HOLLA! Habermas

This is not my first time reading something of Habermas, but it is my first reading of his in the event of addressing modernity. This reading once again was a challenge and I could only take a few things from it here and there. On page 99 Habermas discusses what “modern” is and its relationship to the traditional and the present. I took from this reading that modernism is considered as classical. Now I could be wrong but let me explain. Habermas states, “a modern work becomes a classic because it has once been authentically modern” (99). Now if a work of art is once considered as new and modern, for example like the Mona Lisa once was many decades ago, then this once modern piece of work becomes a classic because it once was authentically modern. This can also be said for musical pieces of work like those of Beethoven and Mozart. Now I think I am on the right track but I get somewhat confused when Habermas states, “But while that which is merely ‘stylish’ will soon becomes outmoded, that which is modern preserves a secret tie to the classical” (99). This quotation leads me to believe that what is modern at one time may not be stylish and what is modern can only then become classic. Is there a middle ground for individual art that is both stylish and modern, for example artists like Andy Warhol. His work of art is currently stylish and modern, his work will always be remembered and will “preserve a secret tie to the classical” (99). Does Andy Warhol’s art “make an abstract opposition between tradition and the present” (99)? How can we exactly determine what modern art is versus stylish art and so on? These questions may stay unanswered or may not be a logical question at all, but I would love to find these answers in class tomorrow.