Excerpt from The Postmodern Turn
Table of Contents
1. The Time of the Posts
2. Paths to the Postmodern: From Kierkegaard through Marx and
Nietzsche
3. From the Society of the Spectacle to the World of Simulation:
Debord, Baudrillard, and Postmodernity
4. The Postmodern Turn in the Arts
5. Chaos, Entropy, and Organism in Postmodern Science
6. The Postmodern Paradigm from Theory to Politics
Preface and Acknowledgements
The past several decades have witnessed a postmodern turn in
theory, the arts, and sciences which is part of a major paradigm
shift and, some would argue, an epochal shift from a modern to
a postmodern world. The dramatic changes and turmoil in every
dimension of life have led many to claim that we have left behind
the modern era and are entering a new postmodern epoch. [1] These
arguments provoked an explosion of postmodern discourses over
the past two decades (surveyed in Best and Kellner 1991), producing
theory wars between advocates of modern and postmodern theory.
Key postmodern theorists argue that contemporary societies with
their new technologies, novel forms of culture and experience,
and striking economic, social, and political transformations constitute
a decisive rupture with previous forms of life, bringing to an
end the modern era. In the sphere of culture, there has been a
repudiation of modernism and postmodernism in the arts has permeated
every aesthetic domain from architecture to film to new multimedia
artifacts during the past several decades. In addition, various
forms of postmodern theory have circulated through every domain
of academic discourse and have challenged and transformed intellectual
practice in a plethora of fields, including science.
We are calling this dramatic transformation in social life, the
arts, science, philosophy, and theory "the postmodern turn,"
and argue in this book that we have now entered a new and largely
uncharted territory between the modern and the postmodern. The
postmodern turn involves a shift from modern to postmodern theory
in a great variety of fields and the move toward a new paradigm
through which the world is viewed and interpreted. The postmodern
turn includes as well the emergence of postmodern politics, new
forms of postmodern identities, and novel configurations of culture
and technology. Most dramatically, it advances the claim that
we have left modernity behind, that we have entered a new (post)historical
space with new challenges, dangers, and possibilities.
The postmodern turn is exciting and exhilarating in that it involves
an encounter with experiences, ideas, and forms of life that contest
accepted modes of thought and behavior, and provide new ways of
seeing, writing, and living. The postmodern turn leaves behind
the safe and secure moorings of the habitual and established,
and requires embarking on a voyage into novel realms of thought
and experience. It involves engaging emergent forms of culture
and everyday life, as well as confronting the advent of a expanding
global economy and new forms of culture, politics, and identities.
Indeed, the postmodern turn itself is global, encompassing by
now almost the entire world, percolating from academic and avant
garde cultural circles to media culture and everyday life, so
as to become a defining, albeit highly contested, aspect of the
present era.
Although many at first dismissed the postmodern turn as a fad
and have been predicting its demise for years, its discourses
continue to proliferate and attract interest, winning fervent
advocates and passionate opponents. The term "postmodern"
is thus increasingly taken as a synonym for the contemporary social
moment and as a marker to describe its novelties and breaks from
modern culture and society. Yet there is no agreement on what
constitutes the postmodern, whether we are indeed in a new postmodernity,
and what theories best illuminate the dynamics and experiences
of the contemporary moment. Accordingly, in the following and
forthcoming studies we will engage in mapping some of the many
twisting and winding pathways into the postmodern, exploring some
of the theoretical discourses that have investigated the postmodern
turn in theory, the arts, and the sciences.
We will therefore map and analyze some key moments in the postmodern
turn in an attempt to illuminate our current situation. Our goal
is to interrogate key shifts in theory, culture, and society to
provide insights into the passage from the modern to the postmodern.
We combine social theory with cultural criticism to contribute
to writing the "history of the present" (Foucault) and
to developing "a theory of contemporary society" (Horkheimer).
We believe that mapping the transition from the modern to the
postmodern requires sociological and historical perspectives which
relates the current moment both to the past that conditioned it
and the future it anticipates. Critical theory, as we interpret
it, rejects the mechanistic notion of time that fragments the
temporal continuum of history into a random and meaningless series
of "events" (such a nihilistic view is evident in Foucault,
for example); it sees past, present, and future as an unfolding
evolutionary dynamic that has moments of discontinuity, but nevertheless
is coherent and meaningful. Rejecting the positivist dichotomy
between fact and value, theory and politics, critical theory interrogates
the "is" in terms of the "ought," seeking
to grasp the emancipatory possibilities of the current society
as something that can and should be realized in the future. It
thereby gains a leverage for normative criticism and "utopian"
projection by analyzing the social forces that constrain and inhibit
the realization of human potentialities for greater freedom, social
justice and solidarity, as well as a harmonious relation with
the natural world, while envisaging the new social forms and sensibilities
required to enable and realize these possibilities. Critical theory
affirms with Hegel that "the rational is real" only
when the possibilities for human freedom have been actualized,
in the context of a rational society governed by democratic and
ecological norms. Of course, against Hegel, such a society is
to be actualized through the struggles of human beings, not a
hypostatized Spirit, and nothing guarantees that a humane and
ecological society will ever be realized. Yet the possibilities
for new relations of human beings with one another and the natural
world exist and they justify militant struggle and sacrifice.
Our entry into the conceptual field of the postmodern in Chapter
1 provides a provisional mapping of the contours of the postmodern
turn and explains some of the key concepts, issues, and problems
that we will engage. In Chapter 2, we explore some important sources
of postmodern theory in 19th century thinkers such as Kierkegaard,
Marx, and Nietzsche, and show how these theorists anticipate contemporary
forms of the postmodern turn, demonstrating our claim that postmodern
discourses do not emerge in vacuo, but rather have a complex history
of anticipations in modern theories and developments. In Chapter
3, we explore one key path to the postmodern through Guy Debord
and the Situationist International, to Jean Baudrillard and French
postmodern theory. Debord and the Situationists updated the Marxian
critique of capitalism within the context of consumer and media
society, providing a transitional link from the modern to the
postmodern and influencing the work of Baudrillard, who developed
one of the first and most compelling analyses of a new postmodern
era.
After these analyses of some trajectories of postmodern theory,
Chapter 4 maps the origins of postmodern culture in literature,
the visual arts, and architecture, and charts the shift from modernism
to postmodernism in the arts. Our analyses suggest that in a postmodern
society of the image and spectacle, culture is playing an increasingly
important role and thus it is imperative to develop critical theories
of culture and a cultural studies that will interrogate the meanings,
effects, and consequences of this shift in culture and technology.
Chapter 5 analyzes developments in postmodern science which constitute
a major break with modern science. In particular, we claim that
the transition from modern to postmodern science is a key route
into the postmodern turn and examine how the concepts of entropy
and chaos figure importantly in contemporary scientific discourse,
along with new understandings of organism, ecology, and the cosmos
as a whole that put in question the misguided modern project to
dominate nature. These shifts are parallel to developments in
postmodern social theory, philosophy, and the arts which leads
us in Chapter 6 to chart the contours of a new postmodern paradigm
shift. In this concluding chapter, we argue that we are entering
a new conceptual and social field which the discourse of the postmodern
is attempting to articulate.
By now, there are many genealogies, many narratives, and many
ways of presenting the turn to the postmodern, each with its own
designated precursors, privileged disciplinary focus, path of
development, and point of view. No genealogy of the postmodern
is neutral and unmotivated, and responses range from positive
and celebratory discourses of those affirming the postmodern like
Hassan to the critical ones of Habermas and others deploring it.
The postmodern turn, as we shall see, moves through many different
fields and crosses a varied terrain of theory, the arts, the humanities,
science, politics, and diverse areas of social reality. We will
trace the pathways through some of these thickets, mapping some
territories traversed by the postmodern turn, and illuminating
some of the ways that the postmodern has captured the contemporary
imagination.
While we show how the postmodern turn in the arts and sciences
parallels in certain respects the transition from modern to postmodern
society and from modern to postmodern theory, we will also show
differences among postmodern discourse in the fields of theory,
the arts, and science, as well as variations within these domains
themselves. There is thus a specificity to each path to the postmodern,
different accounts that can be given of the postmodern turn in
each field, and intense contests over how to portray the postmodern
turn in particular domains, as well as more generally. Yet despite
these differences and contestation, we wish to show that there
is a shared discourse of the postmodern, common perspectives,
and defining features that coalesce into an emergent postmodern
paradigm (see Chapter 6).
How we trace the genealogy of the postmodern helps determine
how we see contemporary society and whether we have a positive
or negative, simplistic or complex, vision of the vicissitudes
of contemporary history, the problems of the present age, and
prospects for the future. Thus, it is important to have many genealogies
and numerous perspectives in order to acquire a dynamic and complex
account of the postmodern that grasps both continuities and discontinuities,
as well as progressive and regressive lines of development.
Our goal throughout is to delineate the postmodern turn in a
variety of fields and to show how the disparate trajectories of
the postmodern, despite their differences, are coalescing into
a new paradigm that we see as emergent, not yet dominant, and
therefore is hotly contested. As Kuhn defined it (1970), a "paradigm"
is a "constellation" of values, beliefs, and methodological
assumptions, whether tacit or explicit, inscribed in a larger
worldview. Kuhn observed that throughout the history of science
there were paradigm shifts, conceptual revolutions that threw
the dominant approach into crisis, and eventually dissolution,
a discontinuous change provoked by altogether new assumptions,
theories, and research programs. In science, Kuhn argued, a given
paradigm survives until another one supersedes it, seemingly having
a greater explanatory power. At any one time, in other words,
certain assumptions and methods prevail in any given discipline
until they are challenged and overthrown by a new approach that
emerges through posing a decisive challenge to the status quo
and, if successful, becomes dominant, the next paradigm, itself
ready to be deposed by another powerful challenger as the constellation
of ideas continues to change and shift.
Kuhn limited his focus to scientific paradigms, but obviously
there can be a paradigm for any theoretical or artistic field
as well as for culture in general, such as Foucault attempted
to identify for different stages in the development of modern
culture through his concept of episteme (1972). As we conceptualize
it, the "postmodern paradigm" signifies both specific
shifts within virtually every contemporary theoretical discipline
and artistic field, as well as the coalescing of these changes
into a larger worldview that influences culture and society in
general as well as the values and practices of everyday life.
We wish to contextualize paradigm shifts not only in the history
of ideas, as Kuhn and others have done, but also as effects of
developing social and institutional factors, as driven by changes
in industry, technology, economics, politics, and often science
itself. Thus, we will analyze paradigm shifts both as internal
and hermetic responses within a given domain, as changes in the
tacit, underlying, (archaeological) "rules of knowledge"
that the early Foucault tried to identify as informing conceptual
ruptures within the human sciences, and as part of broader shifts
in society and history that influence shifts in culture and thought.
Philosophy, art, literature, and science have their own histories,
problems, debates, and conceptual dynamics, but they are also
deeply conditioned, whether acknowledged or not, by larger social
and political conditions.
We will thus examine changes both "inside" and "outside"
given disciplines, avoiding both sociological reductionism and
determinism and conceptual idealism that fails to see intellectual
shifts as part of broader social patterns and movements. Thus,
in our view, postmodern paradigm shifts arise in different fields
as critical responses to ideas and methods perceived to be staid,
dogmatic, erroneous, or oppressive, as well as in response to
developments in society, technology, economics, and politics.
In the next chapter we will begin delineating features of the
once dominant modern paradigm and some conceptual distinctions
to elucidate the dominant types of postmodern paradigms. In succeeding
chapters, we will depict emergent postmodern paradigms in the
fields of theory, art, the sciences, and politics. We sort out
the claims for and against postmodern theory, and advance our
own position that we are currently in an era between the modern
and the postmodern, and that therefore both modern and postmodern
perspectives are relevant, requiring new syntheses and a transdisciplinary
approach to capture the complexity and turbulence of current events
and developments.
We endeavor to follow up our previous book Postmodern Theory
(Best and Kellner 1991) which interrogated the discourses of the
postmodern in its now classical theorists from Foucault through
Jameson with some studies that supplement and go beyond that earlier
work. After its positive reception, we began by collecting some
essays already published separately and jointly by us on postmodern
culture and theory. We then reworked all of these texts, while
adding new ideas and undertaking further collaborative studies,
so that the text now appears, as in our first book, as a joint
authorship and the studies form an articulated whole, delineating
our shared perspectives on contemporary culture, society, and
politics. We work in a transdisciplinary space and develop critical
reflections on a wide range of topics in social theory, philosophy,
media culture, painting, architecture, literature, science, technology,
and politics. The text reflects our position that social reality
can be analyzed most adequately through multiple methodological
and theoretical perspectives. Building on recent work in Kellner's
Media Culture (1995) and Best's The Politics of Historical Vision
(1995), we seek to present new insights into both postmodern theory
and contemporary society and culture, which we argue is a borderland
between the modern and something new for which the term "postmodern"
has been coined. Providing conceptual content and articulation
to this vastly overused and abused concept is one of the goals
of the following studies. [2]
Notes
1. The books on postmodernity and the concept of the postmodern
now fill a small library and are still growing. They include:
Baudrillard 1983a; 1983b; and 1993 [1976]; Lyotard 1984 [1979];
Kroker and Cook 1986; Harvey 1989; Turner 1990; Lash 1990; Best
and Kellner 1991; Jameson 1991; Bauman 1992; Smart 1992 and 1993;
Lyon 1994; and Bertens 1995.
2. Toward the completion of writing this book, we rediscovered
Ihab Hassan's book The Postmodern Turn: Essays in Postmodern Theory
and Culture (1987). Although our books share the same title, and
Hassan's subtitle implies the engagement of a postmodern paradigm
shift, to which he contributes a certain amount of anecdotal evidence,
our orientations are completely different. Hassan's approach is
symptomatic precisely of what we reject -- an ironic, detached,
playful, and willfully cryptic and allusive approach to postmodern
discourse. A paradigmatic example of a certain postmodern style,
Hassan's book is a pastiche of enigmatic essays, none of which
clarify or define the main tendencies of "postmodern theory
and culture." Indeed, Hassan is a master of "definition"
by lists (both names and concepts), quotes, examples, and arcane
terminology. As he proudly admits (40), "I have not defined
Modernism: I can define Postmodernism less." He invokes Thomas
Kuhn's name and the notion of paradigm shifts at various places,
but doesn't engage the concept of paradigm except to reject it
for vague reasons (120), while still declaring that we live in
a "postmodern moment of unmakings" (121) that transcends
the postmodern turn in any one discipline. Our approach, by contrast,
is to recognize the complexity, plurality, and unfinished nature
of postmodern discourse, while nevertheless attempting to clarify
and map numerous genealogies, approaches, and styles of the postmodern,
examining its various uses and abuses, regressive and progressive
aspects. While postmodern discourse is open, evolving, and unstable,
it is not totally indeterminate or closed to definitions and analysis.
And while Hassan seeks to flee from "rightist or leftist
cant" for "a tough and limber pragmatism" and a
"posthumanism" (xvii), two utterly opposed concepts
in the tradition of James and Dewey, we cannot flinch from the
fact that transformations of capitalism are responsible for key
aspects of the postmodern turn and are the source of global social
and environmental crisis today. Moreover, we seek to revive the
egalitarian, democratic, and humanist norms that constituted the
best of modern and progressive traditions which Hassan and other
postmodernists are willing to leave behind.
Back to Essays page
|