Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 64

Powell, Jim. "What Is Modernism?" "What Is Postmodernism?" Postmodernism for Beginners. York: Writers and Readers, 1998. 8-81.



Well,whot is modernism?


ie Lerm H lvloderniem a blanket, for an exploeion neweLylee of and trende in the arLe in the firet half of the zolh cenlury.lf lhe modern era had a cenlral imaqe-it wae LhaT, a kindof non-imaqe-a of Void-and if the era had a quoIation that, eummedit,all up,il was lriehVoet, m Willia SuIlerYeaLs's linee:

But whot things fell oport in the modern ero? What center could not hold?

Whatfellapart in Lhemodern were values the ltth era xhe of

century,the Aqe of Enligh;f,enment,, known bhe Aqe of Keaeon. aleo ae Trobably the mainvalueof lhe aqe, beeides reaoon, wae lhe idea of Vrogreoe.

ln f,hel9th cenlurybhinkere became oVlimisticIhat by ueinqNhe valueeof ocience, univereal reaaonand loqic, they couldqet rid of all Ihe myihs and holyideasf,hat keVf humanityfrom ?roqreoeinq, They felt this wouldevenLually humanilyfrom mieery, free religion, euperotif,ion, ircational all behavior, unfounded and belief. Humanilywouldthue ?roqreeeLo a elaf,e of freedom,happineeeand proqreee. Francishacon eaw ?roqreee akinqI,heform of a wiee, t elhicaland ecience-minded whowouldbe Nhe eliLe guardiane knowledge who, of and t h o u q hl i v i n q u f , e i d L h ec o m m u n i o e l,y,wouldneverthelese inffuence il. Marx aleo believed in and a ?roqreee, envieioned Ulopia,7ul Marx'eUloVian vieionwae of a ?erect,world brouqhtr aboul by a maLerialiet, ecience,

Otherbhinkere, however, were nol, Eo oVtimietic.Edmund 9urke wae diequetedwilh Nheexceooeo the French of Revolution. And lhe Marquie de 1ade, lhe qreaf,-qranddaddy 3/M, of exVlored the pervereitiee eexualfreeof dom-Vainting a dark Victrure hurnanliberof Theeociologiet al,ion. Max WeberVroVheeied lha| lhe future wouldbe an iron Vrieonof reaeon and bureaucracy,

Well, moybeYeots ond oll the

were right. lt look os if things skeptics did foll oport. Whot did Science, get Reason ond Progress us, ofter oll? ThezOthcenturyhos beennothing if nightmoreof not o dork, Kofkoesque rqtion-olly odministered deqth comps, WorldWqrs deoth squods,Auschwitz, I ond ll, Hiroshimo, Nogosoki, ecologiof col disqster-ond vorious systems And oll in the nome totolitorionism. ,,)), /,'), \s

vqluesof Science, of the Enlightenment Liberotion, Reoson, Freedom ond Progress !








7uI I haven'|, evenlold vou the biggeet, ekepticof abouf, a e e a l l - I h e Ge r m n ? h i l oo V h r for had no lolerance Enlighlvalues. Keason? Unienmenf, vereality? Mo raliry?7roqreee? Alltheee Enlight enmenf, pre' nolhinqtro him. leneee meanf,

He eawthe worldae the dance of the deolructively crealive god deef,ructive and creatively Willto Tower-and Dionyouo wae hie modelof howlo acL in Ihe chaotic eLormof life.Any man who acf,edin euch a way w o u l db e a S u p e r m a n .

FriedrichNietzsche.Nief,zeche Dionyeue-the danceof the

411 lv

And Nietzeche hit the head. nail right on t,.he

notrdrill holeein lhe walleof our housesand hallow lhese hollowe,

Afr,er many all,

ZOt h-century IuV ermenhave ?rovenlhaf, you haveto deotroy in order f,o create: Hitler, Vao, 1halin,etc. Nief,zeche aleo ?ro' Ihe "Oeabh God" as claimed of wellas trhedealh of Chrietian - moralilyand metaphyoico. With

t worohiVpinqhemearneolly with lhe worde"O rmyHoly Hole, oave mel),l" No.We livein a cull,ure lhat, esNeems over ?reeence icon overnon-existence, absence, voluVNuoue virqinovervacant,

vacuum, wholesover holesl And one waveof his VhiloeoVhical wand, ye|,,wherewe Vreviouely had a the central oymbols, insNilutions center-wheNher in Christrian reliand beliefeof Weslern cullure, qionor in f,he whichhad alreadyeuffereda IS NOTI{IN6 idealeof ecilremendousblowby lhe Aqe of enceand Keaeon,diea??eared-?OOF?roqreoo likea maqician's rabbiT, into the -euddenly dark folds of a cloak. we had nothinq, What remained wereonly dark waveoof Nothin7neee-a Void. Nature, however, abhorga vacuurr, and we Wegf,ernerg, unlike Ouddhie|,e Taoietre, nol and do


toleraie voids very well.We do

)ome modernjof'g, euch as Heminqway, creaf,edworkeof arr f,hatr ex?reeeed kind of Vaeeive a recoqnitrion this lack of a center. ln hie of

ehofr, eIory "A Clean, Well-lighted?lace," oneof hiecharacf,ere, a waitrer, reworksf,he Lord'e Trayer andthe Hail Mary-eubetritrutinq "nada"(or "nolhing"in gVanieh) atr oiqnificanf, Vlacee:
//t t'/t't

rc,c,trA I v t v 7'7A_9'7\ vvJ


lf modern thinkerecouldno lonqerbelieve a in Chrielian God, Chrislian moralif,y, scienlifc ?ro7reoo-if Ihere wao or no lonqera cenlerlo\Neetern culture-it was neceooary find a new Xo one for, aft,erall, we don'I likevoids. And il wae Nief,zsche-whohad t'he proclaimed deabhof Enliqhlenmenl valuee, God and Chrislian moraliby-Ihat, ehowed the way. Alf,houqh had deVrived he Weetern

he culture of a centrer, only did so by Vuttinq eomething eleein ils guVerman qood and evil who ie beyond place-nof, onlythe idea of a qood and evil.Thue,amonq allNhefraqment buNaleo ar| beyond alion and chaoe,amidel everythinq fallinqaVafi,,modernarAists beqantro lookfor oomeet ernalvaluetrhat wae beyond the chaos, all Theee arlieNeadoVtedIhe heroic, almosl )uVerhumanrole of rediscovering eeeence humanily,of findinqan eNernal lhe of value beyond lhe chaoe,of fillinqin NheVoot-NielzecheanVoid various all in wayo.ln a world withoul a cenf,er, aeslhelicsatb-became centrral, Afr for arL'o sakel Modern q Vaint,in wa s abo uNVaintinq- eelf abeorbed, eelf exVlorinq own VrimaryVoeeibiliite ?oeee6eed, |/ tiee: all pooeible inheractione bef,ween memory,idenlify. VerceVt.ion, q Oohemi avanf,- arde, exV an, erim enlinq wilh Iraditional qenreeand otyleemoderna(bisf,e, who brouqht modern arDto ite fullesl bloeeoming eomeIime be|,ween 1910


and the 193Oe,

ralliedaround poet

Ezra Tound'e ballle

cry "Make it new," eeeinqNhemgelvee a6 creators of the newralher than as of forme, ?reoervere old cultrural )uch aft becamea way t o reVreoenl Ihe eNernal Ihe mideVof chaos.Cubiem in drew ineViration qeometries from lhe eimVle of Af rican oc ulVhur d emaleri alize obje e, d cte, bre aki q lh em n down into trheirbaeicgeomelricforme,Cubistr afrieT,s Vainted, ag TicagooVut,il,, "nof,what,you oee,but what you knowis fhere."

youlh seeksensilive the inqtroeecape confineeof hie in CatholicuVbrinqing ie Dublin, baeedon Greek trheancient, mfih of the hero

aro6ewar machines ao ?owefiulae Ihey were effrcient ln ltaly, of Ihe war machine lhe )u?erman ltAussolini. Germany, ln )uVer-

and ated AuechwiLz AndNhere Hiroehima. wereolher Vrob' leme-aftietic oneo.

af,tremVtinq m a n Oaedelue Hitler's the LabyNoeecaVe rinIh. Thue,it, has a at rnyDh it s cenler. OneoymbolIhaI atlem?f,ed f,o fill in Ihe Voidlhal had been left by Ihe "deal,hof God" wao the oymbolof the Toel Ezra machine. Toundeaw wordeae machines. Voet The WilliamCarlos said Nhat Williams the wholeVoemie a machine madeuV of worde,Modernarchitecle f,houqhl ot housesae machinee for livinqin. ln facl, all of society wae becominqmoremachinelike:bureaucraNic, raf,ional, Nechnical, Fromthie kindof Nazi Nrainsran on f,ime, deliverinq theirhuman carqo lo deabh campe like Auschwitz and These buchenwald. cam?oNhemselves drew u?onmoderniet planninandarchiq NecturalVrincipleo. And lhe Nazl war machine had iIs own center-Nhe myth of Ihe SuVerRace-f,he euVeriority blueof eyed,blondmembers of the Aryanrace. 9o one Vroblem Modern arL and lit eraf,urebecame increaeingly difficulf No underetand. Moderniam Hiqhmodbecame e r n i e m H i q hm o d . in ernismpeaked

1922, wilh the with moderniem is of Vublication thal science and rea- JameeJoyce'o
eon didn't juel create Ulyeeeeand

machine4ike efficiency ?roqre6e-Nhey cre-

"The Wastelandl' T,9. ElioN'o ln bolh Ulyeeeeand Finneganb Wake, Joyce exVerimenled with a sNream- conscioueneee ofelyle, plunqin7 the reader within Ihe fluid,ehiftrinq free-flow hie of characNere' ?oychee. g E]iol' "Waeteland" exV erimenNed with a fraqmenied poetry full of literary,hieNorical and mytholoqical tidbire from around the world-depiclinq a soul and a eocietyin fraqmenNalion and deeV eeekinq air, reinleqraf,ion, a new cenf,er.1of,h Joyce and Eliof, rejected lhe etraiqhttorward, and ralional ffowof the et ory or lheme. Theyaleo rejecLed Nraditi onal characT,er elo Vm dev enl, f avoringinetead a fraqmenled otyle. Dul Ihis dislikeof conventional characlerdeveloVment and the celebration insf,ead, Vrv of vaf,e, eubjecNive ex?erience added trothe t endency moderniem'e of arf,iels,assembled emall in qrou?ein ?aris,Oerlin, Kome, Vienna, London, NewYork, Chicaqo, CoVenha7en, Munichor Moscow, o viewlhemselvee an t as exiled, alienahed cultural eliLe. ln "The Metamorphoeie" lhe wrif,erFranz Kafka eymbolized Nhiealienation the arl,jet wilh of Nheimaqeof a huqehuman-eized buqNraVVed an abeurdhuman in environmenl. Such afrieIs creaf,ed workseo challenqing weird and tha| Nheycouldonly be appreciated by a narrowaudience. This onlyfufi,heraddedtrolheir elitiet imaqe. Modernafr,, in fac|,, wao eo far-ouI thal it, dividedculture into "Hiqhbrow" and "Lowbrow." Il, excluded middleclass,who the could not,underelandiI, and qave riee No a kind of "Vrieolhood"of echolarsand crif,ice. Theirjob wa6 and ie f,o explain moderniem'e myof,eries, read James Joyce'o To "Waeteland" Ulyeeea,T.9. ElioN'e "Cantoo" ie an or Ezra Tound'o advenf,ure,You needa quide, you wereexplorinq ae Nhough the Amazon.

differ rhen how doesPostmodernism

from Modernism?

there ie lirrleaqreemenr Nhe eubjecl, on becaue Varf,ly

an aNIemVINo

"TooT,modernism"whaleveril is-is

of what ie qoingon now-and we can oeeIhe Vreeenl only in retrosVect,,

theorieL,lhabHassan,offere a Nable differenceo )ne Toetmodern of the beT,ween Nwomovemenf,g;

Form (,coniuncf,ivel cloged) <" " " " " " ">
{ . . . . a a . . . o o o o o }

Antiform (digjuncbivel o?en)

{ . . o o . . . . . . o o o o }


{ o o e . . . . . . o o o r o }


AfL Obieet/FinighedWork {oooo......o..o} TrocegglTertormance/

Tresence Cenlerin
{ o o o o a a a . . a o . . o }

Abeence Diepereal

{ o o . . . . . . . o o o o o }

TexIllnt efreKY
(T?L 267-0)


{ o o o o . . . . . . o o o o }

,' ,g:

Thue,where and Joyce reoLore deep new a

Yeaf,e, Eliot eouqhrf,o

cenT,er. new a

eenoeof Vur?oee, newl eenee deeign, a form of ' and deVth,a neweenee of grimordial oriqinin m$h,ToetmodernieLe for oflen eee no reaoon a lnelead Lheyf avor a decenLering-a ?lay cenLer, of chance, Lo anT,iform, eufiace.Accordinq and lasean, whereae f,heimaginaLions mod' of euchae Joyce,Ticaoeo ernieLe and Eliol were conslellatring aroundnewcentere,newcoherenl gf,ruclureg, 7ogT,mo dernieIg often create, comy o ? o 6 e o r ? a i n I e n t r i r e lb y c h a n c e - e p i l l i n q r , randomly deter' throwinqpainl on canva;eee, mining the qiLchand duraLion mueical of Io arf,noLeein a melody, eeeking de-define
f' .t


For lo create non-arf, anf,i-arf,. Haegan, or who compoeer John Cageie a Toelmodern advocaleecomp oeition by chance-by an L e i m V l y u r n i n g n L h em i c r o V h o n e e d o random,everyday oounds, recordinq

pretty chootic.lt's no wonderthqt we need lt oll sounds

"mop'mokers," intellectuols chort the depthless to new world q center. Who ore someof these"mop-mqkers"? without


7oetmodern Thi nkers


Lyof,ard bornin wae E Jean-Francois France 1924andtrauqht Alqeria, in in

Braziland California, beforebecoming of profeeeor philoeophy Ihe UniaN veroityof Taris in 1968. ln 1985 he became director of the Colleqe ernalnt Iional de Thilooophie. For some 15 yeare he wae associa|,ed with a leflieNqrou? called goaialism or Barbariem,which, amonqother trhinqe, criNicized 3 ovieI- elyl e communiem.AlNhuqh Lyotard o became djsillueioned socialiem with and

Marxiem early 1964,Vhe ao as

evente of the studenL revolt in ?arie,in May of 1968, confirmedhis unregf,.

Discouroe, figure
ln 1971 we find him b e g i n n i na q Ionq,VoeIMaxist, periodin

and drippingwilh deeire.Like muchmodernpainNinq, dreame are fragmenf,ed. lheir attempV ln to makeunconocioue matrerial vieual, dreamedierupt Lhe kindof linearawareneee NhaN lanquaqe requiree. visu fiqure- akinq The al, m

o o

of whichhe is qiven nabure the unconecioug,Ihou7h dioruVte N ot h i n k i n q at workwithin lanquaqe, about, languaqe, dieruptrs rational trhe



:\ =^-\\

orderof lanquaqe,Thie becauee ie the fiquralnaf,ure Nheunconof and VhiloooVhy,lanquaqe Nhearts. His book Diecouree, figure,ar7uee with Ihe conceVt, Vut,forAh by JacqueoLacanIhaI lhe unconeciousmind is likea language, lnstead, Lyohardeu4qeotstha| Ihe unconscious not so much is likea lan7uaqe it ie visualand ae fiqural,like fiqureo 6he one draws eciousie difficultr reVreeent Io in lanquage, ThefiquralreeieNe reVreeentration in T,he same oenoef,haN lhe Holocausl reeisto reVreeentrabion. At,AuschwiNz lhe Nazis would drownouf,the ocreamgof the vic' time in the death cam?oby playinq muoicloudly. t 7imilarly, o

atlemptr t o reVreeentAuechwif,z or Vainte.Languaqe, after all, ie ll flat, Lwodimensional. reVreeeeo in lanquaqe-t o reducethe deaf,hand et ench degradaf,ion, on desire.Dreamo, Nheolher hand,are vieual, fi7ural, alivewilh three-dimeneion dream fiqureo, al lo a conceVN-drowne outrthe ecreame,AccordinqLo Lyotard, itr

thal f,he is thereforeneceeaary alaine imm emori Holo ausf,rem c remainebeinqlhal which Ihat, iN, cannot be remembered-but aleo be Ihal whichcannot, forgotten, Thus,any art, af,lemVlingto reV' ehouldconreeenlthe Holocauet

feelinq trhaI there ie eomelhinq t alion. Of,her han re?reoent of offers Ihe examVle LyoNard on Vaeaccio'eTrinity,painf,ed Ihe in walleof 1anf,a Varia Novella, Florence, whichdieplayeboth elemedieval and Kenaieeance

t i n u et o h a u n l u e w i l h i t e i n a b r l i N ymenle, 3y alt.emVtinqlo preoenN differenl eras,Lhe T,he entable, trwoimVoooibly No reVreeenN unreVree lf, to oay f,he uneayable. should No conf,inue haunt ue with the 6eemeT,o eay Ihal f,here paintrinq whichcannol io alwayl an Otrher be truly reVreeented. Another examVleLyotrard Mont offers is Cezanne'e an 9 a int-Victo i rr- a eimulf, eou6aI,IemVI Io preoenL modeeof NwodifferenT, vieion: vieionwif,ha distinct, focal cenler and vieionwhich i e V e r i p h e r a l i,f f u s e i n d i e d , tincN.Aqain,f,woheteroqeneoueelemenf,g.

The Tostmodern Heterogeneous?Condition trl T ln 1974,the year Helero' n Yes.


The 7overnment,. repo(Deurveyothe sf,atrus scienceand of f,echnolo6,y, hae and oomethinq become

qeneoue rneano "rnadeup of dissimilar elementra," ToeLic melaVhor ta a c c o m ? l i e h eh e eame.WhenI eay "my loveig a roge" I am invoking hef,eroqea neou6difference. Aft,erall, a rose and my love may havevery liVllein common. Oecauee f,hese all worksof arfi bring our attention Eo f,he to Ohher, a radieal they are difference,

Toetmodern noveliel ThomaeTynchon'e Gravityb Rainbow, wonLhe Naf,ional SookAward,"sfreak' inq"became fad in a Ihe UniLed SIalee, lrAama Caeeof the

thal for lhe past few decadeeeciencehae increasN ((n

languaqe, linquie-i l il,

ingtyinveoNiqaLed N



Lo deaf,h

etoraqe,daf,a banks, of and Vrobleme tranelationfrom one T,o computer languaqe He anof,her. Vrof,'hese claimedNhat, chan7eo Nechnoloqical would havea major imVacX knowledqe. on fhus, in 1974 he

on a eandwich, and a )oviet down probef,ouched on Mare, Lyof,ard qainedinternaf,ional fame for The Poatmodern Condition: a report on knowledge, a n a c c o u n lc o m m i g -

ed sionedby lhe Council Vredict that, no will of Univereities knowledge eurvive of lhe Quebec Ihat cannol be

and etoraqeof informationwillno longer

iN int,ereot, Iurno ouf', is nof,so much in oci-

and o d e p e n d n i n d i v i d u a l e ,enlific knowledqe Ihe scientificmet'hod, bul on compuT,ere. lnformalion will be and eold. produced Nalione will fight for lhe way Ihey ueed to fight,for Lerri?er oe, but,in howsciand knawledge enNific melhod leryibimize lhemeelves-how and believable selvee f,rusNworIhy,And al

informaf,ion they makethem-

this Voint,Lyotard fory. lnformaf,ion makesa disf,inctrion willzip aroundf,he globeaL f,heepeedof and electriciNy, Veo' ple willtry No et eal it. The role of the sf,af,ewill grow weaklhe placeof er.Taking corporaNione Nional willdominaNe. 7ul havinq eaid tranelated into comallthie about, Vuter lanquaqe-inf,o Lhedirection quanlitiee of informa- of ecienf,ific will knowledqe, Eion. Learning no lon7erbe aseociaf,ed wihhhhe lraining of minde-wiNhleachFor f,hetranemieeion Lyolard adde lhat, scienhific knowledge noN ie Hie knowledqe. betweenecienlific talk and narcaT,ive t alk.Of couree he doeen'N uge f.,he He word"Nalk," u6eoocienlifrc "digcouroe" and

e eLalee,huqemulf,ina- na r raf,iv "diI caurga."

ere f,raininqeluden|,s. lhe onlykindof

El Norrotive? I n Yee.I willqiveyou eome examplee IhaI LyoLard doeenol uee, which buL helV exVlain hie f,heory. When membere the of
Winnebaqo tribe ei|,arounda fire and hear a chanl of how Ihe world was created by thought,or Nheboshon0o, a 1anf,uIribe, chanl howNheqod Dumbavomiled fofDh lhe Moon and ?lare, or when the early JaVaneoe hearda chanN about f,he formatrion of Heaven and EarAh from a : atr NheeameT,ime bheyleqitrimize lhe eocietyin whichIhey are lold. Theteller of trhemfih doee not, haveI,o argue or ?rove,like scia entiet, whenhe chanNe Ihe otory of Oumbavomitinqf,he Voon and the 1f,ars, Verely in Vefiorminq Lhe myth, in lhe vibrationsof 6he the chanT,, beat,, the rhyT,hm-lhe 6en6eof naf,ural time is dieeolved and Ihe awareneoo oVene o t mythic lime: No narcalive time. Accordinqto Lyotard, nureery rhymeoand eome repetitiveforme of contem?orarymusicaNIempI t o enNer Nhesame o?aceof mylhic f,ime. Thechanter of the mfih leqilimizesiNeimVlyby etatinq: ':.,


Trimordial S\ Eqq-they
are lisf,en-

inq to narcative, poVularst oto riee,mythe,legendo and t ales. And euch mylhe leqitimize ih ems elv e-m ake Nh eelv e e em e believable-juot, the t ellinq.And in

*'He"e fhe is
r^tylh o0 Bvtvv} )a, Vot tifirtg fhe l.{oon
avr| Sfatrg, atS l'Ve

claimed IhaI the chanl hae been chanled forever, thal gumba Himeelf wae Ihe firel one t o chanV r , h e h a n t .T h em f u h , l h ec h a n L e r , c lhe audience, form a kindof all socialbond-a socialqrouplhal leqitimizee ileelf f,hrouqh the chantring lhe of mfih.The myf,h requiree no authorizaf,ion or Ieqitimizatrion "v" other /lhan iloelf. The

atlwatyshecrA if

charrfe,A. lwill char'rf if fo yoh irr

r,try fr4vrr. LiSf er\."
He then chants the myth. When he is finiehed he eaya:

*'He"eenAs fhe

u'ryfh o* Butr,"rbat. definee The u^athwho hats what hae ttluilWr\ the righl \ cl"l*anfed if lo ro be eaid and \ yoh iS Pontgo." donein Nhecullure.
7 u f ,a c c o r d i n q t o The narrator has authority f,o chant f,hechanl becauoe hao he heardit chanted himeelf,Anyone l i e l e n i n g a i n et h e o a m ea u t h o r i q ly merelyby lietening, ie even lt


'( \ t

Lyotard,ecientificdiecouroeie a differenl kind of lanquaqe qameI,hannarral,iv diecouree-th an myth. e 5 cientific diecouree annol c legitimize iteelf.


^{ g



Ihe work of the Vhilooopher Ludwiq WiVLqenef,ein.hie early workWittrgenstidn ln looked f,hepertecf,,loqical for languaqe that could of,ale everylhinqwilh clarif,y and Vrecieion. of,heru6e of lanAny quaqe-euch ae tellinga joke,reciting lhe poetry,or chanf,inq mfih of Sumba-he wouldhave6eenae

meaninqleee. 7 u I l h e n h e c h a n g e d i e m i n d .H e h be6anLo eee LhaLLhereare many qame6thaN we languaqe differenL e-?r ayinq, ?lay, For inetanc jokee, qoeeiVinq, oinqinq, Iellinq makinq promiee, awearinq, a taking f,ellinq a vow,Wonouncinq coupleman and wife, a qamefrom thaV of mylh, ie kindof lanquaqe a lie.Science a differenf, ll cannot, legilimize ileelf or validat if,eelfby ile own ?roceduree. e qameof ecience f,hescientiel makeedenola' ln the lanquaqe rather than myT,hical ones. Livegf,af,emenl,g

El Denototivestotements? I ig A denotativesLaf,ement one ouch as "'Moon' n ie a f,ermtrhatr denof,es material body (oafellife) a ' whichrolaleo and orbita aroundlhe planel and at' EarIh wilh a uniformand knowneVeed f,o a defrniledislance,according knownNewlaw6." f,onian(or Eineteinian)

qeneralized cribical Do you meqn to soy thot NASA scientists,in order to legitimize the moon-shot, chont the myth of how Bumbq vomited the Moon? I No.Accordinq to n Lyolard,ecience has deVended upontwo The ot.hernarcaNives. firet ie polif,ical, the eecond, Vhil ooVhi al. o c Thefirst, narrative reliee ecience u?on in orderNo leqif,imize itself ie because lhe qreat thinkere of the

inNellct-in f act, f,he e veryideaof an intellectual-was a Vroductof lhe Enliqht enmenl,lnlellectualswere


"'VhiJoooVhers In France lhey werecalled ' philoeophee, where they enjoyed6reaf, celebrityand and Vreotiqe, do to thio day.

men , such ,onf


wilh the associat'ed l9rh century,trhe and Enliqhtenment the The Revolution. French l9th centurywas also calledthe Aqe of Rea' 6on,-in FranceLe Sibcledee Lumibre*

Volr,aire, Rougseau, buffon, Condillac and DideroV, appliedreason to everyarea of qion,moralitry, life: reli eociallife, politice, Theideaof a place in oocietyfor a kind of

Reject rellgiouo authorlt'yl Downwith old lhinge like metaphyoice,ignorance, ouperotit ion, int oleranaeand paroahialism! Let,t'lheratlional faculties of t,lhemind,

weddedto ecience, advance knowledgeto everexpandingviotasl Let reason unloakthe laws of nature and usher in an ofiimletic agel Let the praaliaal allow men and women to get, on with t,he ?ro?er busineeeof eeekinghapplneeel And happineee meano p olitlical freedo ml Let, lhe happinessof humanity on earth mean the libert'ythe liberation of humanity! All this meano ?rogreesl Let scienceand reaoon bring ?rogrese and treedoml Joinedto f,his French polilicalnarrative of freedom is a Germannarrative: Heqel'o of VhiloooVhy Ihe Unityof all Knowledqe. Heqel, For knowledqe played an essenlialVarLin the gradual evolution of Nhehuman

mindfrom iqnorance to f,olal being. both NheFrench Enliqht narraenmenf, live and the German knowledqe narcabive are what,Lyotardcalls grand narrativeo, biq gtories,glorieg of mythic proVorLionethal claimtro be able

to accountfor, exVlain and eubordinate all lesser, little, localnarratives.)ome other melanarralives are lhe philoooVhiee of Marxigm t,henarraor tive of Chrisliansalvation. Thusf,henarraf,iveof a successful Mare exVedition in which 3" x 3" nanoa roverlandeon the

disaoverlee eoience metanarcatives of or

-11O Celsius surfaceof lhe Vlanet qenerate to and tranemit backNo Earth diqital imaqee of the Mare-oca?e,ie a litlle narcalive Nhat io Vaft of the biq ot ory-Nhe metanarraiive-of f,hefreedom,trheliberalion of humanity(French), and the af,tainmentof a ?ure,self-conscious eViril-the Unityof all Knowledqe (German).


Soporodoxicolly, science octuolly depends uponthese two grond norrotives for legitimizotion.

That'e right,. buI lhe Vroblem-accordinq to no Lyotard-ie thal einceWorldWar ll, peoVle lonqer in AfLerall, believe Lhesetwo grand meNanarratrivee. scienceand reaeonIo Lhe conelruclion of qae aVplying Lhe and efficienlrailroadschedules, chambere Did Nazieexterminaled millione humanbeinqe. of freedomand liberaLion? exVerience theee VeoVle Anddid ocience fulfillAegel'e narcaNive increaeing ol has led ue NoNherealizabion No. knowledqe? For Vhyeice can f,ravelI,wodifferenf,palho Nhrouqh lhaf, elec|,rono 6?aceeimullaneouely-or ?aeefrom one orbil No A f,heeVacein beNween. Varadoxl anolher withoul croeoinq if And howcan we unfoldthe Unity of all Knowledqe our are Nhoughtproceeeee notrevenabletro comVrehend Ihinqe haVVen? howLheee in of Oecause disbelief NhemeNanarcascience ecience, lives trhat had leqilimized no lonqerplayeNherole of a herolhat, wouldlead us elowlyloward full freedom e and abeolut knowledqe.

reseorch no longerobout finding Truth-then is @ ,u* if scientific

whqt is it obout?

,r,hat, When ecience encount ?aradoxes, er6 suchas the elechron qoe6oVVooihe directione eimu\,aneouoly, it,abandone search iNe for ' decidable truths and eeeks legitrimize through Io itself
performativity. Scienceotopo aokinq,"Whatkind of research will unfold the lawe of nature? " and be7ino iaekinq,"What kind of reeearchwill work best?" And t o "work be6t" meano"What kind of research can qenerate more of the eame kind of reaearch?Can it perform? Can it produce more of the oame kind of research?"9o ecience ie no lonqerconcerned witrhtruth but,wiT,h ?erf or mativiNy-V erto r minq-V rod ucinq mo re of th e oame kind of research,becauee the more research you Vroduce,Ihemore Vrootyou Vroduce and the

moreyou are oeen beinq ao riqht,the moremoney and power getr. you
9o whenVeople lon7erbelieve lhe metranarcano in lives trhat,legitrimize ecience, scienceie then forced No leqilimizeiloelf-juef, as Ihe myth of Dumba vomitinqthe Moonand 7trars leqilimizeo itoelf by itself. bolh science and VeoVle chantinqthe bumba chant,can then oay,


Ao whatf we Ao,

becarhse fhatf's fhe

warywe A,oit"

Thenwhot'sthe difference between two, qfter qll? the

I The difference, LyoIard,ie for n LhaNwhere tradilional eocietiee are underthe eVell one domiof nanNnarraf,ive, ouch as the mfuh of Dumba,TosNmodern oociely ie a oocief,y whichno one narcain tive-biq or litlle-no one lanquaqeqamedominaf,ee, Toslln modernsocietrieo many micronarralives jammed are toqether.And bhis carnival narof raNivee reVlacee monolilhic the of ?regence one metanarratrive.

legitimized by Ihe q r a n dH i n d u Nheliberalion of the human eoulIhrouqh Enliqhlenment. ln conf,ragf,,

',,;r ', .-/

otory-tellerat,your localbookslore, or vieiting children the

atryour local echool, may tell a t raditional Eskimo or


But doesn'tthis meon the disoppeoronceof our universql systemof meoning? Doesn't this just creqteq void? Yes,Dut,thie void ie filledin by ewirlingqalaxieeof little etoriee-lit t le micronarcaf,iv s. The e void ie filled in by a kind of et oryIellingIhaf, doee noL seekt o |eqitimizeitself Nhrouqh erenc ref e qrandnarcative t o a eingle out For instance,a f,ellerof side if,self. talee in ancientr lndia,eitrtrinq underhie banyantree, wouldhave Iold Nhousands etrories-buI of wouldhavebeen all Ihese e|,oriee



Naf,ive Ameri' can TrickgT,er t a l e ,o r the eNory lettinq down her lonq, of RaVunzel younq qolden hair for a handeome or Vrince, the otory of bumba vomiNinq Moonand 9t arsf,he and f,ellNhem in one oiltinq. all

eloriee eeekeleqilimizaf,ion Noneof Nheee Each or Vrooflhrough oomeqrand narcalive.

I n !'t

isn't E But
[yotord's storyobout
disbelief in metonorrotives

just qnother metonorrotive? lsn't he being outhoritorion obout how there cqn be no quthorities?

Yee. Lyot has been ard attracked Nhoee on grounde. facL,hienotion ln trhatr VeoVle

haveetoVVedbelievinq qrand narcativesbein caueeeuch narrativee marqinalize minoriliee



definitionof ?oef,moderniem ae incre dulity tow ard metan a rrativ ee conlinueef,o havegreat inffuence.

Whoore some othermopmokersof the Postmodern world?

A eecond infruential Toslmodern Ihinker is Fredric As Jameeon. a Marxigf,,Jamegon ie int eresf,edin trhe relationehiV rhe of individual the to world of objecNe, whetherNhoee objectre be cans ot o o u ?o r m u l t i n a lional corVoratione. Like mostr Marxietrs, his refreclionson Ihie relationehip alwayelead backto hielorical reality. For instance, leminqway'e?roee olyle-hie bare, een' Vared-down f,enceg-can degcribe movemenf, through naf,ure and ouqqeoltension and resent ment belweenhie machocharactrere. The ekillof a bullfiqhter or t roul fisherman Hemin inqwayreffectrs the American admiratrionof trechnical skill-buf, rejecte Ihe way in which induetrialoociety alienaleoVeoVle. Thue skillis disin Vlayed leieure acbivilies,far from indueNry, uoually by exVatriateewho havealienat ed from themselves

American induslrial eociety, u?oetmodernlem, or ihe Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism" Lyotardcelebratee the multiVle, incomheteroqenVatrible, eoue, fraqmenled, conf,radict ahd ory nabure ambivalenf, of Tostmodern 6ociety while Jameson distrusls anddielikes ln hiefal it,. "?opl,moueeegay moderniem: or Loy'ic LheCultural CaViIal' of Latre ieml'Jameeon doesnot,seeNhe

S E C ON D : Late Capitaliem, whichbrokedown Toetmodern ae era Voetinduef,rial-ae an ebb in the Lide of caVitraliom, Ka|,her, sees iL he ae an intensificaNionand lat eel of Vhaoe a caVifalietrworldeyetem, wae Jameeon heavily infuenced by Erneel Vandel'e rhe 19lh and ZONh centuriesinto definitre hietorical periodo. F I R 9 T :f r o m 17OO 1&5O, r,o the periodof marketr caVitraliom. Durinq Lhis era induetrial caVihal aocumulatred moetly in n ahi,bAl rnarket s. r, :1, m o n o V o lc a V i a l y t i e m ,d u r i n ql h e a g e of imVerialiem. National marketre ex?anded inI,oworld markat"s.Thou1h f,haoe mar\els were baeedin Vafricular imVerial nationgNateg, they deu?onoutVended lyingareao for raw materiale and cheaplabor,

THIKD-i'.heToslmodern Vhaee wilh the unreeruVled Ihe worldecene on strictedgrowVh multinalional of corVoraform Thieis Ihe Vureot, lione-euch ae Coca-Cola. of caVilaliomyeI f,o emerqe-invading nature by forme of agriculluredeetroyinqthe ?re-capilaliet, the mindby advefiieinq. and invadinq unconecioue hiot,ory inepired Mandell'o Jamesonlo proclaim Ihree culNural Veriodo-in each of whicha unique af,es; cu\ur al logic domin

is Fiv51- fhe ^ge o0 Reatlisr,"r

hietoricalnovel. Theera of Ihe bourqeoie,

SeconrA is fhe ^ge o+ Hoaevhisu

culf,ure modernieN because Jamesonadmiresmoderniem wilh I'he world.TakeEdvard ite ex?reoaed dieeaNistact'ion The Munch'eVainT,in7 gcream. For Jameeonit' ie a deeVerate of Nhemee alienaf,ion, Nhe cry ex?reeeinq qreaf,modernieV eolilude,and eocialfraqof roolleeeneae,lack identrily, menf,alion. gimilarly,Van Peaoantthoee critrOoqh'oVaint'inq and mieery. icizesan enfire world of peaeanl poverLy "qreat euchae Le Corbueier'e Modernielbuildinqe, beaconsin Vilolio"etrandouf,ae grand ut'oVian city our' lo briqhl conf,rastr the deqraded a them. Theyex?reee Volirically roundinq visionof Ut'oVia. Vaeeionat'e

Thiv/' is fhe ^ge oP PosfuroAevnisu,t

and ?oelmoderncultural f orme reflecIlhe dielocatrion fraqmeninlo smallqrouVecommunities-eVlinlered t alion of lanquaqe

"a each o?eakinq curiousVrivale languaqe itreown,each profeeof

neeewith no linkt o any realily: the collaVee Nhedistinction of

eiondeveloVinq Vrivat code or between iIo e hiqhcullureand lowculdialect,and frnally each individual lure; maeeeeof oVechaf,,ore abancominqNo be a kindof linguistic ieland,oeVaraXed from everyone
el6e" (co 114).

donedf,o a qazeof imaqe addictrion:'N imaqee etripVedof reality, leavinq onlya 6urface,a gimulacrum, schlock, kitsch, O movies, adver?ul? fic|,ion, Nioing, motrele, KeadersDiqeef, cul-

Thue,accordinq Jameeon, tro ?oslmodern y -dwellers cit are alienahed,liviinan hallucinanq f,ion, exhilaraNinq a reality an blur, evaporatinq inlo mereimageo, oVect acles,elranqe newwarVein time and oVace,fixal,edon com-

moditieg, Vroducf,o, imaqee, f,ure:Nhemerelydecoon on likethe exVloeion Andy Warhol'e ralive, euV cial, qraof erfi poVa(0, on floweof imaqeeet olen t uitous eclecbicism of from conoumer cultrure and re?ro- 7oslm od ern architeclure ducedwilh induetrialreVebiIion, CamVbell'e )oup cane,Srillo boxee, botllee of Coca-Cola, collaqeeof idenf,ical imaqesof Hollywood eNareeuch as Marilyn Monroe,all eamenees, surtace-all all deVthleoaneee. ComVared Van to Gogh'e Peaaant thoes, whichex?re6eeea real worldof rural mieery, Warhol'e Diamond Duet thoee ex?ree6eo a depthleooc a n n i b a l i z i n gl N h ea r c h i al leclural eNylee the of Vaet+f,he Donavenlure lotel in Los Anqelee, mona umenl of Toef,modern archif,eclural eVace.

lile a[ac[doon! entens lle apostmodenn [ypers[ace!nides lfe eleuatonsescalatons and etennally up ilown 0iant gondolloating and lile

=:l :1-

:.-- 1 diny, dnonlnin0[euuildenin0 ina emptire$$. lleuuants s0 he map way extennal uuonldl * r- Ii amal tlrat can ftis tothe
i ,;ameeonf eelet'hat, hie dizzineet when aced wirh ?oetf ) our incaVacily ma? our relato rcrld of vael comVut nef,worke er >ns. Toetmodern theory, too, offere ,m of the centerleespoelmodern ,wellknown hie dieT,inclion for Onethinq trhal ToeLmodernily hae
' I

, worldthan a cure. I

4o. In the aqe of modernitywe sLill L^ti ^. ,^ ) t believed, ^ the eubject-the - eqo. in , - - r ^^ - . . t ^ ! ^ ^ L L t Afr,ieteeuch ae Heminqway ?ooeeeeed unifiede4o and idenlia f,y-even if it wae an alienatedone,
1:-1151 : i l : l*\J -n.'



And an Nhey ?oeoeaeinq identity, ?oeeeeseda otyle f,hat could be the oubject of Varody-you could make fun of iI by imit atrinqil. Everyyear,for instance,f,hereis a lilerary conteel in whichwritere imitrale tt Heminqway's otyle in a humorou; way,


Everyyear we met at Harryb bar. Wedrank there. And everyyear was a good year. And we sat and drank and imitated Hemingwayb

etyle. And we were good there.

',,4> ('oK

f.t t-


(,) N+



but Toetmodernityhao fraqmented lanquaqe and T,he oubject-bolh havebecome echizoid. Jameaonfeelethat, parodyand ealire are only in Voeoible an era af healthylinquieticnormaliNy. You meon like in Gulliver'sTrqvels,Jonothqn Swift wds oble to sotirize the qbnormql longuoge of scientific reoson becouseeveryone knew what normol speechwqs like?



I Dut,in ToeNmodern the ie aqe,rhere nolinquiot.ic normaliLy. lfl Yee,

Thuewe can only Vroduce paotiche-lke an impereonaNor ranwho domlyet,arls ouNimVersonaling boqarr, and Nhenswirchee, the in middleof hie line,f,oMarilynMonroe, and rhen No Doy Georqeor and f'hento KonaldKeagan.lnVaetiche Jamee Dean, Lhereio onlyIhie omorqaebord quotarione-like a dozendifferent,movieand M'W of videoeand televieion ehoweeVliced randomly toqether.

As a Varxisl who believee trhat, the world is run by hielorical forces,Jameson'e bigqeet7ripeaboul the ?oslmodernera is lhal it eignalo Lhe end of a qenuine awareneoe hiehory. of bu| Jameson feels that an awarenee;of history i6 Vrecieely what we now needto Viece Ioqether our ehaf,Nered ?oef,modernlanqua7e and eelvee, which,like HumVly

DumVLy, havebecome ' fragmented,Itrie whal we needto unifylhe paoI- Vreeenl-fulureof trheeenNence-t o unifyour ?oychee and our lives. What we needis whal Jameeon callean "aesthetia of cognitive mapping"No repreeent our imaqinary relationehip realiLy, Lo What we need,accordinq Jameeon, Marxism-a ecii6 to encef,haf,can f,,ell whaVie imaqinary and what ie real-Nhal can recover lrue historicalconecioueneol and normalcy.

7't JP

pl rut wouldn't Lyotordsoythqt Morxism is

q metonorrotive? I l) Yeo. And 60 you can oee Ihat nol all Tostmodernists aqree.ln fact,,Jameson ffow of imaqee eeemeovercome T,he by media-but, in the Toetmodern our nexL"ma?-maker," Jean gaudrillard, oeemsIo euqqeet,a kind of paooive f,o eurrender this ffow.


and the Deathof vhe Real

-I1ne gatssivevichu'r oS You arve wiveA. -fl.1,cou,rgullv, auA 42Y4vtiSirrg. Yoq awe hygrrofizeA by the lhbe, by fhe obsce\e
low oP iu,ratges. )orr ratise You{v eYelias. A Varu,rgirs53

is krreelirrg ovev yoq-volugh^ously-fhe muscles oP he"

rrecl., fhe ivory cqwe o he" shoql/ets, illramirre/ as i by cool moonlight She lic\cs he' scar"let ligs liLe
ath arhiu arl, gla:ilng fhem with at shee\ forrgrae glistertirrg 45 if laqs fhe whife o u,roisft^v,hev eugovgeA feefh. She leatrrs close",

o* eel her cool breo*h, fherr the shat"Phess ihcisors Pehetvarlirrg yotar treck. Yoq close yoqv eyes ih at latrrgtrotor,ts ecsfatsy atrrA watiFwatif wifh beatfirtg heatrt

t'heoristJean of tro This, accordinq t'heimaqery ToeNmodern gaudrillard, eimilar eociely'e world No relaNionehiptrhe to is newo?a?ero, Lelevieion, adve(bisinq, of maeemedia,
The maqazines. era of maoe communicat'ione ue invades our darkenedroome,embracinq with if,scool,lunarliqhl, ?enetrabinA We inNoour mooT, ?rivale receggeo, auccumbto the fatal af,Nracl.,ion, in ^urrenderinq ourselvee an ecelaoy of communication.

Thetrhoughtof Jean Daudrillard ie parl of a New Wave of French theory lhat brokeon American ehoresin the'7O9,'BOs '9Oe-replacinq and Nhetrenry over former waveo dominaledW poet-WorldWar ll fiqureesuch as )a(Dre. Just ae Nietzeche once the Vroelaimed Oeabhof God, baudrillard's Nhouqht declares I,he death of modernity, the death of the real, and the death of eex. Oaudrillard underminee deep foundationsof thouqhi in diecisuch as Vlinee Marxism, eemiotice, polit,ical ecience,economice, reliqiouo eNudies, anthropoloqy, liher alure, film and mediaetudies-to namejuol a few.

ln Vay of 1968-while miniskirt-cladAmerican womenwerecelebralinq No 7ra Day by burninq Nheir undies, whileAmerican , hi?Vieo weretriVVinq " TurVleHazel"' V ellow No Yellow," and "Mrg. Kobinoonn-Tarieian youlh, backedby Communiste and other Marxiste,took f,o Ihe etreets in a defianI and jubilant, mood, creat inq oomelhinq betrween carnivaland a a revoluNion. Tariei univ an erei f,ies wereeventually ohut down by the studenl eNrike, and factory workerefollowed suit. Troduction and educabion camelo a hall, Underthe threatr of a radical overthrow of the oyoNem, Gaulle de left,fhe countrry. Oy June, however, wag oummer if, vacabion lime, turning the wouldbe studenl revolul,ionaries inlo beachqoers. workers, The encour-

a7ed by de Gaulle, relurned Notrheir jobe-and thinqe wereeoon back No normal. Nevet'Vhelees, the mags conlagion of Nhemovement left deep imVreeeione on oomeof the participanT,o. of theee One

Semiotics? lEl Structurolism? T AN timeae fil Yee, the eame

the etrudenf, uVrieinq, revolu).

Iionary evenf,s werelaking placein Lhe eLudyof lan-


o o

de )aueeure arquedthat meaninq in lanquaqe nof,Vroduced ie by a colleclionof sounds

gauwae Jean drillard, for who,

manyyeareto come,would ei'ill

iI I

1ausgure, there is
) )

no natural correeVondence betrween "oound"horge, Nhe lhe

continue be tro inffuenced by Marxiet, thouqhl, but,would feel

increaeinqly that Marxisf,Vhiloeophy ie ineuffrcienl No exVlain in life lat e caVitaliet societiee. he 9o beqanlookinq also gf,ructuraligm to and eemiolicet o ouVVIemenL Marxiem,

concept"hor6e"and a horee.Katrher, Nheorized, he Ianguage a eyelem of differie


).\\\ . \ ',\ \

encee,eomebhing Ihe red, like yellowand qreen liqhtoin a traffic eignal.

',\\ \..

t1,o fu


4for"ab-.* 6tern f"t




The red,yellowand qreenliqhle qaintheir meaninqe onlyin relatrionA ehiVNo each oNher. eyelem of purple, blueand qold liqhtowouldworkjueL ae well. exf,ended aue3 9 emioNics intro ic eure' linguiet et rucNuraliem e f'he mfuh,faehion, obherrealme: reliqion, elc, TheIerm media,Volitrice, "Devil" inghance, no meaninq hag for by ileelf. lI onlylakes on meaninq ol ag an elemenlin a eyet'em an e qy Chrieli Nh olo / myth, where"devil"ig relaied lo other conceptssuch as
"Godr" "Anqel," eIc, ,




Earfy Writinge
)emiotice ie the slrucluraliet eNudy variousoyetemeof of like f,rafficoiqnalo, meaning, myT,he, lanquaqe, fashion,eNc.Daudrillard's workscombine eemioNic, eNrucburalisl, etrudy cullure a of with a neo-Marxistanalyoio.For insNance, his early works-The in )yetem of )bjects, The )ociety of Consumption and For a Critique of the ToliticalEconomyof the )ign-Saudrillard arque; that, juot, a6 a younqboy who qroweu? amonqwolvee

{\ . \ t\\\

becomeowolflike, qrowinq Veoplein ToetmoderneocieLy, up in a world of objects-become more objecllike. .i ThouqhTostrmodern oocietry basedon Nheconie oumpbion commodities-on buyinq of and uoinq thinqo-Ihis coneumVtion can nevermakeuo happy.



lEl But don't commoditiessotisfy our noturol needs? This ie not,what,Marx believed. Varx, an For objectr, beforeif, ie a commodity, hae a natural

usevalue. car is ueeful A because io VleaiN

eurableto drive-becauee it lete you feel Nhevoluptuoue curvalureof the earthand becauee traneVoflo you to variif, oue Vlacee.

ltrlarx However, aleo believed T,hat, eocietyan objec| in a caViLaliet a and I,akes becomee commodivy value. Thecar an an exchange for Dul can be exchan4ed money. eaw Ihie Marxiel Saudrillard of aeoeoementr an object ae too i l i m i t i n ya n d e u V V l e m e n t erd , wilh a semiotic analyeioof an analyeie Lhe o meaninq f the F

he examVle, ie buyingint o a wholesyef'emof needelhaL ie homoqeneouo, aT, once rat'ional, The eyef,emalic and hierarchical. of difpurchaoe f'he Mercedee terenliateo Lhe buyereocially who driveVolkswafrom VeoVle 6 e n e a n d L h i e? u r , -- '-r) chase helVe --1--i-; inLegrale ! hinr,oyef,em-


^$,nffiY'4 . . -

..' jtRf>*-

For, f,raf- j objecl. like



lM y

and arically

ficlishre,commoditieehave l, m e a n i n a en l h i e



''*i;..;.-y I,N, into a homo\ qeneoue level

donr moditiee

i'2ilh,' *ffi (

of bvet eociery

1ueIea|iefynaf'ur.,4/','lt','..'lso.ffitW.'N.-inwhichevery ','N\ a al needs-rathe. $ ,, ,ir*dffiffiffillii I \ __ onedriveo our crear,ee dtNi,: eocietry ffifllii;1i,, $i$'- Mercedee. r.\,, for Thue, \aulluman neede. ffi *NN$ffi.
beinqo, afLer all, '\\lrr \-*6-' ffi did drillard, lxrlarx the not,recoqnize eymbolic, objeclaopect'of f,'he eemiof.,ic Ihe factrthal whenyou buy a eomet,hinq, if, Mercedee eiqnifiee havinq a beeidee The Merc&des, gerveo a eiqn of ae use value, rank, lhe consumer';Vreoliqe, Thueconand eocialelandin7. ie eumVtion noLiuet conoum7coneum?f,ionbut'conoVicuoue lion, We dieplaywhaLwe buy, havea deeVdesireLo dietrinfrom oLher guiehthemeelvee throuqhoyotemo humanbeinqe For of oocialdifrerent'iat'ion. of members tribal cultures miqhtr oigbe differenceo Nheee naledby rhe uee of certain f,at,toog or f eat'herg. whena Oul in our eocief,y, buyoa Mercedes conourner tor inetead of a Volkowagen,

in cona?icuouoly, orderIo differee entiatreourselv oocially. Andyou can'trbuyjuol one a object in ordert o enNer eocial you needNo buy into an level, entire eyolem of objecte. Thue \:::---\-

buyby ceaoeleoely ing inlo f,he lalest' fads and trends. Theeecodeeare juot likethe

ruleeof --.-----:>.-

whenyou are Vickinq your out, you Mercedeo, also needtro ohop for a T,ennig club,an egt,af,e an in exclueive neiqhborhood, qood a e a Vrivat echoolfor your children, faehionable vacaT,ion epof,,etc, A go mucha need,lhen, not, ig needfor a Vafticular object,as it is a need Io disl"linguiehoneeelf eocially, needfor social differa enceand meaning, NeiLher coneumption is for Vrimarily pleaoure-for il requireo immense reaourcee and enerqy. VereonmuoT, A earn trhe moneyand leieure trimetro obtain the Mercedee and ehow it off, The effoft requiredt o do lhie of-f,en demandeNhedenialof ConeumVNion, lhen, ie Vleaeure. not natural-somelhinq we aut,omaticallyinheritfrom naturebutrcullural,TheconeumVtion, dioVlay and uee of objectetakee placeon Nhebaeieof cullural codesthaN demandwe conform 4rammar that, underlie a lanquaqemakinq communicalion The Voeeible. codeeorganize commoditriee hierintro archicaleyelemo of meaning baeedon Vriceand preotiqe, This Iiring feedinq frenzyof coneumplion, this searchfor beinq, meaninq and Vreetiqe trhrough coneumVtion, cauoeofatique and alienation the heroee conin of eumVbion. Alwayslatentrin cone u m V t i o n , I h e n , l u r k se V i r i to f a rebellion. Coneumers reacha Voint,of refusal-they qeI fed uVand end up burninq their brae or eruVtinqinlo more radical forme of eocialchange.

a IttNKt, fiREFoRr L rMl

'The Ordere of 9imulacra" rhe 197Oe Ourinq and 19BOebauem' drillardet oVVed hio Vhaoizinq Marxist and was leaninqo as heralded the themoef,advanced orief,of mediaand eociety in f,he ?oetrmodernera, sociTostrmodern elies, dominaled by ers comVut and f,ele' vision,havemoved

inNoa new realif,y, whichhe outlinee in "The Orders of jimulacra." Simulqcrq?

howNherelaNionehiV be|,ween trhe real and hae lhe simulacrum hioNhrouqh chanqed tory.Durin7Nhefeudal era,whenGuinevere; blewkisses from the ramVafie to of castrlee Lance' armor, lote in ehininq whenthe feudal lord wae Nheoymbolof eafthly auNhorily, and trheVirqinMary the illumined etained qlaeewindowe and

Isimulocro, plurol;
simulocrum, singulorl Yee.For Dauare drillardsimulacra coViee real obof jecto or eventg.ln "TheOrdereof Simulacral' he deecribee

the hearf,sof her oociely devof,eee, wae orqanizedby to a relaf,ionehiV a eyetrem fixed of eiqne, which werelimited in n u m b ea n d e u ? r divine. Voeedly For insLance, we can read in Lancelol's coal of arms h i e e o c i a lr a n ka n d elalus. The eocial

of trhe
blowinq Vrinceee kiseeefrom trhe ram?arLe, eiqie nifiedby her dreeeand by her adherence f,he to convenNione of love.And,of courT,ly c o u r 6 ea l l t h e g e , codeeof behavior and dreeeare divineIy eancLioned f,he by eymboleof lv1ary and o f J e e u ee h i n i n a eerenely the Iop aI of the hierarchy of eymbole-throuqh o l a i n e dg l a e o windowe. ln eucheocieLiee o n e i e a e e i q n e do t a fixed social e?ace,

likea caeLe,and mobilitybelween eocialclaeeee or caef,es imoooeible. is A serf, Iaboring in the fielda, could not become a knight.

w@ ":0

Then, Nhe in Veriodof early modernily,from f,o trhebeqinninq of Ihe lndueNrial RavoluNion,Ihe riqidorderof lhe feudalera brokedown due t o Lhe rise of the bourgeoieie. the medieval Durinq periodNheworld wae creaf,ed in f,he imaqeof God. but, in lhe era of early modernif,y, imaqeo, oigneand eymbols werenot divinebuI atificial in and Vroliferaled the fieldeof

ruled like a qod over hio pertect, world made Voeoible conby cref,e-which for him wae like a in a6 emerqed Ihis Veriod a medium of baroqueaft,, and qave riee eu?reme lo gaudrillard'e examVle of thie aqe-Nhe 7Iucco Anqel.lt

lhe Renaieeance mental substance,7lucco aleo

wasorllyone more oteV to Vlaolic.

simulacramoldedof etuc' DUN co, concrele(and latrerVlaelic), Ihouqh counf,erteif,, a Vroduced newworld of torms made of a e, d ealhl es s, frexibl ind es|'ruclible eeeeIhis mat erial.1audrillard as olaqe of the simulacrum f,he

otraqe of fashion,aft and Voli- beqinninq theaf,er, lhe simulacrumtriceae lhe newrieinqclaee ed af,NemVt No creahef'he world in iNeown image. a For baudrillard, "o eymbolof thie aqe Kenault, old an wae Camille who eculVNor, livedin cook,Nurned lhe and discovered the Ardenneo f ducing pertecf,subsNanceor repro lhe world in hie own imaqe-Kein' forced Concrete.From thie he chaire,drawero, fashioned an machineo, ent'ire oewinq violine, est orch ra, includinq Accorda oheeV, hoq,Nrees. Renault' ing to Daudrillard, NheFireLOrder of jimulacra,


TheSecondOrderof Simulacra a??earewiLhf,headvenl of ulacra now becomeinfinitely re?rol d u c i b l eh r o u q hi n d u e l r i a m a e z l produclion. Whereao Camille Kenaull molded arlificialworldby hie hand,in the induef,rial mecnera anizedmeaneof maeeaoeembly and producf,ion enable Kenault a aulomobile facf,oryto Nurnouf, maeoeeof exacf,replicae care. of WhengholograVhy cinema and arriveon trheocene, evenarl ouccumbet o the force of mechanical reprod ucLion, Kep ducti on ie ro governed markel forcee,which by

nowbecome lhe dominanf, Vrin' Lhe ciVle-reVlacinq worldof nat7uL,accordinq Saudrillard, to we are now in lhe Third)rder of )imulacra-the era of ToeImodernity-lhe era of models.No l o n q e r s t r h es i m u l a c r u m c o u n i a LertdL likeCamille KanaulL'o hog,or an i$finiteeeriee, concreLe

I h e l n d u e l r i aR a v o l u l i o n ,h ee i m - ural objecle. l T

Iike aulomobilee rollirlq the off line-bul aeoembly i

IHt |JLfl[HlJl 5|I,l H[[ill't t5



tT"'$rLF fiifft4{Ti

TheVreoidinq in ?ower trhis m e n f .a c o m m o d i era is Nhe modelor the code. t y , a V o l l , a t , e l e v i "Diqilalityie iVemef,aVhyei- s i o n ?roqram, a
c a l V r i n c i p l e . . . a n d n e w o s s u eo r a ? o i DNA ie its l i t i c a l c a n d i d a l e ,

('tu 63-04). Juet' as lan-


re6?on6e ie


El You meon like: " A r e y o u w o t c hi n g erned by Ihe doytime TV or not? "code" of qrammar Areyou buyingPepsi or and our bioloqical Coke? you for con' Are ?roce?oeo are conX didqte or Y? Are you trolled by the DNA code, weqring ColvinKlein our cu\ural life ie baeed or Jordoche?' on a variety of codee; T we have oex videos, n Exactly. And such yoqa videos, how't o LesIs nof, only regtrricL
quaqe ie qovmanualg, cookbookg, our reg?oneeoto "yeo" videog,?arexercige manuale, entrinq t a n d n e w e ? a ? e r sr o provideNhesecodes. Theeecodes not,

algodetermine or"no" buN o u r o p l i o n e ,l i m i l i n qt h e and lhin7e we may choose from, Thus our liveeare cont rolled by a oyotem of

q, adv efi,isin t elevieion very eco?e of the issuee

binary requla|ion-where o n l y V r o v i d em od ' oVf els buf,also conf,in- trhe queof,ionlanewer ion uallylest' ue. Every o f t h e I e s t ' h a s b e e n r e -

time we reepond duced No an eilherlor binary "yeo" or "no" t'o code: a fashion,an adverlise-

of This oyoT'em binarychoicesacf'g ao a "deherradical chanqe' rence modell'whicheu??reoses pl w.tl, I con see how thqt would hoppen. After qll, if we feel we hove o choicebetween Pepsiond Chon' Coke,betweenthe Soopsqnd the Discovery nel, between o Republicon ond q Democrot, ond Copitolism-oll ruled by betweenSociolism whqt more o binory, either/ot4l1-logic-then do we need? ; For baudrillard t'he Nwinf,owereof Ihe H t'his eymbolize NewYork WorldTradeCent,er the olher ekyecra?ere, While binaryeyeNem. and comearlier, oinqular are buill decades for af,tent'ion,Nhe t'wo pele aqqreaoively t owerestrandlor lhe "clo6ureof Ihe oygof Lem in a verhiqo duVlicalion"lotutb6-T). Thue, everylhing becomes reduced to cybernetice-t o a binarycode thaL geeme f,o reVreeenN differencee but, which, in realiNy,only perpetuateo binary eyolem, Ihie oelf-requlalinq, which only minimizes differenceoae iN Noqqlesback and fofth belween "yeo"or "nol' TeVei Coke, KeVubor licanor Democral.



Tomeit seems thefifm like park. Jurassic

oeemoNo leaVNowardhim.He slams on the brakes. ekide. He CrashlTheNwovehiclee up in a go burst of flame. A eecond laNer the craeh evaporalee. Joe Tlayer'e


Becouse Jurassic Park is obout people either possively occepting refusing or to buy into beingpossiveobservers o of spectocufor, monstrous worldof simulocro, copies, of generoted infinitumby od meons codes. of


Thal'e brilliantlbutr you muet, aleo realize NhaI your veryexample,lhe film Juraeeic Fark,ie it self a monetrouosimulacra qeneraNed infinif,um a ad via code.buI accordinq 7auto drillard, inculburat ed VeoVle int o Toslmoderneociety are 60 surrounded simulacra by Nheyno lonqerhavea choice, Consider the caoe of Joe Tlayer, 17-year-old an behind the wheelof a car, He is on a narrowmounLain road. He is anothercar on a curve. Vaeeing He is doinq22O, too f ast to evadeNheoncominq truck thal



He unecathed, car rea??eare Foore it,,racinglo Vaeo anothercar juetrahead of him,Joe Tlayeris ?layinq a videoqame.Whenhe

he runeouI of qua(bers qoeo ]

lof',into hio gx out,into Ihe Varkinq realcar, buI, ae he pulleout'inf,o\ Lraffic, iI doesn'L, eeemreal. Nor do Nhecare on lhe road, He feels IhaI if he ran into them he would juel ea| them likeMe. Tacman eaNsdobs.Joe ?layer is eurfinq the simulacrum. ei accordOriqinally rnulac?urn, ie inq tro ?laNo, Nhefalse copU that overshadowsour expertence of bhe essential and ldeal Forme. a A cockeropaniel, Germanohepfor herd,or a collie, ineNance, wouldbe,in ?latro'e VhiloeoVhy, imVure coVieo a univereal of and ldealEeeence Doqgineea, of view,Toel7ut in Saudrillard'a Nhe modernity hae ovefr,,hrown very concepl of true co?y. And in Ihis hao hapVened ef,aqee. f,heexVerience a lmagine of Chrietiannun in medieval EuroVe. the worehipo icon of the an Madonna.The icon reffecle a The feminine realiNy. icon is divine it a qood,Lrue copy because is so closetrothe original lhat, in her meditationeNhenun awakene l,o NheeViritual?reoence behind the form, the couldbe calledan idolater-a worohiVer an idol. of

1uT' trheiconoclasN seeethinqo differenNly. doeo not,feel NhaN )he imaqeerevealdivinily,but mask and perve(D Nhedivine. Therefore, euch imageoare evil,bad coVies, and ehouldbe deslroyed. A f'hird ?ero?ect.ive that of the ekeVIic.He feels Nhat the whole is t'hinqie a farce.The icon of Ihe Madonnaonly hidestrhefactrlhat t.hereie no divinebeing-hidee bhe abeence a divinebeinq. of Finally, t'hereie a foufth pereVective, NheToeNmodern icone, ln era, imaqee, copiee-simulabione-bear no reaemblance any realiry,ln f,o factr, the eimulation, the simulacrum, the oopy, beoomee the real! You meon like thereore o million copiesnot of the Modonno-but of Modonno-which becomemore reol thon Mqdonno the person?

Holy Writ which they, like, wrote down, were only the outer expressions of a, like, deep fntcrcou?le they were having with the mystical Word that illumined their, like, players. But of course, all these, like, prayers wete, fike domfnatcd, by a single image-that of the Holy, like, Virgin, the, like, Madonna. Today, of course, it is not like, the Madonna who dominates, but, like, Madonna.like.flc! Today it is like, my image that undulates forevetmore, leploducing, like, infinitely, like, there are millions of me and like, and mil. lions of my like belly buttons, like, bouncing back and forth before everyone's vision as if trying to like, decide between am I like a like Virgin or like a like Whore, in a like, erotic stream of images that MTV viewers, like, edit with like, Beavis and Butthead binary brains: they like think that my image, the image ol my like, belly button, is either like, "cool" or like "sucks." It is the image of my belly button, not my belly button, which has become the reaa.,



q 5uc,KS ,


t ' . ' @ ] s 4 f f i



a I

4 F - . * t q r d . *


T his emVhaeizee n Daudrillard
0 0 1nl I

nol wilh hio bellybuIIon bul wit'hI h e

tale in whicht'he cart'o7raphero frorqeo draw u? a ma? eo of an emVire det ailedbhat it, ende uV coverinq f,heNerritory.ln coverinqu? f'he beril ri|,ory, is t akenfor f,he real. For baueocie|y ie drillard one of lhe characteriet'iceof Tost'modern Nhat we are all similarlyentrancedby ourfingthe eimulacra. and Top ArL,'N, cyberbliNz, of ln lhe universe Hollywood, and of eVecLacle t'he mediaecaVe-siqne the dazzlinq lo imaqeono lonqerbear any corceeVondence t'he "real" world-bul creale Iheir own

lhat hVperrealiNy-an orderof represenrafion is and haoroplaced'realiLy' is noI lhe unreal,buN


more than real, more real than real,

For Daudrillard, ente(bainment'

suchas Varko


M n M a g i c o u ta i n ,M a r i Disn and World, eoVecially

ite land,wilh iNeTirat',ee, Fron f,ier,its Fulure World,its Tom gawyer'eleland,are the pertect exa

hyVerrea of Vlee rhe hyVerceal.Theee ae worlde ?reeented imaqinary only are

Ihat, the lAOf, of Loe Anq lead ue to believe are (a21. gut lhey are nol. Theytoo and America a hyVerred-p ure eimul crum.

Los Angeles is enoircled by theoe "imaginary stations" which feed reality, reality energy,to a town

io whoee myot,ery precisely / that it, is nothingmorethan a networkof endleso, unrealcirculation,-a town of fabulous?ro?ortiono, As but,withoute?aceor dimensione, much and nuclear as eleatrical ?owergtationg,ao muaha film etudlos,this town, whichis nothing morethan an immenae ocript, and a ?er?etual molion machine, needsthie old imaginary makeup oignalsand faked phantasmsfor its of childhood sympalhet'icnervouooyetem (?lM 26).
What Saudrillard callelhe Oeath of the Real arouaes noelalgic aNtempteNo reaurrect the real, SaudrillardeeesWahergale ao one such attemVt, For paradinqNheecandalouo illeqalities of home.Here, accordinq the Io qovernffient'o ethnologigt f,he o, tribe could liveuncorcup\ed civby ilizaf,ion, audrill 3 ard ar6u how ee, ever, that in removing Taeaday the f rom mod ern civilizaNi et hnol qy on, o


n NheNixo adminiehraf,ian imVlieo, eimulT,aneouely ignoreothe real f aloely,f,hat NhesaaffronNef,o Taeaday-who wanf,No remain demacracyre?reeenV deviation a from lhe norm-and lhal t:he eyeLemof governmenlin general reeVecls law and morality. The Death of the Real also ineVireea VroliferaT,ion mytho of of origin.Thus,in 1971, the qovernmenf, the ThiliVVines of re-siluat ed a emall tribe of Taeaday junqle lndians their ori7inal l.,o living amonq'Ws and care-and creaf,ea mere model,a simulacrumof whal an "ori4inal" pre-civilizedt ribe " ehould" looklikebefore ethnologyl

F Ft

In other words, this representotion of whqt q tribe should look like wos ceqted only by ethnology?

No @ rru. AndrhisaT,NemVN
regurrect, real,the oriqinal, the has also t akenVlace lhe at caveoof Lascauxin soulhern France, wae here,durinqthe lt, clooinq millennia the laetr of GlacialAqe,lhatrteeminqherde qrazinq of maqnificenl animals Vaeeedin wavesacroee trhe qlaciallandeca?e, vastrVoetfallin7?reyto Nhe occaeionally huntinqtrribee IhaI deVended u?onIhe herdefor Nheir eubeielence.And iI wae here,in thaT, Ihe subtrercanean caveo, ma7art,iste Vainf,ed primitive nificenlformg,bison,marnmof,hg, rhinoceroeeo. Yet f,oday 5OO mef,erefrom f,he oriqinalcave6-an exacl reVlicaof the caveehae been created in order to Vreoerve lhe lt, oriqinal. hae become more real than the real cave. And in the oameway,modernscience recently hao gearedup Lo eave trhemumrryof Rameeell. Thus,with the Death of f,he Keal,the hypercealtrakeeover* The Dieneyland, Taoaday, Wafer' qaf,e, the Lascauxgimulacrummore real f,hanthe real ibeelf. And wilh hy?erreality all Nhe 6iv ally VoNentri Volitical, exVlo e, Ihat had Volaranlaqonisme inhabiled and animaledLhe int RealcollaVee o one anot'her-implod* eci eoV ally in f,he realml Volitical

E con yougiveme on exomple?

E ' somewhere-Vilnius, Poris, AdisAbobo. BOng!! smoke oboveon ort blossoming
' museum,o grovernment building, or perhopson oir terminol. Ripplingwoves of the explosionsuffocoting deoth screqms. Splotsof humon flesh,flying in concertwith frogmentsof recliningnudesond peocefulttolion londscopes, or governmentdocuments, perhopsoirline tickets-cohor vulsingsposmodicolly omid floweringsof brick or morble dust ond spent plostique,bits of eyeballs,somewhot bloodshot,chosingshredsof newspoperor otom-

suppose bombgoes o off

izeddroplets espresso, frogments on of of Elvis oll whirligiging qbsurd, CD, in

blind circles,perverse orbits, surging kqleidoscopi-

E whodidit?

I# Saudrillard aeke.LeftieI ex1remisld H Thatlejuetthe queetion

lo Nhe ekinheade? Cenlriste seekinq diecredit, exf,remee? KiqhI-winq 3 Lo aVVealinq the publicneedfor eecurily?The answer(e), Corrupt Volice eaye Daudrillard,have nothing t'o do wiih the facts. All Ihe media and ree?onoes are and inlerVreNalione alreadypreVroqrammed all in naueeoue circleo, orbit'ing whirliqiqing, absurd,?erverge, orbit,, f codeeor modele. aroundtrhemereeVacV-accordin7 No eelabliehed

"9imulation ie charact'erized a W of the model,of all mod' ?receooion ele around the meregt fact'-t'he models comefirst, and t'heir orbital (like the bomb) circulation the genuinemagnetia field of evente. aonetit'utes Facte no longer have anytrajectory of t'heir own,they ariee at the intereectionof the models;a einglefact' may by evenbe engendered all the modelsat onae.Thie anticipation, this ?receesion,thie short-circuit (no more diverno genceof meaning, more dlalectical polarity,no more negative electricity or implosion of polee) ie what each time allowsfor all lhe poooibleinterpretatione, even the most contradictory-all are true, in the oenee
that their truth is exchangeable,in the image of modele from whiah t"hey proaeed, ln a

generalizedcycle"(alu 32),

Thus, f ormer antaqonisyrlo, Volarif,ies, intrermincurveback u?ontheir oVVoeif,ee, q l i n q l i k et r h ec u r v i n q V i r a l o f a M o b i u s o e cuf,in half aqain et rip cut,in half and trhen g o a a n da q a i n n da q a i n - e p i n n i no u f , V i r a l i n g galaxiee f re?reeent,alion; f evenf,e, o o real and Voeitive neqalive, and eimulacrum, t inwarde o a Voint, abeolute of imVloding
abeorVtion-where trhe difference belween r e a l a n d e i m u l a t i o n i s a ? ?e a r s - i m V l o d e e d inf,onothinq. trhereis no realiry behind ln the hyVerceal Ihis qeneralized, neulralizedand neutered frowof codeo,aimulatione ln and eimulacra, hyVerceallty the model, the code come6 fireV. AuI it is invisible-one eeeo only its e i m u l a l i o n s - i d e n f ,ac e h o V V i n m a l l ef i l l e d il q with idenT,ical televisionimaqeo,medicinee, liVotrick,brae, condoffie,foods, furniture, imaqeeof Madonna'e bellybutlon,


Likethe Deaviaand 'tT AuIIhead epieodein which :'i'*1 the two, watchinq TV, watch '.,'r Lhe cope breakin trhedoor and bust them-live!-but lr,hey Loo'"", are qluedNolhe tube No realize Ihat, iI io Ihey,lhemselvee, that are being the whole trhinqie takinq Vlacelive-IhaV the cope and Nhecamera havebueNed inhoIheir livinq room. Life has become TV and W, life. W watchea us, and we watch TV watching over us, It watrchee over us like whirliqiqs DNA,orbitingaroundu6,yovof erningthe mutaNione Nhereal into trhe of hyperreal. and life,realand hyperceal, ry conT,r cL, c oll Vs e, T,eleco e, imVl d e into a a e o ? eimulabion. ^ Volar . dichot'omiee dieeolve. 7eneralized A deterrenceis qeneraled.A1omic war willneverhaVVen. hyVerceal The mediaeVectracle the nuclear of arm6 raceand the e?acerace imploded ant agonieme the lhe of In hyVerreality antraqonisme and euper?owero toward a ?eacefulco-exislence. And in orbit',loaling freelyabove allanlagoniomo,Iheul1imaLe end vroduct of Nheevace race ie trhecool,lunar,hyver-eimulation: t h e L u n a rm o d u l e , bueted-that

ln The Shadowof The Oilent Majorities


ghadowof the gilent Majoritiee(ogv In H ln anorherbook, the 1970)'Daudrillard conhends thaL whaN had been oocietyhae imVloded inlo a hyVerconformieT' obeeeeed much body eo wilh epectacle Nhatil

hqs s| Butwhot othereffects this hqd on society?

wouldrather walch'N Lhan NakeVolilicalaclion. lt becomee electrifiedonly by compuler nelworkeand electronic media-by whichif, ie eo polled, teeted, and hyVedby modelelhal itr hae become ine(Yand bored,Dut,atr trheeamelime it, io hyVer, resigtanf,,demanding ?aogive, g, evenmoremoonghot rock eVecf,aculare, mago entrerXainmenf,e-yet euoVicioue eceVlical, and if, aValhetic becauee realizee IhaN any atrIemVItro chanqeNheeyetrem eimVlybe will co-oVtedby lhe oyetem for if,eown ende, All thie hae oiqnaled dealh of the social, trhe

On 5eduction
ln his nexl book,On 5eduction, Daudrillard Nalkeaboul love. love, the medieval in Couraly courte of eouthernFrancein Nhe 11Nh cenNury, wa6 an involved and elaborat riNual e requiring the exchanqe love?oemo, blushee of behind fforalfane, eyeeeuddenly downcael aft,ercaolinq a oly eidelonq qlance, kisses blownfrom lhe ramVar2eof caef,lee, implic alione,half unveilingo, double enf,en e, Nitillabione, whi pere, o dre jealoueies, adroiNevaeione, feiqnedrefusale, feint e, - eurren erin .. f ainlinq, half d 0o.

juch moveo Nhe dielincl et rucin qame of court,lylove werearielocraNic, ic-deliqhf,ingin Nhe Lurewhichie diecriminaf,.inq, caef,ralion, Vhallue, lhe nameof Ihe Thereion'I any other. lf, gervegno to ?ur?o6e dream of somenon-

afbificial and oymbol- cenT,ered the on ?lay of r,heqame it eelf Thegame relied faf,her,repreooion. , u?oninfinitedeferral-in Nheputlinq off of acf,ualsex-in

Ihe Vrolonqing art, and arAifice eeduc- Vhallic of eexuality tion. Andfor 1authat, is neither drillard,eeducbion ie feminine. )ex, on Nheolher hand,baudrillardrebarcednor

markedeED16). )ince seduclion ie composed the of

,tt/i r::;{

gardeae a maeculine a(Difice eiqneand of mode-alwaye cengeeburee, ie a form il Nered the Vhalluo, of mast ery overT,he on na0ural, non-a rlifi cial. oymbolic universe. Freudwao riqhb: f,hereio onlyone einqle eexuality, one einqle libidomaeculine. Sexuali|yio Ihis )exualiNy, the on of,herhand,io not culturalbul naturala form of maetrery overIhe real univeree.Feminine eeductionrelies on aflificemakeup,aehion, f the dieplay of

a ehoulder or breaeN beneathblack lace,And it ie onlylhrouqh euchseduclion that the maeculine can be eubvefredl Thieie hoI seduclion. butrthere ie aleo,for Daudrillard, a cool eeduclion-the eeduclion eimuof

lacra-of filme, radio, lhe idols of Nhesilver or Technicolor ecreen-a selfin seducf,ion which we geduceoureelveg our' by immeroing eelvesin a Vlayof simulalions, eiqno, that eoca?e imaqeo male eexualit'y. ln hie nexl,book n ard cont'i uee b a udrill on his medilaT,ione culture, Toetmodern by taking a road f,riVIo f,he mosf' of Toshmodern Tost'modernculNuresAmerica. America ln the early 19rh cenlury NheFrench count Alexiede Iook a IriV Tocqueville lo the NewWorld, Americarich in but,?oor democracy, in civilization. l n t r h e1 9 7 O e n d a 19bOs Oaudrillard

ard' a ccounf'.b a udrill s also contravelogue forms trothe more recenl Frenchfixations on such Ameri' cana as NhedeeerA', the AmericanWlld Wesf,,Le Jazz-myevariousaeNifyinq Vecte of Americaas e ally eeeenf,i VrimiNiv and oavaqe. road Oaudrillard's IriV, oVeeding VaoI vietas of endlees road eiqne,neon liqhto, empty deserx mof,ele, landgcaVeo, reveale Americaof an van' surtace qlit'Ner, iohinqinlo emVf,'ineee. ln factr,Lhe Iille of an imVorLanI chapter is "Vaniehing ?oint,," referringtothe Death of Meaning,

the Death of Reality, maf,er- followedin de TocquewhichVrovided t,lheDeath of the e ial for one of hie besl- ville' f oolst e?6,?ro' 1ocial, the Death of knownworks:Democ' vidinq,in America,a the ?olitical, and the Tostrmodern simularacy in Amenca, He tion of de Tocqueville'e Oealh of Sexuality in wrole Ihat he found

trheTostmodern univerge- thege"realitieg" recede into a vanishin7 point in Daudrillard's rearview mircoron hie drivelhrouqh Death Valley, ln facf', Daudrillard'e lraveloque beqino wilh the warninq onefinds on oomerearview mircors; Cauf,ion:Objecrein thie mirror may be cloeerLhanthey aVVear! 1ae1 The realitieeof NheVre-oimulacrumera vanishing miraqee like in a rearview mircoris an a?ocalyVricvieion-a vieionof the end of the world,For baudrillard rhie visionof Americais rhe model for t'he resl of Nheworldlhe code for an emerqinq r? *t hyperreal and eimur^+ ^ )

world, oecauee thie America of ie "the cenT,er the world."And of

Americais a deeerf,-esVecially in ite citiee-a Vlacewhere"real life" hae vanishedinto a kindof qlirLerinq,empNynon-culhure, And rhie emVty, dry, ot erile, lunar deserD astral America,trhe of deeerbof meaninqfut oocief,y, emVtya6 a'N f,unedto a dead channel-wheNher if,elandin oca?e6or cirysca?eo, whetherin lhe insanemovemenf, joqqere, of rraffic and Vedeetriansin Loe Angelee, bodiescirculatinqon freewayo Vluqged o com?uror int er circuirs,whetherin the uloVia of California, Sanha Barbara or of of )antra Cruz,Nheparadiee of
r- ^lrE^.^,^t ^ ,..2L1- .L '!.-L ^r - -r.. | -



in the qreat neonwhoreof Lae -w Veqao, he "wall-No all proolilut

*. \e

* ' "* * ,B

Nion"of NewYork,with ite

VtrJll r-/l l\L/VV lU/l N, VVlVll lV-J


of like Vlumee smoke

"girlswrinqinq oul Lheirhair

afLer balhinq,"with ils "beaufy of the blackand 7uefro Kicowomen" wilh ibs allurinq"Tigmenlation of lhe dark racee"wibhiIe Nribes and gangeand Mafia,with itrevioIenc e-3 audrill d'6 America ie t urbulent,,VrimiNiv ar e, eleclrifyinq, anim eNi viN pof,enl,, per real. ali c, al, hy It seemsos if Boudrillord hqs surrenderedto Postmodern Americq in q kind of possiveecstosy. T H Actually,Ihisie one of the main criticismsof Saudrillard: only ree?onoe offere f,o the The he ffowof mediaimaqeoie paeeive eurrender-an eceT,aoy communicaf,ion-which, facI, is of in the title of hie nexLbook. The Eastaoyof Communicaiion Accordinqto baudrillardin TheEcstaey of in Communication, the new Toetmodern univeree of int erconnecT,iviLy-of Lelevision and compuler nef,works-we are all likeechizophrenics. For f,heechizophrenic, huddled hie cell,is no|,rein movedfrom realily-butr realily preeeesin u?onhim,lI is too cloee.ltr ie abeolulely close, He doee not mirror realily buf,becomeo ?ure a 6creen. 1imilarly, haveall become we like


,\9 \-r


\\J ilr



t elevieion andcomVuler
9Creen6E h o e el u n r i -

noue eyee illuminatinq nd a even Venetraf,inq our moof,privaf,e e?aceewith an obecene ?reooure. And thie Vromiocuou; invaeion our former of Vrivacyie bolh ecotatic and obecene. The obeceniLy not of the hidden but of the allf,oo-vieual. The that no obeceniT,y lonqer harboreany gecret,. obgcene An eceNaey-a coollun seducT,ivelece, ar trricVornoqraVhy of imaqeeand excessive informalionfeeding u?onue, ?enelratinq all our private o?ace6, the obscenif,y like of faecinaf,ion, a


?ornoqraVhic clooe-up, a Vroducinq et aie of giddiness lo which eurcender we in

an Ecef,aey Comof municalion. 7ul1audrillard informeue in hie introduclionlhal Ecataoy ie only a eimulation modelof oomeof hie earlier booke-a simulation in whichSaudrillard him' out-tsaudrillards eelf-becominq more

forgeLthaf, in trhe French cullural6cene theoriee are juet, like commodiliee-trhey are in comVetriLion with other theorieein f,he Frenchcullural marketplace, And 1audrillard underet ands thal trhebeel way t o makehie lheoriee competrilive t o is Iransform them inNohyVerceal eimula-

Oaudrillard Lhan Oau- tione of theory, To drillard, musf,not, eVinoul Juraeeic We

sincethe imPoct Tark monsl'ersof baudrillard's Nheory. ' of undersf,andinq the mediahas madehim an eftective comVet'iIor-a kind of celebriNy-because hie atf,acks on hie fellow made famous,by hYVerrealst'af,emenle guchae "TheGulf War neverhappened!' ln facL, oomecritice c l a i mt h a l O a u d r i l lard, in hie later work, of technologies on culturesis so intense.

lrue. ln Thatr's
facl, eome Toetmodern f,hinkersoaYlhaN e cerlain s cienc ficf,ion writ ers do a bet'ter the job al deocribinq impactrof cybefi'echthan doee noloqiee at, Daudrillard, b ut,frh

is actuallydoinqoci' Frenchintellect'uals ence ficlion inst'ead eVectraare hyVerreal theory. of Toet'modern cleemean| for Vublic lendinq con6urn\,ion, l$l Butit seems moreand more thot Postmodern t oward a kind of van' iehingVoinLFor inehe f,ance, hag been criticized,but aleo theory would hove to be similur fiction, to science

we is a Eop,tc can ref,urnNo laf'er.