Modernism and Postmodernism
*Please note that the following is an attempt to place these two very large ideas into categories
that appear binary and exclusive. However, the lists which you see below are contrasting
categories only because we must, in order to live in this world, create logocentric oppositions
(the Other) to avoid going bonkers. (Unless you are a modernist who believes in grand totalizing
theories that conveniently place issues and ideas in specific boundaries and borders.) The
information about literary theory comes from a variety of sources, most notably Selden’s A
Reader’s Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory (4th), Michael Ryan’s Literary Theory: An
Introduction, my incomplete and flawed notes from Dr. Thomas Preston’s Literary Theory class,
and other readings and discussions regarding the issues.
*Second note: I am not a physicist or biologist. The information below is culled from a variety of
sources (Paul Civello and Fritjof Capra, in particular) and only claims to capture the larger
concepts behind the ideas. My contention, in essence, is that literature is influenced by the
scientific community of which it is a part. (By the way, I think science is influenced by
philosophical ideas, literature, and all other fields also.)
I.
Physics:
A. While it seems odd to begin with a discussion of physics with regards to literary
theories, the evolution of 20th century physics mirrors (and probably influences) the
development of literature.
1. Newtonian physics– physics derived from Newton (duh)
A. classic physics posits a mechanical universe (a clock or watch)
B. the universe is a mechanism, a "conglomeration" of parts that function
according to certain rules
C. the parts are capable of operating independently and could be separated
and studied independently as well
D. atom is the smallest part
E. Basic theory–study various parts in isolation, even at the atomic level,
one could construct an accurate picture of the entire universe. The whole
is a sum of its parts and they move across chronological time in a linear
fashion.
–cause and effect is not reversible (the clock can’t run backward)
–time ends when all the parts reach a state of equilibrium (all
energy is evenly distributed–entropy) and the universe becomes a
lifeless mass
F. The operations of these discrete, linear processes were governed by
fixed natural laws (gravity, inertia, thermodynamics). These three basic
tenets of physics (discreteness of matter, linear cause and effect,
knowability of natural laws) presupposes a basic scientific method:
–because these laws could be isolated, they could be knowable–the
goal is to isolate the parts and then study cause and effect (this is
important)
–scientist believed they could separate themselves from the
experiment (subject from object, observer from observed)
G. This physics effects storytellers (linear stories with a clear beginning,
middle, and end) and those who study stories (pull out symbols, study
symbol, plug symbol back into story to draw conclusions and all symbols
or myths share the same truth–a spring is always a symbol for . . . or write
a novel about one man/woman and draw universal truths about the human
condition)
–Joseph Le Conte’s theories influence Norris and Zola–Le Conte
argues that species are continually evolving toward higher forms–
no species ever devolves, thus there is a linear progression that
benefits all of mankind
2. New Physics:
–Fritjof Capra writes: "The two basic theories of modern physics have
thus transcended the principal aspects of the Cartesian world and of
Newtonian physics. Quantum theory has shown that subatomic particles
are not isolated grains of matter but are probability patterns,
interconnections in an inseparable cosmic web that includes the human
observer and her consciousness. Relativity theory has made the cosmic
web come alive, so to speak, bu revealing its intrinsically dynamic
characteristics by showing that its activity is the very essence of its being.
In modern physics, the image of the universe as a machine has been
transcended by a view it as one indivisible, dynamic whole whose parts
are essentially interrelated and can be understood only as patterns of a
cosmic process. At the subatomic level the interrelations and interactions
between the parts of the whole are more fundamental than the parts
themselves. There is motion but there are, ultimately no moving objects;
there is activity but there are no actors; there are no dancers, there is only
the dance."
–Specifically, Godel’s Incompleteness theory, Einstein’s Relativity theory,
and quantum mechanics play a major role in undercutting Newtonian
physics
–each argues, essentially, that the universe is an all encompassing
field where parts can not be detached and be expected to react the
same as they do when in a group.
–there is no linear cause and effect–instead there is a mutual
reciprocal interaction between events
–each is both a cause and effect (physical reactions move
two ways simultaneously)
–Implicit–observer can no longer be discrete from observed,
subject no longer separated from object, audience no longer
separate from writer/art work
–we are involved in what we describe: Civello writes: "This
inseparability of subject and object in the field concept goes hand
in hand with perhaps the most significant epistemological shift
brought about by the new physics: the shift from Newtonian
certainty and knowability to uncertainty and indeterminancy.
Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem is of course seminal here–it is
often referred to as the indeterminancy principle–for he
demonstrated mathematically that indeterminacy was inevitable
that one could never prove a theory that was not false was
completely true."
–Einstein–conceptualizes notion of interconnected field that contained
observer (objectivity impossible)
–Quantum theory– (Planck, Bohr, Heisenberg)
–Planck–light does not behave like the electromagnetic was "it was
thought to be"
–instead, behaved like energy particles (quanta)
–Bohr–probability wave–electromagnetic waves not real waves but
indicators of probability that a light quantum was present.
–Basically uncertainty
superceded
certainty
–Heisenberg–mathematical formula proving that impossibility of
locating position and velocity of particle demonstrates limitations
of Newtonian physics–our knowledge can only be partial,
probable, guesses
–the act of observing is part of the experiment because we
observe what be expect and what we expect depends
greatly on our theoretical perspective
3. Systems Theory (biology):
–developing parallel to quantum mechanics
Ludwig von Bertalanffy–argues biology should not focus solely on the
molecular level
–argues that a biological system "was not a loose collection, but a
complex organization of many interrelated and interdependent
systems"–when you separate the parts, they behave differently.
–closed and open systems are physics systems:
Closed systems–(2nd law of thermodynamics)–universe move
toward maximum disorder (entropy) and a state of equilibrium (all
energy dispersed evenly)
–Open system–living systems interact with the environment to
continually build up and break down components, moving toward
a complex organization
–Bertalanffy attacks the linear paradigm in history and psychology,
arguing that man "is not a passive receiver of stimuli coming from an
external world"
–people create as well as are created, determine as well as are
determined
–history–great people are triggers not causes of historical event–
make and made
–attacked humanity’s application of science paradigm (closed
system) to its interactions with the environment and self
–this paradigm (the enlightenment, Newtonian paradigm)
threatens to destroy the world by glorifying technology
(assumes human scientific ability will evolve to solve
problems and is always forward thinking)
4. These two sciences undermine the naturalistic novel and the modernist belief in
creating a fiction that can re-center the world. But they also deny the postmodern decentered approach These movements take us away from a centralized truth and destroy
the subject/object dichotomy in the 20th century novel. The modern idea is that one must
perceive an external truth, grasp it objectively, and we gain insight. The new sciences
present the self with a new dilemma: how to locate the subjective self in and reconcile it
to a world in which there is not distinction between subject and object.
II. Modernism:
A. a group of characteristics that emerge at a particular time in Western literature.
I would argue, too, that modernism and pomo become the first truly world literary
movements. Specifically, though, American modernism (and British to a degree)
grow as a reaction against Romanticism, Realism, and Naturalism. We will get to
some specifics in a minute, but we want to set the historical stage first:
1. Freud, Jung, Darwin, Marx, Dalton (atomic theory), Mendeleyev
(periodic table), and other philosophic, scientific leaders create a climate
where the old truths just won’t do anymore
2. Explosion of churches: there’s a new religion on every street corner and
the church fragments (a process starting when Gilgamesh rejects Ishtar,
but that is another class)
3. Why is the church fragmenting? Time, money, and war
–clocks change who control time–a bigger idea than you might
think
–money–Western culture is now an economic culture and not
barter controlled. Marx will show us quite convincingly that losing
one’s labor power will lead to alienation and despair (as well as a
lack of power). This condition leads to very wealthy segments of
the population (who all go to church) who have lavish parties
while people starve to death out the front door.
–war–look at a timeline–in America alone starting with the Civil
War: the indian wars, the Spanish American war, the Mexican
Revolution, World War I–what is most notable, of course, is that
WWI was fought by two christian nations killing each other for
god and country.
–archeology merits some mention here too–biblical
research is beginning to call into question "the true’ events
of the bible.
–urbanization–related to money–the agricultural demise has
forced millions of people into the cities, creating a huge
workforce. Too many people and not enough jobs is a gold
mine to corporate owners who keep wages artificially low,
forcing men, women, and children to work for 9 cents a day
(almost enough to eat on). A work week is 60-70 hours and
it’s easy to fire folks. The company owners: good christian
men who crushed strikes with bloodshed (and govt. help).
–you can imagine the alienation, despair, and loss this causes.
These three ideas are keys to the modern sensibility–modern man
suffers from an angst ridden existence in which he feels un-moored
by the events within his life. The world is fragmented and truth
seems elusive. The church is flawed, the govt. can not provide, and
even science does not have the answers (see the atomic bomb
being created and thousands dying from flu epidemics world wide)
This social situation shows up in art.
–The following list provides some insight into the central ideas of the modern artists’
aesthetic goals (source for quoted information Martin Irvine
<ww.georgetown.edu/irvinemj/technoculture/pomo.html> :
1. “Master Narratives and Metanarratives of history, culture and national identity;
myths of cultural and ethnic origin.” This ideas spurs the idea of books like “The
Literary History of the United States” and other books that decide what events
merit historical, scientific, philosophical, literary recording, creating an archive
that represents the “true” story or canon.
2. “Faith in "Grand Theory" (totalizing explanations in history, science and
culture) to represent all knowledge and explain everything.” A universal Truth
(the big circle with a center that we must maintain). Artists have a special insight
into this Truth.
3. “Faith in, and myths of, social and cultural unity, hierarchies of social-class and
ethnic/national values, seemingly clear bases for unity.” Anti-hyphenation–this
idea spurs the educational system in the early 20th century in America.
4. “Master narrative of progress through science and technology.” Science and
technology help us evolve as a people and they are good.
5. “Sense of unified, centered self; ‘individualism,’ unified identity. Idea of ‘the
family’ as central unit of social order: model of the middle-class, nuclear family.”
6. “Hierarchy, order, centralized control”–leads to “faith and personal investment
in big politics (Nation-State, party).”
7. “Root/Depth tropes. Faith in ‘Depth’ (meaning, value, content, the signified)
over ‘Surface’ (appearances, the superficial, the signifier).” The New Critics seize
on this idea when reading literature and most teachers still rely heavily on this
idea in the classroom.
8. “Faith in the ‘real’ beyond media and representations; authenticity of
‘originals.’” Coupled with #5, this idea argues, in essence, that we have a real self
and we should get in touch with it.
9. “Dichotomy of high and low culture (official vs. popular culture); imposed
consensus that high or official culture is normative and authoritative.” The
creation of the literary canon and, to a certain extent, the creation of professors
whose job involves interpreting literature.
11. “Art as unique object and finished work authenticated by artist and validated
by agreed upon standards.” See number 1 and 2. The standards are often created
after the art, effecting the production of future art. Critics and artists argue for the
objectivity of these standards and argue that beauty is something that we can
agree upon (within reason) based on the myths of the past. In other words, The
Odyssey is a great work of literature that meets certain standards that other works
of literature and art contain. These standards become the basis for hermeneutics of
presence (what is in the work).
12. “Sense of clear generic boundaries and wholeness (art, music, and literature).”
Argues for genre and genre styles. Poems look a certain way and contain certain
elements; plays are not poems, therefore they contain different things.
13. “Clear dichotomy between organic and inorganic, human and machine.”
14. “Phallic ordering of sexual difference, unified sexualities,
exclusion/bracketing of pornography.”
B. Note that the ideas behind modernism, a movement associated with people like T.S.
Eliot, Ezra Pound, Wallace Stevens, Marianne Moore, Faulkner, Ellen Glasgow,
Hemingway, and all those other writers and artists who begin producing from 19141940s, spawns other artistic movements within this idea (cubism, imagism, vorticism,
etc.).
–For more information, you should read about the New Critics in literary theory.
These men (and they were mostly anglo men) created the American canon and
were, in large part, responsible for establishing the aesthetic principles that drove
the creation of artistic standards.
III. Postmodernism:
A. A movement that begins officially after WWII, but there is no real agreement about
when. The problem, as we will see, is that post-modernists see all literature as
postmodern and would argue that it has always been so. To discuss pomo, we will need to
necessarily discuss linguistics a bit. Please note that some of what follows also influences
modernism and the ideas associated with it. As a sort of foreshadowing (because you are
all in suspense), modernists and postmodernist do not disagree on all ideas. To a certain
extent, they both believe the world is fragmented; however, the modernists believe we
should (and can) return to a central Truth. The pomodernist, on the other hand, enjoys the
fragmentation and sees it as an inevitable outgrowth of language (as we will see). We
should also see the real connections to the new physics. Postmodernism, like modernism,
is a large idea that we throw around in many ways. More than any other movement,
though, pomo is a word used generically to indicate many types of movements.
Additionally, many movements are often modernist in certain ways, but they are a
product of a postmodern world. In essence, the term postmodernism includes the literary
theory of the second half of the 20th century. Meaning for the post-modernists is
historicized and contextualized, constantly re-evaluated, and recognizes that the binary
opposition of meaning is just as important to meaning.
B. Language development and theory:
1. Structuralism (in very general terms):
–Saussare gives us the signifier/signified (remember class notes)
–basically the signifiers have meaning within a system, i.e.
Mustang/car (system–discussion about vehicles)
–the goal, Saussare argues, is to always locate the system that
creates meaning for the language used. In other words, in
literature, locate the symbol system within which the author was
working.
–Genette criticizes S. by arguing that we do not create and read by
locating the present system. Instead, we read by eliminating the other
systems (what system is not used–or what definition does not fit)
–Both systems are flawed by they do not recognize the historical
complexities that blur system boundaries. Each signifier has an endless
chain of signifieds based on an infinite # of signifying systems that change
continuously. In other words, how do I know what system I am using right
now to create these words, and how do I know what system you are using
to interpret them. Additionally, if you read these notes before you happen
to pick up Saussare or Derrida, they will exist within a different system.
2. Self-conscious language use–these ideas (and ideas like them) create an
increasingly self-conscious language use among artists (and individuals who read
about these theories). They ask us to consider not only what language system we
are working within, but Genette asks us to consider why we are eliminating other
systems and words. Think about why I am using the above language instead of all
the other choices. Why, for instance, did I chose a mustang as an example? In my
hand-written notes I use mother as the signifier and cookie as the signified. Why
the change? Was I hungry before? The net effect of this self-consciousness is an
awareness that all is text–all activities create signifying systems by which we read
other symbols. (Symbols are the key, of course. When we choose to write dog, we
are using three symbols to convey an idea. We have not produced the object itself.
In essence, I had an idea of dogness; I created some symbols to communicate that
idea. You have read those symbols and interpreted them. Perhaps you will write
those symbols down. The idea has now traveled from between my ears, to my
fingers, to your eyes (or ears if I were lecturing) to your head, where you have
created an image of dogness. Dog is many times removed from the reality that
started in my head. Of course my reality is influenced by the cultural moment that
exists right now and by my personal history of anti-dog sentiment. If you are a
dog lover, your idea and subsequent initial idea of dogness is different from mine.
This all assumes a symbol system that agrees we are talking about an animal of
some sort and not a hotdog, or a slow car.)
3. Think back to modernists/New Critics–for them, literature is a group of words
that artists use to create reality. There is a system within the poem/novel we must
privilege. We use that system to determine meaning via symbols and myths
already established. However, if symbol systems can change (as Saussare will
admit) then meaning can change. Genette’s idea of cancellation forces us to
acknowledge that artistic choice is not a way to control reader choice (because we
are absenting our own set of systems).
4. Wittgenstein– rejects Saussare and Genette by arguing that language acquires
meaning based on function and context. Language is a game; words are tools with
countless uses (imagine you are trying to put a nail in the wall, but your hammer
is lost. You have a wrench. Take the wrench and knock that nail in. The meaning
of the wrench is not constant and unyielding. Neither is language.) W. is a post
structuralist moving control of language away from the elitist control (professors
and works) by arguing (eventually) that reading and writing are functions of
language use. (As a brief note: certainly post structuralist and post modernists
differ, but these are notes designed to paint with a broad stroke.)
5. Bakhtin: Bakhtin sees all utterance as a struggle for power. All interpretation is
contested, and every word in the public domain implies dialogue and contested
interpretation. Heteroglossia means “different tongues” or “different speech.” For
Bakhtin, the novel is dialogic–the utterer takes account of the possible reply of an
addressee so there are always at least two voices in a novel. A monologic text is
one in which the utterer and utterance do not take into account the possible reply
of an addressee. “Moral freedom is owning one’s own utterances, and the most
basic unit of mature democratic culture is an exchange.” “The importance of
struggling with another’s discourse, its influence in the history of an individual
coming to ideological consciousness, is enormous. One’s own discourse and one’s
own voice, although born of another or dynamically stimulated by another, will
sooner or later begin to liberate themselves from the authority of the other’s
discourse. The process is made more complex by the fact that a variety of alien
voices enter into the struggle for influence within an individual’s consciousness
(just as they struggle with another in surrounding social reality.”
is the contest that recognizes languages’ contamination.
6. Foucault: knowledge is about power. Our idea of truth is dependent not on
insight but on the power structure that accepts truth. In other words, Foucault
argues that an idea is only true if it fits our accepted idea of truth laid down by
political leaders and intellectual authorities. From this idea, we create the
normalizing gaze: Foucault argues that the power systems create a rhetoric of
appropriate action and language. When you move outside that rhetoric, society
condemns you as crazy. He was interested in changing those institutions.
8. Roland Barthes–the author is a location that stores information then repeats it.
The reader can enter the text anywhere he/she wants and can attach any signifying
system he/she wants to attach. Our pleasure is caused by the readings beyond the
general pleasure of the text, and we can ignore the signifiers/structure created by
the author (a privileged figure for the new critics/structuralists). What we don’t
read, Barthes argues, gives us the greatest pleasure. (Barthes tells us that “Reality
is a nice place to visit, but you don’t want to live there.”) Importantly, Barthes’
argues that all discourse is fictive. When we read, we see a connection or
reference that may or may not include the text. This echo disrupts the text’s linear
progression and gives us pleasure. This pleasure is caused by the tension between
the two surfaces (text and memory/echo/reference) and, for Barthes this is akin to
the erotic pleasure associated with jouissance (the pleasure of the text and the
abolishment of repression associated with the orgasm–the tension associated with
that moment of pleasure/pain).
9. Kristeva: Family and society regulate our physical and psychic impulses.
Dominant ideology must suppress alternate significations (semiotic differences) in
favor of homogeneity and cognitive certainty. We must stand together and
recognize truth, beauty, etc. as clear, definitive issues. Writing, because it offers
multiple significations, is subversive and dangerous. Some feminist critics use
Kristeva and Lacanian ideas to discuss the objectification of women as a tool of
social control.
10. Lyotard: All thought and meaning is narration. Micro-narratives are more
relevant and important than the Grand Narratives of the new critics.
11. Frederick Jameson: Turns our attention to the economics of postmodern life.
He argues from a marxist viewpoint, focusing on the production and distribution
of art and the control inherent in a world economy that produces oligopolies. He
claims that the free market rhetoric is used to discourage the social planning of
production, and free choice is effectively limited to selecting standardized good
on the basis of superficial differences. Postmodern capitalism encourages mass
production and the consumption of quantity over quality. According to John
Unsworth, “Seen from this point of view, the consequences of postmodern
capitalism for the author is that s/he now competes for survival in an environment
that is economically demotic (popular, vulgar) but intellectually hieratic
(appropriate to sacred duties or persons). The increasing distance between the
popular and the respectable means that although literacy is widespread and many
people to still read during their leisure time, the writer who aims for intellectual
prestige, formal originality, or artistic merit is likely to have a day job.”
2. Reader Response: what you see is a movement away from controlled reading to a
reader response method. The reader becomes involved in the text as an active participant
and creator. We no longer simply try to unlock the author’s system; we must be
conscious of our own system.
1. Derrida–logocentrism creates problems
–deconstruction–notes a hierarchy, proceeds to reverse it and finally
resists the assertion of a new hierarchy by displacing the second term from
its position of authority also. Important to note: goal of deconstruction is
not to reconstruct (replace one system with another–masculine with
feminine). Language, by the very nature of its construction within multiple
systems, by someone existing in multiple systems, deconstructs itself and
attempts to not privilege any system. All systems (all things) are texts and
all texts deconstruct themselves. Everything consists of signs without
referents and the only path to meaning is construction of referents that we
know will itself be narration and subject to re-vision. (Why the heck are
you reading through all of this, then? Haven’t these notes deconstructed
themselves by using a system of flawed symbols to discuss the inability of
symbols to create meaning?)
2. Linda Hutcheon’s work deserves more attention at some time in your life. This
weekend perhaps in your free time.
3. Social effects: readers are valued as something to study. We listen to your response to
a poem and then study your response as text (which would lead to a study of your study
and a study of our study). All is text–movement, clothes, menus, newspapers–why do we
choose certain words, clothes, meals?
4. Ontology: In essence, post-modern thought argues for the importance of ontological
discussions. Derrida tells us that words related to “fundamental” values and truths imply
a presence. In any given situation, we have accepted behaviors that are logocentrically
defined and imply a presence (someone who will tell you that you have violated that
definition) who will enforce a particular signifer. Derrida and post-modernists want to decenter (separate) that presence from meaning. The refusal to admit that presence exists is
logocentric (language centered). Hence, when we say language is power, we state a clear
truth about society, but it is a truth not based on the power of language, but the power of
the implied presence who enforces power. Derrida (and others) point out that language is
not steady and stable and does not really provide access to some central Truth. Truth is
created by those in power who enforce control over language and get to decide who uses
it well and who does not. Marxists, feminists, etc. see that power in the hands of white
middle class males who have power and who have created a list of qualities that define
“universal ideas.” (See above list associated with Modernism.) Ask yourself why
rationality is more important than emotion, form more important than formlessness?
5. The following list (a concession to modernist requirements for order via language) is a
companion to the list for modernism. Taken from the same web site, it works as a nice
companion to all the notes above.
1. “Suspicion and rejection of Master Narratives; local narratives, ironic
deconstruction of master narratives: counter-myths of origin.” This idea will lead
to an explosion of alternative privileging: Feminist myths, Afro-American,
Chicano, etc. In essence, the world opens up and this leads to post-colonial
movements in literature and politics. Read Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart.
2. “Rejection of totalizing theories; pursuit of localizing and contingent theories.”
All those individual bubbles in the big circle are localized; each has its own
system and theory that may or may not be universal and applicable to others.
3. “Social and cultural pluralism, disunity, unclear bases for social/national/ethnic
unity.” Multi-culturalism rears its head here arguing for hyphenated expressions.
To declare oneself an American is a political decision that carries baggage and
argues for a specific political and cultural ideology.
4. “Skepticism of progress, anti-technology reactions, neo-Luddism; new age
religions.” Technology is a tool of the man to control the little folk. Think
Terminator or Bladerunner.
5. “Sense of fragmentation and decentered self; multiple, conflicting identities.”
Ontology.
6. “Alternative family units, alternatives to middle-class marriage model, multiple
identities for couplings and childraising.” Argues that the “nuclear family” model
is a falsely created and clearly western idea that imposes restrictions on family
life.
7. “Subverted order, loss of centralized control, fragmentation.”
8. “Trust and investment in micropolitics, identity politics, local politics,
institutional power struggles.” This idea gives rise to the grass roots political,
environmental movements. LULAC, NAACP, EarthFirst!, etc.
9. “Rhizome/surface tropes. Attention to play of surfaces, images, signifiers
without concern for ‘Depth’.”
10. “Disruption of the dominance of high culture by popular culture; mixing of
popular and high cultures, new valuation of pop culture, hybrid cultural forms
cancel ‘high’/’low’ categories.”
11. “Art as process, performance, production, intertextuality. Art as recycling of
culture authenticated by audience and validated in subcultures sharing identity
with the artist.”
12. “Indeterminancy, contingency.” Post modernists are very comfortable not
know the answer the world’s problems. Life is to complicated to take a blanket
idea and lay it over each incident. No good post-modernist would agree that, in
the words of George Bush, “You are either with us or with the terrorists.” Zero
tolerance laws are blanket indictments of complicated issues.
13. “Play, irony, challenge to official seriousness, subversion of earnestness.”
Some call this cynicism, but a postmodernist would point out language’s inherent
flaws and then remind you we are trying to communicate with symbols we don’t
understand.
14. “androgyny, queer sexual identities, polymorphous sexuality, mass marketing
of pornography the book as sufficient bearer of the word”
**Please note that I have oversimplified the issues greatly and the notes above are simply guides.
I recommend you take a literary theory class from someone qualified to teach it. At worst, buy a
copy of A Reader’s Guide to Literary Theory and slowly make your way through the text.
Reading theory does not, contrary to popular opinion, rob the text of its flavor. Theory is a way
of reading by recognizing the cultural and historic moments within which art is created. These
are notes originally designed for lecture. Hence, there are some ideas and sentences that are here
in order to remind me of things to say. Please forgive those incomplete moments. In addition, I
have (obviously) used a variety of sources for the information above. I provided bib. information
for a couple. The others are lost to time. Do not, in other words, publish anything from these
notes because I’m not sure from where I got all this stuff.