% deconstructi-e means4
Re% C#ow e(tends t#is in an Finterru&tion0 o/ $redric 3ameson0s ascri&tion o/ t#e term F&ostmodern0 to contem&orar% C#inese literature4 T#roug# a rereading o/ FMandarin Duc!s and
1utter/lies0, a term used to descri)e a )road genre o/ &o&ulist writing in a C#inese tradition, C#ow draws attention to t#e numerous di//iculties encountered in reading w#at we mig#t re/er to as
an Fo)Iect culture0 t#roug# t#e discourses o/ a Fsu)Iect culture06 in s#ort, &ro)lems deri-ing /rom et#nocentrism4
;n all t#e &ieces included in t#is section, t#e di//iculties o/ reading Facross a )order0
::=
are #ig#lig#ted, indicating t#at alt#oug# t#e &ostmodern ma% )e internationalist, it is also necessaril% regionalist, attenti-e to localit% and to t#e #eterogeneous discourses o/ location4
FHere, now06 t#e &ostmodern as a Kuestion o/ geogra&#% anal%sed elsew#ere )% Har-e% and SoIa is #ere addressed in geocultural terms4
*0
;
'ntroduction
&ostmodernism or &ost-colonialism
82 Li &ostmodernism or
&ost-colonialism ,oday
Si#on D,rin
Construction o/ t#e conce&t F&ostmodernit%0 &roceeds toda% at a ra&id &ace4 A welter o/ articles and )oo!s de/ine, ela)orate, cele)rate and denounce t#is t#ing, t#e &ostmodern, w#ose -er%
e(istence is matter /or se&arate, energetic de)ate4 Clearl% interests are at sta!e, careers are )eing made4 1ut t#is acti-it% is /inall% &roduced )% t#e conce&t itsel/, w#ic# )eing )ased on &arado(,
generates discussion4 On t#e one #and, F&ostmodernit%0 names t#e loss o/ critical distance in t#e world toda%, and on t#e ot#er, it names t#e delegitimation o/ t#ose categories )% w#ic# a cultural
centre or a socio-economic )ase mig#t )e identi/ied4 So writing a)out &ostnlodernit% im&lies its a)sence4 ;/ t#ere is no critical distance under &ost-modernit%, t#en #ow can t#ere )e distance
enoug# /or anal%sis o/ it to &roceedD And i/ it is !nowa)le onl% as decentred, t#en #ow can its essence )e recogniGed at allD To )e dis&ersed in t#is sense is no longer to ta!e t#e /orm o/ an
identi/ia)le o)Iect4 Suc# &arado(es, w#ic# resist closure, &roduce t#e dee&l% &ro)lematic o)Iect o/ t#eir attention4
T#e most &ersuasi-e accounts o/ t#e &ostmodern are t#ose H li!e 3ameson0s essa% FPostmodernism, or t#e cultural logic o/ late ca&italismOi and li!e L%otard0s recent wor! H w#ic# remain
sensiti-e to t#ese &aralogisms4 ;t is /or t#is reason t#at ; s#all )e concerned wit# 3ameson and L%otard #ere4 1ut, &artl% in order to esca&e ca&ture )% t#e &arado(es o/ &ostmodernit%, m%
argument will &roceed /rom t#ree &ositions w#ic# counter t#e conce&tual under&innings o/ F&ostmodernit%04
$irst, ; &ro&ose, against 3ameson, t#at &ostmodernit% oug#t not to )e concei-ed o/ as Fa cultural dominant04
5
e(t, ; want to urge t#at it is Iust as rewarding to construe literar% &ostmodernism
as an enem% o/ &ostmodernit% as to consider it as its e(&ression and #el&meet4 T#us in et#ico-&olitical terms &ostmodernist te(ts do not di//er /rom modernist te(ts (-#ic# are simultaneousl%
enemies o/, and moments in, modernit%4 @T#is is to ta!e a di//erent line /rom t#at o/ eit#er li)erals li!e Trilling or .estern Mar(ists li!e t#e later Adorno, w#o see contem&orar% culture as
c#aracteriGed )% t#e disa&&earance o/ ad-erserial &ossi)ilities4A And, t#ird, ; ta!e t#e
$rom ,e=tual &ractice5 *, * @*+E<A, ,5H=<4
::9
::B
&osition t#at i/ t#ere is somet#ing t#at ma% )e called &ostmodern t#oug#t, it too wor!s in wa%s t#at cannot )e regarded as a mere e(&ression o/ an underl%ing &ostmodernit%4
.e can, rat#er )rutall%, c#aracteriGe &ostmodern t#oug#t @t#e &#rase is use/ul rat#er t#an #a&&%A as t#at t#oug#t w#ic# re/uses to turn t#e Ot#er into t#e Same4 T#us it &ro-ides a t#eoretical
s&ace /or w#at &ostmodernit- denies6 ot#erness4 Postmodern t#oug#t also recogniGes, #owe-er, t#at t#e Ot#er can ne-er s&ea! /or itsel/ as t#e Ot#er4 One s#ould #esitate to call a discourse
w#ic# re-ol-es around t#ese &ositions eit#er /or or against &ostmodernit%, )ut it is certainl% not sim&l% consonant wit# it4
T#ese &ro&ositions, none o/ w#ic# is eit#er original or uncontentious, and all O w#ic# will )e /les#ed out )elow, allow me to mount m% central t#esis4 T#is is t#at t#e conce&t &ostmodernit%
#as )een constructed in terms w#ic# more or less intentionall% wi&e out t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ &ost-colonial identit%4 ;ndeed, intention aside, t#e conce&tual anni#ilation o/ t#e &ost-colonial condition
is actuall% necessar% to an% argument w#ic# attem&ts to s#ow t#at Fwe0 now li-e in &ostmodernit-4 $or me, &er#a&s eccentricall%, &ost-colonialism is regarded as t#e need, in nations or grou&s
w#ic# #a-e )een -ictims o/ im&erialism, to ac#ie-e an identit% uncontaminated )% uni-ersalist or Eurocentric conce&ts and images4 Here t#e argument )ecomes com&le(, since &ost-colonialism
constitutes one o/ t#ose Ot#ers w#ic# mig#t deri-e #o&e and legitimation /rom t#e /irst as&ect o/ &ostmodern t#oug#t, its re/usal to turn t#e Ot#er into t#e Same4 As suc# it is t#reatened )% t#e
second moment in &ostmodern t#oug#t4
;/ &ostmodernit% is regarded as a condition w#ic# is dominant toda%, t#en t#e Kuestion immediatel% arises6 w#at else is t#ereD 3ameson, /or instance, does not co&e wit# t#is Kuestion easil%4
He concei-es o/ &ostmodernit% as t#e culture &roduced )% multinational ca&italism6 a totalit% w#ic# is t#e e//ect o/ anot#er totalit%4 All t#e cultural &#enomena t#at 3ameson re/ers to instantiate
&ostmodernit%4 @;n /act, #e comes ultimatel% to t#in! o/ it as so &ower/ul as to )e literall% inconcei-a)le, t#at is, as onl% to )e t#oug#t o/ indirectl%, as t#e su)lime4A T#e onl% tool /or anal%sing
an emergence as immense and total as &ostmodernit% is e(&ressi-e causalit%4 $or a t#eorist as so&#isticated as 3ameson elsew#ere s#ows #imsel/ to )e, t#is re&resents a retrogressi-e, not to sa% a
de/eatist mo-e4
3ameson in#erits t#ese &ro)lems4 His Hegelian #eritage ena)les #im to t#in! )ot# o/ culture as a totalit% and o/ #istor% as a succession o/ e&oc#s4 ;ndeed, current Mar(ist accounts o/
F&ostmodernit%0 are articulated in terms t#at re&eat earlier accounts o/ modern culture )% t#e Hegelian Mar(ism o/ t#e $ran!/urt Sc#ool4 ;n &articular, Adorno0s im&ortant late essa% FCultural
criticism and societ%0 lies )e#ind 3ameson0s te(t4 Adorno came to see w#at #e too called late ca&italism as a condition in w#ic# t#e world is totall% mediated )% consciousness4 ;n it, ideolog% is
no longer /alse consciousness, and #ig# culture )ecomes FneutraliGed04 O Adorno also argues t#at t#e conce&tual under&inning o/ )ot# tranOcendental critiKue @critiKue /rom a &osition outside
t#e &#enomena under anal%sisA and immanent critiKue @critiKue /rom contradictions noted wit#inA #as disa&&eared as societ% #as )ecome rei/ied4
:$9 S;#on D,rin &ostmodernism or &ost-colonialism
1ut Adorno goes /urt#er t#an 3ameson4 He argues t#at t#e Mar(ist trans/or mation o/ trut# as corres&ondence into trut# as &ra(is #as )een a)sor)ed )% ca&italism as t#e #egemonic /orces #a-e
turned &ragmatic -iews o/ trut# to t#eir own ends4 And, on t#e ot#er #and, t#e counter-attem&t to &rotect areas o/ culture /rom instrumental reason now /ails )ecause ideolog% itsel/ #as no
instrumental /unction4 ;t #as dissol-ed into distraction, &leasure4 T#us t#e world is now an Fo&en-air &rison0N a &lace w#ere, in t#e words o/ a *+,< essa% )% Marcuse, w#ic# /eeds into Adorno0s,
Fmen can /eel t#emsel-es #a&&% wit#out )eing so at all04
=
3ameson0s cultural &essimism, t#en, is alread% laid out )% Adorno4 Howe-er, Adorno re/ers not to &ostmodernit% )ut to a /ormation t#at includes totalitarian and /ascist culture4 $or instance,
it is t#e totalitarian state w#ic# #as aest#eticiGed e(istence to t#e degree t#at &oetr% cannot )e written a/ter Ausc#witG4 T#at /amous line does not mean, as is generall% su&&osed, t#at Ausc#witG
is too terri)le an e(&erience to )e written a)outN it means t#at writing under /ascism and late ca&italism #as )ecome too tri-ial to e(&ress real #orror4 T#e discourse in w#ic# 3 ameson constructs
&ostmodernit% was once used, in &art, to denounce /ascism4 @Marcuse0s essa% would )e anot#er &oint o/ de&arture4A T#is matters, not )ecause anal%sis o/ /ascism is irrele-ant to our culture, )ut
)ecause it allows us to wonder w#et#er t#e categories o/ totalit% and dominance need to )e ret#oug#t w#en we turn t#em to our own times4
Adorno also di//ers /rom 3ameson w#en #e imagines lines o/ /lig#t /rom late ca&italism4 3ameson sees esca&e in a &ostmodern &olitics w#ose -ocation would )e to ma& t#e contem&orar%
condition, w#ic# #e )elie-es to )e, under current categories, unma&&a)le4 Clearl% #is own essa% )elie-es itsel/ to )e engaging in suc# a &olitics4 Adorno sees esca&e in a !ind o/ t#oug#t Fw#ic#
stri-es solel% to #el& t#e t#ings t#emsel-es to t#at articulation /rom w#ic# t#e% are ot#erwise cut o// )% &re-ailing language0A ;n almost a li)eral s&irit, Adorno wis#es to &ro-ide room /or sel/-
determination4 True, #e cannot o//er sel/-articulation a &rogramme, t#oug# t#e /ierce insistence o/ Fno &oetr% a/ter Ausc#witG0 does, r#etoricall%, /ree a s&ace in t#e un/reedom w#ic# is our
/reedom4 3ameson0s wea! call /or new /orms o/ ma&&ing, wit# its em&#asis on cogniti-e !nowledge, Iust li!e #is return to e(&ressi-e causalit%, s#ows #ow tra&&ed #e is com&ared to Adorno4
Per#a&s t#is is so because Adorno #as a stronger gras& o/ t#e contem&orar% disintegration o/ cognition, e(&ression and re/lection4 $or #e calls not Iust /or !nowledge )ut /or action4
Yet H and #ere we a&&roac# t#e cru( o/ t#e matter H t#e wea!est moment in 3ameson0s essa% comes w#en, des&ite e-er%t#ing, #e tries to t#in! &ostmodernit% dialecticall%4 He as!s #imsel/
#ow a &ositi-e -iew o/ its emergence can )e ta!en, and #ow it &ermits t#e /orward marc# o/ #istor%4 He turns to t#e Finternationalism0 o/ &ostmodernit%4 ;ts &rogressi-e tas! is to realiGe t#e end
o/ nationalism so desired )% some socialisms4 He adds6 FT#e disastrous realignment o/ socialist re-olution wit# t#e older nationalisms @not onl% in Sout# East AsiaA, w#ose results #a-e
necessaril% aroused suc# serious recent Le/t re/lection, can )e adduced in su&&ort o/ t#is &osition40
?
T#e strongest enemies o/ &ostmodernit% a&&ear at t)is wea! &oint6 t#e
:$1
new &ost-colonial nationalisms4 ;ndeed, one can )e /orgi-en /or t#in!ing t#at 3ameson is #arnessing all t#e &ower in#erent in images o/ totalitarianism to eradicate cultural di//erence in t#e old
s&irit o/ enlig#tened modernit%4 T#e reason w#% one cannot -iew &ostmodernit% dialecticall% )ecomes a&&arent4 As soon as one allows t#e notion o/ t#e F&ositi-e0 or F&rogressi-e0 to rea&&ear in
anal%sis, t#e o)Iect one #as in -iew is not &ostmodernit% )ut a stage on t#e #istorical Iourne% to t#e lig#t4 And &rogress, as e-er, must )e de/ined )% determinate negation H as not t#e
retrogressi-e, not t#e residual, not t#e &rimiti-e, not t#e irrationalism o/ ot#er cultures4 One can sa% in general, t#en, t#at in order to name &ostmodernit% as a cultural dominant e(&ressing itsel/
in &ostmodern arti/acts 3ameson #as to assume t#e coming to &ower o/ neo-im&erialism, and to in/lect &ostmodernit% &ositi-el% #e #as, /or a moment, to )ecome com&licit wit# it4 O
How to t#in! &ostmodernit% ot#erwiseD How not to read it as t#e su)lime, a totalit% so &ower/ul as to resist our older !nowledgeD ;t seems to me t#at one must &roceed at once on two
registers6 one arc#aeological, t#e ot#er genealogical4 @T#ese words are used #ere at some distance /rom $oucault4A Postmodernit% must )e seen as an e//ect o/ discrete cultural s%stems and not as
a s&irit or e&oc#, t#e ad-ance guard o/ #istor%4 T#e /eatures o/ &ostmodernit%, w#ic# no one #as descri)ed )etter t#an 3ameson, are &roduced wit#in a /inite /ield o/ w#at mig#t )e called cultural
mac#ines6 t#ose te(ts, images, discourses, eac# /ormed wit#in &articular tec#nologies or media, eac# wit# its own wa% o/ organiGing t#e inter-ention on t#e real, and eac# wit# its mode o/
su)Iect /ormation4
1ut &ostmodernit% is !nown as &ostmodernit% wit#in a discourse w#ic#, as we #a-e )egun to see, #as its own &ast4 T#us to t#in! &ostmodernit% outside t#e totaliGing categories o/ .estern
Mar(ism is to inter&ret t#e ideological e//ects o/ discrete cultural s%stems wit#out assuming t#at t#ese e//ects ta!e t#e /orm o/ a w#ole4 ;s is also to re/lect on t#e sources and #istor% o/ t#e
conce&ts one uses to descri)e suc# e//ects4 T#ere is alwa%s a li)erating moment w#en one e(amines t#e genealog% o/ one0s discourse4 T#at discourse )ecomes itsel/ not natural and ine-ita)le
)ut #istorical, &ro-isional and o&en to c#ange4 ;n addition to t#ese dual &roIects o/ arc#aeolog% and genealog% one must also t#in! &ostmodernit% diacriticall%4 2i-en t#at F&ost-0 w#ic# rules its
usage, it remains a notion w#ic# needs to )e de/ined against modernit%4
; cannot o//er a /ull reading o/ w#at ; #a-e called a cultural s%stem #ere, )ut let me s#ow w#at ; mean )% loo!ing )rie/l% at Co&&ola0s /ilm Apocalypse How. ;t is an es&eciall% good e(am&le
)ecause it rewor!s Conrad0s modernist classic 7eart O3 <arkness5 and so allows an entr% /or diacritical anal%sis4 ;n turn, 7eart of <arkness is canonical Iust )ecause it o//ers a critiKue o/ modernit%
)% )rea!ing down t#e terms in w#ic# Euro&ean t#oug#t distinguis#ed itsel/ /rom t#e &rimiti-e4 T#us i/ one su&&oses t#at &ostmodernit% di//ers /rom modernit% in t#e wa% it legitimates or
delegitimates im&erialism, or, more radicall%, i/ one sus&ects t#at t#e discourse o/ &ostmodernit% is once again grounded on a denial o/ ot#erness, t#en one would e(&ect Apocalypse How to )ear
t#ese #%&ot#eses out4
7eart of <arkness s#ows t#at t#e ot#erness o/ t#e &rimiti-e is &recisel% Four0
&us tmodernism or &ost-colonialism :$8
:$2 Si#on D,rin
ot#erneSs H w#ere t#at Four0 indicates, #owe-er tentati-el%, a ci-iliGed Eurocentric communitY4 As t#e title suggests, it is a direct in-ersion o/ Enlig#tenment uni-ersalism, w#ic# assumes all
#uman )eings to )e eKual in so /ar as t#e% are led )% t#e lig#t o/ reason and no /urt#er4 T#e -aloriGation o/ .estern reason and ci-iliGation )ecomes /or Conrad a cloa! /or greed, destruction
and, &arado(icall%0, t#e return o/ irrationalit% )ecause it allows men to su&&ose t#emsel-es gods4 T#e stor% ma!es its &oint, #owe-er, in terms o/ an old m%t#ic narrati-e6 t#e -o%age to t#e
underground and )ac!, wit# its !nown stages and clima(4 T#ere is t#ere/ore a con/idence t#at t#e culture can narrati-iGe its reneging on enlig#tenment4 T#e te(t also #as its own &ositi-e
ideological &roIect4 Marlow0s -oice gra/ts t#e discourse o/ Ft#e common man0 on to t#at o/ t#e sensiti-e, alienated intellectual4 ;n t#is wa%, negati-e uni-ersalism still wor!s towards a
consensus4 Marlow also attem&ts, t#oug# -ainl%, to autonomiGe instrumental reason H -ainl%, )ecause #is wor! /inall% /ul/ils im&erialist ends4 $inall%, t#e te(t &resents one &lace in societ% t#at is
&rotected /rom its own trut#s4 Marlow, w#o !nows t#at enlig#tenment is a /orm o/ )ar)arism, t#at t#e .est0s Ot#er is t#e .est itsel/, &rotects .estern women /rom t#at trut# )% l%ing to t#em4
FT#e #orror, t#e #orror0, 'urtG0s last words, are ne-er re&orted to #is /iancee4 S#e continues to )elie-e t#at #e dies wit# #er name on #is li&s4 1ut t#ere is a twist #ere4 Her -alues t#at reKuire
&rotection /rom t#e trut# are t#e #orror too, ma!ing Marlow0s lie a trut#4
2i-en t#is summar% reading o/ Conrad0s stor%, one could sim&l% go on to read t#e /ilm to mar! t#e di-ision )etween t#e modern and t#e &ostmodern4 1ut t#e &rimar% s#i/t is one o/ media
and tec#nolog%, not o/ meaning4 Conrad0s tale is written: #ow to catc# t#e -oice in writing and w#ic# -oice to catc# are Kuestions it is o-ertl% an(ious a)out4 Apocalypse How consists o/ sounds
and images4 @T#is o)-ious &oint #as a somew#at less o)-ious corollar%4 T#e &ri-ileging o/ t#e &la% in writing in current t#oug#t is in itsel/ an act o/ resistance to &ostmodern tec#nolog%4A
$urt#ermore, Conrad0s no-el is t#e &roduct o/ a man writing alone at #ome, autonomousl%N it reKuires no in-estment, no collecti-e enter&rise, and t#us no #ig# circulation4 Alt#oug# it was
written /or Klackwood1s (a%a8ine H no Iournal )eing less a -e#icle /or elitist modernism H t#e sense t#at it #as no real audience is constantl% /oregrounded in t#e stor%4 ;t is as i/ t#e te(t0s im&lied
reader )elongs to 'urtG0s /iancee0s social s&ace, w#ere t#e trut# ma% not )e )orne4 1ut Co&&ola0s /ilm, w#ic# reKuires an audience /or material reasons, cannot draw an% )ounds to its audience
at allN its im&lied reader is t#e a)stract consumer, an%one at all4
1ecause t#e /ilm is a &roduct o/ ad-anced tec#nolog%, it #as Kuite a di//erent &lace in t#e world /rom t#at o/ t#e no-ella4 ;n &articular, it dissol-es t#e di-ision )etween trut# and lie /rom
Kuite anot#er direction4 Ta!e t#e scene w#ere .illard H t#e Marlow /igure H /irst encounters t#e air ca-alr%4 He Ium&s out o/ a #elico&ter into a )lur o/ -iolence, noise and danger, in a scene
w#ose &roduction -alues are sO strong t#at t#e /ilm seems less t#e re&resentation o/ a re&resentation o/ )attle t#an a recording o/ actual /ig#ting itsel/4 Suddenl% a -oice s#outs6 FLoo! li!e
%ou0re /ig#ting^0 T#is is not t#e entr% o/ &ostmodern sel/-re/erentialit%4 .e soon realiGe t#at w#at we are seeing is, in &art, t#e re&resentation o/ a rKAresentation o/ a
;
re&resentation6 t#e troo&s are /ig#ting on and /or t#e tele-ision cameras w#ic# are graduall% &anned into sig#t4 ;s all t#is totall% /a!e, t#en H a moc! )attle /or t#e /ol!s )ac! #ome
watc#ing t#e newsD o6 neit#er /a!e nor genuine, or /a!e and genuine4 FReal0 )odies litter t#e ground4 T#e /usion o/ t#eatre and war, war as t#eatre, is a &roduct o/ modern
communications tec#nolog% and Kuite /oreign to Conrad0s moral sense t#at a lie ma% tell t#e trut#4
;n /act, not onl% is war t#eatre, )ut /ilm is war4 ;/ we read @as good consumersA Eleanor Co&&ola0s )estselling account o/ li/e on location, we realiGe t#at t#ese stunningl% realistic
)attle scenes were made &ossi)le )% Co&&ola0s #iring arms and eKui&ment /rom t#e $ili&ino arm%4 E During s#ooting t#ese were &eriodicall% )orrowed )ac! )% t#e arm% to /ig#t real
insurgents in t#e mountains4 And t#e /ilm set itsel/ was under guard )ecause o/ /ears t#at it would )e attac!ed /or its su&&lies4 T#e /ilm is ena)led )% acts o/ neo-im&erialist war6 it
cannot disengage itsel/ /rom w#at it re&resents4 T#e colla&se o/ distinctions #ere )etween ma!ing /ilms and ma!ing war is not &rimaril% a cultural /act or a t#eme, )ut an outcome o/
s&eci/ic material conditions4 ;ts e//ects remain ideological, #owe-er6 t#is &articular s%stem induces t#eories o/ t#e loss o/ distance )etween t#e image and t#e imaged4
T#e derealiGing o/ t#e world is also an im&licit t#eme o/ t#e /ilm4 .illard0s e%es are constantl% s#own registering dis)elie/ t#at t#e e-ents #e witnesses ma!e u& realit%4 1ut t#e nai-e
res&onse to t#is H F1etter t#an Disne%land0, as one o/ t#e soldiers &uts it H is inadeKuate4 .#at t#e /ilm ma!es clear is t#at Jietnam is Firreal0 )ecause &rinci&les o/ intelligi)ilit% )% w#ic#
to e(&erience it are missing4 ;n Conrad t#ese &rinci&les were narrati-it% on t#e one #and, and t#e unit% o/ t#e su)Iecti-e consciousness on t#e ot#er4 Marlow0s stor% and t#e unit% o/ #is
res&onse ma!e e(&eriences o/ im&erialist A/rica, w#ic# #e also !nows to )e unreal and un)elie-a)le, ultimatel% meaning/ul4 T#ese categories do not wor! in t#e /ilm, &artl% /or
tec#nical reasons4 S#ots o/ .illard0s e%es #a-e to do muc# o/ t#e wor! o/ &resenting su)Iecti-e res&onse4 Yet t#e% can ne-er o/ t#emsel-es s#ow #ow #e inter&rets w#at #e sees4 E-en
seKuences w#ic# mo-e meton%micall% /rom an e(&ression o/ dis)elie/ to scenes o/ #orror can onl% /oreground t#e ga& )etween eac# s#ot4 T#e interaction )etween su)Iecti-e
consciousness and t#e outer world /ails w#en su)Iects )ecome -isual o)Iects6 e%es, mout#s, )odies4 One mig#t argue t#at t#e -oice-o-er could do t#e wor! instead, )ringing t#e e-ents
into t#e unit% o/ a so-ereign su)Iect0s res&onse to t#em4 T#e disIunction )etween image and sound in t#e /ilm &re-ents t#at4 .illard0s -oice-o-er, unli!e Marlow0s, is not in itsel/ t#e
means both o/ re&resenting e-ents and o/ inter&reting t#em su)Iecti-el%4 ;n t#e /ilm t#e re&resenting /unction is gi-en o-er to t#e camera, )loc!ing control o/ re&resentation )%
su)Iecti-it%4 T#us t#e autonom%0 o/ t#e )ourgeois su)Iect, w#ic# de&ends not onl% on a clear di-ision o/ sel/ and world )ut on a means )% w#ic# t#e sel/ can a)sor) t#e world, comes
a&art in /ilm4 Here we encounter a moment in t#e s%stem w#ose e//ect is t#e &ostmodern sense o/ t#e deat# o/ t#e &s%c#ological su)Iect and t#e end o/ e(&ression4
T#e /ilm )egins wit# a Doors song entitled FT#e End0 on t#e soundtrac! as .illard undergoes a ner-ous )rea!down4 T#is )rea!down is e(&ressi-e, )ut o/ not#ing4
;
:$O
:$: '1ostmodernism or &us t-culonialis51i Si#on D,rin
A/ter all, not#ing #as #a&&ened to #im as %et4 T#e scene seems to )e an initial e(orciGing o/ t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ e(&ression6 a/ter t#is #is onl% emotion H i/ emotion it is H is dis)elie/4 1ut t#e /irst
scene wor!s against narrati-e6 at t#e )eginning is t#e end4 At t#e )eginning is a #orror signi/%ing not#ing H or e-er%t#ing H Iust as at t#e end4 T#e grounds /or t#e dismantling o/ narrati-e
&rogress can, #owe-er, )e located more &recisel%4 Conrad0s narrati-e is a Iourne% awa% /rom lig#t to dar!ness and )ac! to lig#t as dar!ness4 ;t reKuires a world wit# a )oundar% )etOseen
ci-iliGation and sa-ager%, e-en i/ t#ose distinctions ultimatel% -anis#4 Suc# a di//erence e(ists in t#e /ilm onl% as Kuotation4 .illard, li!e Marlow, tra-els u& a ri-er )% )oat, )ut messages to #im
are alwa%s in /ront o/ #im4 Helico&ters and Iets /l% a)o(e #im towards #is destination4 T#e /orm o/ #is Iourne% is unmoti-atedN it seems a Conradian ec#o4 1ecause t#ere is no outside to t#e
tec#nolog% o/ war, a teleological narrati-e e(ists as no more t#an nostalgia4
Second, t#e Conradian clima(es w#ic# do occur H 'urtG sa%ing FT#e #orror, t#e #orror0 H do so as citation4 3ust as tec#nolog% is t#ere )e/ore t#e indi-idual @e-en 'urtG0s com&ound #as a
radioA, Conrad0s te(t is alwa%s t#ere )e/ore t#e /ilm itsel/4 T#is s%mmetr% is muc# less t#an an eKui-alence, #owe-er4 Co&&ola is using Conrad0s narrati-e to tell t#e trut# a)out Jietnam, )ut in
t#e attem&t we are le/t wit# #istorical incongruit% and a mere monumentaliGation o/ modernism4 'urti Kuotes EliotN #e is reading $raGer and .estonN #e deli-ers a ietGsc#ean tirade on
greatness as t#e ca&acit% to )ear t#e su//ering o/ ot#ers4 T#oug# #e is descri)ed as a genius, all t#is can ne-er add u& to c#arisma4 ;t is t#e standard matter o/ a li)eral arts education4 His true
distinction in t#e /ilm0s own terms is #is e//icienc%, #is re/usal to &la% t#e #%&ocritical game o/ arm% )ureaucrats4 1ut in #a-ing #im !illed t#e% do not &la% t#eir own game eit#er H so t#ere is no
/inal di//erence #ere4 8ltimatel%, e//icienc% rules e-er%w#ere4 T#e -alues o/ #onour, trut# and wor! /or wor!0s sa!e, w#ic# Conrad u&#olds as #e re-eals t#eir limits, #a-e disa&&eared along
wit# t#e autonomous su)Iect and wor! o/ art4
$inall%, t#ere is t#e Kuestion o/ cultural re&roduction4 ;n Conrad0s te(t t#e stor% is told to a s#adow% Fus0 and not t#e /iancLe4 Co&&ola0s 'urtG is o)sessed wit# getting #is trut# told to #is
sonN #e entrusts t#at tas! to .illard )e/ore committing suicide4 He and .illard t#in! #is trut# is unre&resenta)le, su)lime4 F; worr% t#at %ou mig#t not understand w#at ; #a-e #ad to )e,0 #e tells
.illard4 Yet t#e im&ossi)ilit% o/ re&resenting 'urtG is not t#e su)lime im&ossi)ilit% o/ ma!ing t#e )oundless concei-a)leN it is t#e tri-ial im&ossi)ilit% o/ ma!ing t#e second#and /irst#and4
'urtG0s greatness is a reKuirement o/ narrati-e clima( and intelligi)ilit%N it is not in #im4 A strange conseKuence emerges6 i/ t#ere is not#ing great to tell, iO t#e categories o/ intelligi)ilit%
colla&se, t#en it loo!s as i/ t#e culture mig#t not re&roduce itsel/ #istoricall%4 T#e age o/ #istor% ma% disa&&ear into #istor%4 Here -40e catc# sig#t o/ t#e wa% in w#ic# &ostmodernit% consumes
#istor%, in t#e sense o/ nulli/%ing it4 ;t remains an e//ect rat#er t#an an e(&ression or t#eme4
Yet t#e /ailure to re&roduce will not #a&&en in silence4 A/ter all, 'urtG is on t#e screen /or us all to see4 Conrad )elie-ed #is message to )e so dangerous t#at it mig#t reall% not #a-e #earers4
Co&&ola0s /ilm, w#ic# tells us t#at it )ears an image so
S
dangerous as to resist com&re#ension, reKuires t#at t#e unre&roduci)le #e s#own e-er%w#ere4 T#e true message is t#at not#ing now is unre&roduci)leN it is Iust t#at cultural re&roduction #as
di-orced itsel/ /rom cultural -alues4
T#ese remar!s do not ma!e u& a /ull reading o/ t#e /ilm, )ut t#e% o//er enoug# /or us to see t#at it /unctions as a s%stem creating effects o/ &ostmodernit% wit#in a Kuite s&eci/ic tec#nological,
economic and ideological /rame, rat#er t#an an instance o/ t#at octo&us F&ostmodernit%0 or e-en Fmultinational ca&italism04 .#at seems most dee&l% entrenc#ed in t#ese e//ects is t#e
encroac#ment o/ .estern &ower and tec#nolog% u&on t#e T#ird .orld4 T#e destruction o/ narrati-it% is an e//ect o/ t#at &ower0s )eing a)le to reac# an%w#ere4 T#e /ilm itsel/ )ecomes war
wit#in t#e /rame o/ neo-im&erialism4
At t#is &oint it is wort# recalling a /inal di//erence )etween Conrad and Co&&ola4 T#e original in#a)itants o/ A/rica are re&resented in Conrad0s te(t4 ;t is true t#at t#e% are /alsel% &resented as
canni)als, )ut t#e% &la% a role t#at allows t#e .est to !now itsel/ as Ot#er to itsel/4 T#e Jietnamese enem% are now#ere in Co&&ola0s mo-ie4 T#e /ilm ac#ie-es its sense o/ total irrealit% )%
wi&ing t#em out o/ t#e screen4 ;/ t#e discourse o/ &ostmodernit% c#aracteriGes t#e &ostmodern as t#at w#ic# !nows no Ot#er, t#en in t#is /ilm t#at Ot#er is eliminated )% /iat4 ;/ t#ere were an
enem% a-aila)le /or re&resentation, &er#a&s t#en t#ere would )e narrati-e rat#er t#an Iust citation4 ;n t#e /ailure to concede T#ird .orld nationalism a rig#t to e(istence, w#at is re-ealed is t#at
will to totalit% and /ailure o/ imagination we #a-e alread% /ound in 3ameson4 T#is seems more t#an coincidence4 ;s t#ere, a/ter all, a secret !e% wit# w#ic# to unloc! &ostmodernit%D ;/ so, can it
)e /ound in t#ose w#o come not to denounce t#e &ostmodern li!e 3ameson, nor in t#at w#ic# &roduces e//ects o/ &ostmodernit%, )ut in t#at -er% &ostmodern t#oug#t w#ic# is totalit%0s enem%D
$or L%otard, &ostmodernit% is a condition o/ !nowledge at least as muc# as an e&oc#4 ;t is a moment wit#in and )e#ind modernit%, concei-ed o/ again muc# in t#e s&irit o/ Marcuse and Adorno4
;nstead o/ &ro&osing a #istor% centred on t#e de-elo&ment o/ t#e ca&italist mode o/ &roduction, #e t#in!s o/ modernit% as a &rocess o/ social rationaliGation4 ;n #is /irst account o/ t#e to&ic, ,he
&ostmodern )ondition5 t#is &rocess is concei-ed o/ negati-el%6 t#e modern is mar!ed )% t#e emergence o/ instrumental reason4 ;n modernit%, criteria o/ w#at #e calls F&er/ormaticit%0 o-ercome
a&&eals to tradition or meta&#%sical trut#4 .#at counts is not w#% an act is done or w#% a t#oug#t is t#oug#t, )ut #ow e//icientl% and to w#at immediate end4 A&&lied science is t#e #ome o/
instrumental reason, w#ic# @as researc#A graduall% comes to )e t#e standard against w#ic# all !nowledge is measured4
T#is de-elo&ment #as discursi-e conseKuences6 cogniti-e utterances w#ic# can )e -eri/ied and &ermit control o-er nature are &ri-ileged o-er t#ose w#ic# cannot4 1ut ultimatel% science
cannot -alidate itsel/N onl% its ser-ices to &ower, its instrumentalit%, &ermit it to cast a s&ell o/ Fsel/-legitimac%04 T#e recognition o/ t#e /ailure o/ science0s claim to sel/-legitimation s&ells t#e
end /or t#e grand narrati-es
:$< Si#on D,rin
&us tmodernism or &ost-colonialism
o/ #uman emanci&ation and &#iloso&#ical s&eculation4 T#eir colla&se re-eals a /ragmented set o/ discursi-e /ormations and &ractices4 T#e &ostmodern Iust acce&ts t#at science itsel/ must act in
terms o/ &rescri&ti-es, and cannot -alidate itsel/4 ;t must )e tolerant o/ &aralogism, see!ing no solace /rom t#e /ragmentation and incommensura)ilit% o/ discourses4 And in ,he &ostmodern
)ondition5 t#oug# not in L%otard0s later wor!, narrati-e !nowledge ta!es t#e &lace o/ science as t#e &re/erred order4
L%otard0s most recent )oo!, 6e <tfferend5 t#oug# not directl% concerned wit# &ostmodernism, e(amines )ot# t#e oral conseKuences and t#e &#iloso&#ical grounds o/ discursi-e
#eterogeneit%4 T#e &aradigm /or a d8fferend is a case in w#ic# two &arties in dis&ute cannot articulate t#eir cause in t#e same idiom4 He distinguis#es an inIur% Eun domma%eD /rom an inIustice
Eun tortD 4 ;n an inIustice, t#e inIur% is not Iudged according to t#e litigant0s own criteria o/ -alidit%, so t#at t#e litigant @w#o t#en )ecomes a -ictimA is in e//ect silenced4 T#is Iuridical &aradigm
is not limited to t#e courts4 T#e &ri-ileging o/ descri&ti-e statements o-er &rescri&ti-e ones is a differend w#ic# occurs wit#in endHmeans rationalit%N t#e .est &laces t#e coloniGed &eo&les in a
d8fferendB ca&italism, wit# its ties to uni-ersalit%, creates a dtfferendB /or t#e s&eci/ic, t#e une(c#angea)le, and so on4
$or L%otard, in a Cartesian s&irit, w#at e(ists )e%ond dou)t is t#e &#rase or &#rase e-ent4 1ut eac# &#rase occurs as a d8fferend: to lin! one &#rase to anot#er is to commit an inIustice to
&ossi)le genres w#ic# t#e /irst &#rase mig#t o)ligate4 Once t#e not#ingness )etween &#rase e-ents is )ridged in t#e interest o/ a use, as it must )e, a differend alread% e(ists4 T#us L%otard is a)le
to sa%, F&olitics is a matter o/ lin!age )etween &#rases0 and is constituted wit#in t#e Fci-il war o/ language wit# itsel/04 FO Here t#e .ittgensteinian sense t#at t#e limits o/ language are t#e limits
o/ t#e world gras&s #ands wit# Derrida0s &ro&osition, in #is remar!s on Le-i-Strauss, t#at F-iolence is writing04 O T#e groundlessness o/ language, its edging out on to not#ing, its c#aracter as a
mere e.ent5 t#e /act t#at it does not e(ist as a unit% declaring its own lin!ages to itsel/, all ena)le t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ disagreement, o/ cultural di//erence, o/ -iolence, as well as t#e mirage @;/ sel/-
identit%4
8nli!e .ittgenstein and Derrida, L%otard returns /rom t#ese transcendental claims to #istor%4 T#e result disa&&oints at least as muc# as it &romises4 1ecause language is not a unit%, )ecause
it necessaril% sets d8flerends into &la%, t#ose metagenres o/ discourse w#ic# claimed to co-er all ot#er genres o/ discourse @s&eculationO or w#ic# &romised an end to inIustice @narrati-es o/
#uman emanci&ationA are ungrounda)le4 P#iloso&#% alone is not res&onsi)le /or t#eir de-alidation, #owe-erN t#e% die in #istor%4 ;n modern #istor% it )ecomes im&ossi)le to ignore certain
cultural diffe rends. T#ese differends are recogniGed in t#e /eelings signalled )%0 t#e silences around certain &ro&er names6 Ausc#witG is t#e e(am&le #e uses most o/ten4 o genre o/ discourse
&resents itsel/ w#ic# would &ermit a litigant to a&&eal /or Iustice against t#e wrong Ausc#witG connotes4 T#is silence s&ells t#e end o/ t#e %rands recits o/ Occidental emanci&ation and
s&eculation w#ic0i were t#e secular
:$=
co-er o/ .estern cultural im&erialism4 1e%ond it, no #o&e o/ a )ridge )etween #eterogeneous discourses sur-i-es4 One must acce&t t#e diff)rend.
$rom t#e ot#er side, ca&italism itsel/ wor!s to undo t#e /orce o/ t#e order o/ discourse4 ;n ca&italism, mone%, rat#er t#an language, instals e(c#angea)ilit%0 as t#e dominant relation )etween
o)Iects in t#e world4 1ut mone% is also stored time and securit% H one mig#t add, stored &leasure4 T#us ca&italism dis)urdens itsel/ /rom notions suc# as #umanit% and &rogress w#ic# under&in
#ig#-cultural im&erialism4 1ut it also discounts t#e /ormations w#ic# resist t#ese ideas6 in &articular, nationalism and &#iloso&#ic deli)eration4 8ltimatel%, /or L%otard, ca&italism e-en im&lies
t#e end o/ e//ecti-e &olitical institutions4 T#e &la% o/ e(c#ange, t#e &roduction o/ mone% as securit%, will delegitimate t#e discursi-e &resu&&ositions o/ institutions too4 ;n /act L%otard0s
derationaliGed ca&italism is close to 3ameson0s multinational ca&italism, and, li!e 3ameson, L%otard sees &ost-colonial nationalism as not Iust arc#aic )ut dangerous4 Post-colonial nationalism
articulates itsel/ in t#e Fnarrati-e m%t#icOt
5
w#ic# constructs an immuta)le cultural originN it neutraliGes t#e &#rase as e-ent, and it &roIects a F#ome0 in w#ic# di//erence is sus&endedN its greatest
modern e(em&lar is aGism4 T#us it too is countered in t#ose names surrounded )% silence, &ain and, /inall%, deli)eration4 Deli)eration no dou)t leads )ac! to to t#e &#rase e-ent, and, i/ one is
not to cons&ire in t#e concealment o/ a differend5 one must &unctuate t#e e)) and /low o/ &#rases onl% )% GArri.e-t-il@1
T#ere is #ere t#e #o&e t#at t#e )rea!down o/ legitimations /or cultural im&erialism will /ree t#e world )ot# /rom t#e s&ell o/ instrumental reason and /rom t#e nostalgia /or m%t#ic origins4 ;t
is as i/ &ostmodernit% would toda% )e t#e &la% o/ &ost-colonialisms set /ree not onl% /rom t#e reKuirement o/ uni-ersalit% em)edded in emanci&ation, )ut also /rom t#e #unger /or identit%
im&licit in narrati-e as m%t#4 L%otard aims to clear a s&ace /or ma(imiGing t#e &otential o/ articulation wit#in all idioms4 T#e &ro)lem is not Iust t#e uni-ersalism o/ L%otard0s own Cartesian
a&&roac#4 ot#ing -er% muc# in t#e )oo! so/tens t#e s#oc! o/ t#e transition /rom FAusc#witG0 to GArri.e-t-il@1 T#is last seems a slig#t result /or t#e &romise im&licit in #is -ision o/ discursi-e
#eterogeneit%4
$or L%otard, Ausc#witG is not onl% a name wit# a #alo o/ silenceN it &roduces a &articular emotion, signalling a diff;rend. .it#in w#at conte(t does t#e )inding o/ t#is emotion to t#e name
occurD T#e e-ents at Ausc#witG do not come into t#e world wit# /eelings attac#ed to t#em as i/ )% nature4 Let us t#in! o/ anot#er name, one w#ic# #as as little /eeling attac#ed to it as an% /or
.estern &#iloso&#%6 ew Sealand4 T#is is t#e countr% t#at Maoris call Aotearoa4 .#en one recalls t#is, one recalls t#e massacres, t#e deat#s )% introduced diseases, t#e destruction o/ a culture
and a societ% w#ic# t#e name ew Sealand silences4 ;t is L%otard0s -irtue to recogniGe t#at mere cognition o/ t#ese matters can ne-er )e enoug#4 How can we account /or t#e di//erence )etween
t#e res&ecti-e silences around t#e names ew Sealand and Ausc#witGD One mig#t sa%, o/ course, t#at Ausc#witG #a&&ened to us5 w#ereas ew Sealand did not4 T#at, #owe-er, would )e to
assume t#at we !now
:$@ SM#on D,rin &ustmudernism or &ost-colonialism
w#o we are e(tradiscursi-el% H )% )loodN and it is anot#er o/ L%otard0s -irtues t#at #e does not want to concede t#at eit#er4 One mig#t &oint to a Kualitati-e di//erence
H )ut #ow can we measure t#e loss o/ a culture against t#e loss o/ li-esD
Ausc#witG resonates /or us, not )ecause we are w#o we are geneticall%, )ut )ecause memories o/ it are constantl% circulated orall% and in writing4 ew Sealand0s #istor%, on t#e ot#er #and,
is told wit#in a di//erent r#etoric and is )are) circulated e-en inside t#e countr% itsel/4 T#e emotions attac#ed to Ausc#witG are attac#ed to languageN t#e% remain anal%ticall% inse&ara)le /rom
t#e discourse t#at &roduces t#em4 T#e di//erence )etween a//ect and language )egins onl% w#en one as!s FDoes one #a-e a rig#t to a /eelingD0 ;t seems clear t#at one #as a rig#t to articulate t#e
inIuries one /eels4 ;t is less clear t#at one #as a rig#t to /eel /eelings as inIuries in t#e /irst &lace4 ;n &#iloso&#% t#is Kuestion rarel% arises )ecause it is generall% assumed t#at an inIur% is sim&l%
/elt as an inIur%, in a wa% t#at a )ird is not sim&l% seen as a )ird4 L%otard does not address #imsel/ to t#e Kuestion o/ t#e transmission o/ eit#er language or emotion4 ;/ t#e &#rase e-ent is t#e
)eginning and end o/ deli)eration, it does not /ollow t#at it comes into t#e world merel% )ordered )% not#ingness4 ;t comes transmitted, alwa%s alread% in t#e #istor% t#at it ma!es &ossi)le4 ;/
&#iloso&#% cannot con/ront t#e &#rase as transmitted, t#en again t#at mar!s a &#iloso&#ical limit4
.#at one misses /rom L%otard is an% sense t#at a &#rase occurs in, or in t#e ga&s o/, a &articular language4 ;ndeed, on one )reat#ta!ing occasion #e declares succinctl%6 Fall lan%ue is
translata)le04 *, ;/ #e were to acce&t t#at t#e Kuestion o/ w#at is and w#at is not translata)le across languages is intermina)l% de)ata)le, t#en #e would #a-e to acce&t once again t#at t#e limits
o/ s&eci/icit% wit#in #is own /rame are not /ound in t#e &#rase itsel/4 To o)ser-e t#at &#rases #a&&en wit#in a &articular language is to note a !ind ot#er t#an t#e &#rase6 t#e language t#e &#rase
is in4 And /or &#iloso&#ical deli)eration to con/ront a &articular language at t#e &oint w#ere &resu&&ositions end would also and again )e to to con/ront a socio-cultural order inse&ara)le /rom
linguistic di-ersit%4 T#is order cannot )e co-ered )% t#e &#rase and its lin!ages4 ;n its /lig#t /rom categories o/ totalit%, L%otard0s linguistic turn e-ades t#e one totalit% H so-called Fnatural0
language Hw#ic# it cannot reduce or ignore on its own terms. ;t is &recisel% to t#is totalit% t#at &ost-colonialism toda%0 a&&eals4
T#e &ost-colonial desire is t#e desire o/ decoloniGed communities /or an identit%04 ;t )elongs to t#at &rogramme o/ sel/-determination w#ic# Adorno, unli!e 3ameson, could en-isage4 O)-iousl%
it is closel% connected to nationalism, /or t#ose communities are o/ten, t#oug# not alwa%s, nations4 ;n )ot# literature and &olitics t#e &ost-colonial dri-e towards identit% centres around language,
&artl% )ecause ill &ostmodernit% identit% is )arel% a-aila)le elsew#ere4 $or t#e &ost-colonial to s&ea! or write in t#e im&erial tongues is to call /ort# a &ro)lem o/ identit%, to )e t#rown into
mimicr% and am)i-alence4 T#e Kuestion o/ language /or rust-colonialism is &olitical, cultural and literar%, not in t#e transcendental sensc O#at t#e &#rase as
:$B
diff;rend ena)les &olitics, )ut in t#e material sense t#at a c#oice o/ language is a c#oice o/ identit%4
T#e lin! )etween &ost-colonialism and language #as a #istor%4 ;n #is recent )oo! 'ma%ined )ommunities5 1enedict Anderson #as argued t#at nationalism #as alwa%s )een grounded in 1a)el4
T#at is to sa%, nationalism is a &roduct o/ w#at #e calls F&rint-ca&italism04 He writes6 Ft#e con-ergence o/ ca&italism and &rint tec#nolog% on t#e /atal di-ersit% o/ #uman languages created t#e
&ossi)ilit% o/ a new /orm o/ imagined communit% w#ic# in its )asic mor&#olog% set t#e stage /or t#e modern nation40
t=
One does not #a-e to acce&t t#e /acult% &s%c#olog% #idden in t#e &#rase
Fimagined communit%0 to ta!e t#e &oint4 ationalism emerges w#en some languages get into &rint and are transmitted t#roug# )oo!s allowing su)Iects to identi/% t#emsel-es as mem)ers o/ t#e
communit% o/ readers im&lied )% t#ese )oo!s4
Let us ta!e Anderson0s #istor% /urt#er4 O/ all t#e wor!s t#at created t#e new &rint languages, none #ad more aut#orit% t#an t#e sacred )oo!s4 A w#i// o/ #eres% attac#es itsel/ to t#e stor% at
t#is &oint4 T#e sacred )oo!s, as -e#icles o/ 2od0s word, cannot )e translated4 o dou)t, w#en 2od re-eals #imsel/ in natural language, trans&osition o/ a !ind #as alread% ta!en &lace, )ut t#e
#uman language )ecomes di-ine t#roug# t#e )reat# o/ 2od0s -oice, t#e trace o/ #is #and4 To deli-er t#e 1i)le @or t#e 'oranA to any demotic language is not Iust to allow nationalism to
o-er&ower t#e old c#urc#, )ut /or meaning to &recede /orm, /or communication to &recede re-elation H is to admit, in /act, t#e ar)itrariness o/ t#e sign4
Anderson does not ma!e a /urt#er argument w#ic# seems to me inesca&a)le4 Once t#e sign )ecomes ar)itrar%, once di-ine sel/-re-elation )ecomes trans/era)le across secular languages, t#en
not onl% ma% national identities attac# to t#e &rint language, )ut language itsel/ no longer &ermits o/ an% &ro&er identit%4 ;/ one language can )e translated into anot#er, i/ t#ere is no suc# t#ing
as a dead language, w#at untranslata)le residue remains to )e t#e &ro&ert% solel% o/ t#ose w#o s&ea! itN its /orm, w#ic# cannot )e communicated in H as one sa%s H an% ot#er /ormD Yet an
identit% granted in terms o/ t#e signi/ier @w#ic# ; use, as it is o/ten used, as a /igure /or /orm as suc#A is an identit% t#at necessaril% cannot )e communicated4 ;t would seem to )e written into t#e
/ate o/ nationalism as &rint-ca&italism t#at national identit% is con/erred in t#e /orm o/ its own deat# warrant4 ;ndeed, t#ere are moments in our culture w#ere an unKuenc#a)le nationalist &at#os
con/ronts its own mortalit%6 one t#in!s o/ H`lderlin0s &oetr%4
T#e a&&eal to w#at is une(c#angea)le in language is es&eciall% tem&ting under ca&italism, w#ic# deals wit# t#ings and words /or t#eir e(c#ange -alue4 ;n t#e classic /ormulations o/
nationalism H $ic#te0s Addresses to the /erman Hation5 /or instance H national identit% is )ased on )ot# language @t#e #ome o/ cultureA and soil4 .#en a &ost-colonial nationalist li!e t#e 'en%an
no-elist gugi, li-ing under multinational ca&italism, loo!s at t#e soil, #e sees it as a means o/ &roduction, and means o/ &roduction do not articulate identitiesO indeed, w#ere t#e% can )e
owned, t#e% are o/ten owned )% /oreigners4 T#is lea-es #im language and, wit#in language, culture4 @One mig#t note t#at /or decoloniGed nations t#e ot#er great ground /or
S
:<9 Si#on D,rin
&ostmodernism or &ost-colonialism
nationalist &at#os H war H #as little &lace4 Most &ost-colonial nations and tri)es #a-e a #istor% o/ de/eat )% im&erialist &owers4 $reedom is o/ten t#e enem%0s gi/t4A
Pre-colonial language s#elters all t#e &articularit% elided o-er )% colonial stereot%&ing, )% modernist -aloriGation o/ t#e &rimiti-e and )% ant#ro&olog%4 ;n return, as identical to itsel/, national
language e(cludes t#e we) o/ contacts, t#e &la% o/ sameness and di//erence, w#ic# wea-e one societ% into anot#er4 ;t does so in #a-ing t#e ad-antage t#at it is not uniKue4 T#e num)er o/
languages a-aila)le to )e s&o!en is in/initeN t#e econom% o/ 1a)el is not restricted4 And %et language is not identical to itsel/, and in translation a residue is alwa%s le/t )e#ind4
gugi, w#o &laces language at t#e #eart o/ #is &ost-colonialism, was arrested /or co-writing &la%s in 2i!u%u, alt#oug# no dou)t #is crime was also to aid 2i!u%u0s trans/ormation into a &rint
language4 ;t is clear t#at #e is not trou)led )% t#e sense t#at an identit% gi-en in &rint language is gi-en as a deat# warrant4 T#us, w#en #e, or someone li!e #im, enters a no-el )% a &ost-colonial
writer w#o is distur)ed )% suc# Kuestions, t#e mode o/ encounter is &redicta)le4 ear t#e )eginning o/ Salman Rus#ie0s no-el -hame5 t#e narrator is interru&ted )% suc# a s&ea!er, dis&uting #is
aut#orit% to tell t#e tale4
2utsiderW ,respasserW Uou ha.e no ri%ht to this sub9ectW 444 ; !now6 no)od% e-er arrested me4 or are t#e% e-er li!el% to4 &oacherW &irateW We re9ect your authority. We know you5 with your forei%n
lan%ua%e wrapped around you like a fla%: speakin% about us in your forked ton%ue5 what can you tell but lies@ ; re&l% wit# more Kuestions6 ;s #istor% to )e considered t#e &ro&ert% o/ t#e
&artici&ants solel%D ;n w#at courts are suc# claims sta!ed, w#at )oundar% commissions ma& out t#e territoriesD
Can onl% t#e dead s&ea!D *>
T#is is a dialogue across t#e )ar w#ic# internall% di-ides t#e &ost-colonial4 T#e di-ide se&arates w#at one can call t#e &ost-coloniGed /rom t#e &ost-coloniGers4 T#e &ost-coloniGed identi/% wit#
t#e culture destro%ed )% im&erialism and its tongueN t#e &ost-coloniGers, i/ t#e% do not identi/% wit# im&erialism, at least cannot Iettison t#e culture and tongues o/ t#e im&erialist nations4 O/
course t#ere is not alwa%s a c#oice #ere4 $or man% e(-colonies t#e nati-e tongue is t#e world tongue
H Englis#4 T#is is not Iust true /or Australia and Canada, sa%, as it was once /or t#e 8nited States4 ;t is also true /or .est ;ndians as well as /or man% Maoris and A)originals4 ;ndeed, t#ere e(ists
a largel% unrecogniGed )ut crucial di//erence in t#e -arious &ost-colonial nations4 A countr% li!e Australia #as almost no &ossi)ilit% o/ entr% into t#e &ost-coloniGed condition, t#oug# its
neig#)our ew Sealand, w#ere Maoris constitute a large minorit%, does4 ew Sealand retains a language, a store o/ &ro&er names, memories o/ a &re-colonial culture, w#ic# seducti-el% /igure
identit%4 ; #a-e no dou)t t#at t#e -er% name ew Sealand, and its d8fferend5 will &ass one da%, t#e nation coming to call itsel/ Aotearoa4 .#at one encounters #ere is a &olitics o/ language w#ic#
rests not on t#e &ower wit#in language, t#e &ower o/ r#etoric, )ut on t#e &ower )e#ind language4 $rom t#e side o/ t#e &ost-coloniGer,
:<1
a return to di//erence is &roIected4 1ut, /rom t#e side o/ &ostmodernit%, Englis# @multinational ca&italism0s tongueA will museumi/% t#ose &re-colonial languages w#ic# #a-e attac#ed t#emsel-es
to &rint and t#e image so )elatedl%4
Rus#die0s dialogue )etween t#e &ost-coloniGed and t#e &ost-coloniGer ta!es &lace in a language w#ic# is not Kuite transatlantic Englis#4 $or instance, t#e &osition o/ t#e ad-er) in t#e &#rase
F;s #istor% to )e considered t#e &ro&ert% o/ t#e &artici&ants solel%D0 mar!s a tone at t#e slig#test o/ remo-es /rom t#at Englis#4 1ut its di//erence ma% not )e in-ested wit# nationalist &at#os4 ;t
remains too close to w#at is not di//erent )ut t#e norm, t#e language o/ world &ower4 T#e sense t#at ;ndian, ew Sealand, Australian or ;ris# Englis# is not as di//erent /rom transatlantic
Englis# as $renc# is /rom Englis#, let alone as di//erent as Maori or 2i!u%u, /igures t#e &ost-coloniGer0s em&tiness4 FCan onl% t#e dead s&ea!D0 Rus#die elli&ticall% as!s, #inting, among ot#er
t#ings, at t#e &owerlessness o/ t#e &re-colonial tongues and at t#e deat# warrant in-ol-ed in /inding an identit% t#roug# /allen languages, o/ w#ic# #is own #as /allen /urt#est4
Rus#die answers t#e &ost-coloniGed c#allenge in terms o/ t#e diff;rend. T#e narrator inKuires6 F;n w#at courts are suc# claims sta!edD0 ow it is #e, w#ose side is not Kuite t#at o/ t#e
o&&ressed, w#o a&&ears as -ictim4 He cannot /ind a &lace /or Iustice, nor &lainl% articulate #is case, &artl% )ecause #e s&ea!s neit#er t#e language o/ t#e international mar!et nor a &ost-coloniGed
language4 .#at #e is c#arged wit# is w#at #e in#erited4 ;/ Rus#die, as a &ost-coloniGer, s&ea!s /rom a &lace in contem&orar% #istor% w#ere a differend is dramaticall% /oregrounded, t#en
L%otard0s retreat into transcendental &#iloso&#%, #is m%sticism o/ selected &ro&er names, #is &re/erence /or e(&eriment, #a-e a strong com&etitor4 ;/ 3ameson cannot /ull% distance #imsel/ /rom
t#e su)limit% and internationalism o/ w#at we can call image-ca&italism, t#en t#at is &er#a&s )ecause #e #as not listened care/ull% enoug# to t#ose -oices w#ic# tal! o/ t#e differend on its
)orders4
To consider t#e Apocalypse How s%stem alongside -hame is c#astening4 T#e &ro)lem is not one o/ -arieties o/ &ostmodernism4 Rus#die0s wor! is sometimes called &ostmodern, )ut it certainl%
does not re/lect &ostmodernit%4 -hame1s &ur&ose is to reconnect s#ame H t#at e&ic, indeed &re-ca&italist, emotion t#e 2ree!s called aidos H to t#e recent #istor% o/ Pa!istan4 ;n redirecting s#ame,
t#e no-el calls u&on a -iolence, )ot# /eminine and monstrous, w#ic# does not, li!e t#at o/ Apocalypse How5 reac# a clima( /rom t#e -er% )eginning4 -hame imagines an unlocaliGa)le,
ine(&ressi-e, et#icall% &ro&er -iolence we ne-er see in Apocalypse How. ;ndeed, t#e no-el as a w#ole wor!s in &recisel% t#e o&&osite direction to Co&&ola0s mo-ie4 Histor% is not derealiGed,
a//ect is not atomiGed into intensit%, narrati-e trium&#s, ot#er cultures are not con/ined wit#in Occidental m%t#, nor outside t#e .estern screen4 So we can sa% t#at, w#en con/ronted )% #is &ost-
coloniGed accuser, Rus#die is startled into an articulation o/ t#e &ro)lematic o/ t#e d8fferend5 )ut w#en /aced wit# modern Pa!istan, #e acts as accuser in turn4 Here #is no-el remains connected
to t#ose conce&ts o/ Iustice and reason t#aO/ totaliGing denouncers o/ our &ostmodernit% assure us are in t#eir sa/e!ee&ing4
:<2 Si#on D,rin
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl%0 essential in/ormation4
*4 See c#4 = a)o-e4
54 'bid.5 &4 ?=
,4 T#eodor Adorno, FCultural criticism and societ%0, in &risms5 transl4 Samuel and S#ierr% .e)er, e-ille S&earman, London, *+?<, &4 ,=4
=4 Her)ert Marcuse, FT#e a//irmati-e c#aracter o/ culture0, in He%ations: :ssays in critical theory5 transl4 3erem% 34 S#a&iro, Allen Lane, London, *+?E, &4 *554
!. Adorno, &4 5+4
?4 3ameson, &4 EE4
<4 T#is article was written )e/ore 3ameson0s essa% FOn magic realism in /ilm0 A)ritical 'n>uiry5 5, V*+E?Y, ,9*H5>A a&&eared4 ;t re&resents a de&arture /rom t#e Fcultural logic0 &iece )ecause
it does not allow t#at &ost-colonial /ilms di//er /rom &ostmodern arti/acts in wa%s t#at o//er &romise4 1ut /rom m% &oint o/ -iew t#e essa% remains )ased on dou)t/ul assum&tions, i4e46
*4 Certain F$irst .orld0 /ilms @nostalgia /ilmsA still instantiate &ostmodernit%4
54 Post-colonial /ilms are more realist t#an F$irst .orld0 /ilms )ecause t#e% are &roduced in conditions not totall% dominated )% late ca&italism4
,4 Post-colonial /ilms are also &ostmodern in t#at t#e% e(em&li/% Fdenarrati-iGation0 and a Freduction to t#e )od%0, )ot# o/ w#ic# F;i)idiniGe0 cultural residues4
Howe-er suggesti-e an account w#ic# mo-es /rom t#ese t#eses ma% )e, it continues to rel% on e(&ressi-e causalit% and re/lection t#eor%N it still assumes t#at t#e F&ostmodern0 and Frealism0
are te(tual /eatures, not e//ects, or constituted )% discourse on te(tsN and /inall% it does not allow /or t#e &articular mode o/ et#ico-&olitical de)ate and inter-ention w#ic# ta!es &lace onl%
and &recisel% in &ost-colonial nations4 T#ere is a danger t#at t#e &ost-colonial #ere )ecomes )ot# somet#ing li!e Euro&e )e/ore *E=E /or Lu!#cs and a site saturated )% t#e &rogressi-e
materialism o/ &ostmodernit%, rat#er t#an a /ield o/ /orces w#ic# &ostmodern t#oug#t must anal%se wit#out idealiGation or condescension4
E4 See Eleanor Co&&ola, Hotes5 Poc!et 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+<+, &4 +
+4 $or w#at /ollows, see 3ean-$rancoise L%otard, 6e <8ff;rend5 *+E,4
*94 'bid.5 &4 59=4
**4 3acKues Derrida, 2f /rammatolo%y5 transl4 2a%atri C#a!ra-ort% S&i-a!, 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore, London, *+<?, &4 *,>4
*54 L%otard, &4 5*+4
*,4 'bid.5 &4 55?4
*=4 1enedict Anderson, 'ma%ined )ommunities: 4eflections on the ori%in and spread O: nationalism5 Jerso, London, *+E,, c#4 ,, FT#e origins o/ national consciousness0, &4 =O4 $or /urt#er
material on t#is to&ic, see 3o#n Edwards, 6an%ua%e5 -ociet1t and 'dentity. 1asil 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E>, FLanguage and nationalism04
*>4 Salman Rus#die, -hame5 Jintage 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+E=, &4 5,4
88 Li &ostmodernism and
&eriphery
NeIIy Ric/ard
T/e 3ni(ersa.i7in Mode. o? Modernity
;t is well !nown t#at modernit% @#istorical, &#iloso&#ical, &olitical, economic and culturalA generates its &rinci&les /rom a t#ree/old wis# /or unit%4 T#e Enlig#tenment ideals on w#ic# it is
/ounded de/ine modernit% in terms o/ rationaliGation, as an Fad-ance0 in cogniti-e and instrumental reason4 T#is &roduces &articular categories and s%stems t#roug# w#ic# #istorical
de-elo&ment and social e-olution are conce&tualiGed, )ased on t#e notion o/ &rogress as t#e guideline o/ a uni-ersalist &roIect4 ;t also assumes t#e o)Iecti-e consciousness o/ an a)solute meta-
su)Iect4 T#e &rinci&les o/ modernit% generate s&eci/ic re&resentations o/ societ% )% means o/ )ureaucratic and tec#nological networ!s w#ic# incor&orate institutional &ractices into an o-erall
sc#eme4 T#e s&read o/ a Fci-iliGing0 modernit% is lin!ed to a model o/ industrial &rogress and in t#is wa% it is &art and &arcel o/ t#e e(&ansion o/ multinational ca&italism and its logic o/ t#e
mar!et&lace, centred on t#e metro&olis and its control o/ economic e(c#anges4
T#is t#ree/old /oundation o/ modernit%0s uni-ersalism su//ices to s#ow t#e lin! to t#e totaliGing tendenc% o/ a #egemonic culture )ent on &roducing and re&roducing a consensus around t#e
models o/ trut# and consum&tion w#ic# it &ro&oses4 .it# regard to its economic &rogramme and its cultural organiGation, t#is conce&t o/ modernit% re&resents an e//ort to s%nt#esiGe its
&rogressi-e and emanci&ator% ideals into a glo)aliGing, integrati-e -ision o/ t#e indi-idual0s &lace in #istor% and societ%4 ;t rests on t#e assum&tion t#at t#ere e(ists a legitimate centre H a uniKue
and su&erior &osition /rom w#ic# to esta)lis# control and to determine #ierarc#ies4
Traditionall%, t#is &osition #as )een t#e &ri-ilege o/ .estern &atriarc#al culture, w#ose re&resentational a&&aratus #as )een t#e source o/ t#ose #omogeniGing categories w#ic# a&&l% to )ot#
language and identit%6
As recent anal%ses o/ t#e Fenunciati-e0 a&&aratus o/-isual re&resentation H its &oles o/
$rom ,hird ,e=t5 5 @*+E<HEA, ?H*54
:<8
:<: NeI.y Ric/ard
emission and rece&tion H con/irm, t#e re&resentational s%stems o/ t#e .est admit onl% one -ision H t#at o/ t#e constituti-e male su)Iect H or, rat#er, t#e% &osit t#e su)Iect o/ re&resentation as
a)solutel% centred, unitar%, masculine4
T#e% su&&ress an% notion o/ Fdi//erence0 w#ic# mig#t c#allenge t#e dominant model o/ su)Iecti-it%4 All t#e e(tensions o/ t#e idea o/ modernit% wor! towards con/irming t#e &osition o/
&ri-ilege, and to t#is end negate an% &articular or localiGed e(&ression w#ic# could &ossi)l% inter/ere wit# t#e /iction o/ uni-ersalit%4
Trans/erred to t#e geogra&#ical and socio-cultural ma& o/ economic and communicational e(c#anges, t#is /iction o&erates to control t#e ada&tation to gi-en models and so to standardiGe all
identi/%ing &rocedures4 An% de-iation /rom t#e norm is classi/ied as an o)stacle or )ra!e to t#e d%namic o/ international distri)ution and consum&tion4 T#us modernit% concei-es o/ t#e &ro-ince
or &eri&#er% as )eing out o/ ste& or )ac!ward4 ConseKuentl%, t#is situation #as to )e o-ercome )% means o/ a)sor&tion into t#e rationalit% o/ e(&ansion &ro&osed )% t#e metro&olis4
)o.oni7ation and ),.t,ra. Re0rod,ction
.#at does contact wit# t#e international &rocedures and r#etoric o/ modernit% im&l% /or t#e &ro-ince:&eri&#er%D
$rom t#e outset, moderniGation in Latin America un/olded as a &rocess o/ Euro&eaniGation4 All t#e models to )e imitated and consumed @industrial and economic organiGation, &olitical
structures, social )e#a-iour, artistic -aluesA were )ased on Euro&ean &rotot%&es4 T#e construction o/ #istor% in terms o/ &rogress and linear tem&oralit% is dou)l% ina&&ro&riate w#en a&&lied to
Latin America4 ;t is alien to t#e strati/ications o/ Latin American e(&erience )ecause it cannot accommodate t#e discontinuities o/ a #istor% mar!ed )% a multi&licit% o/ &asts laid down li!e
sediments in #%)rid and /ragmented memories4 T#e ideolog% o/ t#e Few0 as constructed in t#e discourses o/ modernit% is /ounded on an idea o/ time w#ic# /ollows a seKuence and r#%t#m t#at
is com&letel% /oreign to Latin America4 T#is is )ecause t#e diac#ronic triggers articulating t#e logic o/ its &eriodicit% do not #a-e an% eKui-alent in t#e clas#ing Iu(ta&osition o/ t#e
#eterogeneous and intermittent &rocesses w#ic# coe(ist in our su)continent4 T#e ga& )etween images or s%m)ols o/ F&rogress0 or Fru&ture0 w#ic# are constantl% &ro&osed as re-elations o/ t#e
Fess0, and t#e /ragilit% o/ t#e Latin American social and cultural en-ironment t#at cannot use/ull% integrate t#ese notions o/ modernit%, &roduces an e(&erience o/ continuous disassociation4
T#is is &articularl% true i/ one is searc#ing /or a co#erent s%stem )% identi/%ing t#at w#ic# is Fone0s own04 ;n t#e /ield o/ culture H o/ art, literature and t#e #istor% o/ ideas H t#is de&endent and
imitati-e relation to Euro&ean modernism as transmitted t#roug# local elites #as created a &articular instance o/ t#e centreH&eri&#er% relations#i&6 t#at o/ Fre&roduction04
T#is model o/ re&roduction is /ounded on w#at mig#t )e tern O4d t#e constituti-e
&ostmodernism and &eriphery
:<$
e-idence o/ Latin America6 its relation to Euro&e and its )elonging to t#e #egemonic world o/ t#e .est /rom t#e time w#en it )ecame &art o/ world #istor%4 $rom t#is -iew&oint, Latin
American t#oug#t and culture #a-e )een o)liged, /rom colonial da%0s, to re&roduce t#ose o/ Euro&e, to de-elo& as a &eri&#er% o/ t#at ot#er Funi-erse0 w#ic#, )% dint o/ successi-e conKuests,
)ecame one o/ t#e t#emes o/ its #istor%
One o/ t#e as&ects w#ic# illustrates t#is is t#e role o/ t#e enlig#tened elites or intellectuals, a de/ined grou& wit#in Latin American societ% w#ic#, since inde&endence, #as )een t#e
e(&resser o/ /oreign currents o/ t#oug#t4
5
T#us, w#en re/erences /rom t#e metro&olis are )roug#t to )ear on t#e Latin American conte(t, t#e% )ecome t#e o)Iects o/ a &rocess o/ cultural mimesis4 T#is turns t#em into &arodies or
caricatures w#ic# lac! t#eir own o&erational d%namic )ecause t#e% eit#er do not /it t#e conte(t or are reIected )% it4 T#e a&&lication o/ t#is t%&e o/ model )ecomes w#oll% cosmetic, since it is
em&lo%ed to /orge an illusor% identit%, a /ictional -ersion o/ Fone0s own identit%0 in terms o/ Ft#e ot#er0s desire04 As a conseKuence, &rocesses o/ identi/ication &roduce su)stitutes in t#e /orm o/
series o/ im&orted mas!s4
;n t#e /reKuent &eriods during w#ic# t#e elites den% an% Latin American cultural realit%, t#e conseKuent lac! o/ an% underl%ing t#eoretical &ractice @identit%A comes to )e /illed wit# &ro)lems,
categories, and -alue Iudgements /ormulated elsew#ere H in t#e metro&olis At a s%m)olic le-el, t#is contradiction is resol-ed )% mimesis6 a re&etition o/ someone else0s gesture, w#ic#
entails t#e &romotion o/ t#e &seudo-a&&ro&riation o/ t#at gesture0s -alues6 so a re&resentation is made, and e-en li-ed out, o/ )eing w#at one is not4 444 Mimesis )ecause t#e gesture is
re&resented wit#out an% awareness o/ its conte(t6 we co&% t#e im&orted image wit#out !nowing a)out #ow it originall% came into )eing, and also wit#out an% great concern as to w#et#er or
not it #a&&ened to )e rele-ant to our own realit%4
T#e international model o//ers s#am o&&ortunities w#ic# are ado&ted as Fres&onses0 to Kuestions w#ic# #a-e not as %et e-en )een /ormulated )% t#e new conte(t in w#ic# t#e% are &laced4 T#is
means t#at signs are rendered meaningless and ino&erati-e, since t#e mec#anisms /or a reconte(tualiGation t#at would endow t#em wit# a critical /unction are totall% lac!ing4 T#ese signs #a-e
not )een digested and re/ormulated according to t#e contradictions w#ic# would com&licate t#eir insertion into t#e socio-cultural arena w#ic# so /ar sim&l% legitimates t#eir international
&restige4 As long as im&orted t#eories and cultural mo-ements remain di-orced /rom t#e o&&osition o/ /orces w#ic# are t#e onl% means o/ lending s&eci/ic im&ortance and #istorical densit% to
t#e signs &roduced in Latin American cultures, t#e% act as little more t#an ort#o&aedic aides wit#in t#e conte(ts o/ t#ose cultures4 C#aracteristicall%, t#is !ind o/ &roduction e(#austs itsel/ in
mere /ormal re&etitions or Fdoctrinal mannerism04 ;t &roduces &seudo-t#eories w#ic# are disassociated /rom t#e intellectual struggle in w#ic# t#e original c?nce&ts and inter&retations #ad to
/ig#t /or su&remac%4 T#e% are now no more t#an /etis#es in w#at #as )ecome a merel% ornamental construction4
:<< NeI.y Ric/ard
&ustmudernism and &eriphery
)ontradictions o? Modernity ?ro# t/e Pers0ecti(e o? a Latin A#erican Essence
Criticisms o/ modernit% #a-e come /rom a wide range o/ areas including t#e arts, literature, sociolog% and t#eolog%4 T#ese criticisms are )ased on di//ering cultural and ideological -iews o/
w#at constitutes a FLatin American identit%04 Certain tendencies wit#in sociolog% and t#eolog%,
=
/or e(am&le, &ut /orward t#e -iew t#at modernit%0s #omogeniGing &roIect destro%s all memor%
o/ a )irt#-&rocess w#ic# em)odies a multi&licit% o/ &asts w#ic# must )e rescued /rom Euro&ean #istorical reductionism, so t#at Latin America ma% /inall% ac#ie-e its true identit% on t#e )asis o/
its own e(&erience o/ time4 As a /unctionalist and seculariGing &ro&osal, modernit% #as not onl% erased all t#e ritual dimensions o/ a culture to w#ic# t#e &#iloso&#% o/ t#e logos is &ro/oundl%
alien, )ut it #as also su&&ressed t#at culture0s FCat#olic su)stratum0, a &o&ular religiousness w#ose stoc! o/ s%m)ols /orm an integral &art o/ t#e Latin American Fet#os04 A s%m)olic u&grading
o/ t#is et#os would &ro-ide t#e &lat/orm /rom w#ic# to com)at t#e distorting e//ects o/ t#e international moderniGing in/luence since Four cultural s%nt#esis is Latin American, o/ mi(ed race,
and ritual04 As /ar as art and literature are concerned, a w#ole current o/ t#oug#t a)out t#e alienating role o/ t#e idea o/ modernit% as t#e &ur-e%or o/ Euro&ean /ictions is grounded in a de/ence
o/ Latin American culture as deri-ed /rom aut#oc#t#onous )eginnings4 T#is culture is lin!ed to /orms o/ identit% Hre&resentations o/ Fonesel/0 usuall% eKuated wit# t#e Findigenous0 H t#at are
ta!en to re&resent t#e aut#enticit% o/ a F&ure0 culture4 T#is &urit% is de/ined )% t#e m%t# o/ its origins w#ic# &redate modernit% and t#e contaminating e(&ansion o/ t#e culture industr% o/
multinational ca&italism4 T#is -iew H )ot# essentialist and meta&#%sical H o/ w#at constitutes a Latin American identit% is m%t#ologiGed and turned into /ol!lore in an% num)er o/ wa%s6
indigenism, nationalism, t#irdworldism4 ;t consists o/ se-eral !inds o/ &rimiti-ism in w#ic# Latin American identit% is eKuated wit# a &redetermined and /i(ed identit%4 T#e redisco-er% o/ t#is
identit% t#ere/ore in-ol-es a m%t#ical, )ac!ward-loo!ing return to t#e sources and &roduces a static -iew o/ origin @t#e indigenous su)stratumA and memor% @t#e mi(ed-race &astA, turned into
ritual and a&&lied o-er t#e w#ole continent4
E-en in t#e most u&-to-date -ersions o/ t#is argument, t#e demands /or a Latin American art or literature still con/orm to a dic#otom% w#ic# usuall% &osits essences against categories4 T#ese
are drawn /rom t#e o&&osition )etween sel/ @seen as internal identit%A and t#e Fot#er0 @identit% /rom outsideAN /or instance, t#e regional @seen as aut#enticA -ersus t#e international @seen as /alseA,
t#e &ast @t#e -ernacular rootsA -ersus t#e &resent @seen as t#e destruction o/ t#e )inding sense o/ communit%A, &o&ular culture @as &art o/ t#e tradition o/ )elongingA -ersus a mass culture @as
alienating communicationA, and so on4 ;n t#is Manic#aean sc#eme o/ t#ings, modernit% is /ound guilt% o/ #a-ing destro%ed t#e c#aracteristics o/ a true Latin American identit% t#roug# a
conglomeration o/ in/luences w#ic# are in-aria)l%0 regarded as t#reats, /alsi/ications, or tra-esties o/ t#e region0s orginal and aut#entic nucleus o/ culture4
:<=
Modernity and Post#odernity
.#at ru&ture does so-called &ostmodernism im&l% in t#is set-u&D Does &ostmodernist criticism, inter&reted as a crisis in t#e assum&tions )e#ind modernit% in an% wa% modi/% our reading o/ t#e
role w#ic# t#e &ro-ince #as #it#erto &la%ed on t#e ma& o/ international de&endenciesD
Modernit% #as alwa%s )een intimatel% lin!ed to t#e idea and &ractice o/ writing4 T#e storage o/ !nowledge in )oo!s generated meaning and /i(ed re/erence &oints6
t#e )oo! as #istor% is also #istor% as t#e )oo!4 Postmodernit%, on t#e ot#er #and, declares itsel/ concerned not wit# t#e Kuestion o/ esta)lis#ing meanings, )ut wit# t#e c#allenging o/ t#e -er%
conce&t o/ an% monological or uni-alent structure o/ signi/ication4 ;nstead it &ostulates t#e desta)iliGation o/ meaning @as &art o/ t#e crisis o/ re/erence and a resulting delegitimiGation o/
!nowledgeA4 E-er% utterance is su)mitted to a generaliGing interte(tualit% in order to ta!e a&art and reassem)le its /ragments4 Postmodernist deconstruction as o&en-ended signi/ication not onl%
#as a )earing on t#e illusion t#at utterances &ossess a single, de/initi-e meaning, )ut is also and &rimaril% aimed at com)ating t#e su&&osition t#at culture and societ% Hunderstood as te(ts H still
/ollow a #istoricall% and &oliticall% determined direction4 Postmodernism states t#at all &ri-ileged &oints o/ -iew #a-e )een annulled, along wit# t#e dominant &osition w#ic# allowed t#e
esta)lis#ment o/ #ierarc#ies @;/ inter&retation4 To w#at e(tent can suc# a critiKue o/ t#e unidimensionalit% o/ meaning, aimed at t#e #egemonic s%stem esta)lis#ed )%4 a sel/-centred culture, o//er
new a&&roac#es w#ic# mig#t #el& t#e &rocess o/ decoloniGationD T#is is t#e /undamental Kuestion raised )% &ostmodernism in t#e &eri&#er%4
Postmodernism introduces a #ig#l% am)iguous set of co-ordinates into t#e wornout conte(t o/ modernit% w#ic# #as &rogrammed )ac!wardness H t#e &ro-ince Hin order to reintegrate it more
readil% into its /ramewor! o/ glo)al consum&tion4
At /irst sig#t, it mig#t a&&ear as i/ &ostmodernism re/ormulates t#e old de&endencies @centre:&eri&#er%, &rogress:)ac!wardnessA in a wa% w#ic# creates a new #ierarc#%4 $or almost t#e /irst
time, Latin America /inds itsel/ in a &ri-ileged &osition, in t#e -anguard o/ w#at is seen as no-el4 E-en t#oug# it onl% /inds itsel/ in t#is &osition wit#in a t#eoretical /ramewor! /ormulated
elsew#ere, Latin American cultural &ractices are deemed to #a-e &re/igured t#e model now a&&ro-ed and legitimiGed )% t#e term F&ostmodernism04 T#e -er% #eterogeneit% o/ t#e e(&eriences
w#ic# #a-e created a Latin American s&ace out o/ its multi&le and #%)rid &asts creates, at least on t#e sur/ace, t#e -er% Kualities o/ /ragmentation and dis&ersion associated wit# t#e semantic
erosion c#aracteristic o/ t#e crisis o/ modernit% and modernism as its cultural dominant4
Howe-er, Iust as it a&&ears t#at /or once t#e Latin American &eri&#er%0 mig#t #a-e ac#ie-ed t#e distinction o/ )eing &ostmodernist a.ant 'a lettre5 no sooner does it attain a s%nc#ronicit% o/
/orms wit# t#e international cultural discourses, t#an t#at -er% same &ostmodernism a)olis#es an% &ri-ilege w#ic# suc# a &osition mig#t o//er4 Postmodernism dismantles t#e distinction )etween
centre and &eri&#er%, and in so doing nulli/ies its signi/icance4 T#ere are man% instances in &ostmodernist discourse
:<@ NeIIy Ric/ard &ustmodernism and &eriphery :<B
aimed at con-incing one o/ t#e o)solescence o/ t#e o&&osition centre:&eri&#er%, and o/ t#e ina&&ro&riateness o/ continuing to see oursel-es as t#e -ictims o/ colonialism4 T#e signi/icance o/
t#ese categories #as disa&&eared, t#e argument goes, as #as t#e distinction )etween model and co&% due to t#e F&lanetar% s&read0 o/ tec#nological cultureN t#e mass media #a-e o)literated t#e
relation )etween original and re&roduction4
M4 Periola, aut#or o/ an original stud% on simulacra, notes t#at t#e &lanetar% trium&# o/ communications destro%s an% &ossi)le con/rontation )etween models and t#e -er% idea o/ a
secondar% co&%4 T#is disa&&ears in t#e diGG%ing re&roduction o/ wa%s o/ li/e in &laces, times, and socio-cultural conte(ts w#ic# are totall% di//erent /rom t#ose w#ic# ga-e rise to t#e
originals, wit#out t#is s&read leading to an% !ind o/ uni/ication )ut rat#er to a recognition o/ indi-idual &articularities4
and
As its e-er%da% use suggests, a co&% is secondar% to t#e original, de&ends on it, is less -alua)le, and so on4 T#is -iew&oint t#ere/ore )elittles t#e w#ole o/ our continent0s cultural e//orts,
and is at t#e root o/ t#e intellectual unease w#ic# is our t#eme4 Howe-er, current Euro&ean &#iloso&#% @$oucault, DerridaA is concerned to s#ow t#at suc# #ierarc#ies are unIusti/ied4 .#%
s#ould it )e true t#at w#at comes )e/ore is more -alua)le t#an w#at comes later, t#e model )e wort# more t#an t#e imitation, w#at is central )e more im&ortant t#an t#e &eri&#eral 4 4 4 D ?
Or again, t#e centre itsel/ #as )ecome t#e &eri&#er%,
<
since it #as )ecome /ragmented into dissident micro-territories w#ic# /racture it into constellations o/ -oices and a &luralit% o/ meanings4
Postmodernism0s /irst claim, t#en, is t#at it o//ers room wit#in itsel/ /or our Latin American s&ace4 T#is is t#e Fdecentred0 s&ace o/ t#e marginaliGed or &eri&#eral su)Iect /aced wit# a crisis o/
centralit%4 ;t is adorned wit# t#e ci&#ers o/ &luralit%, #eterogeneit% and dissidence, con/irming L%otard0s o)ser-ation t#at &ostmodernism Fre/ines our awareness o/ di//erence04 T#e stress is
&laced on s&eci/icit% and regionalism, social minorities and &olitical &roIects w#ic# are local in sco&e, on sur-i-ing traditions and su&&ressed /orms o/ !nowledge4
T#e /act is, #owe-er, t#at no sooner are t#ese di//erences H se(ual, &olitical, racial, cultural H &osited and -alued t#an t#e% )ecome su)sumed into t#e metacategor% o/ t#e Fundi//erentiated0
w#ic# means t#at all singularities immediatel% )ecome indistinguis#a)le and interc#angea)le in a new, so&#isticated econom% o/ Fsameness04 Postmodernism de/ends itsel/ against t#e
desta)iliGing t#reat o/ t#e Fot#er0 )% integrating it )ac! into a /ramewor! w#ic# a)sor)s all di//erences and contradictions T#e centre, t#oug# claiming to )e in disintegration, still o&erates as a
centre6 /iling awa% an% di-ergencies into a s%stem o/ codes w#ose meanings, )ot# semanticall% and territoriall%, it continues to administer )% e(clus0-e rig#t4
Post#odernist )o..ae and Latin A#erican Identity
Alt#oug# t#is mec#anism o/ t#e Ft#irdworldiGation o/ t#e metro&olis0 @a s-m&tonl o/ Eurocentrism0s uneas% conscienceA immediatel% resol-es into a new tric! o/ r#etoric w#ic# is eas% enoug#
to unco-er, it is none t#e less tem&ting to see i/ an% o/ t#e Fconcessions0 made )% &ostmodernism to t#e &eri&#er% can )e o/ an% critical -alue to us4
;/ &ostmodernism is an admission, on t#e international le-el, t#at a culture and societ% w#ic# &re-iousl% saw itsel/ as uni-ersal is now )an!ru&t, t#en t#ose e(&ressions w#ic#, merel% )%
)eing &eri&#eral to t#is sc#eme, were condemned to )e constantl% e(cluded, #a-e no reason to /eel t#reatened )% t#is colla&se4 or is it necessar% /or t#em to /eel t#e degree o/ &er&le(it% or
anguis# w#ic# accom&anies t#e s#attering o/ t#ose dreams w#ic# #a-e su&&orted t#e illusion o/ a &osition o/ dominance4 Latin Americans need not /eel t#e weariness o/ )elonging to a sated,
o-er-consuming societ%, since t#eir connection to t#at culture #as in-aria)l% )een one o/ dis&ossession4 ;/ t#e colla&se o/ -alues o/ an entire #istorico-cultural construction !nown as modernit%
#as dealt t#e dominant tradition o/ Euro&ean t#oug#t suc# a #ard )low, it is )ecause t#at construction guaranteed its Eurocentric &rerogati-es4 T#is is w#% t#ere is suc# a narcissistic outcr% at its
loss4 To w#at e(tent does t#is loss im&licate Latin Americans, w#o #a-e alwa%s )een on t#e outside o/ t#e s&#ere o/ re/erences and &ri-ilegesD How /ar is it true t#at t#e destro%ing o/ illusions
and t#e conseKuent wea!ening o/ a cultural identit% w#ose tradition #ad )een &resented as t#e &aradigm o/ aut#orit% can /acilitate a more uninhibited re-iew o/ t#e /alse#oods and circular
e-idence on w#ic# its #%&ot#eses o/ &ower were )asedD
1% creating t#e &ossi)ilit% o/ a critical rereading o/ modernit%, &ostmodernism o//ers us t#e c#ance to reconsider all t#at was Fle/t unsaid0 and to inIect its areas o/ o&acit% and resistance wit#
t#e &otential /or new, as %et undisco-ered, meanings4 ;n t#e Latin American conte(t, t#is re-iew o/ modernit% allows us, once again, to &ose t#e Kuestion o/ our own identit%, t#at o/ indi-iduals
)orn @;/ and into t#e dialectic mi(ture o/ t#e di//erent languages surrounding us, w#ic# #a-e &artiall% /used to &roduce a cultural identit% e(&erienced as a series o/ collisions4 T#is identit% can
)e understood as an unsta)le &roduct o/ modernit%0s tro&es w#ic# in-ol-es a continuous regrou&ing, distorting and trans/orming o/ im&orted models, according to t#e s&eci/ic &ressures
&ertaining to t#e critical reinsertion o/ t#ese models into a local networ!4 T#is acti-e &artici&ation, w#ic# t#e indi-idual at t#e &eri&#er% &er/orms, em&#asiGes a creati-it% )ased almost
e(clusi-el% on t#e reuse o/ &re-iousl% e(isting materials w#ic# are a-aila)le eit#er as &art o/ t#e .estern tradition or, more recentl%, &re/a)ricated )% t#e international culture industr%04
;nno-ati-e res&onses to t#ese materials are )ased on strategies o/ redetermining t#e use o/ /ragments or remains in wa%0s w#ic# di//er /rom t#eir original /rame o/ re/erence4
Per#a&s our Latin American identit%0, seen /rom t#e &ers&ecti-e o/ t#e &ostmodernist Fcollage0, is no more t#an a r#etorical e(acer)ation o/ t#e strategies
:=9 NeIIy Ric/ard
o/ decentraliGation and reada&tation4 T#e &eri&#er% #as alwa%s made its own mar! on t#e series o/ statements emitted )% t#e dominant culture and #as rec%cled t#em in di//erent conte(ts in suc#
a wa% t#at t#e original s%stemiGations are su)-erted, and t#eir claim to uni-ersalit% is undermined4
translated /rom S&anis#
)% ic! Caistor
Notes
.#ere /ull details are a-aila)le in t#e 1i)liogra&#%, re/erences contain onl% essential in/ormation4
*4 Craig Owens, FT#e discourse o/ ot#ers6 $eminists and &ostmodernism0, *+E,, &4 !J.
54 1ernardo Su)ercaseau(, FLa a&&ro&riaciacipn cultural en el &ensamiento ;atinamericano0, ):4)5 3une *+E<4
#. C#ristian $ernandeG, F;dentidad cultural % arKuitectura en C#ile0, Cat5ilogo )hile Vi.e5 Madrid, 3anuar% *+E<4
=4 Pedro Morande, )ultura y (oderni8aci_n en America 6atina5 8ni-ersidad Catolica de C#ile, *+E=N see also #is contri)ution to 6os debates sobre 6a modernidad y elfuturo de America 6atina5 ed4
3osL 3oaKuin 1runner, $;asco, *+E?4
!. Pedro Morande, )ultura y (oderni8aci_n en America 6atina.
?4 Rosa Maria Ra-era, FModernismo % Postmodernismo en ;a &lTstica argentina0, 4e.ista de :st;tica5 #5 1uenos AiresN Ro)erto Sc#warG, Facional &or Sustraccipn0, &unto de Vista5 5E, 1uenos
Aires4
<4 FCertainl%, marginalit% is not now gi-en as critical, /or in e//ect t#e center #as in-aded t#e &eri&#er% and -ice -ersa40 Hal $oster, 4ecodin%s5 *+E>4
8: Li 4ereadin% (andarin
<ucks and Kutterflies..
A response to the
Gpostmodern1 condition
Rey )/o1
A crucial, t#oug# largel% unnoticed, moment emerges in t#e current de)ates on &ostmodernism w#en t#e American Mar(ist critic $redric 3ameson re/ers to t#e as-%et untranslated wor!s o/ a
contem&orar% Taiwanese writer, .ang .en(ing @.ang .en#singA, as F&ostmodernist04 .it# t#at word 3ameson means to include contem&orar% C#inese literature in a new culture w#ic#
Farticulates t#e logic o/ a new glo)al and multinational late ca&italism0, and w#ic# Fcan no longer )e considered a &urel% .estern e(&ort )ut ma% )e e(&ected to c#aracteriGe at least certain ot#er
local Gones o/ realit% around t#e ca&italist world04
$rom t#e &ers&ecti-e o/ C#inese studies, it would seem necessar% to consider t#is claim o/ &ostmodernism wit# a large degree o/ caution4 T#at consideration would )egin wit# a
/oregrounding o/ 3ameson0s #%&ot#etical reconstruction o/ C#inese modernism4 Signi/icantl%, 3ameson &ositions Lao S#e0s )amel Xian%8i @/irst
F5
serialiGed in *+,?H<A as an Fearlier moment in modern C#inese literature wit#
w#ic# to measure t#e mutations and critical conce&ts t#at are )roug#t u& ill t#e more contem&orar% wor!s4 .#at results is a !ind o/ sc#ema w#ic# reorders modern C#inese literature into t#e
categories o/ realism @Lao S#eA, modernism @.ang Meng, a contem&orar% PRC writerA, and &ostmodernism @.ang .en(ingA4 T#is reordering, w#ere)% earl% C#inese modernism, )eing )oldl%
summed u& in t#e one wor! )amel Xian%8i5 is eKuated wit# a sort o/ critical realism w#ose FC#inese0 uniKueness is said to reside in t#e interaction )etween two mutuall%0 decoding narrati-e
&aradigms, ma!es it &ossi)le /or 3ameson to descri)e t#e wor!s in contem&orar% C#inese literature as F)rea!t#roug#s into literar% modernit%0, w#ic# a&&arentl% are s#i/ting t#e /ocus o/ critical
discussions to Flanguage itsel/ and to t#e
F,
st%listic ]tec#niKuesR o/ narrati-e 4 -F
$rom )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E?A, ?+H+,4
:=D
:=2
Rey )/o1
To inter-ene in t#is F&ostrnodernist0 sc#ema o/ modern C#inese literar% #istor% is em)arrassing )ecause it ine-ita)l% in-ol-es &ointing to t#e -oluminous studies w#ic# )ase alread% )een
done on t#e su)Iect o/ C#inese modernism
=
H em)arrassing also )ecause t#e discussions o/ language and st% listic Ftec#niKues0 o/ narrati-e date )ac! at least to *+*+, t#e %0ear o/ t#e Ma% $ourt#
Mo-ement, -O#ic# is t#e o//icial landmar! /or t#e )irt# o/ C#inese modernism, a modernism w#ose main /eatures included t#e contro-ersial ad-ocation o/ baihua @t#e -ernacularA /or literar%
writing and m%riad e(&erimentations wit# F.estern0 literar%0 /orms4 T#e case o/ t#e no-elist and &la%wrig#t Lao S#e, in t#is lig#t, is es&eciall% ironic, since #is narrati-e met#ods #a-e alwa%s
)een associated wit# traditional stor%telling w#ic# is not u&#eld as re&resentati-e o/ FC#inese modernism04 $or instance, in #is studies o/ modern C#inese literature, t#e CGec# sinologist
Iarosloa- Pr)ke! interestingl% argues t#at Lao S#e is an Fartistic /ailure0 w#ene-er #e de&arts /rom stories o/ indi-iduals and &uts social &ro)lems in t#e /oreground4
>
.#at t#e name FLao S#e0 calls to mind H t#oug# t#is is not t#e &lace to enter into Lao S#e0s QQor!s #ere H is in /act a traditionalism w#ic# is irreduci)l% &resent in t#e #istor% o/ modern
C#inese literature )ut w#ic# C#inese modernism in its &ro-.estern tendencies #as alwa%s wanted to su&&ress4 .#at ; would li!e to &resent in t#e rest o/ t#is essa% is t#ere/ore a cultural critiKue
wit#in a cultural critiKue6 a critical res&onse to &ostmodernism as Fglo)al culture0 is &ossi)le onl% wit# a rewriting o/ modern C#inese literar% #istor% /rom wit#in4
II
Modern C#inese literar% #istor%, as it is &resented in t#e .est, #as, until /airl% recentl%, )een dominated )% t#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement and t#e cultural re-olution t#at clusters around its
memor%4 FMa% $ourt#0 is now generall% understood not onl% as t#e da% in *+*+ w#en students in 1eiIing &rotested against t#e C#inese go-ernment0s sel/-com&romising &olicies toward 3a&an
and triggered a series o/ u&risings t#roug#out t#e countr%, )ut as t#e entire &eriod in earl%-twentiet#-centurs C#ina in w#ic# C#inese &eo&le o/ di//erent social classes, all ins&ired )% &atriotic
sentiments, were eager to re-aluate tradition in t#e lig#t o/ science and democrac% and to )uild a Fne(- nation04 + ;n literature, t#e term FMa% $ourt#0 signi/ies t#e call /or a re/ormed &ractice o/
writing t#at was to )e )ased on baihua5 t#e -ernacular4 $ollo(-ing t#e de)ates among Ma% $ourt# intellectuals suc# as Hu S#i, C#en Du(iu4 S#eng S#enduo, and Mao Dun on t#e need to create
an Fim&ro-ed0 &eo&le0s language and literature, writers o/ t#e &eriod e(&erimented wit# a -ariet%0 o/ Fno-el0 /orms t#at too! t#eir ins&iration /rom .estern romanticism, naturalism, realism, and
&ragmatism4 T#us t#e &rocess o/ cultural &uri/ication, w#ic# was OsrOntatiousl% iconoclastic, was instigated wit# t#e F.est0 as Ft#eor%0 and Ftec#nolog%04 C#inese culture itsel/, meanw#ile,
increasingl% turned into some !ind o/ &rimiti-e raw material w#ic#, )eing decadent and Fcanni)alistic0, was urgentl% awaiting enlig#tenment4 T#ere was not a )etter indication o/ t#is cultur,OO
/erment t#an t#e
4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies :=8
/reKuenc% wit# w#ic# t#e word Fnew0 E=inD a&&eared as a sign o/ c#ange6 Fnew
%out#0, Fnew /iction0, Fnew literature0, Fnew woman0, Fnew times0, Fnew C#ina0, and
so on4 T#is desire /or t#e new Kuic!l% acKuired t#e /orce o/ an ideological im&erati-e
t#at success/ull% rationaliGed C#ina0s contact wit# t#e .est4 ;n one o/ #is disi58ssions
o/ t#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement as a C#inese cultural re-olution, Hu S#i coiicludes6
F.it#out t#e )ene/it o/ an intimate contact wit# t#e ci-iliGation o/ t#e .est, t#ere
could not )e t#e C#inese Renaissance40
t
;n t#e word F)ene/it0, t#e C#inese
&redicament o/ t#e twentiet# centur% is concisel%0 summed u&4 According to t#e
arguments o/ cultural re-olutionaries li!e Hu S#i, t#e new or t#e modern is tiOt onl%
a)solutel% necessar% )ut also good4 And it is good )ecause it comes /rom t#e .est4
T#e )rea!down o/ traditional C#inese culture is t#us sel/-im&osed as muc# as it is
coerced t#roug# /oreign domination4 .e must now -iew t#e eagerness 9/ Ma%
$ourt# leaders li!e Hu S#i as t#e sign o/ des&eration among a &articular class w#ic#
was traditionall% a&&ointed t#e guardian o/ its societ%, and w#ic# conceded &er#a&s
too nai-el% to seeing C#ina0s &ro)lems in terms o/ its Fin/eriorit%0 to t#e .est4 T#e
o&en and willing es&ousal t#at resulted, t#e es&ousal o/ t#e .estern as t#e Fntw0 and
t#e Fmodern0, and t#us t#e Fci-iliGed0 Ewenmin%D5 meant t#e )eginning o/ a long
&rocess o/ cultural im&erialism t#at was to last )e%ond C#ina0s su)seKuent rOt/le-al
o/ #er leased territories and o//icial concessions4
1ut i/ t#e moderniGation o/ C#inese literature #as )een &art and &aPCel o/
im&erialism, t#e condemnation o/ w#ic# #as )ecome an et#ical &latitude in t#e late
twentiet# centur%, t#e su)tle rami/ications o/ im&erialism are most acti-el% O-it# us
toda% in t#e /orm o/ esta)lis#ed cultural #istor%, w#ere residual
+
material
s&eci/icities are smoot#ed o-er /or t#e sa!e o/ FmaIor0 landmar!s w#ic# are #eld u&
as Fe&oc#al0 and t#us re&resentati-e4 T#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement, #ciwe-er
contradictor% and com&le( its de-elo&ments mig#t )e, now stands in Otodetn
C#inese literar% #istor% as a &rimar% e-ent, a #istoric waters#ed )etween t#e 9ld and
new C#inas4 As a to&ic w#ic# is am&l% researc#ed wit#in modern C#inese studies,
t#e &eriodiGation FMa% $ourt#0 t#us e(ists as t#e s%non%m /or Fmodern C#inese
" literature06 its &ro)lems /unction as signs o/ C#inese literature0s Fmodernit%0N its
t#eories and e(&eriments testi/% to a C#inese literar% Fmodernism04 .#at >uc# a
&eriodiGation em&#asiGes is t#e alignment o/ C#inese literature to a Fworld0 status
t#roug# Fmodernit%0, w#ile F&re-modern0 C#inese literature continues to remli/l ill
t#e esoteric realm o/ Fsinolog%04
T#e issues o/ Fmodernit%0 and Fmodernism0 in C#inese literature, #owe-er, #a-e
to )e ret#oug#t &recisel% )ecause t#e% are ine(trica)l% )ound u& wit# im&eriMlSn=4
Could Fmodern0 #ere )e strictl% t#e Fnew0D Progress /rom Oriental &rimiti-ism /CA t#e enlig#tenment o/ .estern science and democrac%D Cultural renaissanceD Or could
it )e t#e &rocess w#ere)% all suc# conce&ts are &aroc#ialiGed as t#e% are con/r&nted wit# a culture w#ic# seems &ersistentl% su)-ersi-e o/ t#eir r#%t#ms o/ de-elo&mentD Could
Fmodernit%0 in C#ina )e in /act a de&letion o/ t#e use/ulness o/ /orms )ot# Fold0 and Fnew0, )ecause t#e old #a-e lost t#eir Ooriginal rele-ance and t#e new #a-e )een a&&lied /rom
wit#outD
As an a&&roac# to t#ese &ro)lems, t#e culturall% monumental status o/ Ma%
:=: Rey )/o1
4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies
$ourt# literature as Fmodern0 C#inese literature must )e resituated in its #istorical conte(t4 T#e Ma% $ourt# writers were in /act writing in com&etition wit# a large num)er o/ Fold sc#ool0
no-elists w#o, )% ad#ering to more traditional st%les, continued t#roug#out t#e teens and twenties to &roduce an e(tremel% &o&ular t%&e o/ /iction t#at a&&arentl% soug#t onl% to entertain t#e
reading &u)lic wit#out stri-ing /or new social -isions4 T#ese writers are !nown in #istor% as t#e FMandarin Duc! and 1utter/l% Sc#ool0 'lyuan yan% hudie paiD5 and t#eir writings, FMandarin
Duc! and 1utter/l% literature0 Eyuan yan% hudie pai wen=ue5 a))re-iated to F1utter/l% literature0 in t#e /ollowingY4 T#is #ilarious name was /irst used to re/er to B/l S#en%a0s U] ii hun A3ade
&ear -pirit?5 an earl% )estseller &u)lis#ed in *+*54 .ritten s!ill/ull% in semi-classical &arallel &rose, BX0s no-el is strewn wit# sentimental &oems in w#ic# lo-ers are com&ared to &airs o/
mandarin duc!s and )utter/lies4 A related series o/ Io!es and rumors among some writers o/ t#e &eriod resulted in t#e use o/ FMandarin Duc! and 1utter/l%0 as a &eIorati-e la)el /or t#e aut#ors
o/ t#is t%&e o/ sentimental lo-e stor%4 T#ese writers included B/l, Li Ding%i, .u S#uangre, and a /ew ot#ers4 During t#e twenties, as t#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement gat#ered momentum in t#e
&rocess o/ .esterniGing C#inese letters, t#e la)el FMandarin Duc! and 1utter/l%0 was used generall% to attac! all t%&es o/ old-st%le /iction t#at continued to enIo% &o&ularit%4 F1utter/l%0 /iction
#ence/ort# included not onl% t#e lo-e stories t#at were written during its #e%da%, )ut also Fsocial0 no-els, Fdetecti-e0 no-els, F!nig#t-errant0 no-els, Fscandal0 no-els, Fideal0 or F/antas%0 no-els,
comic0 no-els, Flegendar%0 no-els and ot#ers4 T#is )roader de/inition o/ t#e la)el remains t#e one ado&ted )% C#inese Communist critics toda%, w#ile non-Communist writings tend to ad#ere to
its narrower de/inition as Flo-e stories0 onl%4
;n rereading 1utter/l% literature, t#e /irst t#ing we notice is t#at t#e &#enomenal &roduction and consum&tion o/ 1utter/l% stories in t#eir time are in cons&icuous contrast to t#e marginalit% o/
t#eir rece&tion in modern C#inese studies4 T#at marginalit% must now )e reassessed to /orm a com&le( )ac!ground against w#ic# t#e status o/ Ma% $ourt# literature as C#inese modernism can
)e ree(amined4 On t#e ot#er #and, alt#oug# 1utter/l% literature #as )egun to arouse interests among sc#olars in recent %ears, t#ose interests seem con/ined to two maIor t%&es o/ a&&roac#es4 T#e
/irst suc# a&&roac#, w#ic# aims to disco-er intrinsicall% Fliterar%0 e(cellences in certain wor!s o/ 1utter/l% literature, aims also to restore t#em to t#e Fcanon0 o/ C#inese -ernacular /iction4 As
suc#, wor!s o/ 1utter/l% literature are inter&reted as second- or t#ird-rate successors to a long-esta)lis#ed literar% tradition, and are stri&&ed o/ t#eir #istorical signi/icance as su)-ersi-e &o&ular
cultural /orms4 *9 T#e second t%&e o/ a&&roac# de/ines 1utter/l% literature as documents o/ sociological interest4 Largel% in accordance wit# t#e Communist C#inese im&erati-e to Frestore0 a
F&eo&le0s tradition0 t#roug# Fmaterial0 culture H a tradition w#ic# would #ence/ort# Fscienti/icall%0 re&ro-e t#e idealism o/ /eudal, Fliterate0 C#ina O H t#is a&&roac# Fe(ca-ates0 1utter/l% literature
toget#er wit# massi-e #istorical data o)tained /rom /ield wor! and statistics4 Here, w#at is c#aracteristicall% )%&assed is t#e o&acit% or constructedness o/ 1utter/l% stories t#emsel-es, w#ic# are
reduced to more or less trans&arent Fre/leOtions0 o/ ideas4 *5
:=$
T#e inadeKuacies o/ )ot# t#ese t%&es o/ a&&roac#es alert us to #ow t#e s&eci/icit% o/ 1utter/l% literature can )e e(cluded /rom sig#t t#roug# acts o/ restorati-e a&&ro&riation Iust as muc# as
t#roug# downrig#t dismissal4 M% concerns t#ere/ore include not onl% re/uting t#e #istorical reIection o/ 1utter/l% /iction as Fin/erior0 literature t#roug# e(&lications o/ 1utter/l% stories0
Fintrinsic0 merits, )ut also Kuestioning t#e &ersuasi-e in/luences o/ t#ose met#ods )% w#ic# it is now rea&&ro&riated into t#e #omogeneit% o/ Ftradition0, literar%0 or socialist4 ;n ot#er words, t#e
tas! in rereading 1utter/l% literature is two/old6 to recollect 1utter/l% stories /rom #istorical o)li-ion, and to /ind in t#em a met#od to read against t#e critical discourses w#ic# so &ower/ull%
dominate modern C#inese literar% #istor% at &resent4
As a wor!ing #%&ot#esis, ; rede/ine t#e #istorical a&&earance o/ 1utter/l% /iction as a femini8ation o/ t#e &redominant Con/ucian culture, in t#e dou)le sense t#at moments o/ su)-ersion t#at
e(ist in t#is /iction are closel% related to t#e in/erior &ositions o/ women in C#inese societ%, and t#at suc# moments, )ecause t#e% are &art o/ &o&ular culture, continuall% disru&t and resist some
o/ modern C#ina0s most Fserious0 concerns @suc# as FmoderniGation0A e-en as t#e% gesture toward t#em4 F$eminiGation0 as suc# re/ers not onl% to t#e Kuestioning o/ /emale o&&ression, w#ic#
was scri&turall% and sociall% rein/orced in traditional C#ina, )ut also to t#e &rocesses w#ere)% t#e clearcut em&iricist dic#otom% )etween o&&ression and emanci&ation, or )etween
traditionalism and modernism as sta)le, de/inite &ers&ecti-es, )ecomes im&otent4
An e(am&le o/ suc# &rocesses o/ /eminiGation can )e descri)ed t#roug# t#e /ormal structure o/ a signi/icant 1utter/l% su)genre, t#e lo-e stor%4
A su)genre w#ic# )egan wit# .u .o%ao0s 7en hai A-ea of 4emorse or -ea of Woe? @*+9EA, t#e 1utter/l% lo-e stor% is o/ten alluded to in t#is manner6 F)o% meets girl, )o% and girl /all in
lo-e, )o% and girl are se&arated )% cruel /ate, )o% and girl die o/ )ro!en #eart04 *, Accordingl%, -ea of 4emorse #as )een summariGed as a stor% w#ic# Fde&icts t#e ra&id degeneration o/ a wea!-
willed %out# and t#e )elated attem&ts )% #is de-oted /iancLe to restore #im to &#%sical and moral #ealt#4 He dies, ne-ert#eless, and s#e )ids #er &arents /arewell to enter a nunner%40
T#is !ind o/ inter&retation, in ot#er words, sees 1utter/l% literature on neutral )ut im&recise grounds, as stories a)out un/ul/illed lo-e relations#i&s w#ere)% t#e male and /emale c#aracters
eKuall% s#are t#e narrati-e /ocus4 Howe-er, t#e consistentl% ascri)ed F)alanced reci&rocit% o/ t#e romaiitic relations#i&s )etween lo-ers0 ;S /ails to account /or t#e as%mmetrical structure o/
man% o/ t#ese stories, in w#ic# women c#aracters ta!e u& t#e maIor &art o/ t#e narrati-e s&ace4 *? ;n .u .o%ao0s wor!, /or instance, t#e Fwea!-willed %out#0 is not merel% se&arated /rom #is
/iancLe, )ut is a)sent /rom t#e narrati-e /or most o/ t#e timeN #e is reunited wit# #er in #is &#%sicall% and morall% degenerate state onl% in t#e last twent% &ages or so4 $urt#er, #is cons&icuous
a)sence is )roug#t a)out in t#e most im&ro)a)le manner4 E-acuating t#eir -illage during t#e 1o(er Re)ellion, t#e engaged cou&le tra-el in a cart &ulled )% a muleN )ut as t#e% are not %et
married, t#e man decides to !ee& #is /iancLe /rom /eeling em)arrassed )% wal!ing )eside t#e cart #imsel/ w#ile s#e sits
:=< 4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies :==
Rey )/o1
in it4 .#en t#e% are attac!ed )% a grou& o/ )andits, t#e mule runs o// in anot#er direction in /rig#t, t#us se&arating t#e cou&le )% literall% remo-ing t#e man /rom t#e scene4 O)-iousl% crude and
ridiculous, t#is de-ice o/ se&aration nonet#eless illustrates #ow essential it is /or t#e no-elist to /ind a wa% to stage t#e woman alone4 ;n t#e e-ents t#at /ollow, we see #er as t#e -irtuous
daug#ter and wi/e-to-)e, ta!ing care o/ #er sic! mot#er and tr%ing to contact #er lost /iancee under t#e most &o-ert% -stric!en circumstances4 .#en #e /inall%0 rea&&ears, #is degenerac% remains
strangel% une(&lained4 T#is a)sence o/ an% &ersuasi-e sense o/ de-elo&ment in t#e male c#aracter once again #ig#lig#ts t#e sensiti-e moral &erce&ti-eness in t#e woman6 t#e male )ecomes a
mere stage &ro& to t#e melodrama o/ /emale melanc#ol%4
Rat#er t#an )eing reci&rocal, t#en, relations#i&s )etween men and women in 1utter/l% lo-e stories o/ten ta!e &lace in t#e cons&icuous a)sence or lac! o/ &artici&ation o/ t#e women0s
)elo-ed, w#o ma% )e wea!, sic!, dead, /ar awa%, or a /oreigner )e%ond t#e gri&s o/ Con/ucian culture4 ;n )eing le/t alone to struggle wit# t#e traumas o/ li/e, women c#aracters are seen
willingl% to resist &ersonal desires or to gi-e u& t#eir own li-es in t#e names o/ c#astit% and moralit%4 T#is as%mmetrical or sacrificial structure calls to mind t#e C#inese lie n] @F-irtuous
women0A tradition, w#ic# stresses o)edience to unwritten as (-ell as written laws regulating /emale )e#a-ior4 *< As suc#, t#ese &o&ular stories )ecome writings w#ic# Fimitate0 or Fcontinue0
traditional &atterns o/ o&&ression against women in t#e C#inese culture4
Howe(0er, t#e sacri/icial structures w#ic# so &er-ade an% reading o/ t#e stories are mediated )% t#e /ragmentariness o/ t#e narrati-es t#emsel-es4 ;/ 1utter/l% lo-e stories could indeed )e read
as narrati-es w#ic# continue, in /ictional /orm, t#e lie nfl genre, we would still need to as! t#e Kuestion w#% 1utter/l% aut#ors and readers were so tirelessl% fascinated wit# t#is su)Iect o/ /emale
melanc#ol%4 T#e male aut#ors0 una)as#ed attem&ts to /ocus t#eir literar% energies on t#e su)Iect in a !ind o/ writing w#ic# was rooted in traditional stor%telling and des&ised )% t#e &re-modern
C#inese literati as Fsmall tal!0 E=iaoshuoD suggest t#e wor!ing o/ anot#er set o/ concerns w#ic# are closel% related to )ut not identical wit# t#e /eminine one4 $emale melanc#ol%, )eing
ine(trica)l% associated wit# Flo-e0, is at t#e same time t#e occasion /or art and /iction, and t#us aligned wit# t#e acti-ities w#ic# are traditionall% condemned as immoral i/ t#e% are &ursued in
t#emsel-es /or &ure F&la%04
.#at is most stri!ing st%listicall% a)out t#e 1utter/l% lo-e stories is t#eir sense o/ e=cess H a c#aracteristic w#ic# t#e% #a-e in#erited /rom C#inese -ernacular /iction and w#ic# a&&ears, on t#e
one #and, as t#e utmost sentimental indulgence and, on t#e ot#er, as e(treme social entra&ment4 T#e manner o/ narration in t#ese stories is t#us o/ten -isi)l% s&lit )etween a /ascination wit# t#e
s&ontaneit% o/ lo-e, w#ic# is de&icted as a disco.ery )% t#e man o/ #is )elo-ed0s c#arm, and a concurrent rein/orcement o/ t#e o&&ressi-eness o/ t#e &u)lic world4 As romantic images are
Iu(ata&osed against t#e most /rig#tening and re&ulsi-e ones, or as t#e st%liGed language o/ traditional stor%telling is Iu(ta&osed against t#e im&ro)a)le, tri-ial, and /antastical e-ents, Flo-e0 o/
Fsentiment0 @i4e4 t#e F)eauti/ul0A does not so muc# com&el s%m&at#% and identi/ication as it &roduces /eelings o/ e(cess and contradiction4 $or
F>
I I
;0
t#e C#inese reader es&eciall%, lo-e0s e(tra-agant, su&er/luous clas#es wit# t#e F&u)lic0 do not so muc# e-o!e, contem&lati-el%, a sense o/ trut# a)out F&riQ ate0 emotions as t#e% dramatiGe t#e
e//ects o/ em&tiness associated wit# a &articular a//ecti-e tendenc% as F/ictional04
T#is F/ictional0 narrati-e structure, w#ic# is a&&arentl%0 di.ided )etween sensationalism and didacticism, )etween sentimental melodrama and t#e aut#or0s a-owed moral intent, #as t#e e//ect
not o/ )alance and control, )ut rat#er ss/ a staging o/ mutuall% uncom&re#ending realities @suc# as Con/ucianism and .esterniGation, /emale c#astit% and li)eration, countr% and cit% liQes, etc4A4
;rreconcila)l% Iu(ta&osed against one anot#er, suc# e(treme st%liGations &roduce narrati-es t#at are -iolent not onl% )ecause o/ t#eir su)Iect matter )ut, more im&ortant, )ecause o/ t#eir im&licit
undermining o/ w#at t#e% t#emsel-es consciousl% u&#old, i4e4 a Con/ucian attitude toward /emale -irtue4 T#is -iolence, w#ose theatricality ultimatel% stri&s an% single realit%0 o/ its claim to /ull
aut#enticit%, is w#at can t#en )e ret#oug#t as t#e /eminiGing o/ t#e Con/ucian culture t#roug# stor%telling4 ;t is a -iolence t#at reKuires us to read 1utter/l% narrati-es t#e wa% t#e% read #istor%,
as disIunct /ragments rat#er t#an as a co#esi-e w#ole4
ot sur&risingl%, t#ere/ore, t#e /ragmentar% modes o/ 1utter/l%0 stories #a-e )een consistentl% misinter&reted )% e-en t#e most sensiti-e critics as signs o/ t#eir in/eriorit%, t#eir failure to
)ecome good Fcanonical0 literature4 To t#is e(tent, rereading 1utter/l% stories is not merel% an e(ercise in learning a)out t#e mediated nature o/ /ictional discourse, )ut is crucial /or
deconstructing institutionaliGed criticism0s erudite and &ersuasi-e mishandlin% o/ &o&ular cultural /orms4 Suc# mis#andling consists in a &rogressi-e re/usal to acce&t t#e su)-ersi-eness w#ic# is
&eculiar to 1utter/l% literature4
T#is su)-ersi-eness lies not so muc# in an% &otential o/ 1tmtter/l% stories to loo!
Fout0 to a world )e%ond t#e one in w#ic# t#e% are situated as in t#e im&ossi)ilit%0
o/ t#eir narrati-e mode, t#at is, in t#eir attem&ts to /orce toget#er two essentiall%
incom&ati)le /orms o/ writing, stor%telling, and t#e moral treatise4 Tile /act t#at
1utter/l% stories, in s&ite o/ t#eir &ronounced didactic intent, are #eld sus&ect )%
C#inese critics le/t and rig#t since t#e da%s o/ t#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement, indicates
t#at somet#ing is amiss in t#eir Fdidacticism06 not t#at it is not t#ere, )ut t#at it is
out o/ &lace4 T#eir dmdactmcism is inconsistent wit# t#eir lurid de&ictions o/ a
maca)re realit%4 1utter/l% aut#ors were also Funtrustwort#%0 as t#e% s#amelessl%
regarded t#eir own wor! as &la% E.ou=i u1enhau%D 5 as a leisurels0 wit#drawal intO
t#e ideological le/to-ers o/ a social and &olitical world QJ#ic# was colla&sing )ut
w#ic# still constituted, in )ro!en-u& /orms, t#e materialit%0 o/ a &eo&le0s li-es4 T#eir
/iction lac!s t#at urgent sense o/ a com&lete )rea! wit# t#e &ast, and contradicts t#e
" re-olutionar% o&timism o/ a li)erated and enlig#tened C#ina4 1ut t#roug# t#emrm we
see a -er% di//erent !ind o/ su)-ersion at wor!, a su)s ersion )% re&etition,
e(aggeration, and im&ro)a)ilit% H a su)-ersion t#at is &arodic, not tragic, in nature4
T#e /ragmentar% Kualit% o/ t#ese stories O@-#ic# demand irreconcila)l% s&lit
inter&retations necessaril% e-o!es a critical, and not sim&l% a&&reciati-e, res&onse4
T#is critical res&onse is not Iust t#e awareness o/ w#at social &ro)lems t#e stories
:=@
Rey )/o1
Fre/lect For0cniticiGe0, )ut #ow t#eir modes o/ &resentation and contradictions relate to t#e societ% w#ic# gi-es rise to t#ose &ro)lems and w#ic# at t#e same time censors t#eir re&resentation in
t#is &articular /orm4 As melodrama, 1utter/l% lo-e stories in-ite dis)elie/ )% in/lating to /antastical &ro&ortions t#e Con/ucian societ%0s addicti-e ideologies and are t#ere/ore Fdangerous0 /or t#at
societ%, w#ic# relies on its mem)ers0 serious in-ol-ement wit# w#at t#e% read, learn, and stud%4 1utter/l% stories0 /ran! O&eratiOn as mere &la%, entertainment, wee!end &astime, and distraction
/rom F&ro&er0 national concerns also meant t#at t#e% #ad to )e e(orciGed not )ecause o/ t#eir su)Iect matter @w#ic# is muc# more #omes&un t#an most Ma% $ourt# literatureA )ut )ecause o/
t#eir deli)eratel% /ictional stance, t#eir a)solute incom&ati)ilit% wit# t#e modern C#inese demands /or Frealit%0, &ersonal and social4 T#us t#ese stories li-e on as ine(&lica)le dreams /or
enlig#tened C#inese minds, t#eir images #auntingl% /amiliar )ut rationall% re&ressed4
$inall%, t#e &rocesses o/ /eminiGation must also )e understood in t#eir interrelatedness wit# t#e newl% ur)an conditions under w#ic# 1utter/l% literature was &roduced and consumed4 A good
illustration o/ suc# interrelatedness can )e /ound in BX S#en%a0s 3ade &ear -pirit. A stor% w#ic# tells o/ t#e un/ul/illed lo-e )etween a sc#olar-teac#er and a widow w#ose son #e is tutoring,
3ade &ear -pirit stri!es us immediatel% wit# a certain dislocation )etween its language and its su)Iect matter, w#ic# results /rom t#e narrator0s attem&t to record t#e tedious content o/
sentimental lo-e wit# t#e ornate F/our-si(0 &rose st%le Epian 'iD o/ t#e d%ing sc#olar-o//icial class4 .#ile t#e classical, erudite &rose st%le #ad lost none o/ its )eaut%, it was used #ere /or selling
Fmiddle)row0 entertainment to a ra&idl% growing reading &u)lic in ur)an centers li!e S#ang#ai4 T#is dislocation )etween arcaneness and mundaneness, )etween t#e elitism o/ learned writing
and t#e accessi)ilit% o/ &o&ular /iction, suggesti-el% connects t#e 1utter/l% lo-e stor% wit# a !ind o/ signi/ication w#ose emergence coincided wit# t#e emergence o/ t#e moderniGed C#inese
cit% masses6 t#e F&ersonal04 T#is is an age in C#ina w#en romantic emotions, w#ic# #ad usuall% )een #us#ed u& )ecause an% &u)lic demonstration o/ strong /eelings was considered
em)arrassing, were released to untried degrees o/ e(u)erance4 O T#e most unuttera)le, most F/eminine0 /eelings were now endowed wit# a tremendous sense o/ aura and &ut on a &ar wit# t#e
most #eroic and &atriotic, &recisel% )ecause all sentiments were made lucidl% Fa-aila)le0 /or t#e /irst time t#roug# t#e mass &ractices o/ reading and writing, acti-ities w#ic# used to )elong
e(clusi-el% to t#e #ig#)row sc#olarl% world4
T#is sentimental li)eration was not nai-e, #owe-er, )ut com&le(4 ;n t#e increasingl% commercialiGed atmos&#ere o/ treat% &orts li!e S#ang#ai, t#e no-longer-s#ame/ul &roduction o/ suc#
F/eminiGed0 signi/ications went #and in #and wit# un&recedented Fwa-es0 o/ consum&tion4 *+ Emotions, &roclaimed as t#e Ftrut#s0 o/ #uman !ind, meanw#ile turned into lucrati-e commodities
w#ic# o/ten came in serialiGed /orm in &o&ular Iournals and news&a&er columns and ga-e rise to unending desires in t#e )ooming )oo! mar!et4 T#e most interesting as&ect o/ suc# serialiGation
is t#at it #a&&il% coincided wit# a traditional stor%telli6ig de-ice w#ic# #ad its origins in a /orm o/ 1udd#ist sermon t#at was &o&ular in ;ie Tang D%nast%
4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies =<+
@AD ?*EH+9<A and w#ic# man% 1utter/l% writers still used4 T#is de-ice was an
e(&ression t#at #ad )ecome identi/ied wit# t#e traditional stor%teller0s mannerism
in t#e Flin!ed-c#a&ter0 /orm E8han% hui tiD 6 F;/ %ou wis# to !now w#at #a&&ens ne(t4
%ou are welcome to #ear m% ne(t e(&osition40 T#us a modern commercial gimmic!
/ound its &recursor /antasticall%, in an outmoded &o&ular cultural &ractice4
T#e inter&la% )etween traditionalism and modernism in 9ade &ear -pirit is e-ident
in t#e &#%sical wit##olding o/ sentimental desires, w#ic# is c#aracteriGed )% a
consistent concealment o/ t#e lo-ers0 )odies4 T#oug# li-ing in t#e same #ouse#old,
Meng(ia and Liniang rarel% see eac# ot#erN t#e% #a-e two nocturnal meetings
t#roug#out t#e entire wor!, onl% one o/ w#ic# is descri)ed in /ull @C#a&ter BJ;;;6
FCr%ing $ace to $ace0A4 ;n t#at c#a&ter, t#e% clear t#eir misunderstandings )roug#t
on )% Mr Li, w#o #ad tried to e(&ose t#eir a//air, t#en go on to e(c#ange &oetr%
/or t#e rest o/ t#e nig#t amid so))ing and gaGing at eac# ot#er4 T#is melodramatic
&#%sical restraint on t#e lo-ers0 &art, Iust li!e t#e melodramatic e(cessi-eness @;/
t#eir &oetic and moral e(&ressions, is an im&ortant signi/%ing gesture in itsel/4
.it#out t#is /undamental .eilin% o/ t#e )odil% as&ect o/ lo-e, t#e e(citement o/ t#e
sc#olarl% sentimental world would )e com&letel% lost4 ;nstead o/ &#%sical intimac%0,
t#e lo-ers engage in an endless series o/ masKuerades6 letters, )oo!s le/t )e#ind in
t#e lo-er0s room, lost #and!erc#ie/s, &#otogra&#s, /lowers, t#e remainder @;/ a )urnt
s#eet o/ &oetr%, a loc! o/ #air, inscri&tions made wit# )lood H all o/ w#ic# conIure
u& t#e &resence o/ t#e )elo-ed in )ro!en, missing /orms, as incom&lete traces4 T#is
construction o/ Flo-e0 as a /undamentall% em&t% &rocess, an art/ul &la% in w#ic#
gestures could )e continuousl% e(c#anged wit#out an% &ositi-e goal, is &ro)a)l%
w#at unconsciousl%0 led to t#e reIection o/ 1utter/l% literature as Fdangerous0 and
F#arm/ul04 .#at is alarming /or t#e morall% concerned is not sim&l% t#at suc# lo-e
is immoral H a &oint w#ic# is &er#a&s too o)-ious to t#e Con/ucian world--ies- to
)e )ela)ored H )ut also t#at it is /ictional and unrealiGa)le4 $or BX S#en%a, on t#e
ot#er #and, t#e w#ole artistic meaning o/ Meng(ia and Lininng0s a//air would #a-e
colla&sed i/ t#e% #ad allowed t#eir lo-e to )e consummated &#%sicall%4
Lo-e, )ut lo-e wit##eld /rom &#%sical e(#austion, is 3ade &ear -pirit1s most
crucial /ormal as&ect4 ;t is w#at ultimatel% e(&lains t#e /ragmented im&ression o/
" t#e stor%6 w#ile t#e actual contact )etween t#e lo-ers is almost non-e(istent, t#ere
is alwa%s %et anot#er letter or &oem to )e written wit# e-er greater lucidit% and
a)undance o/ emotion4 T#e result o/ suc# F&la%/ul0, sel/-&er&etuating dis&lacement
is t#at e-er% #a&&ening in t#is sentimental world alwa%s seems too large or too
small, too muc# or too little, )ut ne-er co#erent and toget#er4 ;n t#is sensiti-e
registering o/ t#e /undamentall% dislocated nature o/ desire is t#us inscri)ed t#e
dilemma o/ a C#ina w#ic# was still /eudal, Con/ucian, and demoraliGed, )ut w#ic#
was also moderniGed, &rogressi-e, and enamored o/ Fnew and /oreign0 t#ings H
including t#e idea o/ a li)erated C#ina H t#at were at once t#e source o/ /ascination
and /rustration4
T#is attem&t to res!etc# t#e genealog%0 o/ modern C#inese literature is )% no
means e(#austi-e4 .#at ; #o&e to #a-e suggested t#roug# t#e )rie/ discussion o/
1utter/l% literature a)o-e is t#at C#inese modernism was ta!ing a rat#er di//erent
:@9 Rey )/o1
&at# /rom w#at its &eriodiGation in accordance wit# .estern #istorical de-elo&ments #as granted4 T#e &roduction o/ a sel/-consciousl% re-olutionar%, nationalistic literature in t#e Ma% $ourt#
&eriod is now seen against t#e concurrent &roduction o/ &o&ular narrati-es w#ic# are, #owe-er, re&udiated as F)ar)aric0 )% t#e C#inese and C#ina sc#olars t#emsel-es4 .#at results /rom
res!etc#ing as suc# is not t#e glori/ication o/ 1utter/l% literature /or its intrinsic Fliterar% -alues0 or /or its use/ulness in terms o/ F&o&ular !nowledge0, )ut a reconstituted relation o/
contradiction, a relation t#at disem)odies t#e uni/%ing gesture o/ a modernist culture t#at is com&elled to aut#enticate its own rele-ance /irst and /oremost in glo)al terms4
III
Anot#er wa% to inter-ene in 3ameson0s a&&ro&riation o/ C#inese literature wit#in t#e contem&orar% .estern conte(t is )% ree(amining some o/ t#e im&ortant moments in critical t#eor% t#at
#a-e contri)uted to t#e sense o/ urgenc% surrounding t#e recent F&ostmodernist0 de)ates4 ;/ we return )rie/l% to t#e now-&o&ulariGed &#rase o/ t#e Fmeta&#%sics o/ &resence0, it seems &ossi)le to
identi/% in t#e modern .est an in/luential e&istemic concern t#at #as led u& to t#e des&airing im&ulses o/ t#e current F&ostmodernism0 H t#e concern wit# Flanguage0 as a &re-gi-en ontological
condition4 Deconstructing t#e scienti/ic o&timism o/ structuralism0s /ascination wit# Fs%stems0, t#e earl% wor! o/ 3acKues Derrida lea-es us wit# Gdiff;rance15 t#e Fdi//erence-asde/erment0 w#ic#
is said to c#aracteriGe all linguistic acti-ities and all cultural acts o/ identi/ication4 FPresence0 is t#us alwa%s as muc# an illusion as it is a necessar% &resum&tion /or #uman underta!ings4 1ut
w#ile diff;rance5 as writing sous rature5 ma% )e eKuated wit# t#e ietGsc#ean a//irmation o/ Io% H t#e Io% o/ dissemination wit#out t#e o)sessi-e returns to Forigins0 H it #as also gi-en us t#e
&reordainment o/ FLanguage0 in t#e /orm o/ a &rison-#ouse, w#ic# ma% )e glim&sed /rom e(&Yications o/ deconstruction suc# as t#e /ollowing6 deconstruction is Ft#e strateg% o/ using t#e only
a.ailable lan%ua%e w#ile not su)scri)ing to its &remises04 FLanguage bears within itself t#e necessit% o/ its own critiKue0 Vm% em&#asisY 59
$or a reader wit# some !nowledge o/ t#e non-.estern world, t#is readi# &rescri)ed monolit#ic &resence o/ Language @as .orld and critiKue o/ t#at .orld can onl% arouse t#e most
/undamental sus&icions4 ot onl% must s#e &oint out once again, at t#e e(&ense o/ )eing o)-ious, t#at t#e attenti-eness to Language as suc# #as its origins in t#e twentiet# centur% in t#e writings
o/ $erdinand de Saussure, w#o in s&ite o/ ac!nowledging t#e e(istence o/ ideogra&#ic writing s%stems suc# as C#inese, 5* nonet#eless )ases #is Fcourse in general linguistics0 on t#e &#oneticN
s#e must also reiterate t#e interesting /act t#at /or Saussure, Ft#e linguistic signi/ier
is not &#onic )ut incor&oreal H constituted not )% its material su)stance )ut )% t#e di//erences t#at se&arate its sound-image /rom all ot#ers04 55 $or &oststructuralism c" 6a Dernida, t#e assertion
o/ language as Fincor&oreal0 is crucial aO a wa% to undo t#e Fmeta&#%sics o/ &resence0 as &#onocentrism o/ FlogocO4trism04 1ut t#e
4 ereadin .R ' andariu8 l?8tcks and Kutter/lies
deconstruction o/ s&eec# itsel/ as an instance o/ t#e Falwa% s alread% (- ritten0, (( #tcli
is itt turn grounded in an Fincor&oreal0 linguistic signi/ier, returns us to language 4ts
a /acult% t#at is c( erH&resent &recisel% )ecause it is inaudi)le and ins isi#le, neit#er
a stream o/ air nor a stream o/ in!4
T#e &oststructuralist de/inition o/ Language as t#e nos--&ercei( a)le, no(( -immaterial &la%0 t#at is &aradigmatic @;/ all #uman acti( ties is (( #at underlies t;le recent de)ates on &ostmodernism4
Let us ta!e, /or imlstance4 3eanH$rancois ; % otard Fs critiKue o/ 3drgen Ha)ermas0s de/ense o/ t#e F&roIect @;/ modernit%04 ;H;a#erm4mss arguments are made in terins o/ t#e Enlig#tenment
s&irit4 ;n #is essa( Modermtism -ersus &ostmodernism0, w#ic# was written u&on t#e recei&t o/ t#e AdornsA &ni:e, Ha)ermas de/ines &ostmodernism, wit# its neo-consers ati-e0 tendencies, as it
re&udiation o/ culture and t#ere/ore a /alse &rogranl4 5, $or t#e culture o/ modernism to Continue and )e Fcom&leted0, Ha)ermnas argues t#at t#ere is t#e need to esta)lis# unconstrained
interaction0 )et(( ecu t#e cogniti-e, moral-&ractical, and aest#etic s&#eres, and to /ind wa%0s o/ lin!ing e(&ertise wit# e-er%da% &ra(is4 T#is interaction among t#e di//erent s&#eres o/ li/e is
t#en w#at constitutes conlmunicati( e rationalit%04 .#at is o/ interest to us #ere is t#e t%&olog% o/ scienti/ic -ersus narratm( e !nowledge t#at L%otard o//ers as a wa% o/ criticiGing Ha)ermas0s
denunciation @;/ &ostmodernism4 $or L%otard, &ostmodernism is not a )rea! /ronl modernismN it is rat#er t#e nascent state )% w#ic# modernism was &ossi)le in t#e /irst &lace4 1% t#at, #e means
t#at it is onl% in t#e &ostmodern condition t#at tile t0ationalit( o/ t#e modernist is /ull% unra-elled /or t#e /irst time4 ;n t#e s#ort essa% FAn s(( en ng t#e Kuestion6 .#at is &ostmodernismD0,
w#ic# is a&&ended to #is longer ((0or!4 ,he &ostmodern )ondition: . report on knou1led%e5 L%0otard traces t#at relatiOml ill terms o/ aest#etics )ac! to t#e 'antian Fsu)lime0, ((0#ere#%0
re&resentation is /undamentall% a re&resentation o/ t#e Fun&resenta)le06
T#e su)lime 4 . . ta!es &lace 4 4 4 (( #en t#e imagination /,iils to &resent 4*** o)Iect >> iliCll
mig#t, i/ onl% in &rinci&le, conOe to matc# ii conce&t4 FOe #as e t#e ;dea o/ tile >> iwld @t#e totalit%0 o/ ((0#at is , )ut ((0e do not #a-e t#e ca&4lcitA 9@* s#ow an CQdill&lC OA/ it4 .e #a-e t#e ;dea o/ t#e
sim&le @t#at (( #ic# cannot )e )ro!en dos( *, decom&osed )ut (( e cannot illustrate it wit# a setlsi)le o)Iect ((0#mc# (( oitld )e 4 Ocase0 o/ it4 QQ c can concei( e t#e in/initel% great, t#e in/initel%- &o(( er/ul, #ut
e-er% &resent4itiotO o/ 4*** o)Iect destined toA Fma!e -isi)le0 t#is a)solute greatness S;r &ower a&&ears to 8S &4;itl/8#lQ iniideKu4ite4 T#ose are ;deas o/ ((0#ic# **9 &resetit4OtioiO is &ossi)le4 T#ere/ore4 r)es i
tll&4lrt /lO !no(( ledge a)out realit% ce(&enience N t#e% also &re-eilt rile tree union @;/ tile /aculttcs ((0#ic# gi-es rise to t#e sentiment @i/ t#e )eauti/ulN and t#e% &re( cut rile /ormatiotl 4**!Y t#e sta)iliGation o/
taste4 T#e% c4uO )e said to #e un&resetlta)ie4
; s#all call illOdCrn t#e art (( Hell des Sites its Flittle tecllnIcal e(&ertise son 111 t1chni>iuYD , 4;S Diderot used to siiO to &reseilt tile /,Ot tll,it ;llS0 LitA&rc0Seilt4l)lC e(ists4 5=
T#e di//erence )etween modernist and &ostmnodern culture is t#at, O-#ile t#e modernist &uts /orward t#e un&resenta)le as missing contents in good /orms, w#ic#
:@2
Rey )/o1
still allows /or aest#etic &leasure and a collecti-e sense o/ nostalgia, t#e &ostmodern would )e
t#at ((0#ic#, in t#e modern, &uts /orward t#e un&resenta)le in &resentatiO/l itsel/N t#at w#ic# denies itsel/ t#e solace o/ good /orms, t#e ConSensus o/ a taste w#ic# would ma!e it &ossi)le to
s#are eollecti(0el% t#e nostalgia /or t#e unattaina)leN t#at w#ic# searc#es /or new &resentations, not in order to enIo% t#em )ut in order to im&art a stronger sense o/ t#e un&resenta)le 5>
;nterestingl% enoug#, t#e negati-e dialectical relation argued #ere )etween w#at can )e concei-ed and w#at can )e &resented, a relation w#ere)% t#e generation o/ F/orms0 is alwa%s
accom&anied wit# an e-er-&resent sense o/ t#e un&resenta)le, calls to mind /undamental as&ects o/ traditional C#inese aest#etics, an aest#etics w#ic# #as )een deemed to reside in t#e F&ower o/
em&tiness04 5? ;n classical C#inese literature, w#at is em&#asiGed again and again is a similar &rinci&le t#at we can detect in t#e ot#erwise cr%&tic o&ening lines o/ t#e <ao <e 3in%:
T#e wa% t#at can )e s&o!en o/
;s not t#e constant wa%N
T#e name t#at can )e named
;s not t#e constant name4 5<
T#is linguistic:aest#etic &rinci&le could alternatel% )e descri)ed in t#is wa%6
ot onl% can t#e message reac# its destination wit#out #a-ing to )e /ull% s&elled out, )ut it is &recisel% )ecause it is not /ull% s&elled out t#at it can reac# its destination4 in t#is sense, t#e
F)lan!s0 in &ainting, t#e silences in &oetr% and music are acti-e elements t#at )ring a wor! to li/e4 5E
Classical C#inese aest#etics as suc# can )e identi/ied wit# a Ftram&oline e//ect0,
5+
w#ere)% t#e tig#tening o/ a s&ring means t#at its sudden release will launc# in/inite -aster s&aces o/ t#e
unseen4 As a con-ention in &oetr%, /or instance, we #a-e t#e /amiliar image o/ t#e #ermit-sage w#o remains in-isi)le and w#ose trut# is F)e%ond words0
T#is /ormula o/ Fless is more0, w#ic# recurs t#roug#out ancient C#inese linguistics and &oetics, and w#ic# seems to #a-e &er-aded t#e FC#inese common sense0 wit# t#e &ower o/ an
unKuestioned, idiomatic raison d1Ntre5 o//ers us an une(&ected &ers&ecti-e /rom w#ic# to a&&roac# L%otard0s t#eor% o/ t#e Fun&resenta)le04 ;n #is longer wor!, L%otard ela)orates on t#e
Fun&resenta)le0 in terms o/ t#e &ersistence o/ w#at #e calls t#e Fnarrati-e /unction0 in t#e &ostmodern world4 On its own terms, t#e critical im&ort o/ t#e Fnarrati-e /unction0 is as /ollows4
Modernist culture, wit# its scienti/ic tendencies to see! legitimation as t#e means to realit%, #as consistentl% Su&&ressed and marginaliGed Fnarrati-e !nowledge0, w#ic# di//ers /rom scienti/ic
!nowledge most signi/icantl% in t#at it does not demand t#e legitimation o/ itsel/ as t#e onl% /orm o/ trut#, and does not reKuire t#e e(clusion o/ t#e Ot#er in order to
4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies
:@8
come into )eing itsel/4 T#e &ersistence o/ t#is Fnarrati-e /unction0 in s&ite o/ its marginaliGation )% modernist culture leads L%otard to conclude t#at t#e &ostmodern s#ould )e de/ined as Fan
incredulit% toward metanarrati-es0, and &ostmodern @or narrati-eA !nowledge as t#at w#ic# Fre/ines our sensiti-it% to di//erences and rein/orces our a)ilit% to tolerate t#e incommensura)le04
L%otard ends #is s#ort essa% wit# a set o/ &leading im&erati-es I FLet us wage a war on totalit%N let us )e witnesses to t#e un&resenta)leN let us acti-ate t#e di//erences and sa-e t#e #onor o/ t#e
name0 H im&erati-es w#ic# are &aralleled )% t#e concluding allusion in t#e longer wor! to Fa &olitics t#at would res&ect )ot# t#e desire /or Iustice and t#e desire /or t#e un!nown04 ,9
;n s&ite o/ #is use o/ t#e word F!nowledge0, t#e Kuestion t#at L%otard0s anti-rationalist model o/ narrati-e raises is t#at o/ art as su)-ersi-e &ractice4 T#e /ormulaic )elie/ in narrati-e and art
per se as alternati-e wa%s o/ F!nowing0 t#at are distinct /rom t#e o//iciall% endorsed is es&eciall% &ro)lematical .is-Q-.is t#e C#inese conte(t, w#ere writing #ad alwa%s de-elo&ed as a critical
acti-it% @in t#e /orm o/ censors#i&A w#ile )eing ostensi)l% a Frecord0 o/ moral reason4 T#e in-eterate didacticism t#at resulted, a didacticism w#ic# still remains one o/ t#e reasons w#% C#inese
literature can )e un&alata)le to .estern readers, &oints to t#e ine//ecti-eness o/ writing or Fart0 w#ose critical ca&acit% #as )een #istoricall% institutionaliGed and &oliticall% rein/orced4 Canonical
C#inese modernism, as is indicated )% Ma% $ourt# writers0 /reKuent attac!s on t#eir /a-orite target, wen
8ai dao @Flitrature as t#e em)odiment o/ moral instruction0A, arose originall% as a reaction a%ainst t#is traditionall% institutionaliGed &ractice o/ writing and art4 As -ernacular /iction @rat#er t#an
drama or &oetr%A was em&#aticall% &romoted as &art o/ t#e nation-)uilding &rogram and increasingl% &racticed )% all writers, t#e agenda o/ t#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement )ecame &al&a)l% t#at o/
t#e Fautonom%0 o/ literature, on w#ic# a res&ecta)le )ecause inde&endentl% Faest#etic0 trut# was endowed4 ;ronicall%, #owe-er, t#e ele-ation o/ /ictional writing to a le-el o/ aest#etic
signi/icance, an ele-ation w#ic# was in/luenced )% .estern learning and li)erating in &rinci&le, returned t#e &assionatel% re)ellious Ma% $ourt# intellectuals to t#e traditional status o/ t#e
C#inese literati w#o #ad alwa%s mono&oliGed t#e Faest#etic0 or literar%0 as a di//erent, learned realm, a realm t#at was Fsu&erior0 to t#e -ulgar, womanl% narrati-es o/ t#e lower classes4 T#e
di//erence is t#at w#ile t#e Faest#etic0 used to )e situated in FC#inese0 literar% e(cellences @suc# as t#e dic#otomous inter&la% )etween e(&ression and silenceA, it was now relocated in t#e
no-elt% o/ /oreign /orms4 Accordingl%, t#e ideological &ositioning o/ w#at were considered F-ulgar0, Fwomanl%0, or F)ar)aric0 narrati-es also s#i/ted, /rom t#e sim&le Flower classes0 to t#e
Funenlig#tened nati-es0 w#o continued to inter&ret realit% t#roug# traditional C#inese stor%telling4
Parado(icall%, t#en our Flocal0 #istor% o/ 1utter/l% narrati-es as narrati-es Iointl%0 &roduced )% /oreign im&erialism and nati-e sc#olastic elitism ma!es t#e &ronouncement o/ a Fnarrati-e
/unction0, w#idl is in turn intimated as a Fcentral instance o/ t#e #uman mind0,
,t
#ig#l% irrele-ant4 Suc# a &ronouncement is &ossi)le onl% in terms o/ a Fmonolingual0 world--iew, w#ic# ma% at
/irst a&&ear o&&osite to w#at L%otard &ro&oses, namel%, t#at t#e &ostmodern world is made u& o/ different
:@: Rey )/o1 4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies :@$
Flanguage-games04 1ut t#e di-ersit% o/ language-games is tolera)le a&&arentl% onl% )ecause somet#ing more /undamental called FLanguage0 @in t#e Derridean senseA, w#ic# is now rede/ined as
Fnarrati-e0, is w#at e(ists &rimordiall% )etween indi-iduals and t#e world or t#e Fun&resenta)le04 .e seem to #a-e come )ac! once again to a certain /atalistic ine-ita)ilit%, &resented #ere as a
Fnatural0 &resence Ia F/unction04 .#at t#e rereading o/ 1utter/l% literature as marginaliGed &o&ular narrati-es s#ows us, instead, is t#at t#ere are alwa%s more t#an one language and one narrati-e
/unction6 )etween us and t#e un&resenta)le are interloc!ing and uneKual narrati-es, w#ic# are /urt#er mediated )% #istories o/ institutional or &olitical su&&ression4 T#e un&resenta)le is in t#is
res&ect not sim&l% t#e Fname0 o/ di//erence to w#ic# we must all F)e witnesses0, )ut clusters o/ irreduci)l% contending, culturall% s&eci/ic relations4 T#ere/ore, t#e Fun&resenta)le0 does not
necessaril% lead us to t#e re/inement o/ sensiti-it% or t#e rein/orcement o/ tolerance I Kualities w#ic# rat#er dangerousl% resem)le t#e F)enign0 strategies o/ certain colonialisms after t#e nati-es
#a-e )een conKuered I )ut more trut#/ull%, to an alertness to t#e &ower &olitics in all #uman underta!ings4
T#e &ro)lem t#at ultimatel% /aces us in an% &rocess o/ rereading is t#e &ro)lem o/ t#eoretical reconstitution4 T#e u&surge o/ interest in t#e Fun&resenta)le0, w#ic# is currentl% assuming a
great -ariet% o/ /orms in academia, suggests t#at w#at s#ould concern us now is no longer sim&l% t#e un&resenta)le itsel/, )ut, more alarmingl%, #ow t#e un&resenta)le is &ut to use4 Here, t#e
generation o/ contradictor% im&lications w#ic# are inaliena)le to t#e critiKues o/ t#e .est /rom wit#in can )e /ull% realiGed onl% t#roug# suc# critiKues0 con/rontation wit# t#e non-.estern
world in its non-#egemonic &ositions4 A t%&ical instance o/ t#is is t#e rearrangement o/ t#e Fconstellations0 o/ t#in!ing, w#ic# )egins as a critiKue o/ .estern meta&#%sics and &roceeds )%
redem&ti-e reinscni&tions o/ t#e Fun&resenta)le0 in #istor%, )% now a /ull% con-entionaliGed &ractice wit#in t#e con/ines o/ $irst .orld academic institutions4 To testi/% to t#is, we need onl%
&oint to t#e nota)le &rominence, in recent %ears, o/ critical met#ods w#ic# s#are a certain em&#asis on t#e marginal, t#e un!nown, t#e auto)iogra&#ical, and t#e institutionall% su&&ressed4
.it#in literar% academia, at least, it would )e #onest to admit t#at t#is o-erw#elming ent#usiasm /or o)scure, un&resenta)le Ftrut#s0 not in/reKuentl% coincides wit# t#e institutional
reKuirements /or t#e Foriginalit%0 o/ researc#6 to tr% to sa% w#at was not said )e/ore turns more and more into Floo!ing /or a new territor% w#ic# no one else #as disco-ered04 Academic
sc#olars#i& itsel/ t#us )ecomes a continuous widening o/ s&aces, wit# an e-er-increasing Kuantit% o/ interest-to&ics4 T#e accom&an%ing dem%sti/ication o/ .estern cultures logicall% leads to t#e
searc# /or Falternati-e0 &ers&ecti-es outside t#e F#egemonic0 s&ace o/ t#e F$irst .orld04 ;t is in t#is lig#t t#at t#e current emergence o/ t#e FT#ird .orld0 as a -ia)le critical signi/ier must )e
understood4
T#e resultant e(&losion o/ #it#erto un&resenta)le &ers&ecti-e is, o/ course, not necessaril% democratic4 ;/ .estern t#eor%, as a sel/-conscious attem&t to negotiate some /orm o/ reconciliation
wit# w#at is alwa%s missing /rom its own &resent
attention, #as now identi/ied t#e non-.estern world as a Fresource/ul0 territor% /or in-estigation, t#en it is .estern t#eor% too w#ic#, in s&ite o/ its original li)erating intentions, is
com&licitous wit# t#e #istorical F$irst .orld0 desire to use t#e non-.est to su&&l% its Flac!0 in so man% di//erent wa%s4 T#is Flac!0 is o/ten eulogiGed as t#e FOt#er06 as woman, &rimiti-e
nature, s&iritual )e%ond4 ;n eac# case t#e non-.est recei-es /ull credit as alternati-e representational principle5 w#ile t#e F#egemonic0 .est continues to )alance suc# acts o/ meta&#%sical
generosit% wit# t#e most &ragmatic discriminations and miscom&re#ensions4
An e(am&le o/ t#is t%&e o/ com&licit%, w#ic# is im&lied t#oug# unintended, is t#en /urnis#ed )% 3ameson0s &roclamation o/ &ostmodernism on t#e contem&orar% C#inese literar%
scene4 .#ile #e acce&ts L%otard0s a#istorical a//irmation o/ narrati-e, 3ameson also wants to politici8e t#e glo)al crisis in narrati-e in t#e /ollowing wa%6 t#e great master narrati-es #a-e
not disa&&eared )ut #a-e )een dri-en underground, in w#at #e #as elsew#ere called Ft#e &olitical unconscious04 $or 3 ameson, t#ere/ore, it is not enoug# Iust to assert, as L%otard does,
t#e narrati-e potential o/ a scienti/ic and tec#nological world, )ecause w#ate-er c#ange mig#t )e induced )% t#e narrati-e &otential would automaticall% )e rea)sor)ed )% t#e ca&italist
s%stem itsel/4 Cr%&ticall%, #e concludes #is /oreword to t#e Englis# translation o/ L%otard0s )oo! )% &ointing to Fgenuinel% &olitical action0
,5
as a means to interru&t t#e mono&olistic
tendencies o/ ca&italism4
$or 3ameson, t#e &ostmodern is t#us de/ined in terms not o/ a narrati-e /unction, )ut o/ a &ractice o/ ma&&ing, a meta&#or to w#ic# #e attac#es great signi/icance in #is essa%
FPostmodernism, or t#e cultural logic o/ late ca&italism04 O ;n t#e essa%, 3ameson &ro&oses a de/inition o/ t#e &ostmodern world as one in w#ic# t#e
dissolution o/ t#e autonom% o/ culture #as led to an e(&losion t#at #as a)olis#ed critical distance altoget#er4 T#e moment o/ trut# in &ostmodernism is t#ere/ore Fan e(traordinaril% demoraliGing
and de&ressing original new glo)al s&ace0,
,=
w#ere, ideall%, a new t#in!ing t#at unites catastro&#e and &rogress would arise4 T#e in-ention and &roIection o/ a glo)al cogniti-e ma&&ing,
w#ic# would ta!e &lace in t#e Fs%m)olic0 )etween t#e indi-idual and !nowledge, and w#ic# would generate relations to a new Totalit%, are t#en w#at would gi-e &ostmodernism t#e
meaning o/ a peda%o%ical political culture. 3ameson concludes t#is essa% )% suggesting t#at #is Fs%m)olic0 is a re/ormulation o/ t#e Lacanian Fs%m)olicO as an Faest#etic0 o/ cartogra&#%4
FO ;t would seem t#at t#is Faest#etic0 is Alt#usserian too I e-en t#oug# 3ameson would not gi-e t#e latter credit H in t#e sense t#at art is t#e s&ace w#ere ;deolog% is internall% distanced
/rom itsel/, made incom&lete and t#us trans/ormed6
,?
a s&ace w#ic# is %et distinct /rom Science4
.#at is at sta!e #ere is not e(actl% t#e reinscri&tion o/ &ostmodernism in t#e
aest#etic, )e it in t#e /orm o/ narrati-e Fdi//erence0, or o/ cartogra&#ical Ftotalit%04 Kuestion t#at !ee&s rearing its ugl% #ead is t#at o/ #istor% and, in t#is case, its
related issue o/ et#nocentrism4 ;/ t#e de)ates on &ostmodernism in t#e .est #a-e
arisen out o/ a dissatis/action wit# #istor% as tO3eolog%, t#en t#e same de)ates are T#e
una-oida)l% /aced wit# #istor% as in/inite, ungras&a)le #istoricit%4 ;s t#e cultural
:9<
Rey )/o1
#istorian condemned to et#nocentrism, in t#at #e or s#e eit#er #as to reduce t#e Falien0 to some culture-)ound total -ision, or else )ecome utterl% inca&acitated )% t#e e-er-multi&l%ing ot#erness
o/ e-en #is or #er Fown0 worldD
A &ressing, t#oug# &er#a&s not %et /ull% articulated, alternati-e seems to lie in t#e use o/ #istor% as a continuous confrontation wit# &recisel% t#ese two im&ossi)le ends o/ totalit% and
di//erence4 T#at con/rontation, w#ic# would alwa%s &roceed wit# s!e&ticism, #as to )e distinguis#ed /rom c%nical reIection4 M% interru&tion o/ 3 ameson0s attri)ution o/ &ostmodernisrnm to
contem&orar% C#inese literature would #o&e/ull% )e understood in t#is lig#t4 ;/ t#e &at# o/ C#inese modernism #as )een mar!ed o// /rom t#e .est, in t#at it was )orn as a reaction to /oreign
im&erialism, im)ued wit# traditional didacticism and modernist nationalism t#at in turn &roduced a re-olutionar% literature and its )ar)aric Ot#er o/ &o&ular narrati-es, and e-entuall%
&unctuated )% socialism on t#e mainland and colonialist ca&italism in &laces li!e Taiwan and Hong 'ong, t#en t#e la)el o/ F&ostmodernism0, w#ic# is itsel/ a culture-s&eci/ic &eriodiGing
conce&t, would seem /acile and misleading4 ;s it not &ossi)le t#at in t#is &ostmodern narrati-iGation o/ t#e FT#ird .orld0, t#e Fnew0 territories disco-ered are once again )ecoming e(otic
signi/lers t#at are continuall% )eing reconstituted wit#in t#e one /amiliar signi/ied o/ Fworld #istor%0, rat#er t#an )eing recogniGed genuinel% /or w#at t#e% are notD ;n t#e Fnew0 ma&&ing o/ t#e
world as F&ostmodernist0, is t#e &ostmodernist cultural #istorian attending to t#e un&resenta)le, or is #e retrie-ing in/ormation /or an older s%stem Ia metanarrati-eD
Per#a&s t#e words o/ a C#ina #istorian can )e redeli-ered #ere in contest4 Re/lecting on t#e Communist C#inese eagerness to &eriodiGe C#inese #istor% in accordance wit# t#e .est,
3ose&# R4 Le-enson writes6
C#inese #istor% on its own de-elo&ed in a wa% not 9ust its own. T#is was t#e )asic communist #istorical statement 444 wit# eKual weig#t on su)Iect and &redicateN t#ese toget#er esta)lis#ed t#e
eKui-alence o/ C#ina and Euro&e4
; t#in! Mao s#ould )e turned on #is #ead6 C#inese #istor% not on its own @in modern times, at leastA de-elo&ed in a wa% 9ust its own4
Notes
*4 $redric 3ameson, FLiterar% inno-ation and modes o/ &roduction6 A commentar% (odern )hinese 6iterature ;, * @*+E=A, 7!5 <?4
54 'bid.5 ?<4
#. 'bid.5 <54
=4 Sideste&&ing sources in C#inese, 3a&anese, ot#er languages and a good deal in Englis#, t#e reader ma% want to consult some o/ t#e /ollowing6 C#ow Tse-tsung, ,he (ay $ourtl.1
(o.ement: 'ntellectual re.olution in modern )hina5 Har-ard 8ni-ersit%0 Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+?9N CT4 Hsia, A 7istory of (odern )hinese $iction 1*17I1*!75 Yale 8ni-ersit% Press,
ew Ha-en, CT, *+?*N 1onnie S4 McDougall, ,he 'ntroduction of Western 6iterary ,heories into (odern )hina5 Centre /or East Asian Cultural Studies,
0CC
4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies
:@=
To!%o, *+<*, (odern )hinese 6iterature in the (ay $ourth :ra5 ed4 Merle 2oldman, Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, MA:London, *+<<N Manidn 2Tli!, ,he /enesis of (odern
)hinest1 6iterary )riticism A1*17I1 *#W Jeda, 1ratisla-a, *+E9N Iarosla( PriOiie!, ,he 6yrical and the :pic: -tudies of modern )hinese literature5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington,
*+E9, ,he )hinese Ho.el at the ,urn of the )entury5 ed4 Milena DoleGelo-d-Jelingero-T, 8ni-ersit% o/ Toronto Press, Toronto:1u//alo: London, *+S/A4
!. Pr#ie!, ,he 6yrical and the :pic5 &4 55,4
?4 See C#ow Tse-tsung, ,he (ay $ourth (o.ement.
<4 T#e C#inese -ernacular #ad alwa%s )een a &art o/ traditional /iction and ot#er colloKuial literar% genres, )ut its use was o//iciall% ad-ocated /or t#e /irst time under t#e new cultural
conditions closel% associated wit# t#e Ma% $ourt# Mo-ement4 T#e two most Kuoted s&o!esmen /or t#e use o/ baihua were Hu S#i and C#en Du(iu, )ot# o/ w#om wrote /or Xin Min%nian AHew Uouth?5 a
magaGine w#ic# )egan its &u)lication in t#e *+*9s and w#ic# was read mainl% )% C#inese students w#o #ad studied a)road and deri-ed t#eir ideas a)out re-olution /rom an intellectual acKuaintance wit#
t#e .est4 See /or instance Hu0s GWen=ue %ailian% chuyi1 @FSome suggestions /or t#e re/orm o/ C#inese literature0A, Hew Uouth5 3anuar% *+*<, and C#en0s GWen=ue %emin% 'on1 @FOn literar%
re-olution0A, Hew Uouth5 $e)ruar% *+*<4 T#ese articles #a-e )een re&rinted in Phon%%uo =in wen=ue da=i AA )omprehensi.e Antholo%y of the Hew 6iterature of )hina?5 ed4 S#ao 3ia)i, Wen=ue
yan9iu she5 Hong 'ong, *+?5, -ol4 *, &&4 ?5H<*N 7"I!. T#e% #a-e also )een translated in &art into Englis#6 see /or instance .illiam T4 de 1ar% et al.5 -ources of )hinese ,radition5 Colum)ia
8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, &&4 E*EH5+N C#ow Tse-tsung, &&4 5<*H+4
E4 Hu S#i, ,he )hinese 4enaissance5 Paragon Re&rint Cor&4, ew Yor!, *+?,N re&rinted in 4epublican )hina5 ed4 $ranG Sc#urmann and Or-ille Sc#ell, Jintage 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+?<, &4 !!.
+4 ; ta!e t#is term /rom Ra%mond .illiams0s account o/ t#e Fdominant0, t#e Fresidual0, and t#e Femergent0 as wa%s o/ de/ining di//erent moments in an e(isting culture4 .illiams, (ar=ism and 6iterature5
O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+<<, &&4 *5*H<4
*94 E(am&les o/ t#is a&&roac# could )e /ound in 4enditions *< and *E @*+E5A, a s&ecial isstte de-oted to 1utter/l% literature4 T#e entire issue and two additional essa%s are nos% &u)lis#ed
as )hinese (iddlebrow $iction from the )h1in% and :arly 4epublican :ras5 ed4 Liu Ts0un-%an, T#e C#inese 8ni-ersit% Press, Hong 'ong, *+E=4
**4 ; owe t#is insig#t into Communist C#inese #istor% to t#e inimita)le &erce&ti-eness @;/ 3ose&# R4 Le-enson4 See, /or instance, &art two o/ #is )onfucian )hina and 'ts (odern $ate5 -ol4 ;;;,
8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+?>4 $or a good e(am&le o/ t#e &rogrammatic idealiGation o/ a F&eo&le0s tradition0 t#roug# culture, see Mao Sedong0s FTal!s
at t#e Yenan $orum on literature and art0 in (ao ,se-tun% E(ao Pedon%D on 6iterature and Art5 $oreign Language Press, 1eiIing, *+?9, &&4 *H=,4 T#is im&erati-e to restore t#e trut# o/
#istor% t#roug# material mani/estations w#ic# are denounced as /alse and deluded in t#emsel-es is t#e guiding &rinci&le /or two maIor ant#ologies o/ materials on 1utter/l% literature t#at #a-e )een
&u)lis#ed in t#e PRC6
Uuanyan% hudie pai yan9iu 8iliao VResearc# materials on t#e Mandarin Duc! and
1utter/l% Sc#oolY 5 ed4 .ei S#aoc#ang, S#ang#ai, *+?5N re&rinted Hong 'ong, *+E9N and
^ Uuan yan% hudie pai wen=ue 8iliao VMaterials40 on Mandarin Duc! and 1utter/l%
literatureY, -ols ; and ;;, $uG#ou, *+E=4
:@@ Rey )/o1 4ereadin% (andarin <ucks and Kutterflies :@B
*54 8n/ortunatel%0, t#e ground)rea!ing wor! o/ $4 Perr% Lin!, w#o #as written t#e /irst )oo!-lengt# stud% o/ 1utter/l% literature in Englis#, ta!es e(actl% t#is a&&roac#4 See Lin!, (andarin <ucks and
Kutterflies: &opular fiction in early twentieth-century )hinese cities5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles:London, *+E*4 A succinct account o/ t#is wor! is /ound in Lin!0s essa%
FTraditional-st%le &o&ular ur)an /iction in t#e teens and twenties0, in Merle 2oldman, ed4, &&4 ,5<H>94 Lin!0s met#ods lead not e(actl% to t#e a.oidance o/ te(tual &ro)lems, )ut to t#e
unconscious ado&tion o/ a &articular aest#etic terminolog% as t#e natural wa% o/ discussing t#ose &ro)lems w#ene-er t#e% come u&4 Hence, t#e scienti/ic rigor o/ #is sociological a&&roac#
is strangel% accom&anied )% e-aluati-e &ronouncements suc# as Fgenius0, Funusual gi/t04 Fli/e-li!e0, etc4
*,4 3o#n 1erning#ausen and Ted Huters, F;ntroductor% essa%0, Kulletin of )oncerned Asian -cholars E, *@*+<?A 54
*=4 C4 T4 Hsia, FHsX C#en-%a0s YX-li #un6 An essa% in literar% #istor% and criticism0 4enditions *< and *E @*+E5A, 5*?4
1!. $4 Perr% Lin!, F;ntroduction to S#ou S#ou-Iuan0s ].e S#all Meet AgainR and two denunciations o/ t#is t%&e o/ stor%0, Kulletin of )oncerned Asian -cholars E, * @*+<?
*=4
*?4 ;n #is stor% o/ .u .o%ao0s no-el, Mic#ael Egan correctl% identi/ies t#is as%mmetrical structure w#en #e &oints out t#e muc# ric#er &s%c#ological de&iction o/ Di#ua, t#e #eroine, wit#out w#ose reaction t#e tale
o/ #er )elo-ed0s degeneration would )e meaningless4 Egan, FC#aracteriGation in sea o/ woe0, in ,he )hinese Ho.el at the ,urn of the )entury5 &&4 *?>H<?4
*<4 T#e lie nfl tradition originated in t#e 6ie nfl 8huan AKio%raphies of Women?5 w#ic# was com&iled )% t#e #istorian Liu Biang in t#e /ormer Han D%nast% @595 1CHAD 5=A and w#ic# lists o-er
one #undred )iogra&#ies o/ women, )ot# Fgood0 and F)ad0, /rom legendar% times to t#e Han D%nast%4 .it# t#e &assage o/ time, t#e c#aracter lie @O,4;35, meaning Fseries0 or Flist0 in t#e
original title, was re&laced )% its #omon%m lie @R 8
meaning F-irtuous04 T#is sli&&age o/ meanings was &oignantl% coincident wit# t#e increasingl% &ower/ul social and legal restrictions on women0s )e#a-ior in ancient C#ina4 T#e lie nfl
Fideolog%0, w#ic# #as since t#en )ecome well !nown /or a&&lauding womemt0s a)ilit% to sacri/ice t#emsel-es, ga-e rise to a &o&ular genre in w#ic# t#e Fcourageous deeds o/ women, es&eciall%
t#ose w#o committed suicide, were glori/ied4 A&art /rom its ada&tation in man% /ol! stories, t#e genre0s wide acce&tance )% t#e &u)lic can also #e seen in its use in t#e Flocal gaGetteers0, t#e
semi-o//icial #istories o/ counties w#ere)( women0s suicides and li/e-long c#astit% were /reKuentl% recorded in (0i-id detail among t#e Fsigni/icant0 e-ents t#at made a &articular count% outstanding4
*E4 See t#e descri&tions o/ t#is age in Leo On-/an Lee, ,he 4omantic /eneration of )h8ns1sF Writers5 Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+<,4
*+4 1ot# 3ade &ear -pirit and its seKuel, Xuehon% leishi A,he -now and the -u1anB A lachrymose story?5 are Fgenerall% estimated to #a(0e reac#ed a total circulation >9i**C-w#ere in t#e #undred t#ousands,
including large-scale re&rintings in Hong 'ong md Singa&ore4 Some #a-e e-en estimated a total circulation o/ o-er a million, counting continued re&rintings in t#e l+59s and later0 @Lin!, (andarin <ucks and
Kutter/lies5 &4 >,
594 2a%atri C#a!ra-ort% S&i(0a!, FTranslator0s &re/ace0, in 3acKues Derrida, @,: /rammatolo%y5 transl4 2a%atri S&m-a!, T#e 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore:London, *+<?, &4 (-iii4
*
a
5Y 4 )ourse in /eneral 6in%uis tics5 ed4 C#arles 1all%0 and Al)ert Sec#e#a%e in colla)oration s-it# Al)ert Reidlinger, transl4 .ade 1as!in, $ontana:Collins, 2lasgow, *+O=, &&4 5>H?6
T#ere are onl% t(-o s%stems o/ writing6
lI ;n an ideogra&#ic s%stem eac# word is re&resented )% a single sign t#at is unrelated to t#e sounds @;/ t#e word itsel/4 Eac# written sign stands /or a w#ole word and, conseKuentl%0, /or t#e idea e(&ressed )%
t#e word4 T#e classic e(am&le o/ an ideogra&#ic s%stem o/ writing is C#inese4
5A T#e s%stem commonl% !no((0n as F&#onetic0 tries to re&roduce t#e succession o/ sounds t#at ma!e u& a s-ord4 444
To a C#inese, an ideogram and a s&o!en word are )ot# s%m)ols o/ an ideaN to #im writing is a second language, and i/ two words t#at #a-e t#e same sound are used in con-ersation, #e ma% resort to
writing in order to e(&ress #is t#oug#t4 1ut in C#inese t#e mental su)stitution o/ t#e written word /or t#e s&o!en word does not #a-e t#e anno%ing conseKuences t#at it #as in a &#onetic s%stem, /or t#e
su)stitution is a)soluteN t#e same gra&#ic s%m)ol can stand /or words /rom di//erent C#inese dialects4
' shall limit discussion to the phonetic system5 and especially to the one used today5 the system that stems from the /reek alphabet. Vm% em&#asisY
554 Saussure, &&4 **EH*+4
5,4 See Ha)ermas, FModernit% -ersus &ostmodernit%0, Hew /erman )riti>ue 55 @*+E*A,
,H*> @see &&4 +EH*9+ a)o-eA4
5=4 3ean-$rancois L%otard, ,he &ostmodern )ondition: A report on knowled%e5 transl4 2eo// 1ennington and 1rian Massumi, 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E=, &4 <E @see &4 =, a)o-eA4
5>4 L%otard, &4 AO* @see &4 =? a)o-eA4
5?4 Simon Le%0s @Pierre R%c!mansA, ,he Kurnin% $orest5 :ssa?1s on )hinese )ulture and &olitics5 Holt, Rine#art \ .inston, ew Yor!, *+E?, &&4 5+ //4
5<4 Lao TGu, ,ao ,e )hin%5 transl4 D4C4 Lan, Penguin 1oo!s, 1altimore, MD, *+?,, &4 ,<4
5E4 Le%s, &4 5+4
5+4 'bid.5 &4 ,54
,94 L%otard, &&4 ((i-, ((-, E5, ?<4
,*4 3ameson, F$oreword0 to L%otard, &4 (i4
,54 'bid.5 &4 ((4
,,4 See c#4 = a)o(0e4
,=4 'bid.5 &4 E<4
,>4 'bid.5 &4 +*4
,?4 See Louis Alt#usser, FA letter on art ill re&l% to Andre Das&re0 and OCremonini, &ainter o/ t#e a)stract0, in 6enin and &hilosophy5 transl4 1en 1rewster, ess Le/t 1oo!s, e(- Yor!:London, *+<*, &&4
55*HE, 55+H=54 See also FT#e FOPiccolo TeatroR6 1ertolaGGi and 1rec#t0, ill $or (ar=5 transl4 1en 1rew0ster, e(- Le/t 1oo!s, London, *+<<, &&4 *5+H>54
,<4 Le-enson, )on9ucian )hina and 'ts (odern $ate5 -ol4 ;;;, &&4 =+, ?94
w Kiblio%raphy
; #a-e restricted t#e entries to t#e )i)liogra&#% in t#e interests o/ ma!ing it managea)le4 T#e Co
" m&re#ensi-e inclusion o/ e-er%t#ing rele-ant would result in a -olume o/ incalcula)le
magnitudeN and, as researc# in t#e /ield Continues its ra&id e(&ansion, a /ull% Fcom&re#ensi-e0
)i)liogra&#% would ra&idl% )ecome o)solescent4 T#e )asic reason /or selecting items /or
inclusion is t#at t#e list s#ould )e use/ul /or /urt#er researc#6 interested readers will /ind t#at,
on consultation o/ t#e wor!s listed, a more inclusi-e )i)liogra&#% &ertinent to t#eir own
interests will )e generated4
Accordingl%, ; #a-e made t#is )i)liogra&#% wit# some )asic &rinci&les in mind4 $irst, onl% w
or!s o/ a general nature &ertaining to t#e /ield #a-e )een included6 essa%s, articles or )oo!s
w#ic# relate t#e &ostmodern to t#e wor! o/ one artist #a-e )% and large )een dro&&ed, on
" t#e tacit understanding t#at t#e% are more a)out t#e artist in Kuestion t#an t#e% are a)out
&ostmodernism4 Secondl%, ; #a-e omitted muc# o/ t#e &#iloso&#ical #istor% w#ic# s#a&es t#e
conce&t o/ t#e &ostmodern, assuming t#at readers will Kuic!l% disco-er t#e im&ortance o/
'ant, ietGsc#e, Heidegger and ot#ers /rom t#e wor! re&rinted in t#e su)stance o/ t#e
&resent -olume4 T#irdl%, ; #a-e also assumed t#at )i)liogra&#ies o/ t#e wor! o/ certain more
recent &#iloso&#ers w#ose t#oug#t is &ertinent @Derrida, $oucault, 1lanc#ot, ;rigara%,
'riste-a, 1ataille, etc4A are readil% a-aila)le elsew#ereN w#ere t#ese writers are concerned, ;
#a-e listed onl% t#ose items w#ic# seem most directl% /ocused on t#e issue o/ &ostmodernism4
A))as, M4 A4, FP#otogra&#%:writing:&ostmoOernism0 (innesota 4e.iew5 n4s4 5, @*+E=A,
+*H***4
Adams, R4 M4 F.#at was modernismD0, 7udson 4e.iew5 ,*@*+<EA, 5+H,,4
Adorno, T4 .4, He%ati.e <ialectics5 Routledge \ 'egan Paul, London, 1*7#.
Adorno, T4 .4, (inima (oralia: 4eflections from a dama%ed life5 transl4 E4 $4 4 3e&#cott,
ew Le/t 1oo!s, London, *+<=4
Adorno, T4 .4, A%ainst :pistemolo%y5 transl4 .illis Domingo, 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E54
Adorno, T4 .4, Aesthetic ,heory5 C4 Adorno and R4 Tiedemann @edsA, transl4 C4 Len#ardt,
Routledge \ 'egan Paul, London, *+E=4
Adorno, T4 .4 and Hor!#eimer, M4, <ialectic of :nli%htenment5 transl4 34 Cumming, Jerso,
London, *+E?4
Agam)en, C4, 'dea della prosa5 $eltrinelli, Milan, *+E>4
Agam)en, C4, 6a communutd che .iene5 2iulio Einaudi, Turin, *++94
Agger, 14, ,he <ecline of <iscourse: 4eadin%5 writin%5 resistance in postmodern capitalism5
$almer Press, 1ristol, PA, *++94
A!!erman, 34 S4, F.#% classicismD @O)ser-ations in &ostmodern arc#itectureA0, 7ar.ard
^ Architecture5 ! @*+E<A, <EH+4
Allen, D4 and 1utteric!, C4, &ostmoderns: ,he new American poetry re.ised5 2ro-e Press,
ew Yor!, *+E54
:B1
:B2 Kiblio%raphy Kiblio%raphy :B8
Allen, R4, FCritical t#eor% and t#e &arado( o/ modernist discourse0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A,
?+HE>4
Al&ert, 14, FPost-modern oral &oetr%0, Koundary "5 , @*+<>A, ??>HE54
Alter, R4, &artial (a%ic: ,he no.el as a self-conscious %enre5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+<>4
Altieri, C4, F$rom s%m)olist t#oug#t to immanence6 T#e ground o/ &ostmodern American &oetics0, Koundary "5 *, , @*+<,A, ?9>H=*4
Altieri, C4, FT#e &ostmodernism o/ Da-id Antin0s ,unin%15 )olle%e :n%lish5 =E, * @*+E?A, +H5 !.
Altieri, C4, Muality and Act5 8ni-ersit% o/ Massac#usetts Press, Am#erst, *+E54
Amin, S4, 6e <;.eloppement in;%al5 Minuit, Paris, *+<,4
Anderson, P4, FModernit% and re-olution0, Hew 6eft 4e.iew5 *== @*+E=A, +?H**,4
AndrL, L4, FT#e &olitics o/ &ostmodern &#otogra&#%0, (innesota 4e.iew5 n4s4 5, @*+E=A,
*<H,>4
Antin, D4, FModernism and &ostmodernism6 A&&roac#ing t#e &resent in American &oetr%0, Koundary "515 *@*+<5A, *JI1##.
A&&ignanesi, L4, @edA, &ostmodernism5 $ree Association 1oo!s, London, *+E+4
Arac, 34, )ritical /enealo%ies: 7istorical situations for postmodern literary studies5 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+E<4
Arac, 34, @ed4A, &ostmodernism and &olitics5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E?4
AronowitG, S4, ,he )risis in 7istorical (aterialism5 Praeger, ew Yor!, *+E*4
AronowitG, S4, FPostmodernism and &olitics0, in A4 Ross @ed4A, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+E+, &&4 =?H?54
Attali, 34, Hoise: ,he political economy of music5 *+<<N transl4 14 Massumi, Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E>4
Auslander, P4, FTowards a conce&t o/ t#e &olitical in &ostmodern t#eatre0, ,heatre 3ournal5
,+, * @*+E<A, 59H,=4
1ac#elard, ).5 6a &o;ti>ue de l1espace5 P8$, Paris, *+><4
1adiou, A4, ,h;orie du su9et5 Seuil, Paris, *+E54
1adiou, A4, 61sFtre et l1;.oFnement5 Seuil, Paris, *+EE4
1a#ro, R4, ,he Alternati.e in :astern :urope5 ew Le/t 1oo!s, London, *+<E4
1alsamo, A4, F8nwra&&ing t#e &ostmodern6 A /eminist glance0, 3ournal of )ommunication 'n>uiry5 **@*+E<A, ?=H<54
1alsamo, A4, FReading c%)orgs writing /eminism0, )ommunication5 *9 @*+EEA, ,,*H==4
1anes, S4, ,erpsichore in -neakers: &ostmodern dance5 .esle%an 8ni-ersit% Press, Middletown, CT, *+E?4
1arilli, R4, F8na generaGione &ostmoderna0, 'l Verri5 *H5, <t# series @*+E=A, 1!I!!.
1arilli, R4, 'cons of &ostmodernism: ,he nuo.i-nuo.i artists5 Allemandi, Turin, *+E?4
1art#, 34, FT#e literature o/ e(#austion0, in M4 1rad)ur% @edA, ,he Ho.el ,oday5 $ontana, 2lasgow, *+<<4
1art#, 34, FT#e literature o/ re&lenis#ment6 Postmodernist /iction0, Atlantic (onthly5 5=>, * @*+E9A, ?>H<*4
1arGun, 34, )lassic5 4omantic and (odern5 See!er \ .at)urg, London, L+?54
1audrillard, 34, 6e -ysti1me des ob9ets5 2allimard, Paris, *+?E4
1audrillard, 34, 6a -oci;th de consommation5 2allimard, Paris, *+<94
1audrillard, 34, 6e (iroir de la production5 Casterman, Tournail, *+<,N tratisl4 M4 Poster as ,he (irror of &roduction5 Telos Press, St Louis, MO, *+<>4
1audrillard, 34, 61:chan%e s.mboli>ue et la mort5 2allimard, Paris, *+<?4
1audrillard, 34, 61:ffet Keaubour%5 2alilee, Paris, *+<<4
1audrillard, 34, 2uhlier $aucault5 2alilee, Paris, *+<<4
1audrillard, 34, <e 'a seduction5 Denoql, Paris, *+<+4
1audrillard, 34, &our une criti>ue de l1;conomie politi>ue do si%ne5 2al#imard, Paris, *+<5N transl4 C4 Le-in as $or a )riti>ue of the &olitical :conomy of the -i%n5 Telos Press, St Louis, MO, *+E*4
1audrillard, 34, -imulacres et simulation5 2alilee, Paris, *+E*4
1audrillard, 34, 'n the -hadow of the -ilent (a9orities5 transl4 P4 $oss, P4 Patton and 34 3o#nston, Semiote(t@eA, ew Yor!, *+E,4
1audrillard, 34, 6es -trate%ies fatales5 2rasset, Paris, *+E,4
1audrillard, 34, 6a /auche di.ine5 2rasset, Paris, *+E>4
1audrillard, 34, Am;ri>ue5 2rasset, Paris, *+E?4
1audrillard, 34, 61Autre par lui-mNme5 2alilee, Paris, *+E<4
1audrillard, 34, )ool (emories5 2alilee, Paris, *+E<4
1audrillard, 34, ,he :.il <emon of 'ma%es5 Power ;nstitute Pu)lications, S%dne%, *+E<4
1audrillard, 34, -elected Writin%s5 ed4 Mar! Poster, Polit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+EE4
1auman, S4, 6e%islators and 'nterpreters5 Polit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E<4
1auman, S4, F;s t#ere a &ostmodern sociolog%D0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 ! @*+EEA, 5*<H,<4
1auman, S4, (odernity and the 7olocaust5 Polit% Press, O(/ord, *+E+4
1a%!an, A4, F.omen )etween /undamentalism and modernit%0, in 14 S4 Turner @edA, ,heories of (odernity and &ostmodernity5 Sage, London, *++9, &&4 *,?H=?4
1ee)e, M4, F.#at modernism was0, 3ournal of (odern 6iterature5 ,, ! @*+<=A, *9?>HE=4
1ell, D4, ,he )omin% of &ost-'ndustrial -ociety5 1asic 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+<,4
1ell, D4, ,he )ultural )ontradictions of )apitalism5 1asic 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+<?4
1ell, D4, FModernism and ca&italism0, &artisan 4e.iew5 =? @*+<EA, 59?H5?4
1Lnamou, M4 and Caramello, C4 @edsA, &erformance in &ostmodern )ulture5 Coda Press, Madison, .;, *+<<4
1en#a)i), S4, FE&istemologies o/ &ostmodernism6 A reIoinder to3ean-$rancois L%otard0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 ,, @*+E=A, *9,H5?4
1enIamin, .4, 'lluminations5 ed4 H4 Arendt, transl4 H4 So#n, $ontana, 2lasgow, *+<,4
1enIamin, .4, ,he 2ri%in of /erman ,ra%ic <rama5 Jerso, London, *+<<4
1enIamin, .4, 0nderstandin% Krecht5 Jerso, London, *+<<4
1enIamin, .4, 2ne-Way -treet and 2ther Writin%s5 Jerso, London, *+<+4
1enIamin, .4, )harles Kaudelaire5 transl4 H4 So#n, Jerso, London, *+E,4
1ennington, ).5 6yotard: Writin% the e.ent5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+EE4
1ergonGi, 14 @ed4A, 'nno.ations5 Macmillan, London, *+?E4
1erman, M4, All ,hat is -olid (elts into Air5 Jerso, London, *+E54
1erman, R4 A4, FT#e routiniGation o/ c#arismatic modernism and t#e &ro)lem o/ &ost-modernit%0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E<A, =+H?E4
1ernstein, R4 34 @edA, 7abermas and (odernity5 M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+E>4 1ertens, H4, FT#e &ostmodern Weltanschauun% and its relation wit# modernism6 An introductor% sur-e%0, in D4
$o!!ema and H4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+E?, &&4 +H>*4
1etG, A4, FCommodit% and modernit% in Heine and OenIamin0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 ,, @*+E=A, *<+HEE4
:B:
Kiblio%raphy
;
1e-erle%, 34, FT#e ideolog% o/ &ostmodern music0, )ritical Muarterly5 ,* @*+E+A4
1#a)#a, H4 '4, FDi//erence, discrimination and t#e discourse o/ colonialism0, in $4 1ar!er et aW. @edsA, ,he &olitics of ,heory5 8ni-ersit% o/ Esse(, Colc#ester, *+E,4
1#as!ar, R4, -cientific 4ealism and 7uman :mancipation5 Jerso, London, *+E?4
1lanc#ot, M4, 61:space litteraire5 2allimard, Paris, *+>?4
1lanc#ot, M4, 61:ntretien infini5 2ailimard, Paris, *+?+4
1lanc#ot, M4, ,he Writin% of the <isaster5 transl4 A4 Smoc!, 8ni-ersit% o/ e)ras!a Press, Lincoln, *+E?4
1lau, H4, FT#e remission o/ &la%0, in ;4 and S4 Hassan @edsA, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation5 8ni-ersit% o/ .isconsin Press, Madison, *+E,, *?*HEE4
1lau, H4, ,he :ye of &rey: -ub.ersions of the postmodern5 indiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+E<4
1;oc#, $4, Fons%nc#ronism and dialectics0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 **@*+<<A, 55H,E4
1loc#, E4 et aW.5 Aesthetics and &olitics5 Jerso, London, *+<<4
1loc!er, H4 C4, FAutonom%, re/erence and &ost-modern art0, Kritish 3ournal of Aesthetics5 59, , @*+E9A, 55+H,?4
1lumen)erg, H4, ,he 6e%itimacy of the (odern A%e5 transi4 R4 M4 .allace, M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+E,4
1ouieG, P4, &enser 'a musi>ue au9ourd1hui5 2ont#ier, Paris, *+?,4
1ourdieu, P4, <istinction5 transl4 R4 ice, Routledge \ 'egan Paul, London, *+E=4
1o-L, P4, FT#e inelucta)ilit% o/ di//erence6 Scienti/ic &luralism and t#e critical intelligence0, in 34 Arac @ed4A, &ostmodernism and &olitics5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E?, &&4 ,
H5>4
1o-C, P4, intellectuals in &ower: A %enealo%y of critical humanism5 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+E?4
1o%d-1owman, S4, F;maginar% cinemat#ZKues6 T#e &ostmodern &rogrammes o/ ;A0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A, *9,H*<4
1o%ne, R4 and Rattansi, A4 @edsA, &ostmodernism and -ociety5 Macmillan, London, *++94
1rad)ur%, M4 and Mac$arlane, 34 @edsA, (odernism5 Penguin, Harmondswort#, *+<?4
1r%son, 4, Word and 'ma%e5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E*4
1uc#lo#, 14 H4 D4, FT#e &rimar% colors /or t#e second time6 A &aradigm re&etition o/ t#e neo-a-ant-garde0, 2ctober5 ,< @*+E?A, =*H>54
1uci-2luc!smann, C4, 6a 4aison baro>ue5 2alilee, Paris, *+E=4
1urger, P4, ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 *+<=N transl4 M4 S#aw, Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E=4
1urgin, J4, ,hinkin% &hoto%raphy5 Macmillan, London, *+E54
1urgin, J4, FSome t#oug#ts on outsiderism and &ostmodernism0, Klock5 **@*+E>H?A, *+H5?N re&r4 in ,he :nd of Art ,heory.
1urgin, J4, ,he :nd of Art ,heory: )riticism and postmodernity5 Macmillan, London, *+E?4
1utler, C4, After the Wake: An essay on the contemporary a.ant-%arde5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+E94
Cage, 34, -ilence5 .esle%an 8ni-ersit% Press, Middletown, CT, *+?*4
Calinescu, M4, FA-ant-garde, neo-a-ant-garde, &ostmodernism6 T#e culture o/ crisis0, )lio?5 = @*+<>A, ,*<H=94
Calinescu, M4, $aces of (odernity: A.ant-%arde5 decadence5 kitsch5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+<<4
Kiblio%raphy
:B$
Calinescu, M4, F$rom t#e one to t#e man%6 Pluralism in toda%0s t#oug#t0, in ;4 and S4 Hassan @edsA, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation5 8ni-ersit% o/ .isconsin Press, Madison, *+E,, &&4 5?,HEE4
Calinescu, M4, FPostmodernism and some &arado(es o/ &eriodiGation0, in D4 $o!!ema and
;-;4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+E?,
&&4 5,+H>=4
Calinescu, M4, $i.e $aces of (odernity: (odernism5 a.ant-%arde5 decadence5 kitsch5 postmodernism5 Du!e 8ni-ersit% Press, Dur#am, C, *+E<4
Ca#inescu, M4 and $o!!ema, D4 @edsA, :=plorin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+EE4
Caliinicos, A4, FPoststructuralism, &ostmodernism, &ostmar(ismD0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 5, , @*+E>A, E>H*954
Cailinicos, A4, A%ainst &ostmodernism5 Macmillan, London, *++94
Canguii#em, ).5 ,he Hormal and the &atholo%ical5 transl4 C4 R4 $awcett in colla)oration wit# R4 S4 Co#en, Sone 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *++*4
Carra-eta, P4 and S&edicato, P4 @edsA, &ostmoderno e letteratura5 1om&iani, Milan, *+E=4 Carroll, D4, ,he -ub9ect in Muestion: ,he lan%ua%es of theory and the strate%ies of fiction5 8ni-ersit% o/
C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E54
Carroll, D4, &araesthetics5 Met#uen, London, *+EE4
Carroll, 4, FAir dancing0, <rama 4e.iew5 *+, * @*+<>A, >H*54
Ca-eli, S4, ,he )laim of 4eason5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+<+4
C#am)ers, ;4, FMa&s /or t#e metro&olis6 A &ossi)le guide to t#e &resent0, )ultural -tudies5
* @*+E<A, *H5*4
C#e/dor, M4, .ac#tel, A4 and Cuinones, R4 @edsA, (odernism: )hallen%es and perspecti.es5 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois Press, 8r)ana, *+E?4
C#ow, R4, FRereading Mandarin duc!s and )utter/lies6 A res&onse to t#e ]&ostmodernR condition0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E<A, ?+H+,4
Clar!, T4 34, ,he &aintin% of (odern 6ife5 T#ames \ Hudson, London, *+E=4
Cli//ord, 34 and Marcus, C4 $4 @edsA, Writin% )ulture: ,he poetics and politics of ethno%raphy5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+E?4
Collins, 34, FPostmodernism and cultural &ractice6 Rede/ining t#e &arameters0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A, **H5<4
Collins, M4, ,owards &ostmodernisttm: <esi%n since 1J!15 1ritis# Museum, London, *+E<4 Connor, S4, &ostmodernist )ulture: An introduction to theories of the contemporary5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *++94
Conro%, M4, (odernism and Authority: -trate%ies of le%itmation in $Waubert and )onrad5 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore, MD, *+E>4
Coo!, D4 and 'ro!er, A4, ,he &ostmodern -cene: :=cremental culture and h.per-aesthetics5 Macmillan, London, *+E?4
Cor!, R4, Vorticism and Abstract Art in the $irst (achine A%e5 5 -ols, 2ordon $raser, London, *+<?4
Couturier, M4, 4epresentation and &erformance in &ostmodern $iction5 8ni-ersitL Paul Jaler%, Mont&ellier, *+E,4
Co(, H4, 4eli%ion in the -ecular )ity: ,oward a postmodern theolo%y5 Simon \ Sc#uster, ew Yor!, *+E=4
Creed, 14, F$rom #ere to modernit%6 $eminism and &ostmodernism0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A,
=<H?E4
:B< Kiblio%raphy
Kiblio%raphy
Crim&, D4, FPictures0, 2ctober5 E @*+<+A, ?<HE?4
Crim&, D4, FT#e &#otogra&#ic acti-it% o/ &ostmodernism0, 2ctober5 1! @*+E9A, +*H*9*4
Crim&, D4, FT#e end o/ &ainting0, 2ctober5 *? @*+E*A, ?+HE?4
Crim&, D4, FOn t#e museum0s ruins0, in H4 $oster @edA, &ostmodern )ulture5 Pluto Press, London, *+E,4
Croo!, 34 M4, ,he <ilemma of -tyle: Architectural ideas from the pictures>ue to the
postmodern5 3o#n Murra%, London, *+E<4
Cros)%, A4 .4, :colo%ical 'mperialism5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E?4
Crowt#er, P4, ,he Lantian -ublime5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+E+4
Dallma%r, $4 R4, FDemocrac% and &ost-modernism0, 7uman -tudies *9, * @*+E<A, *=,H<94
Danto, A4 C4, ,he &hilosophical <isenfranchisement ofArt5 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew0 Yor!, *+E?4
Da-idson, D4, 'n>uiries into ,ruth and 'nterpretation5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord,
*+E=4
Da-idson, M4, FPalim&te(ts6 Postmodern &oetr% and t#e material te(t0, /enre5 59 @*+E<A,
,9<H5<4
Da-is, D4, Artculture: :ssays on the postmodern5 Har&er \ Row, ew Yor!, *+<<4
Da-is, D4, FLate &ostmodern6 t#e end o/ st%leD0, Art in America5 7!5 ? @*+E<A, *>4
Da-is, M4, F8r)an renaissance and t#e s&irit o/ &ostmodernism0, Hew 6eft 4e.iew5 *>* @*+E>A, *9?H*,4
de Certeau, M4, ,he &ractice of :.eryday 6ife5 transl4 S4 Rendell, 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia
Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+E=4
de Certeau, M4, 7eterolo%ies: <iscourse on the 2ther5 transl4 14 Massumi, Manc#ester
8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E?4
de Lauretis, T4, Alice <oesn1t: $eminism5 semiotics5 cinema5 Macmillan, London, *+E=4
de Lauretis, T4, ,echnolo%ies of /ender5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+E<4
Deane, S4, ,he $rench 4e.olution and :nli%htenment in :n%land 1 7J*I1 J#"5 Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+EE4
De)ord, ).5 6a -ociete do spectacle5 1uc#et-C#astel, Paris, *+?EN re&r4 C#am& Li)re, Paris,
*+E,4
De)ord, ).5 )omments on the -ociety of the -pectacle5 Jerso, London, *++94
DeleuGe, ).5 :mpirisme et sub9ecti.ite5 P8$, Paris, *+>,4
DeleuGe, C4, 6e ber%sonisme5 P8$, Paris, *+??4
DeleuGe, ).5 <ifference et repetition5 P8$, Paris, *+?+4
DeleuGe, ).5 6o%i>ue du sens5 Minuit, Paris, *+?+4
DeleuGe, ).5 F$ai;le et /eu( locau(0, )riti>ue @*+<9A, ,==H>*4
DeleuGe, C4, FCu0est-ce Kue c0est, tes ]mac#ines dLsirantesR /l toiD0, 6es ,emps modernes5 @*+<5A, E>=H?4
DeleuGe, ).5 FPensLe nomade0, in Hiet8sche au9ourd1hui5 -ol4 *, 8nion generale d0Lditions,
*9:*E, Paris, *+<,, &&4 *>+H<=4
DeleuGe, C4, FP#iloso&#ie et minoritL0, )riti>ue5 ,?+ @*+<EA, *>=H>4
DeleuGe, C4, )inema: 15 Minuit, Paris, *+E,4
DeleuGe, ).5 F$rancis 1acon6 Logic o/ sensation0, $lash Art5 **5 @*+E,A, EH*?4
DeleuGe, ).5 Lant1s )ritical &hilosophy5 transl4 H4 Tomlinson and 14 Ha))erIam, 8ni-ersit% o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E=4
DeleuGe, C4, )inema: "5 Minuit, Paris, *+E>4
DeleuGe, C4, 6e &h5 Minuit, Paris, *+EE4
:B=
DeleuGe, C4 and Cuattari, $4, Anti-2edipus5 transl4 R4 Hurle%, M4 Seem and
R4 Lane,
At#lone Press, l4ondon, *+E=4
DeleuGe, C4 and 2uattari, $4, A ,housand &lateaus5 transl4 14 Massumi,
8ni-ersit% o/
Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E<4
DenGin, 4 '4, 'ma%es of &ostmodern -ociety5 Sage, London, *++*4
Derrida, 34, <1un ton apocaWypti>ue adopt) na%u)re en philosophic5 2alilee,
Paris, 1*J#.
Derrida,34, Writin% and <ifference5 transl4 A4 1ass, Routledge \ 'egan
Paul, London, *+<E4
Derrida, 34, 6a )arte postale: de -ocrate d $reud et au-de6i5 $lammarion,
Paris, *+E94
Derrida, 34, 6a Verite en peinture5 $lammarion, Paris, *+<E4
Descom)es, J4, 61'nconscient mal%re lui5 Minuit, Paris, *+<<4
Descom)es, J4, 6e (hme et l1autre5 Minuit, Paris, *+<+4
Dews, P4, FT#e letter and t#e line6 Discourse and its Ot#er in L%otard0,
<iacritics5 *=, # @*+E=A, =9H+4
Dews, P4, 6o%ics of <isinte%ration: &oststructurahist thou%ht and the
claims of critical theory5
Jerso, London, *+E<4
D0Haen, T4, FPostmodernism in American /iction and art0, in D4 $o!!ema and H4 1ertens
@edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+E?, &&4 5**H,*4
Dic!ens, D4 and $ontana, A4 @edsA, &ostmodernism and -ociolo%y5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago
Press, C#icago, *++94
Dilnot, C4, F.#at is t#e &ostmodernD0, Art 7istory5 *5 5 @*+E?A, 5=>H?,4
Do)son, A4, /reen &olitical ,hou%ht5 Har&er Collins, London, *++94
Doc#ert%, T4, FT#eor%, enlig#tenment and -iolence6 Postmodern
#ermeneutic as a comed% o/ errors0, ,e=tual &ractice5 *, 5 @*+E<A, *+5H
5*?4
Doc#ert%, T4, After ,heory: &ostmodernism/postmar=ism5 Routledge, London,
*++94
Do%le, 4, FDesiring dis&ersal6 Politics and t#e &ostmodern0,
-ub9ects/2b9ects5 , @*+E>A,
*??H<+4
Du)ois, C-C4, 6e Karo>ue: profondeurs de l1apparence5 Larousse, Paris,
*+<,4
Durand, R4, FT#eatre:S;2S:Per/ormance6 On some trans/ormations o/
t#e t#eatrical and
t#e t#eoretical0, in ;4 and S4 Hassan @edsA, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation5
8ni-ersit% o/ .isconsin
Press, Madison, *+E,, &&4 5**H5=4
During, S4, FPostmodernism or&ost-colonialism toda%0, ,e=tual &ractice5
*, *@*+E<A, ,5H=<4
Eagleton, T4, FCa&italism, modernism and &ostmodernism0, Hew 6eft
4e.iew5 1!" A1*J!?5
?9H<,, re&r4 in Eagleton, A%ainst the /rain5 Jerso, London, *+E?4
Eagleton, T4, ,he 'deolo%y of the Aesthetic5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *++94
E)ert, T4, FT#e con-ergence o/ &ostmodern inno-ati-e /iction and
science /iction0, &oetics
,oday5 *@*+E9A, +*H*9=4
Eco, 84, &ostscript to the Hame of the 4ose5 Harcourt 1race 3o-ano-ic#,
ew Yor!,
*+E=4
Eco, 84, FA guide to t#e neo-tele-ision o/ t#e *+E9s0, $ramework5 "!
@*+E=A, *EH5>4 Eco, 844 ,ra.els in 7yperreahity5 transl4 .4 .ea-er, Pan,
London, *+E<4 Em)erle%, 34, FT#e /as#ion a&&aratus and t#e
deconstruction o/ &ostmodern su)Iecti-it%0, )anadian 3ournal of &olitical
and -ocial ,heory5 **@*+E<A, ,EH>94
EnGens)erger, H4 M4, ,he )onsciousness 'ndustry5 Sea)ur% Press, ew
Yor!, *+<=4
EnGens)erger, H4 M4, <reamers of the Absolute5 Radius, London, *+EE4
$aursc#ou, C4, F$as#ion and t#e cultural logic o/O &ostmodernit%0,
)anadian 3ournal of &olitical and -ocial ,heory5 **@*+E<A, ?EHE=4
$eat#erstone, M4, )onsumer )ulture and &ostmodernism5 Sage, London,
*++94
:B@ Kiblio%raphy Kiblio%raphy :BB
$ederman, R4 @ed4A, -urfiction: $iction now... and tomorrow5 Swallow Press, C#icago, *+<>N 5nd e(&anded edn, *+E*4
$e!ete, 34 @edA, ,he -tructural Alle%ory: 4econstructi.e encounters with the new $rench thou%ht5 8ni-ersit%0 o/ Minnesota Press, Minnea&olis, *+E=4
$e!ete, 34 @ed4A, 6ife After &ostmodernism: :ssays on .alue and culture5 Macmillan, London, *+EE4
$err%, L4, 7omo Aestheticus5 2rasset, Paris, *++94
$err%, L4 and Renault, A4, 6a &ensee ?E, 2al#imard, Paris, *+E>4
$e%era)end, P4, A%ainst (ethod5 ew Le/t 1oo!s, London, *+<>4
$iedler, L4 A4, FT#e new mutants0, &artisan 4e.iew5 #"5 = @*+?>A, !0!I"!.
$iedler, L4 A4, FCross t#e )order I close t#at ga&6 Postmodernism0, in M4 Cunli//e @ed4A, American 6iterature since 1*005 S&#ere 1oo!s, London, *+<>, &&4 ,==H??4
$isc#er, M4 M4 34, FEt#nicit% and t#e &ost-modern arts o/ memor%0, in 34 Cli//ord and ). E4 Marcus @edsA, Writin% )ulture5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+E?, &&4 *+=
H5,,4
$la(, 34, FPostmodernism and gender relations in /eminist t#eor%0, -i%ns5 *5 @*+E<A, ?5*H=,4 $o!!ema, D4, 6iterary 7istory5 (odernism5 and &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam,
*+E=4
$o!!ema, D4 and 1ertens, H4 @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+E?4
$orte, 34, F.omen0s &er/ormance art6 $eminism and &ostmodernism0, ,heatre 3ournal5 =@* @*+EEA, 5*<H,>4
$oster, H4, F@PostAmodern &olemics0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 ,, @*+E=A, ?<H<E4 $oster, H4 @ed4A, &ostmodern )ulture5 Pluto Press, London, *+E,N also &u)lis#ed under t#e title ,he Anti-Aesthetic:
:ssays on postmodern culture5 1a% Press, Port Townsend, .A, *+E,4
$oster, H4, 4ecodin%s: Art5 -pectacle5 )ultural &olitics5 1a% Press, Port Townsend, .A, *+E>4
$oucault, M4, ,he Archaeolo%y of Lnowled%e5 transi4 A4 M4 S#eridan Smit#, Ta-istoc!, London, *+<=4
$ram&ton, '4, FTowards a critical regionalism6 Si( &oints /or an arc#itecture o/ resistance0, in H4 $oster @ed4A, &ostmodern )ulture5 Pluto Press, London, *+E,, &&4 *?H,94
$ram&ton, '4, FRe/lections on &ostmodernism and arc#itecture0, )uadernos del Horte5 E, =5 @*+E<A, >=H<4
$ran!, 34, FS&atial /orm in modern literature0, -ewanee 4e.iew5 !# @*+=>A, 55*H=9, =,,H>?,
?=,H>,4
$ran!o-its, A4 @edA, -educed and Abandoned: ,he Kaudrihlard scene5 Semiote(t@eA, ew Yor!, *+E=4
$raser, 4, FT#e $renc# Derrideans6 PoliticiGing deconstruction or deconstructing &olitics, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 ## @*+E=A, *5<H>=4
$raser, 4, F.#at0s critical a)out critical t#eor%D T#e case o/ Ha)ermas and gender0, Heu1 /erman )riti>ue5 #! @*+E>A, +<H*,*4
$raser, 4 and ic#olson, L4, FSocial criticism wit#out &#iloso&#%6 An encounter )etween /eminism and &ostmodernism0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 !5 5H, @*+EEA, ,<,H+=4
$rege, ).5 ,ranslations from the &hilosophical Writin%s of /ottlob $re%e5 transl4 and ed4 M4 1lac! and P4 T4 2eac#, 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+>54
$ris)%, D4, $ra%ments of (odernity5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Canarridge, *+E>4
Ca)li!, S4, 7as (odernism $ailed@5 T#ames \ Hudson, London, *+E=4
2allag#er, C4, FT#e &olitics @;/ culture and t#e de)ate o-er re&resentation0, 4[presentFti.58s. ! @*+E=A, **>H=<4
Cane, M4, Kaudrillard1s Kestiar.: Kaudrillard and culture5 Routledge, London, *++*4
2ar)er, $4, F2enerating t#e sti)Iect6 T#e images o/ Cind%0 S#erman0, /[nre5 59 O*+S<,
,>+HE54
Cars0in, H4 R4 @edA, 4omanticisn85 (odernism5 &ostBnodernism5 1uc!nell 8ni-ersit% Press, Lewis)urg, PA, *+E94
2ass, .4 H4, $iction and the $i%ures of 6ife5 'no&/, ew Yor!, *+<94
Ca%, P4, ,he :nli%htenment5 5 -ols, O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+??4
2eras, 4, FPost-mar(ismD0, Hew 6eft 4e.iew5 *?, @*+E<A, =@*HE54
Ciddens, A4, FModernism and &ostmodernism0, Heu1 /erman )riti>ue5 55 @*+EL,
*>H*E4
2iddens, A4, A )ontemporary )riti>ue of 7istorical (aterialism5 8ni-ersit% @;/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+E*4
2iddens, A4 and Turner, 34 @edsA, -ocial ,heory ,oday5 Stan/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, Stan/ord, CA, *+E<4
2ilson, $.5 &einture et r)ahit)5 Jrin, Paris, *+>E4
2oodman, 4, ,he -tructure of Appearance5 1o))s-Merrill, ess0 Yor!, n4d4
2oodman, 4, FRoutes o/ re/erence0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 E, * @*+E*A, *5*H,54
2orG, A4, $arewell to the Workin% )lass5 transl4 M4 Sonensc#er, Pluto, London, *+E54
2ra//, C4, FT#e m%t# o/ t#e &ostmodernist )rea!t#roug#0, ,nMuarterly5 5? @*+<,A, ,E,H=*<N re&r4 in M4 1rad)ur% @edA, ,he Ho.el ,oday5 $ontana, 2lasgow, *+<<4
2ra//, ).5 F1a))itt at t#e a)%ss6 T#e social conte(t o/ &ostmodern American /iction0, ,nMuarterly5 ,, A1*7!?5 ,9>H,<4
2ra//, C4, 6iterature A%ainst 'tself: 6iterary ideas on modern society5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+<+4
2reen)erg, C4, FModernist &ainting0, in 2regor%0 1attcoc! @edA, ,he Hei-e Art5 Dutton, ew Yor!, *+??4
2reen)erg, C4, FA-ant-garde and !itsc#0, in C4 Dor/les @ed4A, Litsch5 8ni-erse 1oo!s, ess0 Yor!, *+?+4
2reen)erg, C4, FModern and &ostmodern0, Arts (a%a8ine5 >= @*+E9A, ?=H?4
2ri//in, D4 R4, ,he 4eenchantment of -cience: &ostmodern proposals5 State 8ni-ersit%0 o/ ew Yor! Press, Al)an%, *+EE4
2ross)erg, L4, FT#e in-di//erence o/ tele-ision0, -creen. 5E, 5 @*+E<A, 5EH=?4
2ross)erg, L4, FT#e &olitics o/ music6 American images and 1ritis# articulations0, )anadian 3ournal of &olitical and -ocial ,heory5 **@*+E<A, *==H>*4
Cross)erg, L4, FPutting t#e &o& )ac! into &ostniodernism0, in A4 Ross OedA, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+E+, &&4 *?<H+94
2rosG, $4 et al. @edsA, $utur Gfall: :=cursions into po\tmoderiiity5 Pos-er ;nstitute o/ $ine Art, S%dne%, *+E?4
2uattari, $4, (olecular 4e.olution5 transl4 R 4 S#eed4 Penguin, *Hlarmondswort#, *+E=4
2uil)aut, S4, FT#e new ad-entures o/ t#e a-ant-garde in America0, 2ctober5 1! @*+E9A, ? *H<E4
Ha)ermas, 34, 6e%itimation )risis5 transl4 T4 MacCart#%, Heinemann, London, *+<?4
Ha)ermas, 34, ,he ,heory of )ommunicati.e Action5 5 -ols, transl4 T4 MacCart#%, Polit%, O(/ord, *+E=4
$99 Kiblio%raphy
Kiblio%raphy
Ha)ermas, 34, ,he &hilosophical <iscourse of (odernity5 transl4 $4 C4 Lawrence, M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+E<4
Ha/re%, L4, FT#e gilded cage6 Postmodernism and )e%ond0, ,niMuarterl?15 !+ @*+E,A, *5?H,?4
Har-e%, D4, ,he )ondition of &ostmodernity5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E+4
Hassan, ;4, ,he 6iterature of -ilence5 'no&/, ew Yor!, *+?<4
Hassan, ;4 @edA, 6iberations: .FFs,ew essays on the humanities in re.olution5 .esle%an 8ni-ersit% Press, Middletown, CT, *+<*4
Hassan, ;4, FPOSTmodern;SM0, Hew 6iterary 7istory5 ,, * @*+<*A, >H,94
Hassan, ;4, FA)stractions0, <iacnitics5 5 @*+<>A, *,H*E4
Hassan, ;4, &aracniticisms: -e.en -peculations of the ,imes5 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois Press, 8r)ana, C#icago:London, *+<>4
Hassan, ;4, FT#e critic as inno-ator6 T#e TutGing Statement in ( /rames0, Amerikastudien5
55 @*+<<A, =<H?,4
Hassan, ;4, ,he 4i%ht &romethean $ire: 'ma%ination5 science5 and cultural chan%e5 8ni-ersit%
o/ ;llinois Press, 8r)ana, *+E94
Hassan, ;4, ,he <ismemberment of 2rpheus: ,oward a postmodern literature5 5nd edn,
8ni-ersit% o/ .isconsin Press, Madison, *+E54
Hassan, ;4, FDesire and dissent in t#e &ostmodern age0, Lenyon 4e.iew5 ! @*+E,A, *H*E4
Hassan, ;4, FPluralism in &ostmodern &ers&ecti-e0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 *5, , @*+E?A, >9,H594
Hassan, ;4, ,he &ostmodern ,urn: :ssays in postmodern theory and culture5 O#io State 8ni-ersit% Press, Colum)us, *+E<4
Hassan, ;4 and Hassan, S4 @edsA, 'nno.ation/4eno.ation: Hew perspecti.es on the
humanities5 8ni-ersit% o/ .isconsin Press, Madison, *+E?4
Haug, .4-$4, )riti>ue of )ommodity Aesthetics5 Polit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E?4
Haug, .4-$4, )ommodity Aesthetics5 'deolo%y and )ulture5 ;nternational 2eneral, ew
Yor! and 1agnolet, *+E<4
Ha%man, D4, FDou)le Distancing6 An attri)ute o/ t#e ]&ost-modernR a-ant-garde0, Ho.el5
*5, * @*+<EA, ,,H=<4
Heat#, S4, ,he Hou.eau 4oman5 E;e!, London, *+<54
He)dige, D4, -ubculture: ,he meanin% of style5 Met#uen, London, *+<+4
He)dige, D4, FA re&ort on t#e .estern /ront6 Postmodernism and t#e ]&oliticsR o/ st%le0, Klock5 *5 @*+E?H<A, =H5?4
He)dige, D4, FT#e im&ossi)le o)Iect6 Towards a sociolog% o/ t#e su)lime0, Hew $ormations5
* @*+E<A, =<H<?4
He)dige, D4, 7idin% in the 6i%ht: 2n ima%es and thin%s5 Comedia, London, *+EE4
Heidegger, M4, Kein% and ,ime5 transl4 34 MacKuarrie and E4 Ro)inson, 1lac!well, O(/ord,
*+?<4
Heidegger, M4, &oetry5 6an%ua%e5 ,hou%ht5 Har&er Colo&#on, ew Yor!, *+<*4
Heidegger, M4, ,he Muestion )oncernin% ,echnolo%y5 Har&er \ Row, ew Yor!, *+<<4
He!man, S4 34, /ender and Lnowled%e5 Polit%, O(/ord, *+E+4
HIort, A4 M4, FCuasi-8na-AmiciGia6 Adorno and &#iloso&#ical &ostmodernism0, Hew 2rleans 4e.iew5 *=, * @*+E<A, <=HE94
Hoestere%, ;4, FDie Moderne am EndeD Su den Oast#etisc#en Positionen -on 3urgen Ha)ermas
und Clement 2reen)erg0, Peitschrift f]r Asthetik und abl%emeine Lunst%ewissenschaft5 5+,
* @*+E=A, *+H,54
Ho//man, $4 34, F.illiam 3ames and t#e modern literar% consciousness0, )riticism5 = @*+?5A,
*H*,4
$91
Ho//mann, C4, FSocial criticism and t#e de/ormation @;/ man6 Satire, t#e
grotesKue and Oomic ni#ilism in t#e modern and &ostmodern American
no-el0, Amenikastudien5 5E @*+E,0
*=*H59,4
Ho//mann, C4, FT#e a)surd and its /orms o/ reduction in &ostmodern
American /iction0, in
D4 $o!!ema and H4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5
3o#n 1enIamins Amsterdam, *+E?, &&4 *E>H5*94
Ho//mann, ).5 Hornung, A4 and 'unow, R4, ]FModernR,
F&ostmodern0 ,tnd
]contem&orar%R as criteria /or t#e anal%sis o/ twentiet#-centur%
literature0,
Amenikastudien5 55 @*+<<A, *+H=?4
HO#enda#l, P4 84, ,he 'nstitution of )riticism5 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press,
;t#aca, Y, *+E54
Honnet#, A4, FAn a-ersion against t#e uni-ersal6 A commentar%0 on
L%otard0s &ostn8oclenn
)ondition15 ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 5, , A1*J!?5 *=<H><4
Honnet#, A4, )riti>ue of &ower: 4eflecti.e sta%es ma critical social
theory5 transl4 '4 1a-nes,
M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *++*4
Howe, ;4, FMass societ% and &ostmodern /iction0, &artisan 4e.iew5 5?, ,
@*+>+A, =59H,?4
Hug#es, R4, ,he -hock of the Hew5 'no&/, ew Yor!, *+E*4
Hutc#eon, L4, Harcissistic Harrati.e: ,he metafi ctional parado=5 .il/red
$anner 8ni-ersit% Press, .aterloo, O, *+E94
Hutc#eon, L4, A ,heory of &arody: ,he teachin%s of twentieth-century art
forms5 Met#uen,
London, *+E>4
Hutc#eon, $4, F1eginning to t#eoriGe &ostmodernism0, ,e=tual &ractice5
*, * @*+E<A, *9H,*4
Hutc#eon, L4, FT#e &olitics o/ &ostmodernism6 Parod% and #istor%0,
)ultural )riti>ue5 !
@*+E<A, *<+H59<4
Hutc#eon, L4, A &oetics of &ostmodernism: 7istory5 theory5 fiction5
Routledge, London,
*+EE4
Hutc#eon, L4, ,he &olitics of &ostmodernism5 Routledge, London,
*+E+4
Hu%ssen, A4, After the /reat <i.ide: (odernism5 mass culture5
postmodernism5 Macmillan,
London, *+E?4
;nigara%, L4, -peculum: de l1autre femme5 Minuit, Paris, *+<=N transl4 as
-peculum of the
2ther Woman5 C4 C4 2ill, Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+E>4
;rigara%, L4, )e -e=e >ui n1en est pas on5 Minuit, Paris, *+<<4
3aco)s, 34, <eath and 6ife of /reat American )ities5 Jintage 1oo!s, ew
Yor!, *+?*4
3ameson, $4, $ables of A%%ression5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press,
1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+<+4
3ameson, $4, (ar=ism and $orm5 Princeton 8ni-ersit% Press, Princeton,
3, *+<*4
3ameson, $4, (odernism and 'mperialism5 $ield Da%, Derr%, *+EE4
3ameson, $4, ,he 'deolo%ies of ,heor?15 5 -ols, Routledge, London, *+EE4
3ameson, $4, 6ate (ar=ism5 Jerso, London, *++94
3ameson, $4, &ostmodernism5 Jerso, London, *++*4
3ameson, $4, -i%natures of the Visible5 Routledge, London, *++*4
3ardine, A4, /ynesis: )onfi%urations of u1oman and modernity5 Cornell
8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+E>4
3e//erson, A4, ,he Hou.eau 4oman and the &oetics of $iction5 Cam)ridge
8ni-ersit% Press,
Cam)ridge, *+E94
3enc!s, C4, 6e )orbusier and the ,ra%ic View of rchitecture5 Allen Lane,
London, *+<,4
3enc!s, C4, ,he 6an%ua%e of &ost-(odern Architecture5 Academ%
Editions, London, *+<<4
3enc!s, C4, &ost-(odern )lassicism: ,he new synthesis5 Academ% Editions,
London, *+E94
$92 Kiblio%raphy Kiblio%raphy $98
3enc!s, C4, 6ate-(odern Architecture and 2ther :ssays5 Academ% Editions, London, *+E94
3enc!s, C4, Architecture ,oday5 A)rams, ew Yor!, *+E54
3enc!s, C4, What is &ostmodernism5 Academ% Editions, London *+E?4
3enc!s, C4, ,he &ost-A.ant-/arde: &aintin% in the 1*J0s5 Academ% Editions, London, *+E<4
3enc!s, C4, &ostmodernism5 Academ% Editions, London, *+E<4
'a/alenos, $4, F$ragments o/ a discourse on Roland 1art#es and t#e &ostmodern mind0, )hica%o 4e.ieu15 #! @*+E>A, <5H+=4
'aite, 1 4, ]FO)sessionR and desire6 $as#ion and t#e &ostmodern scene0, )anadian 3ournal of &olitical and -ocial ,heory5 **@*+E<A, E=H+4
'am&er, D4 and .ul/, C4 @edsA, 6ookin% Kack on the :nd of the World5 transl4 D4 Antal, Semiote(t@eA, ew Yor!, *+E+4
'ant, ;4, )riti>ue of 3ud%ement5 transl4 ;4 C4 Meredit#, O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord and ;,ondon, *+>54
'a&lan, E4 A4, 4ockin% Around the )lock: (usic5 tele.ision5 postmodernism5 and consumer culture5 Met#uen, London, *+E<4
'a&lan, $4 A4 @edA, &ostmodernism and its <iscontents5 Jerso, London, *+EE4
'aniel, H4, ,he <esperate &olitics of &ostmodernism5 8ni-ersit% o/ Massac#usetts Press, Am#erst, *+E+4
'earne%, R4, FEt#ics and t#e &ostmodern imagination0, ,hou%ht5 ?5 @*+E<A, ,+H>E4
'earne%, R4, ,he Wake of 'ma%ination5 Hutc#inson, London, *+EE4
'earne%, R4 @edA, Across the $rontiers5 .ol/#ound, Du)lin, *+E+4
'ellman, S4 C4, ,he -elf-Ke%ettin% Ho.el5 Macmillan, London, *+E94
'ellner, D4, 3ean Kaudnillard: $rom (ar=ism to postmodernism and beyond5 Polit% Press, O(/ord, *+EE4
'ellner, D4 @edA, &ostmodernism/3ameson/)niti>ue5 Maisonneu-e Press, .as#ington, DC, *+E+4
'ern, R4, FCom&osition as recognition6 Ro)ert Creele% and &ostmodern &oetics0, Koundary
"5 ?, ,N <, * @*+<EA, 5**H,94
'i&nis, $4, F$eminism6 T#e &olitical conscience o/ &ostmodernismD0, in A4 Ross @edA, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+E+, &&4 *=+H??4
'ir)%, M4, FPost-modern dance issue6 An introduction0, <rama 4e.iew5 *+, * @*+<>A,
,H=4
'iremidIian, ). D4, FT#e aest#etics o/ &arod%0, 3ournal of Aesthetics and Art )riticism5 5E, 5 @*+?+A, 5,*H=54
'lin!owitG, 34, 6iterary <isruptions: ,he makin% of a post-contemporary American fiction5 5nd edn, 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois Press, 8r)ana, *+E94
'lin!owitG, 34, 6iterary -ub.ersions: Hew American fiction and the practice of criticism5 Sout#ern ;llinois 8ni-ersit% Press, Car)ondale, *+E>4
'o/man, S4, )amera obscura: de l1id)oWo%ie5 2alilee, Paris, *+<,4
'o/man, S4, 6e 4espect des fenimes5 2alilee, Paris, *+E54
'o#ler, M4, ]FPostmodernismusR6 $in )egni//sgesc#ic#tlic#er 8)er)lic!0, Amenikastudien5 55, *@*+<<A, EH*E4
'ramer, H4, ,he A%e of the A.ant-/arde5 $arrar, Straus \ Cirou(, ew Yor!, *+<,4
'ramer, H4, FPostmodern6 Art and culture O t#e *+E9s0, ,he Hew )riterion5 *, * @*+E5A4
,?H=54
'ramer, H4, ,he 4e.en%e of the &hihistines: Art and culture 1*7"I1*J. $rce Press, ess Yor!, *+E>4
'ramer, 34 D4, FCan modernism sur-i-e 2eorge Roc#)ergD0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 ;;, 5 Ol+E=A, ,= *H>=4
'rauss, R4, FPoststructuralism and t#e ]&araliterar%R0, 2ctober5 *, @*+E@*A, ,?H=94
'rauss, R4, FScul&ture in t#e e(&anded /ield0, in H4 $oster @edA, &ostmodern )ulture5 Pluto Press, London, *+E,4
'rauss, R4, ,he 2ri%inality of the A.ant-/arde and 2ther (odernist (yths5 M;T Press, London, *+E>4
'niste-a, 34, &ou.oirs de lhorreur5 Seuil, Paris, *+E@*
'nistes0a, 34, FPostmodernismD0, in H4 R4 Car-in @edA, 4omanticism5 (o6lenn6cm &ostmodernism5 1uc!nell 8ni-ersit% Press, Lewis)urg, PA, *+E9, &&4 *,?H=*4
'riste-a, ;4, <esire in 6an%ua%e5 transl4 T4 Cora, A4 3ardine and ;44 S4 RoudieG, 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E*4
'ro!er, A4, F1audnillard0s Mar(0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 5, , @*+E>A, ?+HE,4
'ro!er, A4 and Coo!, D4, ,he &ostmodern -cene: :=cremental culture and hyper-aesthetics5 Macmillan, London, *+EE4
'ro!er, A4 and 'ro!er, M4 @edsA, Kody 'n.aders: -e=uality and the postmodern condition5 Macmillan, London, *+EE4
'u#n, T4, ,he -tructure of -cientific 4e.olutions5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+?54
Laclau, $4, FPolitics and t#e limits o/ modernit%0, in A4 Ross @ed4A, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+E+, &&4 ?,HE54
Laclau, $4 and Mou//e, C4, 7e%emony and -ocialist -trate%y: ,owards a radical democratic politics5 Jerso, London, *+E>4
Lacoue-La)art#e, P4, FTal!s0, transl4 C4 $%ns!, <iacnitics5 *=, # @*+E=A, 5=H,<4 Lacoue-La)art#e, P4, 7eide%%er5 Art and (odernity5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *++@*4
La//e%, 34 $4, FCaco&#onic rites6 Modernism and &ostmodernism0, 7istorical 4eflections5 *=, * @*+E<A, *H,54
Lang, 14, FPostmodernism in &#iloso&#%6 ostalgia /or t#e /uture, waiting /or t#e &ast0, Hew 6iterary 7istory5 *E, * @*+E?A, 59+H5,4
Las#, S4, F2enealog% and t#e )od%6 $oucault:DeleuGe:Dernida0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 5, 5 @*+E=A, *H*<4
Las#, S4, FPostmodernit%0 and desire0, ,heory and -ociety5 *=, * @*+E>A, *H,,4
Las#, S4, FPostmodernism as #umanismD 8r)an s&ace and social t#eor%0, in 14 S4 Turner @edA, ,heories of (odernity and &ostmodernity5 Sage, London, *++@*4
Las#, S4, -ociolo%y of &ostmodernism5 Routledge, London, *++94
Lawson, H4, 4efle=i.ity: ,he post-modern predicament5 Hutc#inson, london, *+E>4
LaGarus, 4, FModernism and modernit%6 T4 .4 Adorno and contem&orar% w#ite Sout# A/rican literature0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E?H<A, *, 1I!!.
Lea, '4, ]F;n t#e most #ig#l%0 de-elo&ed societiesR6 ;4-otard and &ostmodernism0, 2=ford 6iterary 4e.iew5 +,*H5 @*+E<A, E?H*9=4
Lecercle, I4-34, &hilosophy ,hrou%h the 6ookin%-/lass5 Hutc#inson, London, *+E>4
Lecercle, I4-34, ,he Violence of 6an%ua%e5 Routledge, London, *++*4
$e Doeu//, M4, Women and &hilosophy5 1lac!s-ell, O(/ord, *++94
Le/e)-re, H4, ,he &roduction of -pace5 transl4 D4 ic#olson-Smit#, 1lac!well4 O(/ord, *++*4
Lemaire, C-C4, F$e S&ectre du &ost-modernisme0ILe (onde do <imanche5 *E Octo)er *+E*, (i-4
$9: Kiblio%raphy
Kiblio%raphy
Lentnicc#ia, $4, Alien the Hew )riticism5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E94
Let#en, H4, FModernism cut in #al/6 T#e e(clusion o/ t#e A-ant-2arde and t#e de)ate on
&ostmodernism0, in D4 $o!!ema and H4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n
1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+E?, &&4 5,,HE4
Le-in, D4 M4, ,he 2penin% of Vision: Hihilism and the postmodern situation5 Routledge,
London, *+EE4
Le-inas, E4, ,he 6e.inas 4eader5 ed4 S4 Hand, 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E+4
Lewis, .4, ,ime and Western (an5 C#atto \ .indus, London, *+5<4
Linden)erger, El4, F$rom o&era to &ostmodernit%6 On genre, st%le, institutions0, /enre5 59 @*+E<A, 5>+HE=4
Li&sitG, C4, FCruising around t#e #istorical )loc!6 Postmodernism and &o&ular music in $ast
Los Angeles0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E?H<A, *>>H<<4
Lodge, D4, Workin% with -tructurahism5 Routledge \ 'egan Paul, London, *+E*4
Lu!es, S4, FCan a Mar(ist )elie-e in #uman rig#tsD0, &ra=is 'nternational5 *@*+E5A, ,,=H=>4
Lumsden, C4 *40 FT#e gene and t#e sign6 2i-ing structure to &ostmodernit%0, -emiotica5 ?5 @*+E?A, *+*H59?4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6a &henomenolo%ie5 P8P, Paris, *+>=4
L%otard, 34-$4, <eri.es a partir de (ar= et $reud5 8nion generale d0editions, *9:*E, Paris,
*+<94
L%otard, 34-$4, <iscours5 fi%ure5 'linc!siec!, Paris, *+<*4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6:conomie hibidinale5 Minuit, Paris, *+<=4
L%otard, 34-$4, 'nstructions pai1ennes5 2alilee, Paris, *+<<4
L%otard, 34-$4, 4udiments paiens5 8nion g#n#rale d0editions, Paris, *+<<4
L%otard,34-$4, FOne o/ t#e t#ings at sta!e in women0s struggles0, -ub-tance5 59@*+<EA, +H*<4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6a )ondition postmoderne5 Minuit, Paris, *+<+N transl4 C4 1ennington and 14 Massumi as ,he &ostmodern )ondition: A report on knowled%e5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester,
*+E=4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6e (ur do pacifi>ue5 2alilee, Paris, *+<+4
L%otard, 34-$4, 61Assassinat de le=penience par ha peinture: (onory5 $e Castor Astral, Paris,
*+E=4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6e <ifferend5 Minuit, Paris, *+E,N transl4 C4 -an den A))eele as ,he
<8fferend5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *++94
L%otard, 34-$4, 6e ,ombeau de l1intellectuel5 2alilee, Paris, *+E=4
L%otard, 34-$4, 61:nthousiasme: ha criti>ue kantienne de l1histoire5 2alilee, Paris, *+E?4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6e &ostmoderne e=phi>ue au= enfants5 2alilee, Paris, *+E?4
L%otard, *4-$4, FSensus Communis0, 6e )ahier do )olle%e 'nternational de &hilosophie5 ,, Paris, *+E<, ?<HE<4
L%otard, 34-$4, &ere%rinations5 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+EE4
L%otard, 34-$4, 61'nhumain5 2alilee, Paris, *+EE4
L%otard, 34-$4, ,he 6yotard 4eader5 ed4 A4 1enIamin, 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E+4
L%otard, 34-$4, 6econs sun l1analyti>ue do sublime5 2alilee, Paris, *++*4
L%otard, 34-$4 and C#a&ut, T4, 6es 'mmateniau=5 Centre 2eorges Pom&idou, Paris, *+E>4
L%otard, 34-$4 and Monor%, 34, 4)cits tremblants5 2alilee, Paris, *+<<4
L%otard, 34-$4 and Rort%, R4, FDiscussion0, )riti>ue5 =*@*+E>A, >E*H=4
L%otard, 34-$4 and T#e)aud, 34-L4, Au 9uste5 C#ristian 1ourgois, Paris, *+<+N transl4
.4 2odGic# as 3ust /amin%5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E>4
L%otard, 34-$4 et al.5 6a $acubte de9u%er5 Minuit, Paris, *+E,4
$9$
L%otard, 34-$4 and $ranc!en, R4, 617istoire de 4uth5 $e Castor Asral,
Paris, *+E,4
McCa//ers0, $.5 ,he (etafictional (use5 8ni-ersit%0 LI? Pitts#urg# Press,
Pitts)urg#, *+E5
McCa//er%, $4 @edA, &ostmodern $iction: A bin-biblio%raphy5 2reens(-ood
;Oress, london, *+E?4
MacCannel, D4 and MacCannell, 34 $4, ,he ,ime of the -i%n: A semiotic
int1rpnct.ition of
modern culture5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press, 1loomington, *+E54
Mc2owan, *4 P4, FPostmodern dilemmas0, -outhu1est 4e.iew5 <5, ,
@*+E<A, ,><H<?4
McHale, 14, F.riting a)out &ostmodern writing0, &oetics ,oday5 , @*+E5A
O**HO
McHale, 14, &ostmodernist $iction5 Met#uen, London4 *+E<4
Maclnt%re, A4, After Virtue: A study in moral theory5 Duc!wort#, London,
*+E*4
MacRo))ie, A4, FPostmodernism and &o&ular culture0, in $4 A&&ignanesi
@edA, &ostmodernism5 $ree Association 1oo!s, London, *+E?, &&4 >=
H<4
Malmgren, C4 D4, $ictional -pace in the (odernist and &ostmodernist
American Ho.el5
1uc!nell 8ni-ersit% Press, Lewis)urg, PA, *+E>4
Mandel, $4, 6ate )apitalism5 Jerso, London, *+<>4
Marcuse, H4, FT#e A//irmati-e C#aracter o/ Culture0, in He%ations5 transl4
34 ;4 S#a&iro,
1eacon Press, 1oston, *+?E4
Martin, .4, 4ecent ,heories of Harrati.e5 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press,
;t#aca, Y, *+E?4
MaGGaro, 34, &ostmodern American &oetry5 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois Press,
8r)ana, *+E94
MegilY, A4, &rophets of :=tremity: Hiet8sche5 7eide%%er5 $oucault5
<ernida5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los Angeles, *+E>4
Mellencam&, P4, F;mages o/ language and indiscreet dialogue6 ]T#e man
w#o en-ied
womenR0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A, E<H*9*4
Mel-ille, S4, Fotes on t#e reemergence o/ allegor%, t#e /orgetting o/
modernism t#e necessit%
o/ r#etoric and t#e conditions o/ &u)licit% in art and criticism0,
2ctober5 *+ @*+E*A,
!!I*".
Mel-ille, S4, &hilosophy Keside 'tself1 2n deconstruction and modernism5
Manc#ester
8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester, *+E?4
Mesc#onnic, H4, (odennite (odernite5 Jerdier, Lagrasse, *+EE4
Mitc#ell, .4 34 T4 @edA, 2n Harrati.e5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press,
C#icago, *+E*4
Mitc#ell, .4 34 T4 @edA, A%ainst ,heory: 6iterary studies and the neu1
pra%matism5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E>4
Mitc#ell, .4 34 T4, 'conolo%y5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago,
*+E?4
Modles!i, T4 @edA, -tudies in :ntertainment5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press,
1loomington, *+E<4
Montag, .4, F.#at is at sta!e in t#e de)ate on &ostmodernismD0, in E4
A4 'a&lan @edA, &ostmodernism and its <iscontents5 Jerso, London,
*+EE, &&4 EEH*9,4
Monte/iore, A4 @ed4A, &hilosophy in $rance ,oday5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit%
Press, Cam)ridge,
*+E,4
Morgan, R4 P4, FOn t#e anal%sis o/ recent music0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 =, *
@*+<<A4 ,,H>,4 Morris, M4, ,he &irate1s $iancee5 Jerso, London, *+EE4
Morrissette, 14, FPost-modern generati-e /iction6 o-el and /ilm0,
)ritical 'n>uiry5 5 @*+<>A,
5>,H?54
Moser, .4, FMode-Moderne-Postmoderne0, :tudes fran`aises5 59, 5
@*+E=A, 5+H=E4
Mou//e, C4, FRadical democrac%6 Modern or &ostmodernD0, in A4 Ross
@edA, 0ni.ersal
Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, $din)urO#, *+E+, &&4 ,*H
=>4
Mul-e%, $4, F$eminism, /ilm and t#e a-ant-garde0, in M4 3aco)us @ed4A,
Women Writin% and
Writin% About Women5 Croom Helm, London, *+<+, &&4 *<<H+>4
;
$9< Kiblio%raphy
agele, R4, FModernism and &ostmodernism6 T#e margins o/ articulation0, -tudies in ,wentieth-)entury 6iterature5 ! @*+E9A, !I"!.
ead, $4, F$eminism, art #istor% and cultural &olitics0, in A4 $4 Rees and $4 1orGello @edsA, ,he Hew Art 7istory5 Camden Press, London, *+E?, &&4 *59H=4
egni, A4, &olitics of -ub.ersion5 Polit%, O(/ord, *+E+4
elson, C4 and Cross)erg, $4 @edsA, (ar=ism and the 'nterpretation of )ulture5 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois Press, 8r)ana, *+EE4
ewman, C4, ,he &ost-(odern Aura: ,he act of fiction in an a%e of inflation5 ort#western 8ni-ersit% Press, E-anston, ;L, *+E>4
ic#ols, 14, FT#e wor! o/ culture in t#e age o/ c%)ernetic s%stems0, -creen5 5+, * @*+EEA,
55H=?4
or)erg-Sc#ulG, C4, :=istence5 -pace and Architecture5 Studio Jista, London, *+<*4 orris, C4, ,he )ontest of $aculties: &hilosophy and theory after deconstruction5 Met#uen, London, *+E>4
orris, C4, FAgainst &ostmodernism6 Dernida, 'ant, and nuclear &olitics0, &ara%raph5 * @*+E<A, *H,94
orris, C4, What1s Wron% with &ostmodernism5 Har-ester .#eats#ea/, Hemel Hem&stead, *++94
%man, M4, FAgainst intellectual com&le(it% in music0, 2ctober5 1# @*+E9A, E*H+4 Oli-a, A4 14, FT#e international trans-a-ant-garde0, $lash Art5 *9= @*+E5A, ,?H=,4 O0eill, 34, FReligion and
&ostmodernism0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 !5 5H, @*+EEA,
55>H,+4
Ono&a, R4, FT#e end o/ art as a s&iritual &roIect0, ,nMuarterly5 5? @*+<,A, ,?,HE54 Owens, C4, FT#e allegorical im&ulse6 Toward a t#eor% o/ &ostmodernism, Pt *0, 2ctober5 *5 @*+E9A, ?<HE?4
Owens, C4, FT#e allegorical im&ulse6 Toward a t#eor% o/ &ostmodernism, Pt 50, 2ctober5 1# @*+E9A, >+HE94
Owens, C4, FRe&resentation, a&&ro&riation and &ower0, Art in America5 <9, ! @*+E5A, +H5*4 Owens, C4, FT#e discourse o/ ot#ers6 $eminists and &ostmodernism0, in H4 $oster @edA,
&ostmodern )ulture5 Pluto Press, London, *+E,, &&4 ><HE54
Palmer, R4 $4, FPostmodernit% and #ermeneutics0, Koundary5 5, !5 5 @*+<<A, ,?,H+,4
Par!er, A4, FTa!ing sides @on #istor%A6 Dernida re-Mar(0, <iacnitics5 **, 5 @*+E*A, ><H<,4
Paterson, 34, F$e Roman ]&ostmoderneR6 misc an &oint et &ers&ecti-es0, )anadian 4e.iew o3 )omparati.e 6iterature5 *,, 5 @*+E?A, 5,EH>>4
Pa-el, T4, ,he $eud of 6an%ua%e5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *++94
Pa-is, P4, FT#e classical #eritage o/ modern drama6 T#e case o/ &ostmodern t#eatre0, (odern <rama5 5+ @*+E?A, *H554
Penle%, C4, FT#e a-ant-garde and its imaginar%0, )amera 2bscura5 5 @*+<<A, #I##. Pe&er, 34, FPostmodernismus6 8nitar% sensi)ilit%D0, Amenikastudien5 55, * @*+<<A, ?>E+4 Penlo//, M4, &oetics of
'ndeterminacy: 4imbaud to )a%e5 Princeton 8ni-ersit% Press, Princeton, 3, *+E*4
Perlo//, M4, ,he <ance of the lntellect: -tudies in the poetry of the &ound tradition5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E>4
Perlo//, M4, ,he $uturist (oment: A.ant-%arde5 a.ant-%uerre and the lan%ua%e of rupture5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E?4
Perlo//, M4, FMusic /or words &er#a&s6 Reading:#earing:seeing 3o#n Cage0s 4oaratonio15 /enre5 59, ,H= @*+E<A, =5<H?54
Kiblio%raphy $9=
P#illi&son, M4, &aintin%5 6an%ua%e and (odernity5 Routledge \ 'egan Paul, london, *+E>4
Pi&&in, R4 M4, (odernity as a &hilosophical &roblem5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *++*4
Platten, D4, FPostmodern engineering0, )i.il :n%ineerin%5 !+5 ? @*+E?A, E=H?4
F&4m40, Kolo1Kolo5 Semiote(t@eA, ew Yor!, *+E>4
Pogguoli, R4, ,heory of the A.ant-/arde5 transl4 C4 $itGgerald, Har-ard 8ni-ersit% Press Cam)ridge, MA, *+?E4
Portog#esu, P4, 6e inibi8ioni dell1archittetuna moderna5 $atenGa, 1an, *+<=4
Portog#esu, P4, After (odern Architecture5 transl4 M4 S#ore, RiGGoli, ew Yor!, *+E54
Portog#esi, P4, &ostmodern: ,he architecture of the postindustnial society5 transl4 $4 S#a&iro, RiGGoli, ew Yor!, *+E,4
Potter, '4, FRo)ert As#le% and &ostmodernist o&era0, 2pera5 ,E @*+E<A, ,EEH+=4
Pu;;in, $4, FLandsca&es o/ realit%6 T#e /iction o/ contem&orar% A/ro-American women0, in A4 R4 Lee @edA, Klack $iction: Hew -tudies in the Afro-American Ho.el since 1*!5 Jision Press, London,
*+E9, &&4 *<,H59,4
Putnam, H4, 4ealism and 4eason5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press, Cam)ridge, *+E,4
Ra)inow, P4, FRe&resentations are social /acts6 Modernit% and &ostmodernit% in ant#ro&olog%0, in 34 Cli//ord and C4 E4 Marcus @edsA, Writin% )ulture5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los
Angeles, *+E?, &&4 5,=H?*4
Rad#a!nis#nan, R4, FT#e &ost-modern e-ent and t#e end o/ logocentnism0, Koundary "5 *5, * @*+E,A, ,,H?94
RaIc#man, 34, FPostmodernism in a nominalist /rame6 T#e emergence and di//usion o/ a cultural categor%0, $lash Art5 *,< @*+E<A, =+H>*4
RaIc#man, 34 and .est, C4 @edsA, &ost-Analytic &hilosophy5 Colum)ia 8ni-ersit% Press, ew Yor!, *+E>4
Raulet, C4, F$rom modernit% as one-wa% street to &ostmodernit% as dead-end0, Hew /erman )riti>ue5 ,, @*+E=A, *>>H<E4
Rees, A4 $4 and 1orGello, $4 @edsA, ,he Hew Art 7istory5 Camden Press, London, *+E?4
Reiss, T4 34, ,he <iscourse of (odernism5 Cornell 8ni-ersit% Press, ;t#aca, Y, *+E54
Ric#ard, 4, FPostmodernism and &eri&#er%0, ,hird ,e=t5 5 @*+E<HEA, >H*54
Ric#ters, A4, FModernit%H&ostmodernit% contro-ersies6 Ha)ermas and $oucault0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 !5 = @*+EEA, ?**H=,4
Ri//aterre, M4, F;nterte(tual re&resentation6 On mimesis as inter&reti-e discourse0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 **, *@*+E=A, *=*H?54
Ro)erts, 34, FPostmodern tele-ision and t#e -isual arts0, -creen5 5E, 5 @*+E<A, **EH5<4
Ro)erts, 34, &ostniodernism5 &olitics and Art5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit%0 Press, Manc#ester, *++94
Ro)inson, $4 S4 and Jogel, $4, FModernism and #istor%0, Hew 6iterary 7istory5 ,, * @*+<*
*<<H++4
Roc#)erg, C4, FCan t#e arts sur-i-e modernismD @A discussion o/ t#e c#aracteristics, #istor% and legac% o/ modernismA0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 **, 5 @*+E=A, ,*<H=94
Rort%, R4, &hilosophy and the (irror n9 Hature5 1lac!well, O(/ord, *+E94
Rort%, R4, )onse>uences of &ra%matism5 Har-ester, 1rig#ton, *+E54
Rort%, R4, FPostmodernist )ourgeois li)eralism0, 3ournal of &hilosophy5 E9 @*+E,A,
!J#I*.
Rort%, R4, FHa)ermas and $%otard on &ostmodernit%0, &ra=is 'nternational5 = @*+E=A,
,5H==4
$9@ Kiblio%raphy
Kiblio%raphy $9B
Rort%, R4, F$e cosmo&olitisme sans emanci&ation6 en re&onse a 3ean-$rancois L%otard0, )riti>ue5 =* @Ma% *+E>A, >?+HE94
Rose, 34, G,he (an Who (istook 7is Wife for a 7at or A Wife is 6ike an 0mbrella I$antasies o/ t#e modern and &ostmodern0, in A4 Ross @ed4A, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5
Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+E+, &&4 5,<H>94
Rose, M4 A4, ,he &ostmodern and the &ostindustnial5 Cam)ridge 8ni-ersit% Press,
Cam)ridge, *++*4
Rosen, S4, ,he Ancients and the (oderns: 4ethinkin% modernity5 Yale 8ni-ersit% Press, ess0
Ha-en, CT, *+E+4
Rosen)erg, H4, <isco.erin% the &resent: ,hree decades in art5 culture5 and politics5
8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+<,4
Ross, A4 @ed4A, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+EE4
Ross, A4, Ho 4espect5 Routledge, ew Yor!, *+E+4
Ross, A4, -tran%e Weather5 Jerso, London, *++54
Rosset, C4, 612b9et sin%uhier5 Minuit, Paris, *+<+4
Russell, C4, FT#e -ault o/ language6 Sel/-re/lecti-e arti/ice in contem&orar% American /iction0, (odern $iction -tudies5 59, , @*+<=A, ,=+H>+4
Russell, C4, F;ndi-idual -oice in t#e collecti-e discourse6 Literar% inno-ation in &ostmodern
American /iction0, -ub-tance5 5< @*+E9A, 5+H,+4
Russell, C4 @ed4A, ,he A.ant-/arde ,oday: An international antholo%y5 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois
Press, 8r)ana, *+E*4
Russell, C4, &oets5 &rophets and 4e.olutionaries: ,he literary a.ant-%arde from 4im baud
throu%h postmodernism5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+E>4
R%an, M4, (ar=ism and <econstruction: A critical articulation5 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit%
Press, 1altimore, MD, *+E54
R%an, M4, FPostmodern &olitics0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 !5 5H, @*+EEA, !!*I7+.
Said, $4, 2rientalism5 Routledge \ 'egan Paul, London, *+<E4
Said, $4, ,he World5 ,he ,e=t5 ,he )ritic5 $a)er \ $a)er, London, *+E,4
Sandler, ;4, FModernism, re-isionism, &luralism, and &ostmodernism0, Art 3ournal5 =9 @*+E9A, ,=>H<4
Sasso, ).5 ,ramonto di on mito. 61'dea di Gpro%resso1fra 2ttocento e Ho.ecento5 ;; Mulino,
1ologna, *+E=4
Sc#er&e, '4 R4, FDramatiGation and dc-dramatiGation o/ t#e end6 T#e a&ocal%&tic
consciousness o/ modernit% and &ost-modernit%0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E<A, +>H*5+4
Sc#mid, H4, FPostmodernism in Russian drama6 Jam&ilo-, Amalri!, A!seno-0, in
D4 $o!!ema and H4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins,
Amsterdam, *+E?, &&4 *><HE=4
Sc#oles, R4, -tructural $abulation: $iction of the future5 8ni-ersit% o/ otre Dame Press,
otre Dame, ;, *+<>4
Sc#oles, R4, $abulation and (etafiction5 8ni-ersit% o/ ;llinois Press, 8r)ana, *+<+4
Sc#ulte-Sasse, 34, FModernit%0 and modernism, &ostmodernit% and &ostmodernism6 $raming
t#e issue0, )ultural )riti>ue5 ! @*+E<A, >H554
Sc#ulte-Sasse, 34, F;magination and modernit%N or, t#e taming o/ t#e #uman mind0, )ultural
)riti>ue5 ! @*+E?H<A, 5,H=E4
Sc#usterman, R4, FPostmodernist aest#eticism0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 !5 "I# @*+EEA,
,,<H>?4
Se!ula, A4, FDismantling modernism, rein-enting documentar% @otes
on t#e &olitics o/ re&resentationA0, (assachusetts 4e.iew5 *+, = @*+<EA,
J!*I*#.
S#arrett, C4, FSustaining romanticism in &ostmodernist cinema6 An
inter-iew wit#
S%)er)org0, )m)aste5 1!5 # @*+E<A, *EH594
Sil-erman, H4 34 @edA, &hilosophy and Hon-&hilosophy since (enleau-&onty5
Routledge,
London, *+EE4
Sil-erman, H4 34 @edA, &ostmodernisni: &hilosophy and the arts5 Routledge,
London, *++@*4
Sil-erman, H4 34 and .elton, D4 @edsA, &ostmodernism and )ontinental
&hilosophy5 State
8ni-ersit% o/ ew Yor! Press, Al)an%, *+EE4
Simmel, ).5 ,he &hilosophy of (oney5 Routledge \ 'egan Paul, ;4ondon,
*+<E4
SloterdiI!, P4, FC%nicism H t#e twilig#t o/ /alse consciousness0, Hew
/erman )riti>ue5 ,,
@*+E=A, *+9H59?N re&r4 /rom SloterdiI!, Lnitik den 8ynischen Vernon ft5
5 -ols, Su!r!am&,
$ran!/urt, *+E=4
Sm%t#, $4 34 @ed4A, &ostmodernism and )ontemporary $iction5 1ats/ord,
London, *++*4
SoIa, $4, &ostmodern /eo%raphies5 Jerso, London, *++94
Solomon-2odeau, A4, FP#otogra&#% a/ter art &#otogra&#%0, in 14
.allis @edA, Art After (odernism: 4ethinkin% representation5 Da-id
2odine, 1oston, MA, *+E=, &&4 <=HE>4
Solomon-2odeau, A4, F.inning t#e game w#en t#e rules #a-e )een
c#anged6 Art
&#otogra&#% and &ostmodernism0, -creen5 5>, ? @*+E=A, EEH*954
Solomon-2odeau, A4, F*4i-ing wit# contradictions6 Critical &ractices in
t#e age o/ su&&l%-side
aest#etics0, -creen5 5E, # @*+E<A, 5H554
Sontag, S4, A%ainst 'nterpretation and 2ther :ssays5 Dell, ew Yor!,
*+?<4
S&anos, .4 J4, FT#e detecti-e at t#e )oundar%6 Some notes on t#e
&ostmodern literar%0
imagination0, Koundary "515 * @*+<5A, *=<H?E4
S&anos, .4 J4 @edA, (artin 7eide%%er and the Muestion of 6iterature:
,oward a
postmodern literary hermeneutics5 ;ndiana 8ni-ersit% Press,
1loomington, *+<+4
S&i-a!, ).5 FRe-olutions t#at as %et #a-e no model0, <iacritics5 *@*, =
@*+E9A, 5+H=+4
S&i-a!, C4, FT#ree women0s te(ts and a critiKue o/ im&erialism0,
)ritical 'n>uiry5 *5, *
@*+E>A, 5=,H?*4
S&nin!er, M4, 'ma%inary 4elations5 Jerso, London, *+E<4
Steiner, .4 @edA, ,he -i%n in (usic and 6iterature5 8ni-ersit% o/ Te(as Press,
Austin, *+E*4
Steiner, .4, F;nterte(tualit% in &ainting0, American 3ournal of -emiotics5
,,=@*+E>A, ><H?<4
Ste-ic!, P4, FSc#e#ereGade runs out o/ &lots, goes on tal!ing6 t#e !ing,
&uGGled, listens6 An essa% on new /iction0, ,nMuarterly5 5? @*+<,A, ,,5
H?54
Ste-ic!, P4, Alternati.e &leasures: &ostreahist fiction and the tradition5
8ni-ersit% @;/ ;llinois
Press, 8r)ana, *+E*4
Stratton, 34, Writin% -ites: A %enealo%y of the postmodenn u1on/d5 Har-ester
.#eats#ea/,
Hemel Hem&stead, *++*4
Suleiman, S4 R4, Faming a di//erence6 Re/lections on ]modernism
-ersus &ostmodernisnu00,
in D4 $o!!ema and H4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n
1enIamins,
Amsterdam, *+E?, &&4 5>>H<94
Ta/uni, M4, 6a s9)ra e il lahininto5 5nd edn, 2iulio Einaudi, Turin, *+E@*4
Tagg, 34, FPostmodernism and t#e )orn-again a-ant-garde0, Klock5 **
@*+E>H?A, P<4
Tanner, T4, )ity of Words: American fiction 1*!0I1*705 Har&er \
Ross0, ess0 Yor!, *+<*4
Tarn, 4, F$res# /roGen /eni(6 Random notes on t#e su)lime, t#e
)eauti/ul and t#e ugl% in t#e &ostmodern era0, Hew 6iterary 7istory5 *?
@*+E>A, =*<H5?4
$19 Kiblio%raphy
Kiblio%raphy
Ta%lor, M4, :rrin%: A postmodern a/theolo%y5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *+E=4 T#i#er, A4, Words in 4eflection: (odern lan%ua%e theory and postmodern fiction5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago,
*+E=4
T#urle%, ).5 )ounter-(odernism in )urrent )ritical ,heory5 Macmillan, London, *+E,4
Timms, $4 and Collier, P4 @edsA, Visions and Klueprints: A.ant-%arde culture and radical politics in early twentieth-century :urope5 Manc#ester 8ni-ersit% Press, Manc#ester,
*+E<4
Todd, R4, FT#e &resence o/ &ostmodernism in 1ritis# /iction6 As&ects o/ st%le and sel/#ood0, in D4 $o!!ema and H4 1ertens @edsA, Approachin% &ostmodernism5 3o#n 1enIamins, Amsterdam, *+E?,
&&4 ++H**<4
Toulmin, S4, FT#e construal o/ realit%6 Criticism in modern and &ostmodern science0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 *5 *@*+E5A, +,H***4
Trac#ten)erg, S4 @edA, ,he &ostmodern (oment5 2reenwood Press, .est&ort, CT, *+E>4
Turner, 14 S4 @edA, ,heories of (odernity and &ostmodernity5 Sage, London, *++94
T%ler, S4, FPost-modern et#nogra&#%6 $rom document o/ t#e occult to occult document0, in 34 Cli//ord and ). $4 Marcus @edsA, Writin% )ulture5 8ni-ersit% o/ Cali/ornia Press, 1er!ele%:Los
Angeles, *+E?, &&4 *55H=94
8lmer, ). $4, Applied /rammatolo%y: &ostAe?-peda%o%y from 3ac>ues <ernida to 3oseph Keuys5 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore, MD, *+E>4
8lmer, ).5 ,eletheory5 Routledge, London, *+E+4
8rr%, 34, ,he ,ourist /a8e5 Sage, London, *++94
Jattimo, ).5 6a fine della modernitd: Hichihismo ed ermeneutica nehla cultura post-moderna5 2arGanti, Milan, *+E>N transl4 34 R4 Sn%der as ,he :nd of (odernity5 Polit% Press, O(/ord, *+EE4
Jattimo, C4 and Ro-atti, P4 A4 @edsA, '' &ensiero debole5 $eltrinelli, Milan, *+E,4
Jenturi, R4, )omple=ity and )ontradiction in Architecture5 5nd edn, Museum o/ Modern Art, ew Yor!, *+<54
Jenturi, R4, Scott-1rown, D4 and lGenour, S4, 6earnin% from 6as Ve%as5 M;T Press, Cam)ridge, MA, *+<<4
Jirilio, P4, Vitesse et pohiti>ue5 2alilee, Paris, *+<<4
Jinilio, P4, <efense populaire et luttes )colo%i>ues5 2alilee, Paris, *+<E4
Jinilio, P4, 61:space criti>ue5 C#ristian 1ourgois, Paris, *+E=4
Jinilio, P4, 617oni8on n)%atuf5 2alilee, Paris, *+E=4
Jinilio, P4, 61'nertie polaire5 C#ristian 1ourgois, Paris, *++94
Jinilio, P4 and $otninger, S4, &ure War5 transl4 Mar! PoliGotti, Semiote(t@eA, ew Yor!, *+EE4
.allis, 14 @ed4A, Art After (odernism: 4ethinkin% representation5 Da-id Codine, 1oston, MA, *+E=4
.asson, R4, F$rom &riest to Promet#eus6 Culture and criticism in t#e &ost-modernist &eriod0, 3ournal of (odern 6iterature5 ,, ! @*+<=A, **EEH5954
.aug#, P4, (etafiction: ,he theory and practice of self-conscious fiction5 Met#uen, London,
*+E=4
.ellmer, A4, Pur <ialektik .on (oderne und &ostmoderne5 $ran!/urt, *+E>4
.ellmer, A4, FOn t#e dialectic o/ modernism and &ostmodernism0, &ra=is 'nternational5 =,
* @*+E>A, ,,<H?54
.#ite, A4 and Stall%)rass, P4, ,he &oetics and &olitics of ,rans%ression5 Mer#uen, London, *+E?4
$11
.#ite, H4, ,ropics of <iscourse: :ssays in cultural criticism5 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore, MD, *+<E4
.#ite, H4, FT#e -alue o/ narrati-it% in t#e re&resentation o/ realit%R, )ritical in>uiry5 <, *
@*+E9A, >H5<4
.#ite, H4, FT#e narratis0iGation o/ real es0ents0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 <, = @*+E*A, <+4,HE4
.#ite, H4, FHistorical &luralism0, )ritical 'n>uiry5 *5, , @*+E?A, =E9H+,4
.idger%, D4, FPostmodern medicine0, Kritish (edical 3ournal5 5+E @*+E+A, E+<4
.i!strom,34 H4, FMo-ing into t#e &ostmodern ss0orld0, 3ournal of $orestry5 J!5 * @*+E<A, ?>4
.ilde, A4, 7ori8ons of Assent: (odernism5 postmodernismn5 amid the ironic una%8nation5 3o#ns Ho&!ins 8ni-ersit% Press, 1altimore, MD, *+E*4
.ilson, E4, Adorned in <reams: $ashion and modernity5 Jirago, london, *+E>4
.ol/e, T4, ,he &ainted Word5 1antam 1oo!s, ew Yor!, *+<>4
.ol//, 34, FPostmodern t#eor% and /eminist art &ractice0, in R4 1o%ne and A4 Rattansi @edsA, &ostmodernism and -ociety5 Macmillan, London, *++9, &&4 *E<H59E4
.olin, R4, FModernism -ersus &ostmodernism0, ,elos5 ?5 @*+E=H>A, +H5+4
.ollen, P4, 4eadin%s and Writin%s5 Jerso, London, *+E54
.%sc#ogrod, $4, -aints and &ostmodernism5 8ni-ersit% o/ C#icago Press, C#icago, *++94
.%-er, 34, FTele-ision and &ostmodernism0, in $4 A&&ignanesi @edA, &ostmodernism5 $ree Association 1oo!s, London, *+E?, &&4 >5H=4
Benos, 4, -carcity and (odernity5 Routledge, London, *+E+4
Young, R4, White (ytholo%ies5 Routledge, London, *++94
YXdice, ).5 FMarginalit% and t#e et#ics o/ sur-i-al0, in A4 Ross @ed4A, 0ni.ersal Abandon@5 Edin)urg# 8ni-ersit% Press, Edin)urg#, *+E+, &&4 5*=H,?4
Siol!ows!i, T4, FToward a &ost-modern aest#eticsD0, (osaic5 5, = @*+?+A, **5H*+4
SiOe!, S4, 6ookin% Awry5 M;T Press, London, *++*4
SiOe!, S4, $or they know not what they do5 Jerso, London, *++*4
Su!in, S4, FT#e &ostmodern de)ate o-er ur)an /orm0, ,heory5 )ulture [ -ociety5 >, 5H, @*+EEA, =,*H?4
Sur)rugg, 4, FPostmodernit%, m)ta phone man >u)e5 and t#e m%t# LI? t#e trans-a-ant-garde0, -ub-tance5 =E @*+E?A, ?EH+94