I’m a big fan of the Shrek movies. They enter the world of fairy tales from the perspective of an ogre – a character that has never been painted so sympathetically. But from this perspective, the story – all the stories, really – is turned on its head. Prince Charming, the traditional hero, is a whiny bad guy. His mother, Fairy Godmother, is evil. We are able to see from the point of view of traditional villains like Captain Hook, Rumpelstiltskin, and Snow White’s Evil Queen. Strangely, when the “angle of illumination has altered,” as John Updike wrote in his story “Leaves,” they’re not actually all that bad.

And then there’s the chorus of minor characters: the wise-cracking Gingerbread Man; Pinocchio, whose lies are so obvious he’s a constant source of truth; the wolf and three pigs who eat together; and the love-struck dragon who falls for Shrek’s companion, Donkey. It occurred to me somewhere in the middle of re-watching the final installment in the series that the Shrek movies are animated acts of deconstruction. They are striking examples of postmodernism in popular culture.

As it turns out, film is a fine way to enter into a discussion of postmodernism. I’m taking my cue here from a book by James K.A. Smith, unfortunately titled Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism. Smith insists – like American evangelical philosopher and theologian Francis Schaeffer – that philosophy has a “trickle down” effect into culture. That is, he differentiates between postmodernism, the philosophy, and postmodernity, the time in which we are now living. But postmodernity is permeated with, and perhaps is a result of, the concepts presented in postmodernism. Smith echoes Schaeffer’s assertion that “cultural phenomena tend to eventually reflect philosophical movements.” We can certainly see this in the upside-down universe of Shrek.

But then I started to think, what other parts of our culture bear the mark of postmodernism? Where else have the thoughts of mostly European thinkers from the early to mid-twentieth century nested in our contemporary culture? It seems that the most pervasive residue of postmodernism is my generation’s attraction to irony. Now, irony is not necessarily a tenet of postmodernism, but it is certainly a result of a few of the major ideas that come from postmodern thought: the belief that there is nothing outside of text, and an incredulity toward meta-narratives.

These two concepts come across as rather high-minded, and when they were first introduced, they confused many of their modern audience. But to our twenty-first century minds, they are not that difficult. The idea that there is nothing outside the text is most often attributed to Jacques Derrida, father of deconstruction. It posits that we can’t know anything absolutely, and therefore everything is open to interpretation, like a text. Not too crazy, right?

Another giant of postmodernism, Jean Francois Lyotard, put forth the other big idea – incredulity toward meta-narratives. For him, the biggest problem with modern thought was that certain overarching stories (or narratives) were allowed to make a claim to absolute truth, and do so unquestioned. Certainly religion falls into this category, but then, so does science. In short, anything that claimed to be right “just because” was suspect to Lyotard and his postmodern followers. Again, to our contemporary ears, this doesn’t sound so crazy.

The ironic sentiment that has settled on our generation is a direct result of these two ideas. Once everything is up for interpretation and grand truth-claims are suspect, a detached irony is the only way to safely navigate postmodern waters. The examples are everywhere: tune in to any TV show, read any of our contemporary authors, go to the movies, watch a commercial – irony is everywhere.

This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. When it comes to the open exchange of ideas, would you rather be confronted with somebody who “knows” you’re wrong because they have direct access to truth, or someone who’s skeptical and exhibits her skepticism with a cool detachment?

Neither is ideal. The kind of claims to the absolute that modernity made often lead to solipsism and isolation, and over-irony leads to snark, as David Denby explores in his essay on the subject. An eager sincerity would win the day, but that’s a discussion for another essay.

Irony leaves room for the possibility that minds can be changed, learning can happen, and the door is always open. I maintain that one of the best examples of this in contemporary media is Shrek. Being ironic about the stories we grew up with allows us to see things from a different perspective, to take into account the feelings of those we otherwise would not have cared to consider.

The result of seeing from another’s perspective is generally a broader understanding, a more balanced judgment, and a kinder heart. Maybe Captain Hook really is misunderstood; perhaps the hideous step-sisters have some inner beauty; and maybe, just maybe, an ugly ogre is better served as an analogy for postmodernism than a Broadway musical.

David Denby Francis Schaeffer Jacques Derrida James K.A. Smith Jean Francois Lyotard postmodernism Shrek snark