Fredric Jameson, "The Ancients and the Postmoderns: On the Historicity o...

In The Ancients and the Postmoderns: On the Historicity of Forms, Fredric Jameson embarks on an ambitious exploration of cultural and aesthetic transformations across different historical periods, specifically focusing on the relationship between modernity, postmodernity, and the classical or "ancient" forms of cultural production. Central to the book is Jameson’s ongoing project of mapping historical shifts in art, literature, and culture within the framework of Marxist theory, with particular attention to how forms themselves evolve as expressions of changing material conditions.

Jameson begins by framing the book around the relationship between what he terms the “Ancients” and the “Postmoderns.” The “Ancients” are understood as embodying classical and pre-modern forms, which, in many ways, set the foundation for the emergence of modernity. The “Postmoderns,” on the other hand, represent the contemporary cultural milieu that has moved beyond the conventions and certainties of both the ancient and the modern. Jameson’s intellectual method is grounded in historicism, meaning that these forms—whether in visual art, music, or literature—are deeply connected to the social, political, and economic structures that surround them.

A central argument in the book is that cultural forms do not exist in isolation; rather, they are produced within specific historical moments, and these moments leave their mark on the kinds of art, literature, and philosophy that are possible at that time. For Jameson, then, form is never a neutral aesthetic container. It is always a historical artifact, shaped by the contradictions and crises of its era.

The book is divided into several chapters, each of which tackles a different moment of cultural production and its relationship to the broader history of forms. Jameson weaves a complex narrative that links early modernist forms with later postmodern innovations, while also looking back to classical and ancient sources. In this sense, the book is not just about postmodernity, but also about how postmodernity relates to a longer history of form. For example, Jameson examines the work of modernist figures like Picasso and Stravinsky, demonstrating how their art challenges traditional forms, yet also responds to the conditions of their time, such as the rise of industrial capitalism and mass culture. In contrast, the postmodern artists, he argues, are engaged in a different kind of project—one that is often marked by a sense of fragmentation, irony, and a refusal of narrative closure, which he links to the changes in global capitalism and late modernity.

One of the book’s key contributions is its rethinking of the relationship between aesthetics and politics. For Jameson, aesthetics is not merely a matter of personal taste or stylistic innovation but is deeply embedded in the political and social fabric. This argument is most visible in his discussion of modernism and its aftermath. He shows how modernist forms—whether in painting, music, or literature—often reflect a utopian longing for an alternative to the alienation and fragmentation of capitalist society. Postmodern forms, in contrast, often mirror the fragmentation and multiplicity of the postmodern condition itself, offering no such utopian vision but rather an ironic or playful acknowledgment of the impossibility of such totality in a world of late capitalism.

Another significant theme in The Ancients and the Postmoderns is the idea of nostalgia. Jameson traces how postmodern art often engages in a kind of nostalgic recycling of past forms—what he calls “pastiche”—but does so in a way that is emptied of the political charge that characterized earlier aesthetic revolutions. In postmodern culture, past styles and forms are appropriated and recontextualized, but they are often stripped of their original meaning or political context. This is evident, for instance, in the postmodern fascination with classical forms like the neoclassical architecture of certain skyscrapers or the revival of baroque musical styles in popular media.

Jameson’s approach to postmodernism is also critical of what he sees as the depoliticization of contemporary culture. While modernism sought to challenge and disrupt bourgeois norms, postmodernism, in Jameson’s view, often serves to reinforce the status quo. This is partly due to what he describes as the commodification of culture in the postmodern era, where even radical forms of art or music are quickly absorbed into the circuits of the global capitalist market. The result, he argues, is a kind of cultural exhaustion, where the avant-garde has been co-opted, and the possibility of genuine aesthetic or political innovation seems increasingly remote.

At the same time, Jameson does not entirely dismiss the potential of postmodern forms. He is deeply interested in how they reflect the realities of late capitalism and how they offer new ways of thinking about temporality, history, and the experience of the present. For example, he discusses the ways in which postmodern literature often plays with time, creating non-linear narratives that reflect the disjointed and fragmented nature of contemporary life. Similarly, postmodern architecture, with its mixing of styles and forms, can be seen as a reflection of the complexity and diversity of the globalized world.

Throughout the book, Jameson remains committed to the idea that history is not something that happens outside of culture but is embedded in it. Whether he is discussing the relationship between high art and mass culture or the ways in which contemporary forms of representation engage with the past, Jameson’s work emphasizes the historical specificity of all forms of cultural production. He argues that if we want to understand the present—and the possibilities for the future—we must pay close attention to the ways in which forms change over time and what those changes reveal about the broader social and economic transformations taking place.