ABSTRACT

Many current theorists and writers claim that the most representative cultural artifacts of our time are “postmodern” and fit within the aesthetic-historical category frequently termed “postmodernism.” As the prefix “post” and its companion (i.e. “modernism”) suggest, the term “postmodernism” bears some relation to that which has come before it, presumably, “modernism.” But as Rudolf Beck, Hildegard Kuester and Mark Kuester suggest, the term covers widely disparate phenomena and is by no means universally defined, applied, or agreed upon. Their outline of the word’s myriad usage succinctly describes this battlefield of contending ideas:

While some critics define it [postmodernism] as a counter movement challenging modernism, others prefer to see it as a continuation of modernist endeavors. Sometimes critics do not even agree on whether certain artists should be counted as moderns or postmoderns, for postmodernism is far from being a homogeneous movement. For example, there is a spectrum of quite different definitions in various cultural fields such as literature, art, history, architecture and music, and these definitions were created at different points in history stretching from the beginning of the twentieth century to the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. (Beck, Kuester, and Kuester 3)

Obviously, these divergent construals render the term “postmodernism” highly problematic, often making it an all purpose descriptor for whatever cultural product one pleases. 1 Although scholars have produced significant works attempting to define “postmodernism” and apply it to cultural-material phenomena (e.g. Jameson 1983, 1997; Hutcheon 1988), writers continue to debate postmodernism’s character and categorical legitimacy.