coolbeans, Jencks

Jencks starts out his essay by stating that often times history consists of a combination of continuity and change which can be confusing for people because the way that we view the old as well as the new are both altered in this process. Similarly with Postmodern Classicism the meanings, value and forms of modernism and classicism are changed and formed as one hybrid combination. The combination of the two makes the meanings of things seem modern and familiar as well as classical and unfamiliar. What Jencks is saying makes a lot of sense to me. I am currently, taking an introduction to art history class and in the class we are discussing Neolithic art. For most of us in the class this kind of artwork is so different because it is hard for us to put ourselves in the shoes of the people from that time period because we cannot even imagine what it was like in those days. When we try to put a modern context into art from this time period it does not make sense. For example, in class we were discussing whether or not a hut built by people could be considered to be architecture. To us, the hut would not be considered architecture because we think of buildings such as the National Cathedral or the Arc du Triomphe to be works of architecture. But maybe to the people living in that time period, these huts were created not to just serve a purpose of functionality, but also to be as visually pleasing as was possible of that time. For us, we just see a prehistoric hut and have trouble connecting our modern thoughts with those of a past era so we are confused by this disparity. The Neolithic art is so in the past that it is unfamiliar when we try to think of it in terms of our modern sense.