Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 817

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 List o/ ;llustrations Pre/ace Postmodernism6 An introduction PART ONE: $oundin% &ropositions 'ntroduction Contents Blii * ,, #!

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 , Jr en !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 *! ! Jr en !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 -,r er 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

.il/ord, FClore 2aller%0, addition to *+E5H? @P#otogra&#s R4 1r%antA4 Mar!et0, aerial -iew o/ rede-elo&ment House0, detail o/ rear ele-ation, E5 @P#otogra&# C4 3enc!sA4 $arrell, FT#ematic House0, garden @P#otogra&# C4 3enc!sA4 Torrentius Reno-ation0, ground decoration )% Oli-ie De)rL @P#otogra&# o/ t#e Museum o/ Decorati-e

5*4*, 5 3ames Stirling and Mic#ael 5E= 5*4, Leon 'rier, FS&ital/ields t#e Tate 2aller%, London,

&roIect, London, *+E?4 5*4= Mic#ael 2ra-es, FPloce! 5E< 5*4> C#arles 3enc!s and Terr%

5E?

.arren, ew 3erse%, *+<EH

ele-ation, London, *+<EHE5 5E< 5*4? C#arles Janden#o-e, FHotel /loor, Liege, *+E*H5, courtes% t#e arc#itectA4 5E+ 5*4< C#arles Janden#o-e, F$aMade

@P#otogra&# courtes% t#e FSammis Hall0, central lig#t well, Cold @P#otogra&# courtes% t#e arc#itectA4 /rom /od1s 2wn 3unk yard. 3unkyard. 5+5 554* 5+? 5545 554, 5+< 554=

Arts0, reno-ation, 2#ent, *+E? arc#itectA4 5*4E Moore 2ro-er Har&er, S&ring Har)our, *+E9H* FT#e Long ;sland Duclding0 Duc!4 5+? Road scene /rom /od1s 2wn Decorated s#ed4 5+< 5+9

Preface

2i

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&ostmodern0, 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 Kuasi ietGsc#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 Le acies 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 nonconce&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#em4059 '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 reason045* 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 F ew 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 ontological45, 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# &#enomenalism405> 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 Fnonlinguistic04 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% untrammelled )%, 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 Kualities405? 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#em405< 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%, noncognisa)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-antgarde, /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-antgarde4R

;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-Wdire 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 5,

'ntroduction 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.7i 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 latese-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%04E9 $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<, +!. -54See 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#ant#ou0 statement )% Ric#ard Rort%, t#e most e(&licitl% F ew 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 O E $O8 D; 2 PROPOS;T;O S 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 &ostmodernism@ =*

What 's

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*10 I !? 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-antgardes 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 Jr en !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 &ostmodernity Jr en !a"er#as $8 ,he :ntry into

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 9PPOsition 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

$: &ostmodernity

%r en !a"er#as

,he :ntry into

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 timeconsciousness 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 F ietGsc#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 stages0455 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 r en !a"er#as
9

,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/-delimiting4 ;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 F o 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/ Jr en !a"er#as

&ostmodernity

,he :ntry into $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 worldmaster% 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)Iectcentered 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 Jiir en !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, O ac#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, $4, &ostmodernisn85 or ,he )ultural 6o%ic of 6ate A7Fp8talism5 Jerso, London:Du!e 8ni-ersit% Press, Dur#am, C, *++*, &&4 >,H<, >EH<* E9H+54 T/e Rise o? Aest/etic Po0,.is# ;t is in t#e realm o/ arc#itecture, #owe-er, t#at modi/ications in aest#etic &roduction are most dramaticall% -isi)le, and t#at t#eir t#eoretical &ro)lems #a-e )een most centrall% raised and articulatedN it was indeed /rom arc#itectural de)ates t#at m% ow/l conce&tion o/ &ostmodernism H as it will )e outlined in t#e /ollowing &ages H initiall% )egan to emerge4 More decisi-el% t#an in t#e ot#er arts or media, &ostmodernist &ositions in arc#itecture #a-e )een inse&ara)le /rom an im&laca)le critiKue o/ arc#itectural #ig# modernism and o/ t#e so-called ;nternational St%le @$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 semiautonomous 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 H into 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,

isn 8 =9

Fredric Ja#eson

&us tmode rn =1

)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 oncee(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%,

=: &ostmodernism

Fredric Ja#eson =$

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 H t#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 &ree(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 H in 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 @9 &ostmodernism Fredric Ja#eson V4 4 4*

$ 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 &ostoioh1ruiis ni 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,

@: &ostmodernisn8

Fredric Ja#eson @$

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/ H can )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 r en !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 Jr en !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-antgarde 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 Jr en !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: %,r en !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 Pro ra#s o? t/e Ne ation 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< Jr en !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@ %,r en I-ia"er#as rationalit%, wit# sadness and recommend a wit#drawal to a &osition anterior to modernit%4 eoAristotelianism, 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 F ietGsc#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/utureoriented0 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-esttime, 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

54See 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% F ac#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%ement51 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.o y 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..e ories 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 &ostca&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 socioeconomic 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 &ost2adamerian #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 F ature04 ;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 ,4Ric#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 <42eorg 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:: 1:8 &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 H let 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 F otes toward t#e de/inition o/ &ostculture04 1e/ore t#em, Roderic! Seiden)erg &u)lis#ed #is &ost7istoric (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-antgarde4 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 $orm @conIunctie, closedA Pur&ose Design Hierarc#% Master%: Logos Art O)Iect:$ini s#ed .or! Distance Creation^ TotaliGation S%nt#esis Presence Centering 2enre:1oundar% Semantics Paradigm H%&ota(is

Postmodernism FPata&#%sics: Dadaism Anti/orm @disIuncti-e, o&enA Pla% C#ance Anarc#% E(#austion:Silen ce Process^ Per/orman ce:Ha&&eni ng Partici&ation Decreation: Deconstruction Antit#esis A)sence Dis&ersal Te(t:;nterte(t R#etoric

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-antgarde, 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 Postmodern 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

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

IsJ

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 -isualart 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 F ew 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 1E 3AM; , 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%salread%-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, F eoE(&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 H rat#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%, F eoE(&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@@ the Visual Arts

Pa,. )ro1t/er

&ostmodernism in

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 F eo-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 F eoE(&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 eo2eo 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 90 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 constitutiP9O ;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 /5irst, 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 H il-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".io ra0/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: $rom morality to art5 O(/ord 8ni-ersit% Press, O(/ord, *+E+4 ,he :t1il <emon of W ina%es/-imulacra 1B$ 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#a es 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 *9 H*,, ,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 4obots ,he )ity of 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/ st0cam 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 @F ow 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 soundc#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

)omple=ity in (usic 219 Mic/ae. Ny#an

A%ainst 'ntellectual 5**

/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 )omple=ity in (usic 5*,

A%ainst 'ntellectual

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 F ew O)Iecti-it%0 /or F ew 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 arriZregarde4 ;/ 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-antgarde0s 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

5*E

21=

&ostmodern in t#e cam& o/ t#ose w#o reIect t#e re-olutionar% credentials o/ t#e #istorical a-antgarde4 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-antgarde 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-antgarde 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 *00I 1 *##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-antgarde 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 socalled ,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-antgarde 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 F anted 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-antgarde0s &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*!0s1* 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 well459 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

,radition

Andreas !,yssen 22=

,he -earch for

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 )e455

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-antgardes 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-antgarde museum retros&ecti-es4 or is it t#e in#erent contradiction o/ t#e Postmodernist a-antgarde 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-antgarde 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 Criticism45= ;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-antgarde 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 &oste(&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-antgardism 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-antgarde, 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 -,r er ;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 -,r er 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

I 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 it45 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 /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 -,r er 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 -,r er 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 art4E 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 $4 1assenge, 5 -ols V1erlin:.eimar, *+?>Y , -ol4 ;;, &4 =>5A4 V;n #is translation o/ t#e Aesthetics5 T4 M4 'no( renders t#is &assage as /ollows6 F1ut it is Kuite di//erent (s it# romance, t#e modern &o&ular e&ic0 @-ol4 ;;, &4 *9+5A, )ut t#is seems wrong4 Transl,mtXrQ note4Y ,4 On t#e &ro)lem o/ t#e /alse su)lation o/ art in t#e &ra(is o/ li/e, see 34 Ha)errnas, -trukturwandel der 2ffentlichkeit. 0ntersuchun%en Pn einer Late%orit1 der biir%61rliF h 1 u /esellschaft5 euwied:1erlin4 *+?E, O *E, &&4 *<? //4 =4 See P4 1urger, F$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 ?4 T4 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-antgardists 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 F ot O-er T#ere, Here0, two &aintings were called F ow0, 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 F ow 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-/arde2: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 $reudian HLacanian &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-antgarde 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/ Hans3#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-antgardes )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-antgarde 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<< 2<= &art $i.e: Architecture and 0rbanicity 'ntroduction

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 sociocultural 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)lecoding04 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

4e%ionalism

,oward a )ritical 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 &arado(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 dreamworlds 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% Ha Fworld04 O

8 )ritica. Re iona.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 worldculture 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: To0o ra0/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/ Finla%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