By the 20th century, romantic ideals of authenticity required that other not be severed from its place but remain part of it, and from here the travel industry burgeoned. The postmodern condition witnesses an almost frenzied pattern of mobility through tourism, to which the picturesque Grand Tour fades by comparison. A global exchange of tourists, however, is a central component of the paradox of place. That which the tourist seeks out, intrinsically becomes less authentic each time it is found, because as mirrored in the theories of quantum physics the observer affects the observed.
Often the result is homogenization and substitution of the local landscape that initiated the tourism with the synthetic pseudo-landscapes of conventional tourist infrastructure.
New and challenging modes of thought and writing pushed the development of new areas and topics in philosophy. Robert Desnos T. Huyssen, A. Main article: Jacques Derrida. New York: The New Press,
Local-global is simultaneously a postmodern tool and dilemma that addresses the paradox of place. As indicative of the dilemma, a local-global sense of place is the stretched space of identity from its most irreducible form in the human body, to its most expansive form in the collective global population. Moreover, this sense of place is also the stretched time of identity between the mortality of the individual, and the immortality of the continuing collective memory.
Attempting to traverse this divide, we exist between the world that is immediately at hand and a wider awareness of the extended world that places us within a network of billions of people. The contradiction arrives when the apparitions of the local are amplified until the local itself evolves into a new kind of global imperative.
By revealing previously obscured backstage areas, television served as an instrument of demystification, and to a large extent was responsible for the breaking down of the barriers between public and private places. Furthermore, the eclectic nature of this medium fuelled growing apathy and desensitization to events, which in turn diminished eccentricity and pacified the populous. The late capitalist city is increasingly freed from its attachment to physical place by communications technology, which in turn makes it available to the ageographical requirements of circulating capital and its associated self-similar, hybridized, architectural programs.
In the 19th century the photograph and the railroad removed the contiguity and depth of a foreground view of places despite making remote places more accessible. In the late 20th century, synchronous substitutions by electronic media link even the smallest places, but inherently destroy the social distance that made experiencing them so unique. Fictitious communities Given all of the attempts to reclaim lost meaning through a sense of community and a 'sense of place', the situation as it stands today may not even require it.
That is, to the majority of the first world population, there may be no problem, and certainly no desire to agglomerate into communities of any sort. Much of the populous of the developed world are only too happy to isolate themselves and have no interest in integrating with others outside an immediate circle of friends. The institutionalization of caring for the aged nursing homes , and contributing to the wider community charity organizations are examples of the commodification of originally integral cultural responsibilities.
The physical environment is a response to the situation, not a cause.
The cause is the community that wishes to not be a community, and the overriding system of economics. No matter how exclusionary, attempts to reconstruct places in terms of imagined communities appear to be always porous to the universalizing power of capital. Reactionary attempts to construct new logics from the romantic and the modern result in the aestheticization of politics and place.
The 18th century separation of moral judgment from scientific knowledge exposed a void suitable for aesthetic responses. Within the time that elapsed since, this space increased to the point of dominating the agenda of postmodernism. Within modernism, the sense of place progressed beyond the unauthentic picturesque, to its popularization as authentic romanticism. Within its celebrated framework of postmodernism, however, place is mutated from its authentic origins, back into an unauthentic neo-picturesque.
The ironic situation is such that much of the resistance—conceived to rage against the steamrolling power of capitalism and modernity—has been consumed and re-appropriated to fuel capitalism and the ever-evolving mutations of modernity. Because—as David Harvey pithily observes—the ultimate victory of the modern is not the elimination of all that is non-modern, but its artificial preservation and reconstruction.
First, is the input of the people who are affected through a relaxation of the power-complex. A viable style of life for local areas must discard Newtonian conceptions of community and region and allow people to contribute to the whole. Whereas the outsider reads place through maps and models, the dweller has a more encompassing, time deepened, experience of a place and may give a more authentic, although restricted reading.
Indeed, a full experience of the world requires both participation and description, fusing the creator and the critic, the designer and the dweller. Modernity refers to the last three hundred years of Western history during which many of the current ideas were developed.
To quote Habermas l p. At the same time, this project intended to release the cognitive potentials of each of these domains to set them free from their esoteric forms. The Enlightenment philosophers wanted to utilize this accumulation of specialized culture for the enrichment of everyday life, that is to say, for the rational organization of everyday social life.
Some people argue that there is no single idea metanarrative or a universalistic principle that is associated with modernity. We can, however, glean a cluster of closely related ideas in the various descriptions of modernity: the rule of reason and the establishment of rational order; the emergence of the cognitive subject; the gradual secularization of human thought and the decline of religion in the conduct of human affairs, the rise of science and an emphasis on material progress as the goal of the scientific enterprise; realism, representation, and the unity of purpose in art, architecture and science; the emergence of industrial capitalism and the separation of the spheres of production as an institutionally controlled public activity from consumption as a domestically defined private activity.
If one were to describe the central characteristic of modernist narrative, it refers to a period when the individual is defined as a "knowing" subject, an autonomous agent working within a social and economic order which was driven by the power of reason. In the modernist ethos, knowledge serves an instrumental purpose, as a tool for improving the material conditions of human life on this planet.
Thus, human life is considered in terms of here and now, and there is little reference to life after we leave this planet, as was the case in the premodernist period. The focus of all knowledge is, herefore, the living life that occurs between birth and death.
Improvement necessarily means building on what was available in the past. Thus the progression of knowledge becomes linear, futuristic and goal oriented--or as philosophers call it teleological. The goal of knowledge in modernism is to make it possible for conditions of material life to improve and to make the linear progression towards better life possible.
It also means improving the cognitive capacities of individual minds and enhancing their reasoning skills and abilities so they can make better judgements. The social system accordingly expects to better prepare its members to apply their knowledge to socially determined goals. Individuals become investments and society rewards them in terms of how well they perform in this rationalist enterprise. The positive assessment of modernity usually runs as follows: the process of modernity has improved the human condition and led to material progress beyond imagination.
It is generally known that, in today's world, modernization is a goal that many traditional societies aspire for and toward which they have committed their national resources. The global shift to industrialization and the easing of economic restrictions in command economies, coupled with the move toward individual growth and privatization, constitute a signal that what is modern is desirable and what is desirable must be attained.
What are the implications of the idea of modernity for consumer research? The hallmark of consumer culture is the creation of products and services which have both use value and exchange value. Marketing practice is based on the knowledge that helps achieve its main goal of creating "marketable products," a term that has come to mean everything from shampoo to religion.
Since modernity represents the rise of capitalism which legitimates the exploitation of both nature and culture for the pursuit of wealth accumulation, marketing becomes the consummate instrument in creating the ethos of consumption with which we are all identified. The question now is, how and why would this modernist model be subject to change, or why do we speak in terms of a new paradigm.
Of course, there is no implication here that somehow the period called modernism has suddenly ended, or will soon come to an end.
It is just that we see some anomalies, some cues which suggest that perhaps the assumptions and conditions subsumed under modernity need to be scrutinized. So we ask the question what these cues are and what are the postmodernist tendencies that are relevant here. The first theme centers around the idea of the post-industrial state as enunciated by Daniel Bell l and his contemporaries in the late sixties and early seventies.
Here the essential idea is that the industrial societies are moving toward a new phase in their evolution. This new phase which may be called "post-industrial" differs from "industrial" as industrial was from "pre-industrial. Since it is generally acknowledged that we have already entered the so-called information age, this issue, as presented by Bell, is less contested now.
A second theme on modernity is directed towards its paradoxical character. This has to do with the ideality and reality in modernity. Under conditions of modernity, real becomes hyperreal, representation becomes interpretation, substance becomes form, objects become images, and modernism begins to be consumed in its own images. Thus the paradox of modernity is the unconnectedness of its ideality to its reality.
In this sense modernity is viewed as a myth, or more exactly, its own myth, the myth of modernism. Consequently, the postmodernists would argue that the purpose of their critique is to lay bare the myth of modernity and confront it on its own terms. This is also the celebratory notion of modernity, that is, its liberation from its own constraints. You can see this playing out in practical terms in fields such as gender studies and social work as well as literary criticism, anthropology, law, education, etc. There are deeper problems as well. For example: Postmodernism leaves its practitioners without an ethic.
Action in the world even perception is impossible without an ethic, so one has to be at least allowed in through the back door. The fact that such allowance produces a logical contradiction appears to bother the low-rent postmodernists who dominate the social sciences and humanities not at all. So: postmodernism, by its nature at least with regard to skepticism cannot ally itself with Marxism. But it does, practically. The dominance of postmodern Marxist rhetoric in the academy which is a matter of fact, as laid out by the Heterodox Academy, among other sources attests to that.