Thu, 1 Dec 1994 07:00:41 -0800 for Date: Thu, 01 Dec 94 08:26:47 EST From: "T R. Young" <34LPF6T@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> Organization: Central Michigan University Subject: Social Sources of Postmodern Sensibility To: GRADUATE STUDENTS IN SOCIOLOGY There are three things every sociologist should know about postmodern scholarship: 1) what is it, 2) where did it come from and 3) how will it re-shape the discipline and/or profession of sociology. In the first two mini-lectures, I tried to give you some idea of what postmodernity is all about...in a word, the relocation of 'authorship' of science and knowledge from 'God,' 'Nature' and 'Society' to the fallible human beings who set their own 'texts' as the impersonal laws/word of God, Nature or Society. In this mini-lecture, I will try to locate postmodern scholarship in the social base which gave rise to it...an essay into the sociology of know- ledge as it were. The third needfull thing; what kind of sociology will come out of this, that can be answered only by those of you who think, work, write, teach, and edit the texts, journals and scholarly meetings in the next 50 years...so learn as much as you can; think as much as you might; teach as well as you are able and enjoy this wonderfully damnable discipline of ours for all the days of your life. Social Sources of Postmodern Sensibility. A. Political Economy. The most frequently cited book about the source of postmodernity [hereafter, pomo] is Fredric Jameson [Duke: 1991]. He says that pomo is the cultural logic of late capitalism. And he develops the point in great detail in art, video, architecture, film and ideology it- self. Now one should 'read' Jameson for oneself...and, what follows is not visible in the 1991 work...it is my own effort to give you a short cut understanding of how late capitalism makes it possible for scholars to jump from modernist presumptions about knowledge and truth to pomo ideas. There are two major sources of pomo in late capitalism which gives rise to the data base for pomo sensibility: the legitimacy problem and the real- zation problem. Again, Jameson might not agree with this 'reading' of late capitalism. 1. The Legitimacy Problem: late capitalism is a magnificent system of production but, for more and more people, a terrifying system of distri- bution. Late capitalism relies more and more on capital intensive labor and, thus, tends to disemploy or under-employ more and more workers. Many go into the service sector and do quite well but the overall trend is to increase inequality re: access to the market and all it holds. The logic of late capitalism is to use more and more of the 'surplus' value produced to buy the media and the media 'stars' in order to manage dissent/create a 'favorable climate' for the inequality inherent in a system which amplifies the power/wealth/status of fewer and fewer. In law, science and politics, billions of dollars are spent to create the dramaturgical facsimile of justice, knowledge and democracy. With all the technical and artistic processes which create images, simulacra, performances, expressions-given-off, make-believe, just-pretend and never- was, it is easy for pomo scholars to look at the knowledge process and to see it as a human product rather than an 'objective' description of that- which-is. Part of the task at legitimating inequality is to design a science which legitimates inequality...The Bell Curve, by Herrnstein and Murray is a current effort which transfers failure and poverty to the separate person and, thus, exculpates the larger economic process which throws more and more millions into an underclass. 2. The Realization Problem. Impressive as it is as a productive system, capitalism cannot survive unless it 'realizes' profit. There are lots of ways to do that...many illegal...but since workers do not get paid 100% of the value they produce, owners must generate 'demand'...much more demand than is registered in 'need.' Again, the media and all the technology by which images are artfully created, is useful. Those who have 'discretionary' income can be persuaded to buy more and more via what Marcuse calls the 'colonization of desire.' The very visible use of artists, musicians, heroes [O.J. Simpson], writers, actors and editors to create the dramaturgical image of health, sexuality, status, love or joy through advertisements. Using what we know of psychology, sociology, anthropology and religion, skilled artisans can generate 'demand' on the part of countless millions with one perfect moment in an ad. In all this, the reality-creating process is laid bare for the more nihilistic of the postmodern camp to condemn and to disdain. But there is far more to postmodern sensibility than the dis-enchantment of a few dozen french essayists. B. Feminist Theory. Out of the successes of colonial capitalism came a new layer of 'liberated' women in Europe and England to offer art, music, novels, and later theory with which to displace male phallo-centric cultural products. Modern science is nothing if not phallo-centric, i.e, oriented to prediction, control and instrumental rationality. Feminist theory rejects rationality and control as the 'highest' form of human behavior. In the USA, WWII brought women into factories, shops, and offices...many went back to the home after but, given that women work better, longer, cheaper and with less macho resistence than do males, capitalism tends to give them the economic, social and legal power with which to challenge male hegemony as the only politically correct game in town, home and college. By the 1970's women such as Carol Gilligan were making an effective challenge to Kohlberg's ideas about the use of rational application of abstract principles as best the way to judge/scale moral growth. C. Third World Challenges. World War II saw the collapse of great empires around the world. Germany, France, England and Japan lost empire and, in the doing, lost ideological hegemony over the standards of art, medicine, music, poetry, religion and science. Again, capitalism plays an uncertain role; as the center of wealth moved from Venice to Brussels to London to New York in centuries past, it moves to Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan now. The quest for ever cheaper labor and ever safer shelters for wealth drives the move from country to country and re-centers the standards for art, music, religion and science as it moves. D. Globalization and Bloc Formation. Since the turn of the century, we have seen an uneven process of globalization/bloc formation. The globalization of communications, transport, banking, finance and commerce not to mention the multi-local 'sourcing' of parts and services by industrial capital...all have worked to de-center Europe and its American cousin as the arbitor of morals, standards, tests, and measures. MacDonald's tries to de-culture the production food [with some small success]; Coca Cola tries to universal its beverages; Chase-Manhattan tries to universalize its financial instruments; IBM tries to universalize its hardware and software...in all this, 'difference' is made the topic of analysis while 'otherness' gets a new face...instead of smug and superior dismissal, that which was marginal becomes respectable. Entirely new and different ways to think, to feel, to do and to be are considered. The certainties of pre-modern and modern sensibility are brought back for reconsideration, re=evaluation and, perchance replacement. E. Desire and Sexuality. The text and subtext of many works in postmodern sensibility center around human sexuality and the ways in which both modern and pre-modern sensibility limit and channel desire and sensuality. It is not by accident that some of the more active critics of modernity are gay and lesbian. If we are to understand the concern in pomo with desire and sexuality, we should give a bit of thought to how alternative ways to do and be gendered arise/are repressed. Assume with me that there are an infinite array of ways to do gender...that physiology and psychology permit far more than two and only two gendering modalities. If so, why should some societies limit human sexuality to but two genders; why should other societies not repress variety; why should a social base for gay and lesbian forms of sexuality emerge in late capitalism??? Why should this be the 'sub-text' for so much in both pre-modern, modern and postmodern polemics... I am not the best one to answer such questions...I simply do not know. I tend to think that late capitalism maximizes both the labor reserve and the generation of markets by de-gendering workers and consumers but that is such an easy answer, I don't trust it too much. You take it from here??? Conclusion. Notice that I have not given much room to objective, intellectual reasoned discourse in accounting for the rise of postmodern scholarship. I have tried to give it a social base and a social history...grounded upon, of course, some basic ideas in political economy. I am wise enough to know that my own reading of postmodernism is shaped by my own history and beliefs; that there are other readings of the rise of pomo which, in their own right, have much to offer to the student. I encourage those on socgrad to consider other explanations [but be wary of psychologistic and pathologistic explanations]. Finally, I want to say as emphatically as you can hear, that it is my most carefully considered position that pre-modern, modern and postmodern thinking are essential to a good and decent society. Pre-modernity gives us the basic knowledge tools with which to construct social relations and social life worlds without which there is nothing: faith, belief, trust, hope, compassion, community and fellowship are indispensible to the human project. Modern science has and will always have much to offer the human process; food, shelter, transport, art forms, educational resources, and health care are the enduring contributions of modern science and its concern with control and certainty. Postmodern scholarship is, in a way, biblical in that it offers us of the fruit of the tree of knowledge and, in the taking, we become responsible as never could we be in a god-hewn world or in one driven by 'iron laws' of nature and/or society. As the preacher said in the old testament, I have given my heart to seek and to search out by wisdom all things that are done under the sun and Lo, I find that all is vanity and vexation of the spirit but...also that knowledge and wisdom maketh the face to shine...it is a good time to be alive and to learn. For both you and for me. T.R.