.
Hello everyone , welcome to yet another session
of the nptel course entitled Postmodernism
in literature , in the previous session we
are taking a look at how postmodernism could
be defined in continuation with modernism
or even as a departure from the ah dominant
modernist a tendencies . So, today we also
try to take a look at what exactly happened
in the postmodern period.
We did look at a range of definitions a range
of ways in which a postmodernism could be
differentiated from the aspects of modernism
, but in the today's session we are also trying
to take a look at what exactly happened.
What may be implications of the postmodern
moment in arts literature and in diverse fields
of style .
So, the first and foremost one is that the
disappearance of the comforting security that
reason offered particularly during the modernist
fever . If we look at the trajectory of the
modernist period the modernist period in terms
of the chronological retreat history it comes
in ah ah right after the Victorian period
where there was a ah dominance of ah ah lot
of crisis, the crisis of faith and the and
the tussle between faith and reason and we
also find the during the modernist fitted
there is a way in which modernist also find
ah also trying to find a certain kind of a
security a comforting security within the
aspects of reason within the aspects of rationality
.
We find a continuation of the enlightenment
mode also reaching it is a peak during the
modernist period.
We find we all trying to be more intellectual
and the pursuit of intellect was also seen
as a certain are kind of a an anathema a sort
of a solution to all the problems of the early
20th century .
But we do know that the project modernity
ah ah failed after a point and the intellect
or the reason or the aspects of enlightenment
they provide they may fail to provide any
kind of security or any kind of comfort in
the face of the world and also the aftermath
of the wall . And we also realize that and
following this we also see that there is way
in which hierarchy and system completely breaks
down in the postmodern period , especially
after the fifties and 6ties it is ah very
difficult to talk about the privileging of
a discipline the privileging of an art form
privileging of a journal or even the privileging
of any political system so to speak .
And here will be also see a rampant critique
of all kinds of universalizing theories and
ah this also led to the crumbling of all the
intellectual grounds and foundations giving
rise to a number of a crisis.
A lot of a problems with in disciplinary ah
ah fears within a learning systems within
the lots of a within the within the ideas
of a meaning a making our processes etcetera
. And this I i clearly should be perceived
as a crisis this should have been ideally
a major problem of the postmodern period .
But on the contrary paradoxically we find
that this breaking down of systems is breaking
down of hierarchy and this move away from
the comforting security of reason does prove
very liberating and empowering as well.
In fact, we find that in that process of empowering
and liberating within the ah fields within
the ah ah gamut of different disciplinary
fields of study, we find there is an emphasis
on that value and significance of respecting
difference and otherness .
And and ah this is what we get when hierarchy
and particular rigid systems ah move away.
We have a lot of empowerment a lot of liberation
of spaces sites and identities which were
which were either to not ah been visible are
not audible or not given any space for articulation
. And in cornel west words we do see and the
emergence of new or cultural politics of difference
in the postmodern period .
I wanted to most prominent examples are would
be the emergence of cultural studies especially
from the 1970 onwards.
And this ah as we know as an emergence of
counter disciplinary domains with the deliberate
lack of distinct methodology and refusal to
privilege certain disciplines or ah texts
or sites over the others.
And with the advent of ah with the advent
of cultural studies we also ah ah are being
introduced to new forms of analyzing texts
and sites critically and also able to understand
that; nothing is nothing can be privileged
over anything else and we also find a very
deliberate foregrounding of a mandate to investigate
broad areas rather than very a narrow sense
of scholarship and understanding . And in
the field of cultural studies we also have
a lot of space to experiment negotiate with
alternate forms of knowledge, alternate forms
of identity of history of a privileging ah
ah new kinds of ah ah histories newer kinds
of ah ah subject positions have ah being ah
in most and there is a lot of challenges inherent
in this methodology, but there is also a lot
of power and a lot of a liberation associate
associated by that .
And when we look at the cultural and intellectual
trends of the postmodern period we also, now
find that the implications where very, very
edited in particular ah schools of thought
and then particular art forms.
Some of the things that would immediately
come to our mind would be the theatre of the
absurd which became popular in the 1950s and
60s.
The most prominent example be waiting of go
the where Samuel Becket waiting of go the
was ah ah was a ah play which really talk
about the postmodern condition we observe
the of the postmodern condition without necessarily
lamenting the ah incoherence, but rather celebrating
it in a ah very humorous way in a very nonsensical
way.
And there was also the emergence of magical
realism which could be seen as we perhaps
the most defining aspect of a the postmodern
are narration, the postmodern or will the
other the they seminal architects of this
appeal ah Salman rusty kunthet grass etcetera.
And we also have then entire generation being
named as the Beat generation and the kind
of poetry that generate being know as a ah
Peter poetry you also have the significant
political rendition ah how will happening
in the 1960s, which also challenged the entire
idea of culture, poetry and ah finer aspects
related to all these ah renditions . And ah
looking at these various ah developments which
could be label as post modernist we to see
that these are all the implications these
are all the advantages of having reached the
postmodern age the after modern is where one
had not have one one aware ah one ah no longer
have to be concerned about the form about
the symbols and about the intellectual meanings
of various ah related things as the modernists
where ah very Predominantly concerned about
.
And in terms of theoretical frameworks we
do find that the theories and aspects of post
structuralism and deconstructions I have close
contiguities with postmodernism.
And in in a number of works where we trying
to understand ah the ah element of postmodernism
when we try to theorize postmodernism and
we try to provide ah convenient frameworks
to access postmodernism we find a continuous
discussion and overlapping discussion of post
structuralism and deconstruction .
So, in that sense when we try to ah ah frame
postmodernism as a theoretical as a conceptual
a principal as a dominant cultural tendency
we will be very generously generously using
the writings of Foucault, Barthes, Derrida,
Baudrillard, Deleuze, Lyotard, and ah Kristeva.
Our discussions will not be limited to just
a these takes an all these, but we shall also
be looking at a range of similar works which
were also produced during this similar historical
ah period.
And ah here how do we make use of these different
theories a Foucault as we know was one who
spoke extensively about ah discourse and a
Barthes and Derrida had a lot of discussions
ah related language and semiotic ah ah systems.
And we also have ah Baudrillard talking about
simulation hyper reality in fact when we talk
about hyper reality maybe one of the imitate
examples that would come to our mind would
be the contemporary a movie Inception, where
there is a representation of hyperreality
through the form of a visual media and ah
that use ah spoke about rhizomatic systems
of knowledge where one cannot ah privilege
one form of ah knowledge or one form of knowing
or are or ah any a form of dissemination over
and the other.
And ah Lyotard as we know he was a someone
who also ah a tried to define the postmodern
condition and he spoke about aesthetics and
politics in connection with the idea of postmodernity.
And in Kristeva we also have a number of discussions
related to ah feminism and abjection . So,
following these about ah ah texts and writers
we shall also try to ah build up a framework
within which we can access different forms
of oppose modernisms.
And the other critical paradigms which would
also be used language would be convenient
to locate critique and to ah and to engage
with ah the ideas of postmodernism would be
a primarily Marxism and we also have a ah
couple of critiques and writers it is read
to Jameson and Terry Eagleton accessing postmodernism
trying to critique it within the framework
framework of a Marxist a theoretical principles
.
And ah Kwame Anthony Appiah is one writer
who challenges the idea of postmodernism through
the lens and framework of a postcolonialism.
and we have Patricia Waugh ah ah are talking
about the need for different feminisms within
the post to within the postmodern ah world
and also the absence of certain kinds of gender
related issues within these articulations
of postmodernism . There also other feminist
writers who all who also put forward this
idea that perhaps postmodernism is a very
male forte, because just when the women writers
had began to articulate themselves just when
the ah women writers had begun to acclaim
subjectivity for themselves and for their
works and for their sites and for their text.
The male writers had decided to entirely forgot
the idea of subjectivity the idea of identity
and also move on to a very ah postmodern ah
face.
So, ah there are these different or challenges
within which postmodernism needs to be understood
and situated as well . And we also have ah
some writers such as Sara Upstone and Len
Platt talking about race and African American
writings within a post post ah ah modern ah
framework.
And all of these aspects from Marxism post
colonialism or feminisms and race and African
American writings we ah understand that there
is no single way of understanding postmodernism
but perhaps only postmodernisms.
And what is important for us to remember is
the possibility of different figurations of
postmodernism or it could be French, Canadian,
White American, African American the difference
could be based on ah race, gender, ah the
location, the region the nationality the ethnic
ah ah identities.
And ah unless we take into account the possibility
of these different figurations and accommodate
these different tendencies these different
aspects of postmodernism we would not be doing
justice to this very hybrid, and to this a
very unconventional and ah very non-linear
phenomenon known as postmodernism.
So, in this course though we are trying to
frame postmodernism in a very modernist sense
within particular schemes within particular
systems of thought and within particular critical
frameworks.
We also try to ensure that there are no overriding
principles about postmodernism which are being
privileged over the other, that we take into
account all forms of ah available scholarship
all forms of available critiques ah endorsements
and all kinds of approaches with respect to
postmodernism .
So, we continue to emphasis the idea that
cultural values are local and a particular
and they are not universal and eternal.
There is no linear progressive trajectory.
So, for this course also even we are trying
to trace the genealogy of postmodernism even
when we are try to even when we are trying
to ah delineate a particular trajectory.
We also acknowledge that it would be difficult
to construct a linear progressive intellectual
trajectory . And ah we also ah work with this
inherent assumption that the idea of postmodernism,
the study is on postmodernism all kinds of
discourses and discussions and negotiations
within the ah framework of postmodernism will
always be embedded within debates irregularities
or controversies, provocations and contestations
. And in fact, we shall be working with all
these challenges and within these ambiguities
and along with these ambiguities in order
to define postmodernism through perhaps particular
works.
So, this ah focus on particular works becomes
very important because it also gives a structure
to our thought and also enhances are ah scholarly
understanding about what has been written
about postmodernism related to postmodernism,
what where the theories and the theorists
used to talk about postmodernism, and why
has postmodernism been defined in the way
or has not been defined in the way ah it is
ah seen today.
So, in that sense we shall be primarily looking
at ah Lyotard attacks and Frederic Jameson
writings, Baudrillard, Gilles Deleuze, John
Barth, Linda Hutcheon and Brain Mchale though
these texts cannot reader texts cannot be
seen as ah works per se to define postmodernism,
we find that these are mostly commentaries
and it is very useful to understand the notion
of a postmodernism.
And we also will be taking at look look at
a few ah helpful texts by ah Roland Berthes,
Michel Foucault ah Jacques Derrida though
these were these authors these theories and
philosophers now not directly attempted to
define our theorize postmodern, we find that
they talk about the ways in which the text
the author and language have changed have
ah ah moved away or perhaps even the idea
of the text of the author and the language
of entirely disappeared in the postmodern
ah in the postmodern agents in some form of
the other .
So, ah these the close reading of some of
these works would also help us to form our
own opinion our own critical judgment about;
whether postmodernism is or or was or whether
postmodernism is yet to be or whether postmodernisms
not there at all whether this is an extension
of post extension of modernism or a complete
rejection of modernism . So, these are close
reading perhaps my ah hope is that you would
be able to make your own critical evaluation
and judgment about the phenomena of postmodernism
.
I also try to wind up todays lecture by referring
to a particular work by and John Mcgowan,
ah he had published a book in 1991 about postmodernism
and it is critiques.
So, it is also useful for you us to remember
that postmodernism is not a movement not a
ah an intellectual ah paradigm accepted by
one and all.
It also has it is share of critiques and in
also a number of critiques who even argue
that postmodern face is not there at all that
we only have an extension of the modernist
period . So, having said that John Mcgowan
in his book has identified 4 different distinguishable
cans to talk about the theories later postmodernism.
First of all he talks about poststructuralism
and in the post and among the poststructuralist
we have ah and among the poststructuralist
we primarily have Derrida and Foucault.
then he talks about the literary left that
mean the a second a camp where he talks about
the works by Jameson and Terry Eagleton.
he identifies a third camp as being new pragmatism,
where he chooses discusses he chooses discuss
the works by Lyotard and Rorty . And a fourthly
he talks about a feminism rather feminisms
ah, but; however, he does not choose to delve
deeper into it because he thinks it is also
a part of ah the new pragmatic approach towards
ah postmodernism .
And in in that sense when he talks about Derrida
and Foucault , Jameson, Eagleton and Lyotard
and Rorty . We get a sense of how in different
camps ah postmodernism operates willing not
necessarily by ah John Mcgowan arguments or
his postulates about the existence of these
4 different camps, but nevertheless it is
an interesting way to look at different ways
in which a postmodernism has been framed . And
in connection with this discussion Mcgowan
also talks about the precursors of the ah
postmodern moment and he identifies particularly
Kant, Hegel, Marx and Nietzsche.
And in ah in the context of this it is also
important to recognize that the way Mcgowan
presents postmodernism he even identifies
the precursors to a much earlier period the
, romantic period and he says that it is only
a way in which all of these things get and
he argues that all the postmodern ah items
all the postmodern and modernist tense trends
could be seen as being foreshadowed from the
romantic period onwards.
So, he dates back the precursors to the 90th
century in support of his argument.
Moving on even when part of as part of this
course we shall be very briefly taking a look
at some of the precursors of ah postmodern
moment . A beginning from Lawrence Sternes
Tristram Shandy published as a range of texts
from 1759 to 67 Emmanuel Kant ah Friedrich
Hegel, Soren Kierkegaard, Karl Marx, Friedrich
Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Jacques Lacan.
We may not be going into the details of ah
ah the the works of these particular theories
and writers, but we shall be looking at how
their thought process how their intellectual
ah ah trajectories were also contributing
directly to the figuration of the postmodern
in the ah contemporary in the poster ah 1960s.
So, as we wind up we also take a brief look
at Charles Jencks, ideas about the origins
of the term this is a very useful for us to
construct a genealogy with the term postmodernism
. Ah according to Charles Jencks, Charles
Jencks is also someone who had originally
extensively about postmodernism in a very
lucid way which was also quite friendly to
the Layman.
So, ah Charles Jencks writing about the origins
of the term he tries to trace a genealogy
from the 1870s onwards and he says there are
instances of the term ah being cited though
in various contexts 1870s and much before
the 19 ah 26 and there is also a particular
reference that he talks about which came out
in 1970 . And 1960s he continues to argue
that this is the time of the posties that
is a lot of discussion about post christianity
post of religion , post industrialization
and those were not always seen in a positive
light it was also about ah ah initiate it
was also about the breakdown of structures
systems and are not of a negative ah um aspects
related to it.
But ah in in according to that by the 1970s
we also have a sort of a ah for grounding
of a deconstructive pomo, and keeping in it
is keeping in tune with the various ah ways
in which many dominant ideas and ideologies
of the ah previous eras previous decades where
entirely getting deconstructive , but with
the 80s James argues that we also reach a
more constructive ecological and grounded
and restructive postmodernism, and which also
continues to become the more the most dominant
form of articulation of postmodernism . And
ah today when we look back ah James argues
that the postmodern condition reactionary
postmodernism and consumer postmodernism the
all dominate almost simultaneously and following
which we also have the coexistence of these
varied aspects this varied ah ah item such
as the information age, the Pope and the Madonna
.
So, we also see that it is an fact a coexistence
of multiple things there is a mixing of genres
happening there any aspects of hybridity that
we can see.
So, this work that we shall come back to a
little later is a useful ah framework for
us to look at the genealogy of postmodernism.
To to some of this ah lecture a quote by Charles
Jencks would be very appropriate and useful,
he writes one of the great strengths of the
word and the concept and why it will be around
for another 100 years is that it is carefully
suggestive about our having gone beyond the
world view of modernism , which is clearly
inadequate without specifying where we are
going that is why; most people will spontaneously
use it . So, Jencks talks about the ambiguities
within which the term is a placed and it is
within these ambiguities and uncertainties
that we would also continue to operate and
make sense of the idea of postmodernism and
the aspects and the manifestations and the
various forms of representations in literature.
Thank you for listening and we look forward
to seeing you in the next session .
