Most steampunk I've seen not only accepts but celebrates Victorian norms and styles in a way not postmodern at all, and especially glaring since postmodernism was born as a rejection of the Victorian Age from the superficial down to the most fundamental level. Rejecting modern mores and principles as inadequate and false is very postmodern--unless one affirms older mores and principles in their place; that's just nostalgia. I tried to avoid calling it "escapism", but now escapism is being argued as a virtue, leading me to again wonder if it's not as simple whistling in the dark because the future is scary.

I remain dubious of debating whether algebra is better than math, but the arguments here suggest any comparison must be aesthetic because steampunk is only aesthetics. I'm somewhat dubious of that as well, but if we must debate which is better, that ought to decide the matter. We can question past or present values, or assert value itself as subjective and independent of era, but trading one set of superficial empty values for another is nihilist absurdism not only lacking but denying depth. What can I say? I'm too old to be content with looking cool, but if that's all we're doing I'm definitely too old to debate which fad is best. At the risk of more postmodernism, I think we should look for meaning almost anywhere, whether as readers or authors.