Post Modernism/Modernism and literature

[Homemaster]

Now, I'm studying this at university currently. Some books we have to read are: Things Fall Apart (read), The Bluest Eye (read), Loaded, Kitchen, Fight Club, The Cement Garden, The God of Small Things, The Handmaiden's Tale and Sexing the Cherry.

Apparently these are examples of Modernist literature, and I can see why. They definitely fit in with the thoeries and explanations I've read so far. Currently though I have an assignment on POST-modernism...hardly a difference? A radical change? Well I'll find out, but I just thought it would make for an interesting discussion. What defines a movement? How can you tell the difference? I'm kind of bummed that I didn't read Slaughterhouse 5, as that is a supposed example of post-modernism. I have read Catch-22 and well, if that's the same thing, then I can see where writers may have strayed into post-modern realms.

At first I didn't think there was much need for different terms, but really, considering those books I'm reading, there is a VAST change of pace from classic literature. Examples of modernism can include Virginia Woolf, T.S. Eliot, James Joyce...

What is your opinion on using labels for new movements?

[timbot]

I'm terrible with labels, really. Even though I studied English literature in college, I never did learn my genres well. I suppose they are somewhat useful, but they have limits. They help with comparisons at times and recommendations: "if you liked ______ then you might like ______." But they can't be relied upon 100%. I think labels also work best after a little bit of time. There are probably more sub-genres for books written in the last 30 years than for books that were written between, say, 1878-1908. The little nuances we see now between different styles of writing tend to get glossed over as time goes on. I think that's a good thing, though, because too many genres gets too confusing and just pointless. Did all Elizabethan authors write the same as Shakespeare? No, but they will still tend to fall under that category simply because they were similar enough and wrote within a certain period of time. The same goes for the Victorian Era. Of course, since the Victorian Era was more recent, I'd imagine, without directly researching the subject, that scholars are more likely to break down Victorian writing into more sub-genres. Labels have their uses, but I think the more recent the work being labeled is, the less useful that label will be.

[Homemaster]

Possibly because that work is still evolving? It isn't genres remember, it's the actual literary movements (although you said genre you talked about the movements!)

ps. i kind of think that they are also genres, but those tend to be sci-fi or drama etc.

Many people refer to modernism taking over from realism, about the turn of the century, and that post modernism evolved from this....