Filed under: Uncategorized
After reading Hutcheon’s piece, The Politics of Postmodernism, I felt that I had a more concise understanding of Postmodernism, and what it is meant to do within various areas. Initially, Hutcheon explains the correlation of postmodernism with representation. Hutcheon explains, “Nevertheless, in literary and art critical circles there is still a tendency to see postmodern theory and practice either as simply replacing representation with the idea of textuality or as denying our intricate involvement with representation, even though much postmodern thought has disputed this tendency” (29-30). Hutcheon explains that postmodernism goes beyond replacing traditonal modes of representation and challenges what we see as truth by ‘representing duplicates’ (30). Hutcheon refrences Althusser’s view of ideology as a production of representations. There is no real because everything is a reproduction of a reproduction. “There is nothing natural about the ‘real’ and there never was- even before the existence of mass media” (31). What I liked most about Hutcheon’s explanation of postmodernism is that it made me feel less disconcerting about the intentions of postmodernism. For a while I was thinking of postmodernism as a pesemistic view, where there is no order and no end. From the Hutcheon reading I saw postmodernism in a different light, as stated; “The postmodern, as I have been defining it, is not a degeneration into ‘hyperreality’ but a questioning of what reality can mean and how we can come to know it. It is not that representation now dominates or effaces the referent, but rather that it now self-consciously acknowledges its existence as representation-that is, as interpreting (indeed as creating) its referent, not as offering direct and immediate access to it” (32). According to Hutcheon, we can use postmodernism as a tool to see what we see as truth and reality, and why we see it this way. To question our beliefs and acknowledge what can be changed. As in Sherman’s film stills, she uses images of women in stereotypical roles associated with the female gender to question how women have assumed these roles throughout the years, and hopefully spark change. I thought that this reading was best for me to understand postmodernism, and what it can do for various mediums ranging from arts to politics.
2 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Hey Melissa,
I too felt like Hutcheon put postmodernism in a better light than we’ve seen so far. What a breath of fresh air! I also agree with the way you applied her ideas of referent rather than realistic representation to Sherman:
Exactly. Additionally, Sherman is playing the role of photographer/actress, subject/object, woman/cliché, and yet no one version, nor all of them together, grant the viewer access to who Sherman or the woman in her picture is. Her use of photography, the black and white specifically, challenges our assumption of historical representation in old pictures, yet knowing that they are created by an artist who has manipulated every aspect of the scene turns the medium in on itself to reveal its limitations. This is exactly the self-reflexivity Hutcheon talks about.
Comment by Kim S. Clune October 16, 2007 @ 2:11 pm[...] 2007.10.04 To Tammy on Fight Club, the book 2007.10.15 To Aliya on Cindy Sherman 2007.10.15 To Melissa on [...]
Pingback by Self Analysis « BRAIN DRAIN October 18, 2007 @ 10:08 pm