Post-Modernism as a Critical Theory

The term postmodernism originated among artists and critics in New York in the 1960's and was taken up by European theorists in the 1970’s. One of these theorists is Jean-Francois Lyotard in his famous book called "The Postmodern Condition" he attached the legitimating myths of the modern age (the grand narratives),that is.. the progressive liberation of humanity through science and the idea that philosophy can restore unity to learning and develop universally valid knowledge for humanity. Postmodern theory became identified with the critique of universal knowledge. Lyotard believes that we can no longer talk about a totalizing idea of reason. For there is no reason, only reasons.
In arts the deletion of the boundry between art and everyday life; the collapse of the hierarchical distinction between elite and popular culture, a stylistic eclecticism and the mixing of codes are the issues which are highlighted in postmodern theory. The decline of the originality and genius view of the artistic producer has been replaced by the assumption that art can only be repetitous. A shift of emphasis from content to form or style, a transformation of reality into images, the fragmentation of time into a series of perpetual presents are the new key concepts. There are continual references to eclecticism, reflexivity, self referentiality, quotation, artifice, randomness, anarchy, fragmentation, pastiche and allegory. There is a tendency to "textualize" everything: history, philosophy, sociology and other disciplines are treated as 'kinds of writing' or discourses. Western societies underwent a radical transformation since the 11 World War; Media society, the Society of the Spectacle, consumer society, the bureaucratic society of controlled consumption, post-industrial society are the names given to our contemporary society.
Lyotard claims that in the last 40 years all the leading sciences and technologies have become increasingly concerned with language; theories of linguistics, problems of communication and cybernetics, computers and their languages, problems of translation, information storage and data banks. The technological transformations have a considerable impact on knowledge. The machine industry changes the way in which learning is acquired, classified, made available and exploited.
Now according to Lyotard the nature of knowledge is bound to change,. It cannot remain unchanged as it was. He believes that knowledge which cannot be translatable into computer language will be abandoned, it is doomed to disappear. The old principle that the acquisition of knowledge is indissocible from the training of minds, or even of individuals is no longer valid, it is obsolete. Knowledge is already ceasing to be an end in itself. It is and will be produced in order to be sold.
Now computerized knowledge changed the composition of the work force of the most highly developed countries. (There is a decrease in the number of factory and agricultural workers and increase in professional technical and white collar workers) Knowledge will be the major component in the worldwide competition for power and it is possible that nation-states will one day fight for control of information. Knowledge is competence according to Lyotard; it is beyond simple determination and application of the criteria of truth. It extends to the determination of the criteria of efficiency, of justice and of happiness (ethical wisdom) of beauty (auditory and visual sensibility).

Under the impact of Wittgenstein, Lyotard classifies knowledge in 3 groups. Knowledge makes us capable of forming 3 types of utterances

1)denotative(true /false distinction is important)

2)prescriptive(just /unjust distinction)

3)evaluative(efficient/ inefficient)

Each of the various categories of utterances can be defined in terms of rules specifying their properties and the uses to which they can be put. The rules of language games do not carry within themselves their own legitimation but are objects of a contract, explicit or not, between players. If there are no rules, there is no game. Every utterance is thought of a "move" in a game.
To use language is to fight; questions, requests, assertions, and narratives are launched into battle. The war is not without rules, but the rules allow and encourage the greatest flexibility of utterance.

There are two types of knowledge: Scientific and narrative.
Scientific Knowledge doesn't represent the totality of knowledge, it has always existed in competition and conflict with other kinds of knowledge which Lyotard calls narrative. Narratives are popular stories, myths, legends and tales) they represent positive or negative models of integration into established institutions, narratives determine criteria of competence and /or illustrate how they are to be applied. They thus define what has the right to be said and done in the culture in question.

In traditional societies a narrative tradition is also the tradition of the criterion defining a threefold competence-know-how -, knowing how to speak, knowing how to hear through which the community's relationship to itself and its environment is played out. Truth and justice and beauty are woven together. What is transmitted through these narratives is set of rules that constitute the social bond. Scientific rules underlie what 19th century science calls verification and 20th century falsification. They allow a horizon of consensus. Now scientists need an addressee, a partner who can verify their statements and in turn become the sender, equals are needed and must be created. In scientific knowledge any already accepted statement can be challenged. The main difference between scientific knowledge and narrative knowledge is that scientific knowledge requires that one language game/ denotation be retained and other games be excluded. Both science and narrative knowledge are equally necessary. Both are composed of sets of statements. The statements are moves made by the players within the frame work of generally applicable rules. These rules are specific to each particular kind of knowledge and "moves" judged to be 'good' in one cannot be the same as those judged 'good' in another game (statements) Narrative knowledge certifies itself without recourse to argumentation and proof. Narratives belong to savage, primitive, underdeveloped cultures. They are composed of opinions, customs, authority, prejudice, ignorance, and ideology.However scientific knowledge cannot know or make known that it is the true knowledge without resorting to the other that is narrative kind of knowledge.

Lyotard believes that the unconscious is the OTHER of language. He associates the unconscious with figural representation and the preconscious with language. Language is on the side of censorship and repression whereas figural representation is on the side of desire and transgression. Lyotard thinks of modern art as fragmentary and believes that it is liberatory. Fragmentation and disruption are attempts to make unconscious process visible. Artithen, involves the disruption of convention.

Source: Madan Sarup, Post-Structuralism and Postmodernism, 1993, Athens.
Also edited from reading notes of Critical Theory course.