Marshall Berman; the Contradictions of Modernity - Essay Example

Modernity is often described as a collection of studies into the social processes that order the world we live in while remaining in a constant of flux. If one is speaking with Marshall Berman, modernity is described as “a mode of vital experience—experience of space and time, of the self and others, of life’s possibilities and perils—that is shared by men and women all over the world today. I will call this body of experience ‘modernity’” (Berman, 1982). It encompasses the social changes that are constantly taking shape, the way in which these changes are experienced and the reflection of these experiences in various circles. It is a world of definition and ambiguity, a world of static definitions and constant change. For Marshall Berman, the contradictions of modernity are characterized by a tendency to order space and time while simultaneously promoting their ruination and failure. In describing the modern human, Berman says “they are moved at once by a will to change – to transform both themselves and their world – and by a terror of disorientation and disintegration, of life falling apart” (Berman, 1982). Through this statement, it is easy to see the conflicting emotions of an individual undergoing change of any kind. Relating it to everyday life, an individual might strive to pursue a dream career by quitting their job and launching a business of their own, but at the same time be paralyzed by the fear of this new venture failing, or worse, succeeding. Either way, it represents a change in the way things have been. “To be modern is to live a life of paradox and contradiction. It is to be overpowered by the immense bureaucratic organizations that have the power to control and often to destroy all communities, values, lives; and yet to be undeterred in our determination to face these forces, to fight to change their world and make it our own. It is to be both revolutionary and conservative: alive to new possibilities for experience and adventure, frightened by the nihilistic depths to which so many modern adventures lead” (Berman, 1982). In the capitalistic society, it is greatly argued that man has control of the market, the customer is always right and the consumer is the master by reason of making the choice to purchase or not purchase. However, Berman points out that often this is not really the case. Although we might have our choice of traveling by plane, train or automobile, sometimes that ‘choice’ boils down to just one option based on the availability of flights, trains or roads. Idealistically speaking, we have free choice in which doctors to see for various complaints, however, it is actually the insurance companies that dictate to whom we can go and how much can be charged based on the conditions listed. These few examples immediately call into question just how many choices we are actually making on our own and how many are greatly influenced or even made for us by outside influences. “Poor people cant get lawyers in a country that is glutted with them; the HMOs have abolished the autonomy of physicians; college professors are often glorified fundraisers” (Hitchins, 1999). Another way of illustrating this concept of the modern as both ordered and disordered is in the use of a concrete example such as the World Trade Center of New York City. In terms of its very physical structure, Berman describes the towers as “isolated” in that the center was hard to get to and hard to use, “it gave off hostility” as compared to the Chrysler and Empire State Buildings, which were each seen as being in the middle of life and part of the total system. “Their [the Port Authority who designed the buildings] idea of safety involved repelling the people. The slab shape of the Towers and their isolation grew out of an aesthetic voiced best by Le Corbusier, who said that in order to have modern planning we have to ‘kill the streets.’ For him the street epitomized disorder and chaos” (Berman, 2002). By contrast, the Battery Park City Complex was also designed by the Port Authority in much the same way as the World Trade Center, yet was much more user friendly in that it had parks, museums, restaurants and other amenities that invited people to come in and stay awhile. Although the city is perceived as a melting pot of various cultures, people, ideas, practices and numerous other concepts, Berman points out that it also presents “an endless series of completely sterile and empty gigantic spaces all over the world” (Berman, 2002). Following this line of reasoning, one could infer that Berman suggests this very imperturbability inherent in the structures of the World Trade Center themselves led to their selection as targets by terrorists in 2001. This concept can also be seen in the way in which we order time. With our shift into the cities and the factory, we perceived ourselves as being free of the constraints of time we’d known in rural settings. No longer were our days forcibly ended by the setting of the sun or started with its rising, we moved into a society in which our days are compartmentalized into working and non-work times. Broken down into hours and minutes, the modern world seeks to define when we work and when we play, when we rest and when we socialize. However, this world is constantly moving, constantly changing. Instead of being ordered by daytime and nighttime, we are now ordered by day shift, night shift and graveyard shift. Within the office space, even time to work is sometimes set aside as time to socialize, as in the morning breaks around the water cooler. The time it used to take us to send a message to a colleague has also been shrinking in the modern world thanks to innovations in technology such as mobile phones, instant messaging, email and phone. It now often depends heavily on whether the message was sent via courier, fax or internet as to whether we should expect a response in moments, hours or days. More often than not, though, we expect it immediately. This immediacy placed on everything has the effect of giving time an almost nonexistent quality even while maintaining its importance in the structuring of the everyday life. Thus, modernity is defined by a contradictory set of ideas that constantly shifts and changes even while remaining the same. As people are learning to interact within this modern environment, these contradictions are so ingrained that they are not apparent. In cases in which a person struggles to start a company or stay with their current employer, the contradictions are obvious. But examples exist of cases where the contradictions are just beginning to be considered. Situations such as the health plans dictating medical practices or a free society in which the poorest members do not have access to adequate legal representation in the civil sector are excellent cases in point. In addition, these contradictions are apparent in architecture as in New York’s World Trade Center and in the efforts to order time. Therefore, as Berman said, “To be modern is to live a life of paradox and contradiction” (Berman, 1982). References Berman, Marshall. (1982). All That is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity. New York: Penguin Books. Berman, Marshall. (2002). Big Apple Redux: An Interview with Marshall Berman. Retrieved 13 January, 2006 from < http://eserver.org/clogic/4-2/monchinski_berman.html> Hitchins, Christopher. (17-23 November, 1999). Marshall Berman’s Love Affair with Marx. The Village Voice. Retrieved 13 January, 2006 from < http://www.villagevoice.com/books/9946,hitchens,10070,10.html> Read More