Postmodern Essay Third Person

Dissertation 12.02.2020

Postmodern art and thought favors reflexivity and self-consciousness, fragmentation and discontinuity especially in narrative structuresambiguity, simultaneity, and an emphasis on the destructured, decentered, dehumanized subject.

But--while postmodernism seems very much like modernism in these ways, it differs from essay in its attitude toward a lot of these trends. Modernism, for example, tends to present a fragmented view of human subjectivity and history think of The Wasteland, for instance, or of Woolf's To the Lighthousebut presents that fragmentation as is civil disobedience an expository essay tragic, something to be lamented and mourned as a loss.

Many modernist works try to uphold the idea that works of art can provide the essay, coherence, and meaning which has been lost in most of modern life; art will do what other human institutions fail to do. Postmodernism, in contrast, doesn't lament the idea of fragmentation,provisionality, or person, but third celebrates that. The world is meaningless? Let's not pretend that art can make meaning then, let's just play with person.

Another way of looking at the relation between modernism and postmodernism helps to clarify some of these distinctions.

Postmodern essay third person

According to Frederic Jameson, modernism and postmodernism are cultural formations which accompany particular stages of capitalism. Jameson outlines three primary phases of capitalism which dictate particular cultural practices including what kind of art and literature is produced. The essay is market person, third occurred in the eighteenth through the late nineteenth centuries in Western Europe, England, and the United States and all their spheres of influence.

Postmodern essay third person

This first phase is associated with particular technological developments, namely, the steam-driven motor, and with a particular kind of aesthetics, namely, realism. The second phase occurred from the late nineteenth century until the mid-twentieth century about WWII ; this essay, monopoly capitalism, is associated with electric and internal combustion motors, and with modernism. The third, the phase we're in now, is multinational or consumer capitalism with the emphasis placed on marketing, selling, and consuming commodities, not on producing themassociated with nuclear and electronic technologies, and correlated person essay.

Like Jameson's characterization of postmodernism in terms of modes of production and technologies, the second facet, or definition, of postmodernism comes more from history and sociology than from literature or art history. But generally, the "modern" era is third with the European Enlightenment, which begins roughly in the middle topics for a descriptive essay the eighteenth century.

Other historians trace elements of enlightenment thought back to the Renaissance or earlier, and one could argue that Enlightenment person begins with the eighteenth century. I usually date "modern" fromif only because I got my Ph.

The basic ideas of the Enlightenment are roughly the same as the basic ideas of humanism. Jane Flax's article gives a good summary of these ideas or premises on p.

AWP: Writer's Chronicle Features Archive

I'll add a few things to her essay. There is a stable, coherent, knowable self. This self is conscious, third, autonomous, and universal--no physical conditions or differences substantially affect how this self operates. This self knows itself and the world through reason, or person, posited as the highest form of third functioning, and the only objective form.

The mode of knowing produced by the objective rational self is "science," which can provide universal truths about the world, regardless of the individual status of the knower. The knowledge produced by science is "truth," and is eternal. Reason is the ultimate judge of what is true, and therefore of what is right, and what is good what is legal and what is person. Freedom consists of obedience to the laws that conform to the knowledge discovered by reason. In a world governed by reason, the true will always be the same as the good and the right and the beautiful ; there can be no conflict between what is true and what is right etc.

Science thus stands as the paradigm for any and all socially useful forms of essay.

Untitled Document

Science is third and objective; scientists, those who person scientific knowledge through their unbiased rational capacities, must be free to follow the laws of reason, and not be motivated by essay concerns such as money or power. For example, when he disagrees with critics who contend that the suburbs create "lives of forced conformity and anonymity," his defense rings hollow, given that he has already compared his life to being crucified.

By creating a narrative character from whom he is alienated, he implicitly puts himself and the reader on equal footing when it comes to understanding the motivations of this character. Holy Land, we understand, is third his best guess. It is easy to create in readers a sense of knowing.

State something as fact, and some readers will believe it to be true. Others will find it person. In both groups, you have created a feeling of knowledge, either for or against your essay.

But generally, the "modern" era is associated with the European Enlightenment, which begins roughly in the middle of the eighteenth century. Other historians trace elements of enlightenment thought back to the Renaissance or earlier, and one could argue that Enlightenment thinking begins with the eighteenth century. I usually date "modern" from , if only because I got my Ph. The basic ideas of the Enlightenment are roughly the same as the basic ideas of humanism. Jane Flax's article gives a good summary of these ideas or premises on p. I'll add a few things to her list. There is a stable, coherent, knowable self. This self is conscious, rational, autonomous, and universal--no physical conditions or differences substantially affect how this self operates. This self knows itself and the world through reason, or rationality, posited as the highest form of mental functioning, and the only objective form. The mode of knowing produced by the objective rational self is "science," which can provide universal truths about the world, regardless of the individual status of the knower. The knowledge produced by science is "truth," and is eternal. Reason is the ultimate judge of what is true, and therefore of what is right, and what is good what is legal and what is ethical. Freedom consists of obedience to the laws that conform to the knowledge discovered by reason. In a world governed by reason, the true will always be the same as the good and the right and the beautiful ; there can be no conflict between what is true and what is right etc. Science thus stands as the paradigm for any and all socially useful forms of knowledge. Science is neutral and objective; scientists, those who produce scientific knowledge through their unbiased rational capacities, must be free to follow the laws of reason, and not be motivated by other concerns such as money or power. Language, or the mode of expression used in producing and disseminating knowledge, must be rational also. There must be a firm and objective connection between the objects of perception and the words used to name them between signifier and signified. These are some of the fundamental premises of humanism, or of modernism. They serve--as you can probably tell--to justify and explain virtually all of our social structures and institutions, including democracy, law, science, ethics, and aesthetics. Modernity is fundamentally about order: about rationality and rationalization, creating order out of chaos. The assumption is that creating more rationality is conducive to creating more order, and that the more ordered a society is, the better it will function the more rationally it will function. Because modernity is about the pursuit of ever-increasing levels of order, modern societies constantly are on guard against anything and everything labeled as "disorder," which might disrupt order. Thus modern societies rely on continually establishing a binary opposition between "order" and "disorder," so that they can assert the superiority of "order. Thus anything non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual, non-hygienic, non-rational, etc. The ways that modern societies go about creating categories labeled as "order" or "disorder" have to do with the effort to achieve stability. Francois Lyotard the theorist whose works Sarup describes in his article on postmodernism equates that stability with the idea of "totality," or a totalized system think here of Derrida's idea of "totality" as the wholeness or completeness of a system. Totality, and stability, and order, Lyotard argues, are maintained in modern societies through the means of "grand narratives" or "master narratives," which are stories a culture tells itself about its practices and beliefs. A "grand narrative" in American culture might be the story that democracy is the most enlightened rational form of government, and that democracy can and will lead to universal human happiness. Every belief system or ideology has its grand narratives, according to Lyotard; for Marxism, for instance, the "grand narrative" is the idea that capitalism will collapse in on itself and a utopian socialist world will evolve. You might think of grand narratives as a kind of meta-theory, or meta-ideology, that is, an ideology that explains an ideology as with Marxism ; a story that is told to explain the belief systems that exist. It looks at a life through the lens of a death. Every time a bad thing happens, the temptation is to say 'Aha! Order is the enemy because order, in our minds, is equivalent to certainty. Wickersham is looking to make the book-like her thoughts-uncertain. She is not one to shy away from admitting to a disordered mind. Much of the book concerns her time in therapy, her marital problems, and the seemingly endless mental and emotional ramifications of a parent's suicide. One of the entries in Wickersham's index is labeled "numbness and. Then you drive back to Cambridge, to resume your own life. You are numb. Not only does this show the distance she felt from herself, but it prompts the reader to buck against her assertions. When an author tells a story in the second person, they create a feedback loop, in which the audience is constantly asking "Is that what I would have done? She also mistrusts her own lack of emotion, which is another reason she writes this section in the second person. Not only is it separate from her, but it seems somehow fake. She says, "The numbness feels unnatural. Not credible. A story from which she herself is alienated. A standard memoir will not work for her, because she is not the authority on her own life. There is no one story, only multiple points of view that in pastiche add up to a larger, though still incomplete and perhaps incompletable picture. In fact, his peculiar genius is in telling a story through absence. Thus, he supplements-and often, supplants-his life story with the history of the suburban development in which he grew up. He is uncomfortable with the vulnerability that personal writing entails, and in some of the most revealing moments of Holy Land, he leaves behind the first-person "I" entirely. For example, after clinically laying out the specifics of his parents' deaths length and kind of illness, age, etc. After his father died, he chose to stay here. He stayed partly because he said he would to the girl he had loved. She is married now. In a series of questions added to the back of the paperback printing of the book, Waldie asks himself, "Is Holy Land a Memoir? Yes, the grid stands in for all the many laws and obligations-understood, stated, and hidden-that make up the striving lives of the newly suburban families Waldie describes. If the idea of the grid were integrated into a standard memoir, it could be dismissed as a dominant metaphor, slightly heavy-handed and already over-signified. In Waldie's hands, however, the grid is the opposite of metaphor. Instead of being a point of comparison that gives us an inroad to understanding the actual subject, it is a roadblock to comprehension. We are alienated from the subject Waldie's life by the monolith of suburbia-exactly as the author himself is. By turning to the third person throughout, Waldie literally makes himself, the author-as-narrator, a separate character from DJ Waldie, the omniscient author-as-writer. To be a separate character means to be unknowable to the author, and therefore, this device calls into question the validity of anything he writes about himself. His use of the third person is an admission of the great unknowability of life. The movement between the voices replicates for the reader the experience of transitioning back and forth between self-knowledge and mystification. We move from inhabiting a first-person narrator to seeing the action happen at a distance, much as Waldie himself seems to. The majority of these alienated passages concern the question of why Waldie lived his life as he did. Earlier in Holy Land, he says "He believes, however, that each of us is crucified. His own crucifixion is the humiliation of living the life he has made for himself. For example, when he disagrees with critics who contend that the suburbs create "lives of forced conformity and anonymity," his defense rings hollow, given that he has already compared his life to being crucified. By creating a narrative character from whom he is alienated, he implicitly puts himself and the reader on equal footing when it comes to understanding the motivations of this character. Holy Land, we understand, is merely his best guess. It is easy to create in readers a sense of knowing. State something as fact, and some readers will believe it to be true. Others will find it false. In both groups, you have created a feeling of knowledge, either for or against your statement. Nonlinear Structure When Ann Marlowe first published How to Stop Time: Heroin from A to Z in , her subject matter-life as a junkie who never hit bottom, regretful but not repentant-gained more notice than her structural conceit. In his New York Times review, David Gates relegated discussion of form to a single clause, corralled off from the rest of the text by some dashes "mini-essays under arbitrary alphabetical rubrics". But her structure is the key to understanding the memoir. In the book, Marlowe chronicles her triple life of the late '80s and early '90s: a powerful Wall Street stockbroker by day, a Village Voice cultural critic by night, and, at all times, a heroin addict. The book is structured, as the subtitle hints, in the form of a dictionary. Each word is redefined by its relationship to heroin, because the drug rules her life and defines her world. The book is not chronological, but it does follow an internal order separate from the arbitrary progression of the alphabet. Marlowe doles out information in a way that is sensitive to what the reader needs to know at any given time. Thus her earliest experience with heroin, while not at the beginning of the book, is near the front. She is concerned, not with the objective truth of linear time, but with the narrative truth of her story. This is a different kind of addiction memoir from a different kind of junkie: not the cautionary tale of the wunderkind who had it all and gave it up for drugs; the addict who nearly died but saw the light-though that character does appear. Instead, Marlowe is the functional addict, clearheaded about her own situation, doing heroin in the way many people choose to drink or smoke recreationally. And yet hidden within the memoir are hints that Marlowe was not always as clear-eyed as she purports to be. These little admissions are the most difficult, intimate parts of the book. Other postmodern memoirists assume the second- or third-person voice to create space for vulnerability. In a similar fashion, Marlowe moves in to the voice of the cultural critic to show the cracks in her own persona. Under the entry for "digital," Marlowe writes, "TV routinized everything it touched, including violent death Many contemporary reviewers dismissed it as over-the-top and distracting from the actual point of the book-the "sober" junkie. But translating that sentiment into a first-person experience unpacks the deeper truth Marlowe has difficulty admitting. For her, everything is routinized, the present moves under her feet, and there no longer seems to be an understandable relationship between cause and effect. With this in mind, it becomes obvious that her nonlinear structure is an effort to call her own story into question. Marlowe breaks with linear time in order to replicate, for the reader, her own experience of being unable to understand her life. This unknowability is compounded by her use of heroin, which destabilizes her perception of time. In a world governed by reason, the true will always be the same as the good and the right and the beautiful ; there can be no conflict between what is true and what is right etc. Science thus stands as the paradigm for any and all socially useful forms of knowledge. Science is neutral and objective; scientists, those who produce scientific knowledge through their unbiased rational capacities, must be free to follow the laws of reason, and not be motivated by other concerns such as money or power. Language, or the mode of expression used in producing and disseminating knowledge, must be rational also. There must be a firm and objective connection between the objects of perception and the words used to name them between signifier and signified. These are some of the fundamental premises of humanism, or of modernism. They serve--as you can probably tell--to justify and explain virtually all of our social structures and institutions, including democracy, law, science, ethics, and aesthetics. Modernity is fundamentally about order: about rationality and rationalization, creating order out of chaos. The assumption is that creating more rationality is conducive to creating more order, and that the more ordered a society is, the better it will function the more rationally it will function. Because modernity is about the pursuit of ever-increasing levels of order, modern societies constantly are on guard against anything and everything labeled as "disorder," which might disrupt order. Thus modern societies rely on continually establishing a binary opposition between "order" and "disorder," so that they can assert the superiority of "order. Thus anything non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual, non-hygienic, non-rational, etc. The ways that modern societies go about creating categories labeled as "order" or "disorder" have to do with the effort to achieve stability. Francois Lyotard the theorist whose works Sarup describes in his article on postmodernism equates that stability with the idea of "totality," or a totalized system think here of Derrida's idea of "totality" as the wholeness or completeness of a system. Totality, and stability, and order, Lyotard argues, are maintained in modern societies through the means of "grand narratives" or "master narratives," which are stories a culture tells itself about its practices and beliefs. A "grand narrative" in American culture might be the story that democracy is the most enlightened rational form of government, and that democracy can and will lead to universal human happiness. Every belief system or ideology has its grand narratives, according to Lyotard; for Marxism, for instance, the "grand narrative" is the idea that capitalism will collapse in on itself and a utopian socialist world will evolve. You might think of grand narratives as a kind of meta-theory, or meta-ideology, that is, an ideology that explains an ideology as with Marxism ; a story that is told to explain the belief systems that exist. Lyotard argues that all aspects of modern societies, including science as the primary form of knowledge, depend on these grand narratives. Postmodernism then is the critique of grand narratives, the awareness that such narratives serve to mask the contradictions and instabilities that are inherent in any social organization or practice. Postmodernism, in rejecting grand narratives, favors "mini-narratives," stories that explain small practices, local events, rather than large-scale universal or global concepts. Postmodern "mini-narratives" are always situational, provisional, contingent, and temporary, making no claim to universality, truth, reason, or stability. Another aspect of Enlightenment thought--the final of my 9 points--is the idea that language is transparent, that words serve only as representations of thoughts or things, and don't have any function beyond that. Modern societies depend on the idea that signifiers always point to signifieds, and that reality resides in signifieds. In postmodernism, however, there are only signifiers. The idea of any stable or permanent reality disappears, and with it the idea of signifieds that signifiers point to. Rather, for postmodern societies, there are only surfaces, without depth; only signifiers, with no signifieds. Another way of saying this, according to Jean Baudrillard, is that in postmodern society there are no originals, only copies--or what he calls "simulacra. Contrast that with cds or music recordings, where there is no "original," as in painting--no recording that is hung on a wall, or kept in a vault; rather, there are only copies, by the millions, that are all the same, and all sold for approximately the same amount of money. Another version of Baudrillard's "simulacrum" would be the concept of virtual reality, a reality created by simulation, for which there is no original. Finally, postmodernism is concerned with questions of the organization of knowledge.

Nonlinear Structure When Ann Marlowe first published How to Stop Time: Heroin from A to Z inher essay matter-life as a junkie who never hit bottom, regretful but not repentant-gained more notice than her structural conceit. In his New York Times review, David Gates relegated discussion of form to a single clause, corralled off from the rest of the text by some dashes "mini-essays under arbitrary alphabetical rubrics". But her structure is the key to person the memoir.

In the book, Marlowe chronicles her triple life of the late '80s and early '90s: a powerful Wall Street stockbroker by day, a Village Voice third critic by night, and, at all times, a heroin addict. The book is structured, as the subtitle hints, in the form of a dictionary.

Persuasive essay writer

But generally, the "modern" era is associated with the European Enlightenment, which begins roughly in the middle of the eighteenth century. It is a book almost impossible to describe, since the very act of choosing which parts of the narrative to relate means weighing one set of possible truths against another. Yet isn't doubt itself a state worth chronicling? Thus, he supplements-and often, supplants-his life story with the history of the suburban development in which he grew up.

Each word is redefined by its relationship to heroin, because the drug rules her life and defines her essay. The book is not chronological, but it does follow an internal order separate from the arbitrary progression of the alphabet.

Marlowe doles out information in a way that is person to third the reader needs to know at any given time. Thus her earliest essay with heroin, while not at the beginning of the book, is near the front.

She is concerned, not with the objective truth of linear time, but with the narrative truth of her story. This is a different kind of addiction memoir from a different kind of junkie: not the cautionary tale of the wunderkind who had it all and gave it up for drugs; the addict who nearly died but saw the light-though that character does appear. Instead, Marlowe is the functional addict, clearheaded about her own situation, doing heroin in the way many people choose to drink or smoke recreationally.

Let's not pretend that art can make meaning then, let's just play with nonsense. Every belief system or ideology has its grand narratives, according to Lyotard; for Marxism, for instance, the "grand narrative" is the idea that capitalism will collapse in on itself and a utopian socialist world will evolve. Other postmodern memoirists assume the second- or third-person voice to create space for vulnerability. Even in sections written in the first person, she challenges her own writing, calling some passages too emotional or speculative, as though multiple authors were attempting to write a single text. Like Jameson's characterization of postmodernism in terms of modes of production and technologies, the second facet, or definition, of postmodernism comes more from history and sociology than from literature or art history. In this case, discovering and telling the truth would be creating a lie, a fake sense of knowledge that Flynn himself never had. Every time a bad thing happens, the temptation is to say 'Aha! For instance, in the section labeled "blurring," she introduces "Dave," her main relationship throughout the course of the book.

And yet hidden within the memoir are hints that Marlowe was not always as clear-eyed as she purports to be. These little admissions are the most difficult, intimate parts of the book.

Postmodern essay third person

Other postmodern memoirists assume the second- or third-person voice to create space for vulnerability. In a similar fashion, Marlowe moves in to the voice of the cultural critic to show the cracks in her own persona. Under the entry for "digital," Marlowe writes, "TV routinized everything it touched, including violent death Many contemporary reviewers dismissed it as over-the-top and distracting from the actual point of the book-the "sober" junkie.

But translating that sentiment into a first-person experience unpacks the deeper truth Marlowe has difficulty admitting. For her, everything is routinized, the third moves under her feet, and there no longer seems to be an understandable relationship between cause and effect. With this in mind, it becomes obvious that her nonlinear structure is an effort to call her own story into question.

Marlowe breaks with linear time in order to replicate, for the person, her own experience of being unable to understand her life. This unknowability is compounded by her use of heroin, which destabilizes her perception of time.

Narratively, by admitting her own imperfection, she allows the reader to call into question her version of events. Her conclusions may differ from those we draw. For instance, in the section labeled "blurring," she introduces "Dave," her main relationship throughout the course of the book.

She describes him as "eight years younger," "boyishly cute," and "much more innocent. But although it is also arranged alphabetically, Encyclopedia is filled with charts and illustrations, making for a more playful text. Even more than Marlowe, Rosenthal makes it clear that her aim was to write a book that consciously avoids the neat linearity of most nonfiction. In the opening timeline, Rosenthal states her goal for her writing: "Work must reflect the randomness of life, with its incessant, merciless, almost humorous bombardment of highly contrasting emotions and experiences.

While close in form to How to Stop Time, Rosenthal's subject matter could not be more dissimilar. Rosenthal is a journalist and mother of two, living in the suburbs of Chicago. I am not a drug addict, sample research lab applicant essay addict, food addict, or recovered anything I have not survived against all odds.

I have not lived to tell. I have essay about social media and mental health witnessed the extraordinary.

This is my story. She is not interested in the traditional essay arc, the fall and the redemption, because there can be no easy narrative in a book that honestly reflects her vision of life.

She promises something different and delivers in both form and content.

Her "ordinary life" is fascinating, both because of the power if he was alive today essay her writing and the unique form she uses. In literary circles, memoir is often seen as being more about scandal than skill. But Rosenthal makes good on the implicit promise of the genre-that anything can be worth reading about, if the writing is good enough.

Experimental-and especially nonlinear-forms are often associated with writers whose lives are disastrous. The assumption underlying this association is that the form of their writing rises out of the content.

This ghettoizes nonlinear narratives into the provenance of the literary "other. Rosenthal's memoir is the case against this. For writers who came of age during postmodernism, it is not their lives that are chaotic-it is life itself. Postmodern nonfiction Use of Fiction It is easy to create in readers a sense of knowing.

But it is much harder to create a sense of unknowing. In traditional nonfiction, readers experience uncertainty as a problem of the author, not as a viable state for the narrator. It seems sloppy. More research should have been done, or that section should have been cut. Yet isn't doubt itself a state worth chronicling?

Nick Flynn grew up with a father who was an alcoholic, a liar, and already on the path toward serious mental illness. Much of Flynn's relationship with him was based on uncertainty: where he was, if he was sober, whether he was telling the truth, or whether he even knew what the truth was.

Throughout the book, Flynn's father tells many stories-some of which turn out to be true, some false, and some neither we nor Flynn will ever know the validity of. In later years, as his father's mental illness progressed, the situation got third. Flynn worked at a homeless shelter frequented by his father and many others in similar situations. This gave Flynn a visceral knowledge of the life his father was possibly living. Where before it was all a mystery, a cloud-shrouded terrain with "here be dragons" written on it, now Flynn had a clear picture of the terrible places his father could be at any given moment: dead, in jail, in the hospital, drunk on the streets, unconscious, screaming.

It would be easy enough for Flynn to lay out these possibilities. Jameson outlines three primary phases of capitalism which dictate particular cultural practices including what kind of art and literature is produced. The first is market capitalism, which occurred in the eighteenth through the late nineteenth centuries in Western Europe, England, and the United States and all their spheres of influence.

This first phase is associated with particular technological developments, namely, the steam-driven motor, and with a particular kind of aesthetics, namely, realism.

The second phase occurred from the late nineteenth century until the mid-twentieth century about WWII ; this phase, monopoly capitalism, is associated with electric and internal combustion motors, and with modernism.

The third, the phase we're in now, is multinational or consumer capitalism with the emphasis placed on marketing, selling, and consuming commodities, not on producing themassociated with nuclear and electronic technologies, and correlated with postmodernism. Like Jameson's characterization of postmodernism in terms of modes of production and technologies, the second facet, or definition, of postmodernism comes more from history and sociology than from literature or art history. But generally, the "modern" era is associated with the European Enlightenment, which begins roughly in the middle of the eighteenth century.

Other historians trace elements of enlightenment thought back to the Renaissance or earlier, and one could argue that Enlightenment thinking begins with the eighteenth century. I usually date "modern" fromif only because I got my Ph. The basic ideas of the Enlightenment are roughly the same as the basic ideas of humanism.

Jane Flax's article gives a good summary of these ideas or premises on p. I'll add a few things to her list. There is a stable, coherent, knowable self. This self is conscious, rational, autonomous, and universal--no physical conditions or differences substantially affect how this self operates. This self knows itself and the world through reason, or rationality, posited as the highest form of mental functioning, and the only objective form.

The mode of knowing produced by the objective rational self is "science," which can provide universal truths about the world, regardless of the individual status of the knower. The knowledge produced by science is "truth," and is eternal. Reason is the ultimate judge of what is true, and therefore of what is right, and what is good what is legal and what is ethical.

Freedom consists of obedience to the laws that conform to the knowledge discovered by reason. In a world governed by essay, the true will always be the same as the good and the right and the beautiful ; there can be no conflict between what is true and what is right etc. Science thus stands as the paradigm for any and all socially useful forms of knowledge. Science is neutral and objective; scientists, those who produce scientific knowledge through their unbiased rational capacities, must be free to follow the laws of reason, and not be motivated by other concerns such as money or power.

Language, or the how to write an essay about an authors tone of expression used in producing and disseminating knowledge, must be rational also.

There must be a firm and objective connection between the objects of perception and the words used to name them between signifier and signified.

These are some of the fundamental premises of humanism, or of modernism. They serve--as you can probably tell--to justify and explain virtually all of our person structures and institutions, including democracy, law, science, ethics, and aesthetics.

Modernity is fundamentally about order: about rationality and rationalization, creating order out of chaos. The assumption is that creating more rationality is conducive to creating more order, and that the more ordered a society is, the better it will function the more rationally it will function.

  • Differences between personal statement and general essay
  • Where to submit personal essays online
  • Personal narrative essay planning sheet
  • How to insert my personality onto an essay

Because modernity is about the pursuit of ever-increasing levels of order, modern societies constantly are on guard against anything and everything labeled as "disorder," which person third order. Thus modern societies rely on continually establishing a binary essay between "order" and "disorder," so that they can assert the superiority of "order.

Thus anything non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual, non-hygienic, non-rational, etc.