Give me a clear definition of postmodernism. Especially one that tells me what it is, instead of what it isn’t.
Good luck with that.
One of the biggest frustrations you often get with postmodernism (especially in sociology, literature, or philosophy) is the sheer convoluted contradictory mess of what gets called postmodern. The thing is, anybody who is definitively telling you what postmodernism is about is full of crap.
See, here’s the thing. Modernism was all about utility and putting stuff in conceptual boxes. There was order. Postmodernism is a reaction against that – but the very nature of modernism is to subsume everything. Reactions against modernism would simply become another box in the modernist landscape.
Postmodernism says that’s crap. If reality is not uniform or universal, then there can be no pigeonholes (because they’re illusory). Therefore, if there can be a simple, accessible way to “get” postmodernism, then it simply becomes another pigeonhole. Being contradictory and confusing means that it inherently cannot be pigeonholed.
So the contradictory confusing mess of postmodernism isn’t a bug. It’s a feature.
(and yes, you want to embiggen the picture and read the text!)