Lyotard - Andrea Luongo

After reading Lyotard, I have to admit that I am more confused as to what postmodernism is now, than I was before.  As Lyotard states, “A work can become modern only if it is first postmodern.  Postmodernism thus understood is not modernism at its end but in the nascent sate, and this state is constant” (44).  Lyotard later goes on to explain, “The postmodern would be that which, in the modern, puts forward the unpresentable in presentation itself” (46).  Lyotard focuses much of his essay on the unpresentable; that which cannot be presented because it is too simple, or because it is too complex.  He uses Kant’s citing of the commandment “Thou shalt not make graven images” (44), to illustrate the idea of – in the case the Absolute – something being on too large of a scope to create presentations of.  It seems in his essay, that Lyotard is making the case that the postmodern, then, is not an individual movement, but that it instead coincides with modernism, in the sense that postmodernism does what modernism does not—in this case, give meaning to that which cannot be presented, or created to encompass the entire meaning.

One example given to illustrate the idea of the unpresentable, or the “empty ‘abstraction’ is Malevich’s squares.  When talking about a way to present that which is too simple or too complex and profound, Lyotard states, “It will be ‘white’ like one of Malevich’s squares; it will enable us to see only by making it impossible to see” (44).  This example of a seemingly simple and blank canvas representing so much more than the eye can see, reminded me of composer John Cage’s piece 4’33.  This piece, which can be played on any instrument, is 4 minutes and 33 seconds of what is supposed to be silence, however, when really thinking about it, there is no such thing as absolute silence.  Instead the audience is subject to listen to 4 minutes and 33 seconds of the sounds around them.  In this instance, Cage’s 4’33, represents the idea that “It will enable us to see only by making it impossible to see” (44), or in other words, the importance of Malevich’s squares and Cage’s 4’33, is that they allow us to understand everything, by not saying or depicting anything at all—that is, if my interpretations of this essay and the postmodern idea of putting the unpresentable in presentation is correct.

John Cage's 4'33