A month or so ago I posted my poem on the modernity conundrum. That is now being followed up by the sheer incomprehensibility of the post-modern condition!
The bard once posed a question, `to be or not to be’?
I confess this is exactly my dilemma with post-modernity.

Is it an entity, or concept, or something in between?
which can only be constructed, but never actually seen.

If about modernity as a proven fact we still aren’t sure,
how then can post-modernity make it past the door?

Is it an idea, or a fragment of some literary turn?
or something you think you know, but can never learn.

It denies authorial voice for univocalization is hegemonic
it assumes multivocality as the all-pervasive mnemonic.

It’s anti-discursive, anti-mimetic but pro multidimensionality,
critiques strategizing, hates romanticizing but loves post-coloniality.

Everything prior was construction with a positivist rationality,
its three sworn enemies are meaning, content and intentionality.

The text is now a four letter word in this new dispensation,
for it inscribes in it the worst kind of authorial pretension.

The acceptable escape route now is that of intertextuality,
Interleaved of course with liberal doses of gender and sexuality.

A trope is what now paves the way to an all new clarity,
rhetoric gives asking very rude questions an acceptable gentility.

Reading and meaning have all been thoroughly de-constructed,
everything has been dissected, resurrected and stands fully corrected.

But what I can’t get my head around is a complicated question
if modernity itself is unclear, how can I make it `post’ it with a hyphen?