Constructive Postmodernism
Rowland Croucher
CONSTRUCTIVE POSTMODERNISM (by Kim Thoday)
What is the notion of 'postmodern' and its derivatives, 'postmodernity' and
'postmodernism'? Although much of the contemporary literature often uses the
terms modernity/modernism and postmodernity/postmodernism interchangeably,
some clarification is I think helpful. Thus, I utilise the terms 'modernity'
and 'postmodernity' to refer to the somewhat modernist notion of temporal
eras, while 'modernism' and 'postmodernism' refer to theoretical discourses.
I trust that this is a useful differentiation.
Among the multifarious aspects and applications of the 1990s project of
postmodernism is the realisation that comprehension of postmodernism is
necessarily cumulative and shifting, since theories of the contemporary are
an intrinsic part of the formulation of this project. Definitions of
'postmodernity' and 'postmodernism' proliferate and are often contradictory,
and their use is at times arbitrary. The ambiguity of meanings is due to
both the historically varied contexts and applications to which the terms
have been applied, and the paradoxical nature of postmodern thought.
The beginnings of the term 'post-modern' have been traced to its use by
Arnold Toynbee in 1939 as a label for a new chronological era. Toynbee
argued that the 'post-modern' era was preceded by the 'modern' era; the
assumption being that the 'modern' era ended during World War I.1 Here, the
'post' in postmodern indicates addition to or building on to the base of the
'modern' and 'modernity'.2 Toynbee's use of the term consolidated the
association of the 'post-modern' as a historical period, marking a break
with the past. Thus, one use of the term 'postmodern' came to be understood
to indicate an end to the age known as 'modern'. World War I is widely
acknowledged as a significant point in time that signalled a shift away from
the prevailing Western worldview that paralleled the era known as 'modern'.
There is widespread agreement in the literature that the era known as the
'modern' is broadly characterised by the rational, scientific project of
'modernity' which had attached faith to the "quasi-religious certainty about
progress" emergent through earlier centuries.3
There is a plethora of debate as to the question of whether or not
postmodernity represents a break or a continuity with modernity, either in a
temporal context, or in terms of theory. I would argue that postmodernism
enables 'we' of the contemporary era to critique and move away from the
modern notion of breaking completely with the past, so that we can no longer
think in terms of separate eras or discourses. On the other hand, Frederic
Jameson seems to argue that since 'postmodernity' parallels "late
capitalism" (and by implication, modernity parallels earlier stages of
capitalism) 'postmodernity' is an appropriate label for the chronological
time sequence following modernity.4 Jameson states that the cultural
preparation for postmodernity began in the 1960s (in the North American
context from which he writes) while the economic preconditions of
postmodernity have their beginnings in the post-World War II climate of the
1950s.5 I would agree with Thomas Docherty who points to the problematic
nature of Jameson's conception of postmodernity as the latest in "a
succession of epochs", and then qualifies his argument by adding that
"...postmodernity ... remains a notion which needs to be defined against
modernity."6
Steven Connor notes that theories of the postmodern generally surmise the
pre-existence or at least the recognition of an era of the modern or
modernity, and that the emergence of postmodernism in relation to literary
studies at least requires a 'homogenising' or "back-formation" of
modernism.7 Likewise, Frederic Jameson states that all theories of
postmodernism are mimetic. Jameson elaborates that, although such theories
claim to refute foundationalism, none are totally antifoundational.
Instead, "...they are parasitory on another system (most often on modernism
itself)..."8
The notion of the era of postmodernity, as mentioned, is often associated
with a significant break between the 'past' modern era and the 'present'
commencement of a new, postmodern era. This notion is at least partly based
on modernism's tenets of scientific, industrial, temporal progress that has
its residues in the contemporary psyche. However, it is argued that aspects
of postmodernism is not a completely new phenomenon; rather like traces of a
precious mineral extending through several layers of geological time, so
postmodernity, as indeed all legitimate epistemologies have their ancient
antecedents. With this in mind, discerning theorists such as theologian Hans
Küng do not view postmodernism as an opposition or flight from modernism;
rather, in Küng's view, the project of postmodernity facilitates "...an
immanent critique of modernity...an enlightenment on the Enlightenment..."9
Postmodernism has been applied across a multiplicity of contemporary
disciplines of thought. The terms 'postmodern', 'postmodernism' and
'postmodernity', as noted, have no single usage and indeed, definitions of
these terms are often contradictory. Postmodernism is popularly recognised,
even vilified, as nihilistic, scathing of 'grand' narratives, fragmentary,
and alienating, "antifoundational, antitotalizing, and demystifying".10 My
understanding and experience repudiates this definition for, or type of,
postmodernism, often referred to as "deconstructive or eliminative"11
postmodernism. Rather, my understanding of postmodernism resonates with a
"constructive or revisionary"12 postmodernism, which combines elements of
the premodern and modern whilst simultaneously transcending premodernity's
supernaturalistic notions and modernity's "...individualism,
anthropocentrism, patriarchy, mechanization, economism, consumerism,
nationalism, and militarism."13 This type of postmodernism is not simply
antimodern, since it is not calling for a return to the premodern, nor is it
rejecting rational, enlightened thought; it arises as a response to the
threats is posed for humanity - and, indeed for the survival of our world -
in the face of modernism's materialistic epsitemology and its negation of
the spiritual and ecological impulses of human being. Indeed, modernism
can be described as synonymous with elimination of the "realm of the
transcendent" which had "lost its hold on how we live and how we die".14
The sense of imminent global crisis impinges on the consciousness of a
significant number of theorists - both secular and theological - as they
critique the contemporary era.15 Küng and Griffin are among theologians who
point to the current climate of "crisis" within Western culture at the dawn
of third millennium. Theologians Rebecca S Chopp and Mark Lewis Taylor name
particular instances of "evil" and "sin" such as crimes against humanity,
U.S. imperialism and hegemony, ecological crisis, issues of global poverty
and so on. They identify these realities of evil and sin as having "...been
reinforced and sustained, at least in part, by Christian practices and
theological discourses." These modern practices and discourses are, for
Chopp and Taylor, root causes of the current Western cultural crisis.16
These theologians respond to what they see as the spectre of modern
theology's irresponsibility in sanctioning the Christian Church's
overwhelmingly destructive, imperial behaviour which has underpinned and
perpetuated the contemporary crisis. This in my opinion is a useful
critique, but is an over emphasis, for it negates the many strands within
the Christian tradition that have severely critiqued and indeed resisted the
dominant values of modern Western culture. Perhaps blame also needs to be
laid at the foot of a theology or anti-theology symbolised by Friedrich
Nietzsche's madman who declared the "death of God," fulfilling the humanist
dream of a thoroughly secularised modality of being.
As noted, Küng asserts that a characteristic of postmodernism is to act as a
means by which to critique modernism through a creative synthesis of the
premodern and the modern, thereby facilitating a crucial underpinning for
the platform of constructive postmodernism. Ihab Hassan puts forward an
alternative but useful way of looking at postmodernism with his indices for
postmodernism set out in tabular form in opposition to those for modernism.
While Hassan's work eludes a definitive approach to postmodernism and its
relationship to modernism, this table provides implicit and powerful
pointers to the desirability of postmodernism as opposed to modernism:
Modernism Postmodernism
Romanticism/Symbolism 'Pataphysics/Dadaism
Form (conjunctive/closed) Antiform (disjunctive, open)
Purpose Play
Design Chance
Hierarchy Anarchy
Mastery/Logos Exhaustion/Silence
Art Object/Finished Work Process/Performance/Happening
Distance Participation
Creation/Totalization Decreation/Deconstruction
Synthesis Antithesis
Presence Absence
Centering Dispersal
Genre/Boundary Text/Intertext
Paradigm Syntagm
Hypotaxis Parataxis
Metaphor Metonymy
Selection Combination
Root/Depth Rhizome/Surface
Interpretation/Reading Against Interpretation/Misreading
Signified Signifier
Lisible (Readerly) Scriptible (Writerly)
Narrative/ Grand Histoire Antinarrative/ Petit Histoire
Master Code Idiolect
Symptom Desire
Genital/Phallic Polymorphous/Androgynous
Paranoia Schizophrenia
Origin/Cause Difference-Differance/Trace
Metaphysics Irony
Determinacy Indeterminacy
Transcendence Immanence
Though my bias is for a postmodern epistemology, perhaps rather than a
binary oppositional approach (which could be construed from the above
table), meaning is to be found in the spaces space between: which requires
the recognition of continuum. A constructive approach to postmodernism
enables an openness to new juxtapositioning of relationships with emphases
on diversity within holism. This space enables the sacred to be seen as an
immanent constituent within these relationships, requiring a radical
revisioning involving an intrinsic awareness of and care for the whole of
creation as symbiotic relationship.
Blessings in Jesus' name,
KIM THODAY
1 Thomas Docherty (ed), Postmodernism : A Reader, Harvester Wheatsheaf,
1993, pp 1-2.
2 Jean-Francois Lyotard, "Defining the Postmodern", The Cultural Studies
Reader, edited by Simon During,, Routledge, 1993, p 171.
3 Hans Küng, Theology for the Third Millennium : An Ecumenical View,
translated by Peter Heinegg, Doubleday, 1988, p 3.
4 Frederic Jameson, Postmodernism, Or, The Cultural Logic of Late
Capitalism, Verso, 1991, p xx.
5 Ibid, p xx.
6 Ibid.
7 Steven Connor, Postmodernist Culture : An Introduction to Theories of the
Contemporary, Blackwell, 1989.
8 Jameson, op cit, p xii.
9 Kung,, op cit, p 6.
10 A K M Adam, What is Postmodern Biblical Criticism : Textures of
Postmodernism, Fortress Press, 1995, p 22.
11 David Ray Griffin, Varieties of Postmodern Theology, State University
of New York Press, 1989, pp 32-40. Griffin engages with Mark C Taylor's
book about deconstructive postmodernism, Erring : A Postmodern A/theology.
Griffin notes that this type of postmodernism is "nihilistic" since it
eliminates those ideas which had replaced God as well as acknowledging the
death of God. Griffin sets out these ideas and analyses the problems he
views as inherent in their elimination.
12 Ibid, pp xi-xiv.
Griffin is a process theologian whose emphasis is on the unity and holism
reflected in constructive, revisionary postmodern thought. He writes that
"...deconstructive ... postmodernism overcomes the modern worldview through
an anti-worldview; it deconstructs or eliminates the ingredients necessary
for a worldview, such as God, self, purpose, meaning, a real world, and
truth as correspondence." (p xii) On the other hand, "...constructive ...
postmodernism involves a new unity of scientific, ethical, aesthetic, and
religious intuitions... [and] involves a creative synthesis of modern and
pre-modern truths and values." (pp xii-xiii)
Griffin is influential in the work of Ted Peters who writes that
"Postmodernity in essence is the recovery of meaning, not its dissolution."
Ted Peters, God - The World's Future : Systematic Theology for a Postmodern
Era, Fortress Press, 1992, p 18.
Cf. Kung, op cit, p 6.
13 Griffin, ibid, p xiii.
14 Kevin Hart (ed), The Oxford Book of Australian Religious Verse, Oxford
University Press, 1994, p xix.
15 Peters, op cit, p xiii. Peters warns that the present debate about the
authority of the modern era "...is based on the awareness that the
continuation of modernity threatens the very survival of life on our
planet."
16 Rebecca S Chopp and Mark Lewis Taylor (eds), Reconstructing Christian
Theology, Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 1994, p 5.
--
Shalom!
Rowland Croucher
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/index.htm
11,000+ articles
Mark and Bev Tindall
>(From a friend):
>CONSTRUCTIVE POSTMODERNISM (by Kim Thoday)
A good article!
> Indeed, modernism
> can be described as synonymous with elimination of the "realm of the
> transcendent" which had "lost its hold on how we live and how we die".14
This is a truth that requires some meditation in order to understand the
immense changes that took place in the Enlightenment that have affected the
view of Christianity forever. Likewise the table at the end of this post is
useful in understanding the impact of post-modernism.
> Theologians Rebecca S Chopp and Mark Lewis Taylor name
> particular instances of "evil" and "sin" such as crimes against humanity,
> U.S. imperialism and hegemony, ecological crisis, issues of global poverty
> and so on. They identify these realities of evil and sin as having
"...been
> reinforced and sustained, at least in part, by Christian practices and
> theological discourses." These modern practices and discourses are, for
> Chopp and Taylor, root causes of the current Western cultural crisis.
I think they have a point. It is the freedoms that Christianity brought to
the world that have been misused and are now being used against it and
against humanity.
> Schizophrenia
This nicely describes contemporary Christianity in all its variations.