A COLLECTION OF LETTERS PROVIDING SOME INTRODUCTION TO THE MOVEMENT
Jean-François Lyotard (1924-1998) was a French philosopher, sociologist, and literary theorist, best known as a pioneer of Postmodernism. He was co-founder of the International College of Philosophy with Jacques Derrida, François Châtelet, and Gilles Deleuze.
The Preface to the French edition of this book explains, “We have collected some letters by the author that take up the issue of postmodernity. Obtaining [Lyotard’s] consent to their publication was not without its difficulties. We argued that it could help to clear him of certain accusations… his main objection was the naïveté of these texts addressed to children; that, if they were published, their deceptive, pedagogical clarity would do nothing to life the quality of a controversy that was already confused enough. And, he added, he was too far from being clear about the question himself to venture a pronouncement on a hazy intuition.”
The translator explains in his Foreword, “In these pages Lyotard approaches the postmodern as a way of maintaining the possibility of thought ‘happening’---in philosophy, art, literature, and politics; of thought proceeding when it has lost faith in its capacity to repair the crimes of the past by guiding the present toward the end of the realization of ideas… the promise of the French title to ‘explain to children’ … is surely ironic and not to be taken literally. It will not have explained the postmodern. Rather, it will have shown why it is necessary to approach the philosophical questions raised by postmodernity … with the mind of the child. For childhood is the season of the mind’s possibilities…”
Lyotard states in the first essay, “What then is the postmodern? What place, if any, does it occupy in that vertiginous work of questioning the rules that govern images and narratives? It is undoubtedly part of the modern.” (Pg. 12) He continues, “The postmodern would be that which in the modern invokes the unpresentable in presentation itself, that which refuses the consolation of correct forms, refuses the consensus of taste permitting a common experience of nostalgia for the impossible, and inquires into new presentations… to better produce the feeling that there is something unpresentable.
"The postmodern artist or writer is in the position of a philosopher; the text he writes or the work he creates is not in principle governed by preestablished rules and cannot be judged according to a determinant judgment, by the application of given categories to this text or work. Such rules and categories are what the work or text is investigating. The artist and the writer therefore work without rules and in order to establish the rules for what will have been made.” (Pg. 15)
He states, “There is no reasonable excuse for the confusion of reasons. The confusion lies in the very ‘modern’ project of a universal language, that is, a metalanguage capable of collecting together every shred of meaning established in specific languages. The doubt case on ‘reason’ springs not from the sciences but from the critique of metalanguage, that is, from the decline of metaphysics (and therefore of metapolitics as well).” (Pg. 65)
He observes, “the ‘post’ of postmodernism has the sense of a simple succession, a diachronic sequence of periods in which each one is clearly identifiable. The ‘post-’ indicates something like a conversion: a new direction from the previous one. Now this idea of a linear chronology is itself perfectly ‘modern.’” (Pg. 76)
"He continues, “Technoscientific development has become a means of deepening the malaise rather than of allaying it. It is no longer possible to call development progress. It seems to proceed of its own accord, with a force, an autonomous motoricity that is independent of us… The question of postmodernity is also, or first of all, a question of expressions of thought: in art, literature, philosophy, politics.” (Pg. 78-9)
One may finish reading this book and still be confused about what precisely “postmodernism” is---which, by the nature of the movement, is to be expected. But Lyotard’s words are surely helpful in explaining, and in clearing up some misconceptions.