OMG, you're SO postmodern

Before reading the two selections, my thinking on postmodernism was much different. Mostly in the sense that I really didn't know much about it. But what I did know was that the same kids that were elitist about music, were very into the idea of postmodernism, or at least acting like they were.
The first question that is raised in the Theory Toolbox is whether or no postmodern art is something that can be looked upon and probe discussion and analysis, or if the "correct" interpretation of the art is only held by those elitists who "get the joke." Personally, I think that it is quite the opposite. Postmodern art is that which breaks down the walls that our culture has built in our minds. Postmodernism is "An emphasis on the spatial rather than the temporal (or historical)" (McRobbie, 157). In postmodern art, there is a lack of physical depth, but I think that in turn enhances the mental depth. I think that to simply ignore or disregard this type of art means that you don't understand it, because of the limitations that all of us in society have accepted as "truth" or "real."
The two paintings, "Peasant Shoes" by Van Gogh, and "Diamond Dust Shoes" by Andy Warhol are two great examples for distinguishing between Modernism and Postmodernism. When Jameson compared the two, he noted that Van Gogh's Modern painting held intense colors, poverty, and an entire way of life- just through a pain of shoes. When Jameson explored Warhol's paining he deemed it to be composed of dead objects, suggesting morbid events and claimed that it held a, "Drug-enhanced intensity about them, a chemical induced high" (157). Jameson does a good job of characterizing the two in their specific styles, but I feel like he tried too hard to find reasoning in Warhol's paining. I think that Van Gogh's painting holds more realism than Van Gogh's, but the flatness in Warhol's lets the audience create their own ideas, rather than being subjected to our ingrained ideas. For examples, Jameson believes that Van Gogh's painting gives off a feeling, an assumed idea about the life of the shoes- who they belong to, what social class the person belongs to, etc. Van Gogh's painting does not leave a lot of room for the audience to interpret on their own, for there is a slim chance that these shoes belonged to a wealthy white man, or that the color of the shoes were actually hot pink. With Warhol's painting, we are given less of what we are used to. The shoes are not as clearly defined as they are in Van Gogh's. They are obviously ladies shoes but they do no necessarily hold a reservation in a specific social class. And with the photo being a negative, the "real" colors are not what we see.
Postmodern art let's its audience explore the meaning, instead of it just being given to you. Postmodernism destroys the brick walls that are surrounding our minds, it let's us views things in "alternative" ways.