“…Therefore, it may well be that the co-existence and simultaneity of diverse (and even divergent) systems and practices become an enduring reality, even though their relationships are likely to be ßexible and changeable, and perhaps as much symbolic as substantive. This condition exempliÞes the essence of postmodernity as understood by analysts working in the North (Dear, 1988;Folch-Serra, 1989;Harvey, 1989;Featherstone, 1991Featherstone, , 1995Soja, 1991;Bauman, 1992;Berg, 1993;Watson and Gibson, 1995), in terms of which the monolithic modernist discourses, both liberal and Marxist, have been or are being discarded in favour of a multiplicity of ideologies and modes of explanation. 9 In terms of the schema discussed above, this represents the notion of the postmodern as problematic, overlain with a distinct element of the postmodern as epoch, albeit without a clear break from the modern and, indeed, characterized by the co-existence of and overlap between the two.…”