Abandoning modernist becoming leaves only aestheticized spatial politics

Evidence

Nevertheless, the dilemmas which Jameson depicts are exact and capture the drift of postmodern sensibility as to the meaning of space in contemporary political and cultural as well as economic life. If, however, we have lost the modernist faith in becoming, as Foucault’s Sartrean critic argued, is there any way out except via the reactionary politics of an aestheticized spatiality? — David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, 1934

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: Harvey poses the book’s central dilemma: if postmodernism abandons historical becoming, the only exit is the reactionary aestheticized-space route — the trap he sees closing through commodified aesthetic production.
• XREF: connects to: Modernism’s aesthetic withdrawal from reality was a retreat from politics — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 216; Aesthetics of immediacy cannot build the political will needed for change — Anna Kornbluh, Immediacy, or The Style of Too Late…, 377; Contemporary aesthetics is slackening representation and dissolving medium (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Aesthetics of immediacy cannot build the political will needed for change #expands (0.82) — Anna Kornbluh, Immediacy, or The Style of Too Late…, 377
• Modernist architecture necessarily fixed space within a dynamic historical process #expands (0.78) — David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, 1779
• Contemporary aesthetics is slackening representation and dissolving medium #exemplifies (0.75)