Sgt. Pepper, Habermas

What is modernism?

"The most recent modernism simply makes an abstract opposition between tradition and the present; and we are, in a way, still the contemporaries of that kind of aesthetic modernity which first appeared in the midst of the nineteenth century." (99).

From what I could decipher of Habermas's idea of modernism and modernity, it is on the way out. Or rather, a better way to explain that is to look at his quote above. What he seems to be trying to say in his article is that modernism, in a sense, always reflects what is classical. So, then is it modern at all? He says that once something is considered modern it is "secretly" classical as well.

I'm not sure if this directly relates, but this general type of thinking did cross my mind when I went to NYC's Museum of Modern Art in November. Having been to many art museums, I anticipated mostly what is considered "modern" art, or what's been made in the past century, at least. However, the famous "Starry Night" by Van Gogh is at MOMA, Monet's "Water Lilies," and many other pieces that were made about a century ago which, to me, are not modern art. So are they there because in their day and age they were considered modern? And since they have been dubbed classic, thus still holding on to some kind of modernity? I'm reaching for answers, but is the term "modern" no longer modern?

One thing that frustrated me from the article was Habermas's explanation of the reception of art and modernism and how practically the minute the "everyday expert" receives art or culture in a modern way, it is no longer modern.

So, is it impossible for me to think modernly? Am I really that old fashioned?