Universal explanations (“grand narratives”)

Fixed meanings and stable identities

Objective, absolute truths claimed to stand outside history, language, or power

Plurality and difference

Context and contingency

The role of language, culture, and power in shaping “reality”

Post–World War II disillusionment with progress and rational mastery

Critiques of colonialism, patriarchy, and institutional authority

Growth of mass media, consumer culture, and global capitalism

Modernism

Postmodernism

Challenges sweeping stories that claim to explain everything (e.g., inevitable progress, pure reason, single religious or political destiny)

Highlights how such narratives

Questions the idea of a final, unquestionable foundation for knowledge (e.g., pure reason, objective observation)

Treats knowledge as

Meaning is not fixed once and for all

Interpretation depends on

Focus on how language frames what can be thought and said

“Truth” is often linked to institutions and social power

Examines who benefits when certain claims are treated as “natural” or “obvious”

Rejects single, unified identities or perspectives

Values multiple viewpoints and mixed forms

Embraces

Uses parody, pastiche, metafiction, and self-awareness

Exposes how artworks and texts are constructed

Undermines seriousness of “authoritative” voices

Images and representations can become more influential than “the real”

Media can blur boundaries between

Traditional narratives often assume

Postmodernism highlights

Rejects the idea that a single authority (expert, author, institution) owns meaning

Promotes

National, religious, scientific, and corporate stories can justify power

Postmodern critique asks

Emphasizes micro-histories, local knowledge, lived experience

Resists forcing diverse experiences into one universal framework

Treats truth-claims as shaped by

Focuses on how claims function socially

Knowledge is seen as

“Neutral” viewpoints can conceal

“Incredulity toward metanarratives”

Knowledge as fragmented into language games

Power/knowledge: institutions produce regimes of truth

Genealogy: historical critique of how categories form (madness, sexuality, punishment)

Deconstruction: meanings depend on differences and deferrals within language

Critique of binary oppositions and “presence”

Simulacra and hyperreality

Signs and media can eclipse material reference

Pragmatism and anti-foundationalism

Truth as what our communities justify, not what mirrors reality

Metafiction, unreliable narrators, non-linear plots

Intertextuality, mixing “high” and “low” culture

Example tendencies

Reaction against strict modernist functionalism

Eclectic styles, historical quotation, ornament, playful forms

Appropriation, collage, remix aesthetics

Blurred lines between original and copy

Self-referential narratives, genre blending, pastiche

Media saturation themes; reality vs representation

Irony as a dominant style

Mashups and nostalgia cycles

Brand and image as identity markers

Critiques “objective” histories as narrative constructions

Emphasizes archives, omissions, and perspective

Reflexivity about the researcher’s position

Questioning universal models of culture and development

Reader-response and interpretive plurality

Analysis of ideology, discourse, representation

Critiques universal “human” subject as often implicitly male/Western

Focuses on identity as constructed and intersectional

An overarching story that claims universal explanation and legitimacy

Systems of language and practice that shape what counts as knowledge and truth

Reading strategy that exposes instability, assumptions, and suppressed meanings

Imitative mixing of styles without a single authoritative voice

Imitation with critical or comedic edge; exposes conventions

A copy/sign that no longer refers to an original in a stable way

A condition where representations feel more real than reality

The view that truth/morality depends on context; frequently attributed to postmodernism, though not always embraced in simple form

Reply: Often aims to critique unjustified certainty, not deny all claims

Reply: Many postmodernists present arguments as situated critiques, not absolute pronouncements

Reply: Often targets scientism (science as total worldview) and institutional authority, not empirical inquiry itself

Reply: Can support politics by exposing hidden power and opening space for alternatives

Media influence and misinformation ecosystems

Identity politics and cultural hybridity

Institutional bias and “official” narratives

Consumer culture, branding, and image-based reality

Critical reading of authoritative claims

Awareness of perspective and context

Openness to multiple voices and interpretations