pomo

[Dave Monroe]

... but I'll say what I said last time "postmodernism" came up here as a
point of discussion, roughly, i.e., that I've no particular problem with
the term, as it is ultimately no less difficult to define, as it is no
less inclusive of seemingly heterogeneous aspects, and as it carries no
less (of the expected, inevitable, and not necessarily undesirable)
political baggage of most any other term in aesthetics, in aesthetic
history, in history, in historiography, and, in particular, in
historical periodization, than any other, esp. amongst the big ones, yr
"medieval," yr "Renaissance," yr "Enlightenment," yr "modern" (that
being an esp. contnetious term already, in my experience, and not to be
conflayed with ...), yr "modernist," whatever.  Yr own objections to
standard constructions of "modernism" attest to this, Terrence.  And do
keep in mind, it's ALL jargon, "plot," "characater," "theme," "setting,"
"genre," "literature," you name it ...