Postmodernism’s case rests on a radical break dated to 1960

Evidence

The last few years have been marked by an inverted millenarianism in which premonitions of the future, catastrophic or redemptive, have been replaced by senses of the end of this or that (the end of ideology, art, or social class; the “crisis” of Leninism, social democracy, or the welfare state, etc., etc.); taken together, all of these perhaps constitute what is increasingly called Postmodernism. The case for its existence depends on the hypothesis of some radical break or coupure, generally traced back to the end of the 1950s or the early 1960s. — Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic…, 35

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes the crucial periodizing claim: postmodernism as a ‘radical break’ hypothesis anchored to 1960, not a style one can opt into.
• XREF: Jameson’s periodization recalls his debt to Ernest Mandel and the ‘late capitalism’ schema; connects to reader’s interest in whether the cultural-dominant thesis is falsifiable. — connects to: Postmodernism’s defining move is proclaiming a radical break in Western civilization — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 126; Toynbee dated the postmodern age from industrialism breaking the bounds of nationality. — Perry Anderson, The Origins of Postmodernity, 12; Toynbee’s postmodern age begins with the crash of bourgeois complacency in 1914. — Perry Anderson, The Origins of Postmodernity, 14 (+3 more)