Talk:Postmodernism
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Postmodernism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 120 days ![]() |
![]() | Postmodernism was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was selected as the article for improvement on 25 October 2021 for a period of one week. |
![]() | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
structural issues
[edit]Hey all,
I'm looking at doing some edits to the top of this article (i.e., above Manifestations section) with stronger sourcing to academic works by actual subject-matter experts. There are also, however, some structural issues I wanted to check in on before beginning.
Is there a reason for treating Origin and History separately? I haven't yet worked through the material in detail, but I would default to combining these into one section, probably entitled Etymology, to precede Definition (or perhaps, as with the work I've been doing on Irony, something more along the lines of The Challenge of Definition).
The Theories and Derivatives section is confusing to me. Structuralism and post-structuralism are precursors to postmodernism that were after-the-fact co-opted under that umbrella term. This should be clear in the article. Post-postmodernism seems like it ought to belong to a Legacy section that does not exist (and so maybe should just be its own section after Manifestations until it does?).
I don't love that the header Manifestations suggests there is some one thing called postmodernism that has been theoretically articulated and appears under various guises in different media. My objection is not that this is contrary to postmodern theory, but just that it is a dubious claim that should not be presented as fact without strong sourcing. Lastly, shouldn't Philosophy, to the extent that it has not already been covered incidentally by Etymology and Definition, fall under this header (whatever the best term may be), rather than as its own section above what are currently presented as "manifestations"?
Any input appreciated!
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have not abandoned this. The structure now makes sense to me except for the question of where to put the precursor movements of (post-)structuralism and deconstruction. The next thing on my agenda, which is arguably the main thing, is the section currently titled Definition. I might incorporate them there—although this would probably require condensing them a bit, which I haven't worked through, but don't love.
- Right now, the Definition section is sourced primarily to Britannica, which is not a good source on philosophical topics, and to notes from an old PBS series with no authorship attribution. A few look good, but lack page numbers. I haven't checked all of them, but Bryant, Ian; Johnston, Rennie; Usher, Robin (2004), at least, does not support the claim for which it is cited. My plan is to start fresh, but incorporate as much of what is there as is verifiably and due. Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 21:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I finally got a draft into good enough shape to post to the mainspace. There is obviously a great deal that could (and should!) be added, but I think that it is nevertheless an improvement over the previous version—particularly with respect to sourcing.
- I plan to give it a few days in case anyone has serious objections. Then I will rewrite the lead to summarize the current version of the article.
- In the future, I also hope also to flesh out the philosophical part of the article as much as is appropriate when there is a child article, postmodern philosophy. I might also fiddle with the later parts of the article, but I have no plans to rewrite that material.
- Cheers, Patrick (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Items for further improvement:
- "In various arts" should have a section devoted to film.
- The "In theory" section should be rewritten to focus on the influence of Derrida in the 1970s and Foucault in the 1980s. Probably coverage of Lyotard should be expanded beyond what is included in "Usage/Later developments". Baudrillard needs to be covered, and (per multiple sources) Richard Rorty. Barthes and Lacan would also be justified by the literature, but appear secondary. Anything more than this is probably best left to the postmodern philosophy child article.
- "In theory" should also have a subsection on postmodern theology.
- The "In society" section should have a subsection on the deployment of the term in non-academic political/cultural/popular discourse. It's remarkable that such a messy academic term should attain such currency outside of the academy. Suggestions for sourcing on this would be most welcome. I'm not even sure where best to look.
- Per overview sources, "Criticisms" should give a paragraph each to both Jürgen Habermas and Fredric Jameson. More detailed discussion is best reserved for criticism of postmodernism.
- I'm not going to do all of this, but I welcome comments on the above or, as always, other suggestions. Even just establishing a good TOC enables and encourages productive edits.
- Cheers, Patrick (talk) 20:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Items for further improvement:
still to do
[edit]Since I take the structural issues discussed above to be mostly resolved, I'm starting a new thread. Mostly what I'm interested in here is other improvements to the article could be made without too much research in a way that might encourage and facilitate contributions from those with more subject-matter expertise. Here's my current list:
- "In various arts" needs a section lead to provide even just a superficial explanation of why all these different things are grouped together as specifically postmodern.
- It also needs a film section and a dance section. Even if these are very short, they can Wikilink out to their respective pages.
- There are some mostly unsourced lists that need to be trimmed back or removed.
- "In theory" needs to be rewritten in view of the "Theoretical development" section above. It might go back to "In philosophy" since the article can now dispense with most of the material on poststructuralism already covered. There are a few other names that show up in the literature that should be at least mentioned: D&G, Rorty, Habermas (again), Jameson (again), and Baudrillard (again) and possibly a few others who appear in some surveys (but are completely ignored in others). But since the article has a child page and some of this has been partially covered above, I expect it to be shorter when I am finished.
- The "Criticisms" section is at least 80% criticisms of a specifically philosophical position (that, incidentally, very few people actually hold). I will probably move much of this to postmodern philosophy and see if there is anything at criticism of postmodernism that ought to be restored here to help keep this an appropriately general article.
- I removed the the rather useless sidebar from its place at the top of the article. Trying to put it at the bottom, however, I learned that to do this requires it be reproduced according to a different template. If I can cut-and-paste my way through most of that, I'll do it. Otherwise, it's on someone else.
- I'm pretty sure that postmodern theology is enough of a thing to merit inclusion somewhere.
- The article lead needs to be rewritten to properly summarize the article for a general audience. Once that is done, I believe the maintenance banner can be safely removed.
Is there anything obvious I am missing?
Cheers, Patrick (talk) 22:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- I addressed "Criticisms" as per above. Probably even the remaining material should be integrated into sections above where applicable. It's difficult to meaningfully criticize such diverse phenomena in a general way. (And the problems with using "postmodern" as a general term are already highlighted near the top of the article.) Patrick (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
new article lead
[edit]I've drafted a new lead for the article. It's an imperfect summary of a far from perfect article. Please share ideas for improvement!
Keep in mind that the lead is just a plain-language overview of the content of the article. Anything that is conspicuously missing or wrong in the lead needs to be added to the body of the article with supporting sources before changing anything non-egregiously wrong at the top. For the same reason, per WP:CITELEAD, the body of the article is the source of the lead; individual citations are not recommended except to prevent interventions by editors not aware of this policy. (Probably that will prove to be the case here, but I suggest we wait and respond just to issues that actually emerge.)
Here's the draft that, absent objections, I will soon publish to the article:
Postmodernism is a term used to refer to a variety of artistic, cultural, and philosophical movements that claim to mark a break with modernism. What they have in common is the conviction that it is no longer possible to rely upon previous ways of representing reality. Still, there is disagreement among experts about its more precise meaning even within narrowly defined contexts.
The term began to acquire its current range of meanings in literary criticism and architectural theory during the 1950s–1960s. Building upon poststructural theory, postmodern thought defined itself by the rejection of any single, foundational historical narrative. This called into question the legitimacy of the Enlightenment account of progress and rationality.
In opposition to modernism's alleged self-seriousness, postmodernism is characterized by its playful use of irony and pastiche, among other features. Critics claim that it supplants moral, political, and aesthetic ideals with mere style and spectacle.
In the 1990s, "postmodernism" came to denote a general – and, in general, celebratory – response to cultural pluralism. Proponents align themselves with feminism, multiculturalism, and post-colonialism. Critics, however, allege that its premises lead to a nihilistic form of relativism. In this sense, it has become a term of abuse in popular culture.
Cheers, Patrick (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Patrick Welsh, it seems some key points have been taken out of the lead.
- rejects the certainty of knowledge and stable meaning, and acknowledges the influence of ideology in maintaining political power.[1][2] The idea of objective claims is dismissed as naïve realism,[3] emphasizing the conditional nature of knowledge.[2] Postmodernism embraces self-referentiality, epistemological relativism, moral relativism, pluralism, irony, irreverence, and eclecticism.[2] It opposes the "universal validity" of binary oppositions, stable identity, hierarchy, and categorization.[4][5]
- Critics argue that postmodernism promotes obscurantism, abandons Enlightenment rationalism and scientific rigor, and contributes little to analytical or empirical knowledge.[6]
- These appear to be important points. Do you know why they were taken out? Hogo-2020 (talk) 10:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ Aylesworth, Gary (5 February 2015) [1st pub. 2005]. "Postmodernism". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. sep-postmodernism (Spring 2015 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 12 May 2019.
- ^ a b c Duignan, Brian. "Postmodernism". Britannica.com. Retrieved 24 April 2016.
- ^ Bryant, Ian; Johnston, Rennie; Usher, Robin (2004). Adult Education and the Postmodern Challenge: Learning Beyond the Limits. Routledge. p. 203.
- ^ "postmodernism". American Heritage Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 2019. Archived from the original on 15 June 2018. Retrieved 5 May 2019 – via AHDictionary.com.
Of or relating to an intellectual stance often marked by eclecticism and irony and tending to reject the universal validity of such principles as hierarchy, binary opposition, categorization, and stable identity.
- ^ Bauman, Zygmunt (1992). Intimations of postmodernity. London New York: Routledge. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-415-06750-8.
- ^ Hicks 2011 ; Brown 2013 ; Bruner 1994, pp. 397–415 ; Callinicos 1989 ; Devigne 1994 ; Sokal & Bricmont 1999
- Former good article nominees
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Arts
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Arts
- C-Class vital articles in Arts
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class Aesthetics articles
- Mid-importance Aesthetics articles
- Aesthetics task force articles
- C-Class Continental philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Continental philosophy articles
- Continental philosophy task force articles
- C-Class Contemporary philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Contemporary philosophy articles
- Contemporary philosophy task force articles
- C-Class visual arts articles
- WikiProject Visual arts articles
- C-Class culture articles
- Low-importance culture articles
- WikiProject Culture articles
- C-Class Literature articles
- Mid-importance Literature articles
- C-Class Skepticism articles
- Low-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- Wikipedia former articles for improvement
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press