Postmodern life is rubbish
Paul Speller
postmodern world?". It is crap. Hurrah :) ("Yes", is the gist of it,
btw.)
Now time to go and cook some chicken nuggets and chips, I reckon.
*beam*
--
Paul
Matt Bloomer
Still, the show must go on...
>I have just finished my essay on the subject "Do we live in a
>postmodern world?". It is crap. Hurrah :) ("Yes", is the gist of it,
>btw.)
So, in no more than one hundred words, please explain how we can live in
the future? Surely as soon as we arrive at the future it becomes modern
thus destroying the idea of living in a post-modern world? *confused*
--
* Matthew Bloomer, mailto:mblo...@bigfoot.com *
* http://www.bigfoot.com/~mbloomer last altered 14/03/2000 *
* '...if I was a guitar then I'd play with myself all day long...' *
Paul Speller
> So, in no more than one hundred words, please explain how we can live in
> the future? Surely as soon as we arrive at the future it becomes modern
> thus destroying the idea of living in a post-modern world? *confused*
Bollocks to counting the words :) That is not the meaning of
postmodernism. It's confusing, certainly, but it's not. Postmodernism
is the rejection of modernism, which was a movement in
art/culture/religion/etc etc that spanned the last part of the 19th
century and the first part of the 20th. The basic premise of modernism
was a belief in rationality, functionality, scientific thinking, that
sort of stuff. It stood for the kind of design where appearance was
irrelevant and function was everything. Hence Henry Ford's "You can
have any colour you like, provided it's black", and Le Corbusier's
ugly big tower blocks of flats, etc. Postmodernism followed this, and
as such rejected this scientific thinking in favour of style over
substance, and stuff. If you want to know more, you can read my essay,
but it's a bit boring really :) Still, given that it'll take about ten
seconds to do, I'll whack it into my web server folder... there y'go:
http://bitoclass.staticky.com/postmodernism.doc
1,600 words of bollocks, which is nice :)
--
Paul
kuratowski
>I have just finished my essay on the subject "Do we live in a
>postmodern world?". It is crap. Hurrah :) ("Yes", is the gist of it,
>btw.)
ah, but with essays it's always good to have for & against thingies.
so argue for and then argue against, but have a definite conclusion at
the end.
<g>
:>
(sounds like an interesting essay to write tho, if only i actually
*knew* anything about postmodernism :/ all mine are about symbolism in
the scarlet letter or similar)
--
Katie Wilson
ka...@thewilsons.co.uk
http://www.thewilsons.demon.co.uk/katie
Paul Speller
> >I have just finished my essay on the subject "Do we live in a
> >postmodern world?". It is crap. Hurrah :) ("Yes", is the gist of it,
> >btw.)
> ah, but with essays it's always good to have for & against thingies.
> so argue for and then argue against, but have a definite conclusion at
> the end.
Yeah. I do know how to write essays, actually <g>. I raised points I
agreed with, then raised possible objections to them, then demolished
them with my powers of argument. Or summat :)
--
Paul
Spud
<IDELETEALLMAI...@long-distance.clara.co.uk> mumbled
vaguely about:
>I have just finished my essay on the subject "Do we live in a
>postmodern world?". It is crap. Hurrah :) ("Yes", is the gist of it,
>btw.)
I was going to ask what Matt did, but since you already explained I
won't bother now.
>Now time to go and cook some chicken nuggets and chips, I reckon.
>*beam*
Ahh, now that was the power of suggestion on my part :)
--
Spud (edit...@bigfoot.com)
For wolves and pigs and bears, thinking that they're human is a tragedy.
For a cat, it's an experience.
Paul Speller
> >Now time to go and cook some chicken nuggets and chips, I reckon.
> >*beam*
> Ahh, now that was the power of suggestion on my part :)
<g> Indeed. The wonder of the internet, that someone living in a
remote town in Northern Scotland's meal can prompt someone in a
student residence on the south coast of England to cook himself the
same food a few hours later :)
--
Paul
Martin Griffiths
>art/culture/religion/etc etc that spanned the last part of the 19th
>century and the first part of the 20th. The basic premise of modernism
>was a belief in rationality, functionality, scientific thinking, that
>sort of stuff. It stood for the kind of design where appearance was
>irrelevant and function was everything.
although in art, the modernist movement represented a rejection of art
as mere depiction, replacing it with something which expressed the
artist's interpretation and feelings (eg the impressionists) which was
very radical, but almost the opposite of the above definition. and
modernist literature saw the beginning of an "awareness of the medium"
which has come to be characteristic of post-modern TV and radio. so
it's all a bit more confusing than that really :) the basic problem is
that the terms modernism and post-modernism are highly subjective and
tend to be applied to whatever comes along - hence them meaning
different things to the different arts. I think you made that point
very well.
Paul Speller
Griffiths) wrote.
That, in itself, is news :)
>although in art, the modernist movement represented a rejection of art
>as mere depiction, replacing it with something which expressed the
>artist's interpretation and feelings (eg the impressionists) which was
>very radical, but almost the opposite of the above definition.
Oh right. I should've consulted you on this essay, I didn't know that
:)
>and
>modernist literature saw the beginning of an "awareness of the medium"
>which has come to be characteristic of post-modern TV and radio.
Ooh blimey charlie. Do you think it was obvious from my essay that I
didn't know any of this? <:)
>the basic problem is
>that the terms modernism and post-modernism are highly subjective and
>tend to be applied to whatever comes along - hence them meaning
>different things to the different arts. I think you made that point
>very well.
Woo, I managed to make a point I only vaguely understood well. That's
good :)
--
Paul