Postmodernity and What It Means - Essay Example

Postmodernity and What it Means Zygmunt Bauman was perhaps the first sociologist to investigate the ideas of postmodernism. Throughout, and especially after his retirement from Leeds in 1990, he has written numerous books and essays, identifying and introducing the concept of postmodernism. This idea has been explored in numerous circles, as it became evident in literature and, particularly visual art as a representation of the greater society. The postmodern movement, with its emphasis on illuminating the previously hidden or unrecognized sublime, brings ideas of the contrast between the sublime and the visual to the forefront. “The political and the aesthetic are inseparable, simultaneously present, faces of the postmodern problematic” (Burgin, 1982). On examining the main ideas within these concepts, it is necessary to reflect on various philosophical ideas in relation to recent practices. For illumination, it is helpful to apply these ideas to the world of visual art as a means of illustrating how visual representation has been used in the modern world as an instrument of control and power, or rebellion and dissent, beginning with the Modern movement of the 20th century into the present day. Before one can gain a perspective of what Bauman meant when he discussed postmodern, it is necessary to understand what he meant when he defined a modern society. “Modernity is a project, and not only a period, and it is, or was, a project of control, the rational mastery over nature, the planning, designing and plotting which led to planomania and technocracy” (Beilharg, 2001: 6). The basic concepts of modernism were to take a hard and fast look at various social processes to determine the universal truths of existence. These could then be canonized and applied across all cultures, individuals and time periods as a means of progressing toward a more ideal civilization. The tripod upon which the theory rested were economic, political and scientific rationalization (Mourad, 1997). Economic rationalization would bring all the forces of nature into the understanding and control of intellectual processes. In similar fashion, political rationalization would subject and control the governing bodies as well as the value systems by which the ‘correct’ society would measure itself and others. Scientific rationalization operated on the premise that an objective truth for all could be discovered through the careful application of appropriate scientific methods. (Mourad, 1997). Through this ideology, it is natural and common for the intellectuals of the age to wish to retain some control over what is deemed as ‘correct’ or ‘true’ and to therefore seek positions of power as legislators. A natural by-product of this process is chaos through the resulting disagreements regarding what is the ultimate ‘truth’ on such issues that defy any kind of objective definition as well as through the need to define the world according to that which is new, a paradox in itself. Thus, modernity, as Bauman saw it, was a continuous opposition struggling between chaos on one side and absolute order on the other. In this struggle, the indeterminate qualities of social life are exposed and demand as well as defy explanation. Addressing the ideas coming out of Modernism, Jean-Francois Lyotard argues that realism in art is actually a form of conformism. Thus, the modern artist’s primary task is to produce what he refers to as “incommunicable statements.” These statements are purposely designed to resist being fitted easily into the flow of information within our present computerized society. In his Appendix Answering the Question: What is Postmodernism?, published at the end of The Postmodern Condition, Lyotard wrote that the “only definition” of realism is that “it intends to avoid the question of reality implicated in that art.” It is associated in this account with those who “pursue successful careers in mass conformism by communicating by means of the ‘correct rules,’ the endemic desire for reality with objects and situations capable of gratifying it” (Lyotard, 1979: 75). This uncritical, conformist use of established methods of representation to reinforce rather than specifically address the status quo is contrasted with ‘avant-garde’ art, which, he argues, uses experimental innovations in technique and structure to attempt “to make visible that there is something which can be conceived and which can neither be seen nor made visible” (Lyotard, 1979: 78). These concepts of social and political control become more comprehensible through Bauman’s analysis of the Holocaust and how this one event in history helps to define the role of the sociologist as modernistic approaches attempted to account for or explain away these various social issues. Bauman argued that the Holocaust was not the horrific event of a lapse of civilization and example of primitive barbarism it had been characterized as, but was instead a frightening example of the modern ideal. Talking about the various educated publications of the world and the published opinions regarding the German state prior to the outbreak of the war, Bauman says, “they wistfully described the Germany of the 1930s as the paragon of the civilized state, of prosperity, of social peace, of obedient and cooperative workers’ unions, of law and order. Indeed, as an example for the wan European democracies to follow for its rapidly falling rate of crime, almost total removal of violence from the street …, industrial peace, safety and security of daily life” (Bauman, 1991: 19). This was brought about thanks to strong determinations of rather ambiguous terms such that art was deemed beautiful or banned based upon a single definition of what makes art to the disadvantage of any other form of expression. One of the concepts that emerge in his discussion regarding the Holocaust and the modern social construction is the idea that the first form of human experience takes place within a social context based on interdependence. Therefore, the first human relationship to be experienced is a moral relationship as each individual must work with each other in mutual understanding. Globalization, as it is generally understood, is a process by which temporal space has been diminished between cultures thanks to advances in technology, continuously decreasing the time necessary to effect this communication as well (Harvey, 1989). Bauman points to all this technology and suggests that it has created easily as many divisions as it has connections. As the world has become increasingly distanced through the modern conveniences of the impersonal keyboard and monitor, so has it become easier to dissociate with others. In addition, the world has had a tendency to become more polarized along many lines, constantly attempting to define the other and constantly being foiled in this attempt, again leading to the development of the concept of the postmodern. With this view, it is impossible for Bauman to endorse wide-spread social engineering, understanding this to lead to a dehumanizing view of humanity (Bauman, 2000). Another major theme within the modernist ideology that is important in the development of the postmodern concept is the concept of the stranger. Rather than being the ‘other’ in terms of skin color, cultural background or other specific external characteristics, Bauman describes the stranger as a product of his position as it is granted and defined by modern society. More importantly, Bauman suggests society must have a stranger as its only means of identifying itself. Although strangers are usually defined as “removed and disconnected from us,” Simmel (1950) points out that “strangeness means that he, who also is far, is actually near.” Building off of this idea, Bauman indicates the stranger is anything that doesn’t fit within an accepted societal mold. As such, the stranger is automatically identified as being something foreign and outside of the usual sphere of behavior, but the stranger is also within, forcing an internal comparison that cannot help but frighten. Because it is neither friend nor enemy, the stranger remains suspiciously undecided (Bauman, 1993). Looking at the sociologic thought that predominated when Bauman first started writing and examining his analyses of the modernist ideology, it can be seen that modernism represented a particular regime of order. However, Bauman saw much more in the combative relationships he’d exposed, always leading him to a plurality of meaning on multiple levels of being. “Modern intellectuals aspire to power, as legislators; postmodern intellectuals seek to live out, or to return, to their hermeneutical roles, as interpreters or translators across life-worlds or experiences” (Beilharz, 2001: 6). Emerging from the failed ideals of modernism, the postmodern represents a drive toward an undefined and undefinable goal within a collapse of the traditional boundaries of ‘self’, ‘other’ and ‘stranger.’ It can also be seen as a means of existence in which this multiplicity of forms is recognized and dealt with. It is perhaps easier to understand this division between a form that replicates existing conventions for describing ‘reality’, and one which challenges these conventions by looking at the work of Lyotard as he discussed these concepts in art. The postmodern approach is meant to “allude to something which does not allow itself to be made present” (Lyotard, 1979: 80). This is, Lyotard insisted, central to a definition of postmodernism itself. Lyotard argued that a “postmodern artist or writer is in the position of a philosopher: the text he writes, the work he produces are not in principle governed by pre-established rules, and they cannot be judged according to a determining judgment, by applying familiar categories to the text or to the work. The rules and categories are what the work of art itself is looking for” (Lyotard, 1979: 81). This is an idealistic conception of artistic production. It implies that avant-garde can produce an ‘innocent’ text, detached, by the conscious effort of the individual artist, from the categories established by preceding works. In using familiar methods, which enable the simple reception of the text, realism, Lyotard insisted, simply replicates these established rules while postmodernism examines them and accepts, rejects or simply questions. In its tendency to embrace all concepts as equally valid considerations with a variety of viewpoints, Bauman doesn’t oppose modern to postmodern, as many definitions of the latter term would suggest, but rather attempts to blend them as differing yet mutually explanatory logics regarding social life. Each helps to define the other while illustrating the differences and similarities in each, thereby further highlighting some of the concepts that seem to have widespread (though probably not universal) application. Through the development of his ideas as they explored the general structures of society through the Holocaust and the modern era into the 21st century and the era that came to be known by his own keyword, postmodern, Bauman has shaped and altered the look of sociology. “His position in contemporary social theory has been achieved through hard work, intuition and foresight, progressive sophistication, an altruistic attitude and a never-ending appetite and hermeneutic search for knowledge and truth” (Decjusza, 2000). As his ideas developed from an exploration of the concepts of modernism and an exposure of the blind spots that had developed within the theory to his development of a concept of the postmodern as the aftermath of the modern age, Bauman can be seen to always keep an open mind and a questioning spirit. He explores areas of sociological thought that had been carelessly laid aside and discovers a multiplicity of meaning that had little been expected. His evolving theories lay a groundwork upon which future sociologists can follow and prove the example of his own conception of what sociology should be. References Bauman, Zygmunt. (1991). Modernity and Ambivalence. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Bauman, Zygmunt. (1993). Postmodern Ethics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Bauman, Zygmunt. (2000). Globalization. Columbia University Press. Beilharz, Peter. (2001). The Bauman Reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Burgin, Victor. (March, 1982). New Jersey: Humanities Press Intl. Decjusza, Stowarzyszenie Willa. (2000). “Zygmunt Bauman: Literature Profiles.” Culture PL. Adam Mickiewicz Institute. Available 12 March 2008 from Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Lyotard, Jean-Francois. (1979). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Trans. Geoff. University of Minnesota Press. Mourad, R.P. (1997). “At the Forefront: Postmodern Interdisciplinarity.” The Review of Higher Education. Vol 29, N. 2, pp. 115-140. Simmel, G. (1950). “The Stranger.” The Sociology of Georg Simmel. K.H. Wolff (Ed.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Read More