Ch. 8 Response

I'm glad that the book gives such a thorough definition of the difference between Modernism and Postmodernism--both are terms I've heard used a lot, but never really defined, so it's nice to really get a definition of both. And the definitions definitely makes sense in retrospect.

I do take issue with Baudrillard's statement that "we lost sight of 'the real'"--I think that we do definitely still have a sense of what's "real" and what isn't--it's just that we have become a lot more preoccupied with using simulation technology. There's still a definite division between "real" and "not real" though--especially as simulations become more and more used. For example, people are becoming a lot more savvy and knowledgeable about spotting "fakes"--which would be impossible to do without a very clear idea of what was real.

It is interesting that postmodernity is so rooted in irony; I never would have described it as such, but it makes sense how the book described it. The level of intertextuality makes sense too, and now that it's been pointed out I can see exactly what the book meant. However, I disagree with the assertion that is then made about there being nothing new anymore. That, however, might be a new development--but I've seen a recent backlash to the idea of there being no new ideas, mostly among my peers. I believe that with the developing technology and the ever-changing, developing culture, there will constantly be new sources of inspiration, new ideas to come forth--and while some ideas may be a mish-mash of older ideas, what they create when they are put together is something new.

The section on architecture was, however, quite fascinating, especially with the description of the evolution from modernism to postmodernism. I've noticed this evolution of architecture, and having a description of why this is happening and the thought process behind it is highly interesting.