Pos(t)ing Modernism: The Postmodernism of "The Moderns"

Author(s): Crystal Downing

Source: Pacific Coast Philology, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Sep., 1994), pp. 109-118
Published by: Penn State University Press on behalf of the Pacific Ancient and Modern Language
Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1316352 .
Accessed: 07/05/2014 14:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Penn State University Press and Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Pacific Coast Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Pos(t)ingModernism:
The PostmodernismofTheModerns
CrystalDowning
MessiahCollege

Modernity as a consolation
orginated forthelossofGod,the"I am"
ofDescartes's
Cogitoreplacing the"I am thatI am"ofYaweh'sname.
In thetwentieth
century,
High Modernism wentonestepfurtherthan
ofDescartes'thinking
thevalorization subjecttomaketheavantgarde
theonlythinking
artist subject worthlistening to.AlanRudolph's1988
film,TheModerns,setin Parisofthe1920's,endswitha hyperbolic
expressionofHighModernism. A guideintheNew YorkMuseumof
ModemArtstopsbefore a C4zanneandmakesa tonalgenuflect tothe
paintinganditspainter:
Thisis a workofrareemotional Thisrevelation
delicacy. cannotbe
taught norcanitbeduplicated.
Onlythegreatest
artist
canachieve
whathashappened andonlythen
here, inthat
raremoment intime.
So let'ssilently
observethis...
Aftera prayerful
pause, theguide proceeds:
Wellgentlemen,
didittouchyou?Didyousensethemystery?
Do
youknownowwhythisis a masterpiece?
Whywepraiseit?Why
we genuflect
beforeit?Whyitwilllivethroughtheagesforall
MyGod,I hopeyouunderstand
humanity? that!
CUzanneis the appropriatechoice forsuch a mystification since he
inspiredthe modernistmovementat the beginningof the twentieth
century,whereinartistsseparatedthemselvesfromthe banalitiesof
mass cultureto "make it new" by makingtheirartisticvisions and
versionswhollynew.1As Lyotardnotes,Cezanne's shiftfromrealism
to cubism "posted" Impressionismby "questioningthe rules that
govern[its] images."2I wish to argue thatAlan Rudolph poses the
mystification ofthePost-Impressionist Cezanne in orderto "post" the
Moderns; for he places in the crowd, listeningto the worshipful
museum guide, Nick Hart (Keith Carradine),whom we know has
actuallyforgedthe"Cdzanne."The guide's adulationsare abouta fake,
a meresimulationof the "original."Rudolph has createda brilliant
postmodernmomentin which a reproductionis valorized over the
authentic,consumercapitalismloomingbehindit all.3
historically
Out offinancialnecessity,Hart,a struggling
Americanartistin 1926
Paris, quells his Modernist idealism and agrees to reproduce the
Cezanne,a Matisse,and a ModiglianiforNathaliede Ville (Geraldine

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
110 Crystal
Downing

Chaplain)whowantsto keepthemorelucrative originalsso shecan

pawn offthe forgeries on herdivorcinghusband. whathas
Ironically,
made theoriginalsso expensivein thefirstplace is theprocessof
mechanical reproduction.Photographyled to a mystification of
"original"artworksas thetranscendental signifiedsofcommodified
photographs, and henceas evenmorevaluablecommodities. As John
Bergernotesin WaysofSeeing,"The bogus religiosity whichnow
surrounds originalworksofart,and whichis ultimately dependent
upon their market value,hasbecomethesubstitute forwhatpaintings
lostwhenthecameramade themreproducible."4 The technology of
reproduction, then,is a keystepinthedevelopmentofpostmodernism,
so that,in FredricJameson's words,"aesthetic
production todayhas
becomeintegrated intocommodity production
generally."5Jameson's
word"today,"whichappearsin his1984article"Postmodernism, or
theCulturalLogicofLateCapitalism," mightbe qualified
byJonathan
Arac,who suggeststhat"[t]hesociallyserious1930's... foundthe
preceding generation, whichwe linkwithmodernism at itsheight,
alreadyliableto thechargesthatcriticsurgeagainstpostmodernism."
AracthenquotesMalcolmCowley'sassessment that,in the1920's
"thereemerged 'a newethicthatencouraged peopletobuy,a consump-
tionethic.'"
In TheModerns thisconsumption ethicis mostfullyrepresented
by
Bertram Stone(JohnLone),a nouveau richeAmerican who comesto
Paristoinvestin art.As thedealerLibby(Genevieve Bujold)presents
Stonewiththeoriginals shesays"Thesethree
ofHart'sforgeries, works
capturethe de
l'essence Stone
moderniti." responds "I amonlyinterested
in price. . . . If I paid less it would be less beautiful,"as though
anticipatingLyotard'scomment in ThePostmodern "in the
Condition:
itremainspossibleand usefulto assess
absenceofaestheticcriteria,
worksofartaccordingtotheprofits theyyield."7
WhenStoneopenshisParisianresidence fora privateshowingof
hisartcollection,
highlightedby hisnewly acquired Cezanne,Matisse,
and Modigliani,Nathaliede Ville,who commissioned theforgeries,
entersandproclaims thepaintingstobe fakes.Stonesmugly responds,
"Thisis artbecauseI havepaid hardcashforit.... PerhapsI should
framethemoneyI boughtthemwith."Beauty,forStone,is intheeye
onthebackofthedollarbill.So,whentwoartcritics proceedtodevalue
Stone'scopies--after
hearingNathalie declare
that shehas"papers"to
her
prove paintings to be theoriginals--Stone slashestheno longer
beautifulpaintingsand throwsthemon thefire.At thispointAlan
Rudolphputshisaudienceinaninteresting position,becauseweknow
thatStone'snewly-acquired paintingsarethe originals.Earlierin the

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Modernism
Pos(t)ing Ill

film,afterHarthadspentmanyarduoushoursforging thecopies,we
saw Nathalierefuseto pay him,for,herhusbandnow dead,sheno
longerneedsthemas decoys.Nathaliehas the"original"paintings
stolenfrom Hart'sstudioandshippedtoNewYork;shefailstorealize
thatthestolenworksareactuallythecopies,enabling Libbytosellthe
originalsto Stone--whoburnsthemas fakesin his fireplace. The
audiblegaspsandgroansfrom themovieaudiencewatching thisscene
howartbecomesa mererepresentation
illustrate ofitscommodifica-
tion.Whygroaniftheduplicatesareso perfectly executedthateven
expertsatNewYork'sMuseumofModernArtcan'ttellthedifference?
Thegroan-ifevenunconscious-isoverthelostmonetary valueofan
these
"original."Ironically, "original"paintings which are being
gaspedoverarenotself-identical;
outsidetheworldofthefilmtheyare
fakescreatedto representtheauthenticin thefilm.Theyare,in fact,
simulacra-identicalcopiesforwhich no haseverexisted--in
original
thateachapproximates a Cdzanne,a Matisse,a Modiglianiwithout
comingcloseto duplicating,lineforline,anyactualpainting in our
world.Thesceneironizes"originality"evenfurther through itsown
simulation ofa precursor:
inOrsonWelles'sF isforFake,an artforger
burnsa forged Matisse.9
On severaldifferent
levelsRudolphis gestur-
ingtowardpostmodernism, whichinterrogatesnotonlythedistinction
betweenhighartand popularculture, butalsotheveryfoundation of
like and
concepts "originality" "authenticity"-including that ofhis
ownfilm.
Theantagonism betweenwhatJameson callsthe"high-modernist
conception ofa uniquestyle"and thepostmodern "waningofaffect"
as the"distinctive individual brushstroke"
comestoan end" is literal-
ized inTheModerns through a boxingmatchbetweenHartandStone,
whosenamesareperhapsa bittootransparent. Hart,whosenamewe
firsthearpronounced as artwhena French waiteraddresshiminthe
openingscene,has a modernist heartforthepossibilities
ofart.His
namereflects a valorizationofinside(heart)
overoutside(body),genius
overutility, subjectoverobject.TheheartofHartismostfullyrevealed
whenRachel(LindaFiorentino) comestohimforsexand he refuses
her,saying"Whataboutlove,Rachel?"Thepostmodern Stone,how-
ever,is all hardsurfaces, and hisadmiration forHoudiniimplieshis
valorization ofmanipulated perceptions.It's quiteappropriate
that
Stonehas madehisfortune manufacturing condoms,forhe seeksto
keephishardsurfaces cleanwhilehe rapeswomenas sexualartifacts
andpaintings as culturalartifacts, bothas commodities
objectifying for
exchange.Whilesensuallyrunninghis handdownthebodyofthe
Modiglianinude,he says to the art dealer,"Did you knowthat
Modigliani's modelswereall tarts?Allwomenaretarts;that'swhyI

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
112 Crystal
Downing

lovethem."Stonevalueshiswife,Rachel,exactly as he doeshispaint-
ings,a that
fact is reinforced when
visually one scene showshimwith
a razorclosetothenudeRachel'sbreastas he shavesunderherarmin
a bathtub(beforeengagingin anal sex-to herexplicitdiscomfort),
whilein a laterscenehe takesa knifeto thenude in Modigliani's
paintingandcutsoutitsbreastbeforethrowing itonthefire.
ItisbecauseofRachelthatHartandStonefight---on thecanvasrather
thanovercanvases.Ironically, Hart,unbeknownst to Stone,is still
Rachel'slegal husband.We learnthatyearsbeforeshe had fledthe
financiallystruggling painter,to eventually"marry"intoconsumer
capitalism. The fight occurs in an American gymin Montparnasse,
reminding us of"Parnassus," a mountain "sacredtoApollo,Dionysus,
and theMuses"and "therefore a symboloftheapexofliterature, art,
and culture.""Rudolph'sfilmsignalsthat, justas "MountParnassus"
hasbeenreducedtothegymcanvasesofMontparnasse, so canvasesof
Cezanne,Matisse,andModigliani havebeenreducedtoashesbyStone,
a scionofcapitalist vulgaritywhowinsthefight withHartjustas he
wonRachelfromHart.Onallcounts, Hartistheloser,representing the
appropriation and degradation ofmodernism bythepostmodern, one
aspectofwhichis "thereduction oftheagencyoftheartist."12
Ironically,thepaintings whichdemonstrate Hart'sabilityas a free
agent--those whichare"original" ratherthanforgeries--are thorough-
lypostmodern in effect.
Thisis especiallytrueoftheonewe see most
oftenin thefilm,whichcontainsunconnected imagesofa nudeon a
sofa,withtwo Baroqueputtiand a cucumber-like dirigiblefloating
above her.It modelsthe postmodern "pastiche"--aformJameson
disparagesas "a rubbleof distinct and unrelatedsignifiers" which
effaceshistory by turning itintoa merefundofimages.13 As though
awareofJameson's "logicofconsumer capitalism,"Rudolphstatesin
an 1988interview, "AllofHart'spaintings arecommercials. Ifwe'dhad
enoughmoney, we'd have used eachof his blown
paintin~gs up as a
billboardtoadvertise veryrecognizable products."
To foreground thisappropriation byconsumer capitalism,Rudolph
establishesas Hart's(l'art's)mainfriendinParisOiseau(WallyShawn),
a gossipcolumnist fortheweeklyTribune whois muchmoreeffective
thanHartat makingartpalatableformassconsumption. Atonepoint
he says,"Ifitwasn'tforme,peoplewouldthink surrealwas a breakfast
food."WhenOiseaufakesa suicideandthenwatcheshisownfuneral
dressedas a woman,he embodiesthepostmodern replacement of
"reality"by simulacra. Even his the
name--presumably sign of the
authentic self--becomes a meresignifiersuitedtothemanipulations of

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Modernism
Pos(t)ing 113

as whena half-dozen
others, peopleatthemargins ofhis"funeral" yell
mechanical
"Oiseau"("bird")whilemanipulating birds.Thisisa visual
ofverbalmanipulations
representation earlierin thefilmwhenRan-
dolphgesturestoward Saussurian
diffrancebyhavingcharacters call
Oiseau"Oisif"-"idle."
A connection is made betweenthepostmodern Oiseau and the
postmodern Stonewhenthelattercommits suicideas theformer only
pretendstodo.HartplacesStoneinOiseau'scoffin--after liftingliteral
stonesoutofit--sothatStoneis buriedinOiseau'sgraveandbecomes
theactualreferent ofthenameon thecoffin as wellas ofthefuneral
benedictions and the "Oiseau" maledictions. Rudolphhas subtly
prepared us forthis identity-sharingsince Rachel has calledherhus-
band"Birdie"(whatwe actually hearrather than"Bertie") throughout
thefilm.Thoughone"bird"is Hart'sfriend andtheother"Birdie"his
enemy,theyarebothrepresentatives ofart'sand Hart'sdegradation
through consumer capitalism:firstHart agreesto sell a painting to
Stone,whothenturnsitintoa condomad,andthenlaterheagreesto
moveto Hollywood--that world-famous factory of simulacra-with
Oiseau,whois boredwithmodernist artandwantstobe "wherethe
picturesmove."
Rudolphplaces simulacrathroughout his own movingpicture,
sometimes only as subtle aspects of themise enscene,repeatedly dis-
tancingus fromany sensethatwe can have accessto an innocent
"truth."
TheModerns beginswith"mechanical reproductions" ofParis:
oldfilmstockof1920'sstreet scenesanda monotone photograph ofthe
EiffelTower.Thesebecomethevisualcuesthatthediegesisis setin
Paris;however, theyareforgeries ofauthenticity,sinceall theParisian
sceneswereactuallyfilmed inMontreal. Thephotoofthe"real"Eiffel
Toweris followed bya matchcuttoa fourinchmoldedreproduction
ofthetowerona waiter'sserving trayina Bistro. Thewaiteris serving
uprepresentations ofan"authentic" Parisforthebar'spatrons thesame
wayAlanRudolphservesup representations ofan "authentic" Paris
forhisfilmpatrons, a servicehe parodiesbymultiplying toabsurdity
imagesoftheTower--in all shapes,sizes,andcolors--throughout the
film.
Rudolphservesup representations of thehistorical momentas
aritificial
as thoseofthelocale:Gertrude
SteinandEarnest Hemingway
arehistoricalsignalsofthe1920'sartistic
scene,justas theEiffel
Tower
visuallysignalsParis.Stein
and Hemingway, playedby ElsaRaven and
KevinO'Connor,arelikethreedimensional instantiationsofthetwo-
dimensional caricatureswe see Hartdrawingin theopeningBistro

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
114 Crystal
Downing

scene.Infact,severalreviewers
ofRudolph'sfilmwereangeredbythe
caricatures.In Newsday, Mike McGrady writes,"Admirersof
Hemingwayare sureto be appalledas thewriteris presentedas a
drunken
callow,superficial, stumblebumwhowandersaroundtrying
toworkout thisphrase:'Parisis... um... ah...er... a portable[picnic
. . . no,... a travelling]banquet'"-mocking of course thaticon of
modernism A Moveable Feast.(RandySue Coburninforms us that,
duringthefilming of TheModems,therewere"enoughcopiesofA
Moveable Feastfloating aroundthesettosupplyanentire collegelitera-
tureclass."'5)AndinNewsweek, David Ansenwarnsthat"Worshipers
ofEarnestHemingway and Gertrude Steinwillbe takenabackbythe
debunking thesegiantsreceive .... Thisreductionism is maddeningly
callow.Whydidn't Rudolphevenattempt toportray a serious artist?"
Thesereviewers, ofcourse,arejudgingthefilmfrom a positionwhich
mystifiesmodernist art,a positionwhichpostmodernism hasexposed
as grounded inan illegitimate neo-Romantic metanarrative. Ironically,
theirexcoriations ofRudolph,if situateddifferently, could serveas
praiseforhisbrilliant presentation ofthepostmodern condition: Ansen
writes,"In Rudolph'sjaundicedview,Parisinthe'20swas justa dry
runforHollywoodinthe'80s:hustlers andhypesters turning artinto
commodities." Seemingly without knowing it, Ansen has aligned
"Rudolph'sjaundicedview"withthatofprominant theorists ofour
time,as whenJameson connects the"technological invention and new
commodity production ofthe1920s"with"theriseofHollywoodand
oftheimageas commodity."17 AndMcGrady's assessment, that"'The
Moderns'is anotherbasketofwax fruit fromRudolph"--is simplya
figurativeway totalkofitspostmodernism, as iftosaythatthisfilm
aboutartificial constructions self-reflexivelyexposesitsownartifice.
Theexposureis obviously intentional,as whenseveralbackgrounds in
thefilm,thoseseenthrough therearwindowofa cabandthrough the
curtainsofNathalie'sapartment, are cubistpaintings ofcityscapes.
Reminiscent ofthebackdrops inTheCabinet Dr.
of Caligari, thesepaint-
ings,easilyoverlooked bythecasualobserver, remind usthatthemovie
screenis nota windowon reality, butrathera canvasuponwhich
illusionsare shaped.And,ofcourse,oneofthemostcommonoffilm
illusionsis thesceneofa coupleinthebackseatofa carorcabwiththe
territorythrough whichtheyare passingseenouttherearwindow.
Withanyreflection we realizethat,inall thesescenes,a cameracrew
did notfitthemselves intoan enclosedautomobile to shootthescene
whilemovingthrough a city.Whatwe see insteadis a simulacrum,
fulfillingthepost-industrial conditionas describedby Baudrillard:
"realityitself,entirelyimpregnated byanaesthetic whichisinseparable
fromitsownstructure, has beenconfusedwithitsownimage."'8By

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Modernism
Pos(t)ing 115

making as obviousas a bowlofwaxfruit,

hisartifice Rudolphismerely
being honestabout the falsityof film.He thus goesonestepbeyond
thosemakersof"nostalgiafilms"whopretendtopresent a visionof
thehistoricalpastwhenall theygiveus, according to Jameson, is a
"pasticheof thestereotypical past"--an imitation of an imitation, a
simulacrum, whichinfacteviscerates history.19
Thisis theheartof TheModerns, whoseformimitates theforged
pasticheofitscontent. Atone point,thefilminscribes whatJameson
callsthepostmodern "simultaneity ofthenon-simultaneous"20 when
thecamerapansthe1920'sParisianBistroonlytoendtheshotwitha
collectionof1980'spunkers, all dressedin blackleather,sittingat the
samebarwherewe saw Hemingway seatedin theopeningscene--as
though toagreewithJameson, thatthepostmodernism ofthe80'sgrew
outoftheconsumer cultureofthe20's.Buttheshotof1980'spunkers
seemsalsoa self-reflexivecomment on thetechnological "pastich"of
all contemporaryfilm.In his 1988interview, Rudolphdiscussedthe
needforfilmic "fill"to stretch outthevisualstomeetthetimeofthe
soundtrack:
withthepicture,
Allthesoundreelshavetobeinsynch soyouneed
frombad prints,and imagescatchyoureye.So
tofillin withstuff
andsay,"What's
I'mdoingRoadie, ItwasCries
this?" andWhispers!
... I'mworking
onTheModerns,
andI keepseeing ofKeith
images
CarradinethatI can'tremember Moreandyounger
shooting. shots
of Keithcomingup, and I realized,"Wow,it's ChooseMe [a 1984
in thefill."So I started
film]
Rudolph itin.So theeditor
editing
comesback,and ... I showedhimmyjokeonmyownmovie.21
Withthemultiple imagesofKeithCarradine, TheModemsachievesa
postmodern "simultaneity of thenonsimultaneous." Rudolph'sran-
of
sacking past films effectively
strips them of anysignificanceas
mystifiedworksofart,justas "Postmodern ofthepast
art'sransacking
forthemotifs,styles,and themesitrecycles stripsthepast
effectively
ofanysignificanceas a livedalternative."22
Indeed,through Rudolph's
"joke,"thepastofKeithCarradine is reducedtofiller
as hebecomesa
meresimulacrum ofhimself.
Whilethisjokewas apparently an accident,
TheModernscontains
otherjokeswhichblurthedistinction betweenauthenticity
and ar-
whether
tificiality; Rudolphintended themornotis a mootpoint,for
to talkof"intentionality"
is to invokea paradigmthatpassedaway
withmodernism. Whenwe discoverthatRudolph'sfilmaboutcon-
sumercapitalisminthe1920'swas "rejected bynearlyeverystudioin
theL.A. phonebookon thegroundsofinsufficient commerical
ap-
werealizethatthefilm'sformation--not
peal,"23 justitsform--ironizes

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
116 Crystal
Downing

itscontent. The creditsat theend ofthefilmrevealotherironies;for

example, David Stein,whoforgedthepaintings forthefilm,playsone
oftheartcritics inStone'ssalonwhodeniesthepaintings' authenticity.
In reallife,Steinactuallywenttojailin 1968forforging a Picassoand
a Chagall;and, as RandySue Coburnnotes,"In a twistoffateap-
propriate toTheModerns, Steinnowgetspaidforsigning hisownname
copies,andhislawyeris theformer DA whosenthimtojail."24 Wealso
learnfromthecreditsthata womannamedAda Fuoco,who speaks
onlyseverallinesintheNewYorkMuseumofModernArt,plays"Ada
Fuoco,"a womanwhorecognizes Oiseauas "Irving
Fagleman" thatshe
grewup within Flatbush.However,theveryfactshe playsherself
speakingtosomeone(WallyShawn)notplayinghimself (Oiseau)not
playing himself (IrvingFagleman)compromises her own self-identity:
sheis a meresimulacrum, liketheC4zannearoundthecorner, a false
picture inthepictures. LikethewomenpaintedontheC4zannecanvas,
Ada Fuoco has beenartificially situatedon thecanvasofthemovie
screen, a screenwhichhasalwaysalreadyscreened out"reality."
Immediately beforehe leavesParis,WallyShawn,who is playing
FaglemanplayingOiseau playinga woman,despairsthat"Parisis
takenoverby imitators ofpeoplewho are imitators themselves. It's
becomea parody."TheModerns has becomea parodyas well,posing
andthenpost-ing modernism.

Notes

1. ScottNygren,"Reconsidering FilmandthePostmodern
Japanese
Modernism:
WideAngle11 (July1989):8.
Context,"

2. Jean-FrancoisLyotard,ThePostmodernExplained: 1982-1985,
Correspondence
U MinnesotaP, 1992),12.
trans.Don Barry,et.al. (Minneapolis:

3. Fora helpfuldiscussionofpostmodernismandfilm,seeTonyWilson,"Read-
ing the postmodernist image: a 'cognitivemapping',"Screen31 (Winter1990):
390-407.

4. JohnBerger,WaysofSeeing(London:Penguin),23.

5. FredricJameson,
"Postmodernism,ortheCulturalLogicofLateCapitalism,"
1984):56.
NewLeftReview146(July-Aug

6. Jonathan andPolitics(Minneapolis:
Arac,ed.,Postmodernism Min-
University
nesotaPress,1986),p. xxxi.

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Modernism
Pos(t)ing 117

7. Jean-Francois
Lyotard, Condition:
ThePostmodern A Report
onKnowledge,
trans.
MinnesotaPress,
and BrianMassumi(Minneapolis:University
GeoffBennington
76.
1984),
8. One critictellsStone,"Fakesis whatwe havecalledthemand fakesis what
theyare,fitonlyforthefire."

for'TheModerns',"FilmComment
9. KarenJaehne,"Time 24 (April1988):25.

63 & 64.
10. Jameson,

ed.,TheColumbia
11. WilliamBridgwater, VikingDeskEncyclopedia,
2 vols.(1953;
New York,1960),2:1011.Theremay also be embeddedherean allusionto the
nineteenthcentury a groupofFrenchpoetswhoironized,
Parnassians, ifnotavoided
realistic
altogether, emotioninpoetry.

and thepost-industrial
12. MargaretA. Rose, Thepost-modern (Cambridge,
Cambridge Press,1991),71.
University

66.
13. Jameson,

14. Jaehne,
29.

15. RandySue Coburn,"AlanRudolph'sMoveableFeast."Premiere

1 (Oct.1987):
48.

16. Theseand thetwofollowing quotationswerefirstprinted, in

respectively,
15
Newsday, April 88;and 25
Newsweek, April 88;bothsubsequently in
reprinted Film
ReviezwAnnual:1989,ed. Jerome
S. Ozer (Englewood:FilmReviewPublications,
1989).

17. Jameson,
69.

18. JeanBaudrillard,
"TheOrdersofSimulacra,"
Simulations
(NY: Semiotext(e),
1983),150.

65.
19. Jameson,

20. I firstheardJamesonemploythephrase"simultaneity of thenon-simul-

taneous"ina talkhedeliveredattheUniversity
ofCalifornia,
SantaBarbara,
entitled
"Modernity afterPostmodernism"(8 May1989).

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
118 Crystal
Downing

21. Jaehne,
28.

22. JohnMcGowan,paraphrasingJameson, and Its Critics

in Postmodernism
(Ithaca:CornellUP, 1991),156.

23. Coburn,48.

24. Coburn,49.

This content downloaded from 110.224.221.180 on Wed, 7 May 2014 14:42:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions