Whither Post-Modernism?

By Prof. N.A.deS.Amaratunga

(May 05, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) It was the great historian Arnold Toynbee (1934) who coined the word "post-modernism" to denote the decline of Western civilization. Since then post-modernism has developed basically as a system of criticism of culture in general and literature, film and architecture in particular. It presents a philosophy that takes an opposite point of view to modernism in most of its aspects particularly in relation to liberal humanism, realism, power, language and art.Its relevance appears to lie with the advanced societies of the West and the East as it seems to affirm both the good and the bad of consumerism. However the discourse of post-modernism seems to lack clarity and coherence. Further post-modernists’ language is confusing to say the least and they are not bothered about that problem either.

Philosophers and thinkers if they are to be of some use to society should have the ability to delve deep into life and the world and expose the good and the bad and give guidance for a better life. Post-modernists may not agree with this point of view and may say that there is no meaning in the world anyway and nobody could tell how we should live. Karl Marx once said that philosophers have explained the world in many ways but what is necessary is to change it. Post-modernists who borrow from Marxist concepts which reveal the catastrophic trend of consumerism, that has taken the world in its grip, could only, by their rhetoric either endorse or watch from the side lines. Frederic Jameson the leading contemporary Marxist thinker in a critical reference to post-modernism says; "never in any previous civilization have the great metaphorical preoccupations, the fundamental questions of being and meaning of life, seemed so utterly remote and pointless".

The leading post-modernists like Michel Foucault, Jean Lyotard and Jacques Derrida had been influenced by philosophers of an earlier era such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger. Nietzsche had come under the influence of Schopenhauer who said that the physical world is a construct of the mind thus drawing in to question the concept of reality and truth. Nietzsche borrowing from this viewpoint said, in his publication titled "The Will to Power" (1901) that truth is not absolute but relative and is created by man according to his vision and the needs of his time. He went further and said that the truth is a construct of language. Systems of morals being relative creations too change from time to time. More important and radical were his views on power which he said was linked to the human condition, social structure and knowledge. Due to the views he held, Nietzsche was considered a nihilist and these nihilistic thinking had obviously influenced the post-modernists. Mills (1959), Toynbee (1963), Bell (1976) and Baudrillard (1993) had shown that post-modernity is a nihilistic epoch.

Nietzsche’s nihilism was mainly a concern with the decadence of modernity. Post-modernists however went beyond this nihilism not with the intention of correcting the decadence but seemingly to develop a philosophy to counter modernism in all its aspects. They did this it appears just for the sake of opposing modernism, for no other worthwhile outcome has ensued from their efforts. They expanded Nietzsche’s and also other philosophers’ ideas on truth, reality, power and language to develop points of view to target the major tenets of modernism such as liberal humanism and realism.

There is some truth in the contention that reality cannot be ascertained accurately but when post-modernists go to the extreme of denying totally the possibility of truth the very foundation of meaningful life is undermined. The dilemma of post-modernism is the question; how can the status and validity of it theoretical approaches be ascertained if neither truth nor foundations for knowledge are admitted? If we remove the possibility of rational foundations or standards on what basis can we operate? What do the post-modernists offer in place of what they remove? They do not offer any alternative nor do they engage in searching for a new foundation. Post-modernist theories are a denial of modernism and not an improvement or an option.

Francois Lyotard, leading post-modernist, says that power is more and more the criterion of truth. The fact that this should not be the case does not seem to bother him. Power in Western societies may govern the thinking, behaviour, consumerism, and even the production of knowledge but how it could be the criterion of truth is difficult to understand. Moreover Lyotard’s language in dealing with this subject is extremely confusing and almost impossible to understand. One wonders what happened to Bertrand Russell’s definition of truth not to mention his simple language.

Another important controversial issue found in post-modernism is its philosophy of language. There had been two schools of thought on language. One led by Hobbs and Locke says that language is the means of conveyance of ideas and thought. The other school led by Wittgenstein, Quine, Heidegger and Gadamer holds that language is not a tool but the font of all ideas, thoughts and opinions. Heidegger said "man does not use language, but language uses man". Post-modernists developed this theory further and Jacques Derrida went on to formulate his theory of deconstruction which attempts to find the meaning of texts by a process of deconstruction. Swiss linguist Saussure proclaimed that meaning resides not in relationship between an utterance and that to which it refers but in the relationship of signs to one another. He further said language is not a function of the speaking subject. Roland Bathes said "language displaces who gives voice to it".

Derrida claims that language is constantly turning against itself; we can neither say what we mean nor mean what we say. He also suggests that a deconstructive method could demystify the ideological contents of all contexts, interpreting all human activities as essentially texts. Meaning within language is also made elusive by Derrida’s insistence that language is metaphorical and cannot therefore directly convey truth.

Thus post-modernists have moved language to centre stage. Everything from ideas to facts, from history to knowledge and reality and even human consciousness are said to be constructs of language. They have said that consciousness and language are virtually the same! This made Noam Chomsky the philosopher who was voted as the greatest American Intellectual say that the post-modernist linguists have reduced the world into language and he asked; what about the Universe? What is worse is these theories are presented in incoherent language! Perhaps Derrida’s deconstructive method has to be applied to understand his theory of deconstruction! Ironically Derrida accuses his critics of being unclear while saying what he has to say cannot have clear definable meaning. Well, if meaning is indeterminate how are Derrida’s arguments also not indeterminate?

Another vital area where post-modernism has had a traumatic impact is literature, specially the realistic novel. Post-modernist novelists have rejected the major philosophies and principles that govern novel writing which were adopted by Western and Russian novelists. The principles that decide and govern the plot, the context, the theme, the point of view, the characters, the sequence of events, time and place and the social relevance have either been radically altered or totally given up. According to them the realistic novel cannot depict life; it is not a mirror that reflects man and society. Thus the very purpose of the novel is repudiated. However they are silent about what useful purpose it serves. They have distorted the novel by the adaptation and inclusion of fantasy, mega realism, magic realism etc. Also they do not distinguish in value between elitist art and populist art thus allowing the introduction of superficial populist features into the novel which tends to devalue it further, undermining its ability to serve its function.

Experimenting with language is another technique post modernist writers employ in their novels. Very often this makes it more difficult to understand and it distorts the rules of language and therefore may not help in the development and learning of languages. Local writers who like to ape the West are also guilty of this harmful meaningless practice (See Liyanage Amarakeerthi in "Atawaka Puthu").

Here again the rationale for all these changes are vague and difficult to understand or justify. The fact that reality cannot be determined accurately, which is a viewpoint that arises due to the inexactitude of science, cannot be taken as a reason for its abandonment, or distortion in the creation of fiction. What we experience has to be considered as reality for the purpose of the novel. That reality need not be the absolute truth so far as the novel is concerned. Without recourse to that level of reality it is not possible to construct a novel that serves its purpose. It is the depiction of human experience that could appeal to us and create within us subdued emotions which would enhance our sensitivity and help us understand life, see the evil within and without and perhaps stop us chasing the mirage of happiness in consumerism.

The post-modernist novel on the other hand is incapable of this vital function and devoid of its function it becomes an article of entertainment like many other consumer articles selling by the million and similarly providing an escapist route. In this lucrative business Harry potter caters to children and Milan Kundera to adults. Local post-modernist writers are trying hard to get into this business.

To find out which type of novel performs its function more effectively one could compare Leo Tolstoy’s "War and Peace" with Gunther Gras’ "The Tin Drum". Both attempt to convey the evil of war and violence. The former employs natural experiences such as the death of Piere a man of character and virtue. The latter adopts post-modernist techniques; its chief protagonist, a child stops the growth of his body in protest against violence. As this reaction is unnatural and unreal it does not evoke natural emotions in our minds, we do not take the phenomenon seriously as we know that it is something that has not happened. On the other hand at the death of Piere in "War and Peace" we feel like crying.

Leo Tolstoy one of the greatest novelists of all time believed that the novel had the important function of fostering the moral progress of mankind and that art is not for art itself only. Graham Hough who was the Professor of English at Cambridge and an eminent literary critic held similar views on this matter. The most prominent recent criticism of post-modern art is that of John Gardner. Gardner wrote that the classification of post-modern applied to the art of his time was an evasion, a stab at nothing – i.e. a move to elude the basic function of criticism, which, according to Gardner is to judge art’s moral value.

The novel redirects its attention to itself, reminds the reader that they are artifices, and questions the very grounds of literature instead of continuing to create the illusion of an external world. For instance Ithelo Calvino’s novel titled "If On A Winter Night A Trveller" is all about the author’s effort to write the novel and the reader’s effort to read it! Meta-Fiction, another post-modernist concept, provides a criticism of the novel within the novel itself. What all this means is that post-modern art is struggling against itself, its prior claims to help us understand the world evaporating while even the concept of imagination loses its potency.

Many critics characterize post-modernism as an ephemeral phenomenon that cannot be adequately defined simply because, as a philosophy at least, it represents nothing more substantial than a series of disparate conjectures allied only in their distrust of modernity.

We in South Asia must not adopt post-modernism as a technique of criticism or a philosophy for it is not relevant to us and cannot be applied to our society though some writers attempt to identify isolated instances as features of "post-modernist society" and to justify its adoption in their writing (see Liyanage Amarakeerthi in "Amuthu Kathawa", 2005).Further as post-modernism is an affirmation of rampaging consumerist culture of the West and a repudiation of moral values it can do more harm than good to Eastern cultures.