>Yeah, except I wouldn't say simple. It would be an interesting
etymological excise to trace the various usages of postmodern. I tend to
agree with the marxist left that it is a reactionary political ideology.<
You're right about 'simple' Chris, although I'd 'simplify' the point of the
'left' and describe it as out--and-out an ideological product of capitalism.
On 4 February 2010 06:41, Chris Jones <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 12:23 +0000, David Bircumshaw wrote:
> > could one say that post-modern simply means contemporary industrial
> > systems as applied to arts. No need for imagination there, for all the
> > rhetoric of innovation
>
> Yeah, except I wouldn't say simple. It would be an interesting
> etymological excise to trace the various usages of postmodern. I tend to
> agree with the marxist left that it is a reactionary political ideology.
>
> I can remember reading stuff in the 80s like no more original or
> inventive art is possible. All we can do is repeat what has already been
> done; an eternal hell of the same. (This is why Deleuze's writings on
> art can seem like a breath of fresh air.)
>
> One of the first uses of the term was applied to Rauschenberg's use of
> silk screen printed photo stencils on a painted canvas which lays out a
> new ground for painting (as in post-impressionism.) But after that it
> took off with another meaning altogether. So the term now used in art is
> late modernism. A lot of the art theory and history which first used the
> term is very interesting and useful formalism. Michel Foucault's
> comments on the discursive positions of marxism and formalism, beginning
> with the Russian revolution, seems an interesting direction to follow
> up, as well. Words have always been invented by the ruling class; they
> do not denote a signified, they impose an interpretation. (MF Essential
> works, p 276.)
>
> Today, postmodernism seems to mean ideological confusion and to
> interpret confusion is an eternal confusion as that of an eternal
> repetition of the same confusion, since it cannot be clarified and so
> must remain confusion, anyway, best wishes, cj
>
--
David Bircumshaw
"A window./Big enough to hold screams/
You say are poems" - DMeltzer
Website and A Chide's Alphabet
http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk
The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.bircumshaw
twitter: http://twitter.com/bucketshave
blog: http://groggydays.blogspot.com/
|