(Untitled)

[autopoetic]

At work, someone asked me if I could explain the difference between modernism and postmodernism. Like any sane, reflective person, my immediate answer was, "No." That kind of question is murky at best, and hopeless at worst. But given that my only options were to come up with something more verbose or go back to work, I felt the need to spin

Comments

[lynn_p]

In the postmodern era, time has become personal, less restrictive and inhibited. Rather than viewing time as a strict observer-independent succession of events, time has a temporal subjectivity - a timelessness in form and style. Time is never perfect; it doesn't always reduce to a formal universal. The quality of time is reflected in the attainment of excellence of craft; it provides a systematic yet fluid reference point for measuring innovation.

Space, too, is no longer reductively grounded: the gradual erosion of modernism, which in a way is a retreat from the subjective world, has led to the loss of some universals in form and structure. Postmodern architecture is transformative, becoming engaged, progressive, truly avant-garde. Images and silhouettes become more elegant, even in the streamlined architecture of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Philip Johnson. Architects such as I. M. Pei, Frank Gehry, and Peter Eisenman completely break the mold.

A qualitative change is taking place in postmodernist architecture and art, there is no longer an indifference to the personal requirements of context and place. The viewer's position and attitude give credence to the quality of the aesthetic.