How the West Became Postmodern

A Three Part Story

d

Postmodernism can be thought of as a third stage in the course of Western history (e.g., Ashley, 1997; Kramer, 1997; Graham, 1997). According to this model, premodernism existed from prerecorded times until about 1750, when modernism became visible and premodern beliefs were washed away. Then, for a couple of spectacular centuries, things were modern. Finally, about 1950, postmodernism began creeping in, inconspicuously at first, in nooks and crannies, but growing quickly until today, when postmodernism promises to spread widely over the immediate future.

This historical account, therefore, is a three-part story: first there was premodernism, then there was modernism, and now we have postmodernism.

Of course, like all stage models of history, the three-stage model of premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism is a simplification. The value of this three-part history is not just to inform you of the past, but to provide you the context of postmodern cultural lore (Nucci, 2000; Shore, 1996). While there are important out-of-sync happenings in history, like occasional modernist thinking in ancient times or premodernist thinking during the postmodern era, these three historical waves have some credibility even when looked at closely. One does not need to have counted the raindrops, after all, to say that it’s been raining.

A postmodern reader might want to ponder these details (perhaps later). Arguably, classical Greece was home to important modern thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle whose work prefigured what we are now calling the modern period. Confusing things more is the observation that while ‘premodernity’ is the earliest culture, it appears to thrive today in fundamentalist religion of all kinds.

Premodernity

Premodernity was surely the longest and strongest of the three stages of history, stretching back as far as the mind can see, at least to the culture of cave men. It was the culture of magic and myth as well as, eventually, huge religious institutions (Hawkes & Woolley, 1963; Mithen, 1999) which, during this time, were shaped by the premodern concepts of ghosts, goblins, angels, and demons, as well as by possession and exorcism. What was distinctive about premodernity was that nothing was needed to validate these myths, nothing other than a lack of alternative explanation or the fact that someone once said that something was true. After that, premodern beliefs were repeated like echoes through the halls of premodern time, with scarcely a raised eyebrow.

Imagine it. No one you know has ever traveled more than a few kilometers outside your village. All your neighbors share the same beliefs, handed down from generations before. These truths have been known, it seems, from time eternal. Who would question such things? There are no books or periodicals to tell you otherwise, no radio or television programs (Eisenstein, 1979, p. 461). There are authorities, but they all repeat the same beliefs you take for granted. You go to them for answers. It no more occurs to you to question your leaders than it does to wonder whether the world might be round. Columbus may have been sailing to America during the tail end of this premodern period, but the news has not come down to you — and for you, nothing could be clearer than the fact that the world is flat. Oh, there is a local rumor that people in the community a few miles away think differently, but those people are heretics and fools, as far as everyone you know says (Fielding, 1996). Why would you think differently? It is not important, anyway. Everyone you care about is in your community. What people in your community think is what’s important to you.

You look at the world within your horizon, you see it, and you are confident. And the same goes for all your beliefs.

This is the culture of the premodern. It is said that premoderns had little sense of selfhood or self-worth, little sense of personal agency (Burkhardt, 1878/2003; Dinshaw, 1999), but perhaps the concept of “self-worth” means something different in a premodern culture. Life was too hard to take time to ponder such matters. Instead, premoderns were subject to such miseries as “famines, drought, pestilence [which] combined with human dangers — invasion, predation, theft — that always threatened any fleeting sense of security in premodern life”  (Shepsle, 1991). The great famine (1315-1322), for example, was something to remember. So was the Black Plague (1347-1351), and there seems to have been a centuries-long epidemic of leprosy among the poorest poor (Denton, 1888, p. 206).

Such premodern people were born into a society that understood life in terms of destinies. The oldest son was destined by the rule of custom to inherit all of the family fortune (Stearns, 1982, p. 7; Salzman, 1926, p. 49; Evergates, 1993), leaving his younger brothers effectively disinherited. Daughters were married off to husbands who were chosen by their parents or by an intermediary (Becker & Hill, 1948). They had not voted on or even evaluated these rules privately. These were just the rules that were. All of life was the fulfillment of one’s destinies, plowing the land if that was your father’s trade, marrying whomever your parents selected, following the same rules that everyone before you had ever followed.

....

For thousands of years, the western world was premodern; however, by 1400 there were a few signs that major changes were in store, changes that would become increasingly conspicuous until about 1750, when modernity would erupt. This was the Enlightenment period of premodernity. For example, starting slowly, in the early fourteen hundreds, grammar schools were increasingly available (Cubberly, 1920). Next, dramatically, the printing press (1450). Sotwo important things happened in tandem, over a period of decades: a wider and wider public learned how to read, and intersting and relevant authors began to be published and have their writing disseminated broadly to an increasingly literate public.

An illiterate culture beginning to read is no small thing. Prior to the printing press culture, reading was only for monnks who did not believe in sharing their reading with the illiterate public. Until the invention of the printing press began providing books for mass sales, ordinary people could not read and learn about topics of interest. No matter how bright and talented they were, unable to read, the common folk were trapped in the mindset of their narrow communities. The written form of knowledge that existed was owned by the privileged who often believed that the public should be kept at least somewhat ignorant (Orcutt, 1928).

After the invention of the printing press, all that changed. Literacy rspread widely and rapidly. By the year 1500 there were two hundred and fifty grammar schools in England alone, and there were a similar quantity in Germany (Cubberly, 1920). Literacy rates skyrocketed to 50 percent (Burns & Lang, 1989). Commercially successful printing presses popped up everywhere. How successful were they? By the early fifteen hundreds, the key publisher in England had twenty-four presses and employed a hundred workers (Putnam, 1962, p.150-151). Just a few years later, books began appearing wih woodcut pictures (Bazin, 1996) or hand-paiknted illustrations (Orcutt, 1928). Publishers began to tend to a book's appearance and also to its readiability. Popular fables were printed in both Latin and vernacular languages to expand marketability (Beuhler, 1952).

Postmodernity

But then, in nooks and crannies of the modern mind, postmodern doubts and concerns began to appear. This was a wave of nostalgic postmodernism, disappointment in the magic image of science never falling short. Maybe the blessings of the modern world would eventually make our lives even better, so the nostalgic postmodern might think, but in the meantime we have to deal with the reality that the glorious solutions are not all available now. And how can a simple citizen know which science reports are just hoaxes, commercializing science and selling its wares? How can one separate the promise of science from the promise of over-optimistic modernists?

Let's look at some of the less glorious elements of modernity that would initiate the postmodern shift. We can laugh a little at the guillibility of early moderns as they were repeatedly disappointed. For example, in 1873, a report published in the Journal of Paris claimed that a new invention permitted people to walk on water. These newly invented special shoes, so the story went, were made of elastic, and anyone wearing the shoes could easily walk across rivers or lakes. The thought of walking across water inspired many eager raders. "Why not?" they reasoned. "Humans have conquered the air with flying balloons. No one had thought that was possible. What is so propsterous about people conquering the water as well?" they asked. These elastic, water-walking shoes, so people thought, were just another mora