My Take on Modernism

The three articles we discussed in class concerning modernism differed from each other. In Levenson’s article, we see modernism defined in terms of being a specific event, and less of a movement. This, in my eyes, makes it seem less literary and more idealistic. This also makes it easy to see it as something fundamental that is in place to change the world. I typically do not think of movements in this sense so it is interesting to see it in this way. Levenson also seems to present modernism as a movement that is not all inclusive. He limits it to being only something some people can achieve.  
 From Scott’s article, I get the same sense of acknowledgement of exclusion. Unlike Levenson, Scott seems more drawn to challenging these exclusions rather than encouraging and accepting them. Scott is aware that modernism excludes a variation or race and gender and she thus introduces us to writers who were influential in the modernist realm.
 These differing ideas directly show the difficulty in establishing a definition for modernism. Because there are differing ideas of what it is, it is thus difficult to discern who was or is a part of the movement. To me, the central idea of modernism is advancement. It is an attempt to make things better, by providing people with another option. It is a turn from the past, from the ideas that limited people in the literary world. It also seems like a return to the natural in a sense. I definitely agree with the Levenson that in a sense it is timeless because it is a movement that could be revived at any time.