Modernism’s antibourgeois stance depended on the bourgeoisie it opposed.

Evidence

Kramer’s ingenious attempt to assimilate this ostensibly antibourgeois stance of the great modernists to a “loyal opposition” secretly nourished, by way of foundations and grants, by the bourgeoisie itself, while signally unconvincing, is surely itself enabled by the contradictions of the cultural politics of modernism proper, whose negations depend on the persistence of what they repudiate and entertain — when they do not (very rarely indeed, as in Brecht) attain some genuine political selfconsciousness — a symbiotic relationship with capital. — Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic…, 180

Categorization

• XREF: This symbiotic-antagonist relation bears directly on the reader’s project of explaining parody vs pastiche — it is the modernist era’s version of critique that lives inside what it critiques, a pre-runner of postmodern complicity. — connects to: Avant-gardes shared an anti-bourgeois stance against market culture — Perry Anderson, The Origins of Postmodernity, 217; Barthes saw avant-garde literature as resistance to, not enforcer of, bourgeois hegemony — Marianne DeKoven, Utopia Limited: The Sixties and the…, 246; Poststructuralism’s anti-essentialism is itself a repressive bourgeois position — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Nations, Classes, Literatures, 61 (+4 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Avant-gardes shared an anti-bourgeois stance against market culture — Perry Anderson, The Origins of Postmodernity, 217; Barthes saw avant-garde literature as resistance to, not enforcer of, bourgeois hegemony — Marianne DeKoven, Utopia Limited: The Sixties and the…, 246; Poststructuralism’s anti-essentialism is itself a repressive bourgeois position — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Nations, Classes, Literatures, 61 (+4 more)