Kiwi, Jencks

I know that this is said almost every time, but again… I was very confused with the reading and I’m not sure if I am on the right track with this reading or not, but I’m just going to give it my best shot and I hope for the best.
Jencks introduces to us “disharmonious harmony” which is an object within our society that gives us multiple meanings to help us understand pluralism. So then we ask the question, what is pluralism? Jencks goes on to explain that pluralism is what signifies multiple views of an object opposed to only one. So what does any of this mean? Jencks mentions that postmodern architects and artists create pieces that have multiple meanings to give its individual piece its on signification. This at times can become somewhat frustrating to views because of the unclear clarification.
Jencks also explains the idea of simply improving the old and making it better, rather than destroying it entirely. . Jenks feels that postmodernism is what changes art and architecture while still holding onto the values of the past. “The most commonly-held aim of postmodern architects is to achieve an urbane urbanism. Urban conceptualism gains near universal assent. New buildings, according to this doctrine, should both fir into and extend the urban context, reuse such constraints as the street, arcade and piazza, yet acknowledge too the new technologies and means of transport.” What I think Jencks is trying to say is that, when we build onto something or update a new building we should keep some of the old and add to it. Jencks point is that, he doesn’t see a problem with mixing the past and present together. He likes the past as well as the present, so why not put the two together and make a unique, creative, significant piece. He thinks we should move forward into the present; bring some of the past with as well.
Jencks like the idea of looking at something and questioning what its signification is. He likes the combination of the past and present and believes that they together achieve in an urban urbanism.