Heather MacDonald
POSTMODERNISM AND ITS DISCONTENTED
Postmodernists insist that Western "discourse" be opened to
voices previously silenced - the most sought after being nonwhite, female, or
homosexual. This seemingly unqualified invitation to the so-called victims of
Western culture has, however, one catch: postmodernist discourse is con–
ducted in only one language - high theory - and the participants refuse to
provide a translation. If you seek entrance to postmodernist discourse, unless
you can utter one of the passwords, such as, "The absence of presence un–
derwrites the exteriority of the interior," your voice will not be heard.
A
symposium last year at the Whitney Museum of American Art
entitled "Postmodernism and Its Discontents" (November 5, 1989) drama–
tized this contradiction between postmodernist theory and practice. The pan–
elists included Douglas Crimp, art critic and Coeditor of the journal
October;
Martha Rossler, video artist; Homi Bhabha, Lecturer in Literature at the
University of Sussex, England; and Michele Wallace, Assistant Professor of
English at City College. Brian Wallace, Senior Editor of
Art in America,
moderated.
After the panelists had delivered papers ranging in subject from the
repression of gay speech at Yale University to the economic and social dislo–
cations of the Reagan years, Wallace solicited questions from the audience -
a big mistake. An older man asked what postmodernism was and why the
Whitney had sponsored the symposium, which seemed to be more about
politics than art. A number of equally benighted members of the audience
breathed a sigh of relief and applauded. The panel was stunned. After
whispered consultation, they turned to face the questioner, making no effort
to conceal their contempt. Why had he attended the symposium ifhe was
ignorant about postmodernism? (Although the panel was sponsored by the
Whitney Museum's Public Education Department, apparently education was
not one of its goals.) Besides, what else had they been discussing if not post–
modernism? (None of the speakers had discussed postmodernism directly or
offered a definition of the term.)
It
was sheer impertinence to suggest that
the panel needed justification.
This rebuke did not silence the intruders in the audience.
An
older
woman asked apologetically when postmodernism began, what its aesthetic
was, and who its practitioners were. This was really too much. Rossler shot
out petulantly: "1965 . Only one question per questioner. Next?" Bhabha,
gesturing to Rossler, adopted her no-nonsense approach: "There's one
[practitioner of postmodernism] sitting next to me." Crimp tartly reminded
the questioner that he had discussed one piece of art in his talk and then con-
