postmodernism explained

[ALIEN 603]

Postmodernism is a rat in a Skinner box. The rat use to know the rules of the
game, i.e., which lever to push to make the food pellets appear, which for
water, which to open doors, and so on. For the pre-modern rat, or the medieval
rat, the Law of the Levers was given to all rats by His Holy Rattiness
Himself. But the rat of the modern era (let's say, living in time at some
point between the Renaissance of Rats and the era of World Rat Wars),
discovers that the Law of the Levers doesn't always work! Hence the modern rat
is pissed off with the bullshit from Mr. Holy Rattiness, and wants to figure
out for himself how the levers work. He sets up tests, trial-and-error
strategies to figure it all out. He replaces superstition with science. He is
a rat of the Enlightenment. Happy, optimistic rat, that. Confident in his
ratty cleverness. But then...

The trial-and-error methods stop working! The rules regarding learning the
rules of the levers don't always work! Initially, this rat is depressed. He'd
be pissed off, if he could be, but he doesn't know whom to be pissed at. He
moves to Germany and invents Expressionism. And then ...

Every once in a while, while he randomly pokes about, or follows some
pre-conscious or unconscious motive from within his ratty heart, a pellet
appears! Well, he must be on to something, but he isn't sure what. He's a
little more optimistic now, however. So he isn't going to sit in a small
Berlin apartment contemplating his own death; he's going to rummage about,
trying this and that, hoping for something NEW, but what that will be is
uncertain. Yet it is comforting to know that it has something to do with his
very own heart...

THIS IS THE POST-MODERN RAT! THIS IS WHAT THE ARTISTS AROUND US ARE FEELING
AND DOING! THIS IS MR. DAVID BOWIE!

To demonstrate:

"Stinky weather fat
Shaky hand
Dopey morning Doc
Grumpy gnomes"

Ah! And strangely, a pellet appears, and I am nourished.

----alien

[Eric Hartz]

alie...@aol.com (ALIEN 603) wrote:

And another demonstration, from our much beloved song "The Voyeur of
Utter Destruction (As Beauty)", what I call the post-modern mantra :

Research has pierced
All extremes of my sex
Call it a day
Call it a day
Needle point life
Blinds the will to be next
Call it a day
Call it a day

The line "research has pierced all extremes of my sex" is working
around the idea of demystification of what we know about the human
animal through scientific investigation. However, there's a slight
dullness that comes with demystification (as Bowie says, "Everything
goes tepid, and I have to move on.") and that dullness is, no pun
intended, reflected in "call it a day, call it a day".
The next lines, "Needle point life blinds the will to be next" is so
rich in meaning it makes my throat close up. The poetic "needle point
life" is the greatest metaphor for post-modern living, scientific
facts "pointing" and sharpening one's mind into seeing things from the
"reality" point of view always and not fully considering other
faculties of the human mind that science doesn't pay attention to.
That's why "needle point life" "blinds the will to be next", the will
to move on with this sharpened intellect that somehow lost something
is lost.
Calling it a day, Eric Hartz eha...@umich.edu

[Ice Fiend]

>THIS IS THE POST-MODERN RAT! THIS IS WHAT THE ARTISTS AROUND US ARE FEELING
> AND DOING! THIS IS MR. DAVID BOWIE!

Please say it isn't so. An ancient fear of mine has been confirmed.

[ALIEN 603]

alien wrote:
>THIS IS THE POST-MODERN RAT! THIS IS WHAT THE ARTISTS AROUND US ARE
>FEELING
>> AND DOING! THIS IS MR. DAVID BOWIE!
>

icefiend wrote:
:>Please say it isn't so. An ancient fear of mine has been confirmed.

I'd love to hear your thoughts; please elaborate!

---alien>
>

[Ice Fiend]

The long and short of it is this: I can't stand postmodernism because it is
basically a rejection of reason, and a rejection of the mind. I've heard a
good analogy on this: A Modernist is a producer while a postmodernist is a
consumer. Postmodernity is a movement away from an era filled with creativity
in many different fields (literature, inventions, etc) towards an era where
people rely on others to produce for them.
A short while ago I posted my reasons for hating postmodernist poetry. E.E.
Cummings drives me mad. Regardless of the content of his poetry, he is
probably best known for not using capital letters in most of his poems. Why
does he do this? There is no reason that I am aware of other than: Who says I
need to use capitals? Defiance for defiance's sake. If you get the chance,
check out Nora Dauenhauer's "Tlingit Concrete Poem". What a waste of paper.
But people who read this ACTUALLY PRAISE IT!!
Anyways... I'd better wrap this up...
I can't stand beat poetry.
I can't stand postmodern philosophers.
I can't stand modern art.
I like David Bowie, who is perhaps the musical equivalent of any of the above
stated things which I don't like.
See why this bothers me? :)

[ALIEN 603]

icefiend wrote:
:The long and short of it is this: I can't stand postmodernism because it

:is basically a rejection of reason, and a rejection of the mind. I've heard
:a good analogy on this: A Modernist is a producer while a :postmodernist is a
consumer. Postmodernity is a movement away from :an era filled with creativity
in many different fields (literature, :inventions, etc) towards an era where
people rely on others to produce :for them. A short while ago I posted my
reasons for hating :postmodernist poetry. E.E. Cummings drives me mad.
Regardless of :the :content of his poetry, he is probably best known for not
using :capital letters in most of his poems. Why does he do this? There is no
:reason that I am aware of other than Who says I need to use capitals?
:Defiance for defiance's sake. If you get the chance, check out Nora
:Dauenhauer's "Tlingit Concrete Poem". What a waste of
:paper. But people who read this ACTUALLY PRAISE IT!! :Anyways... I'd better
wrap this up...
:I can't stand beat poetry.
:I can't stand postmodern philosophers.
:I can't stand modern art.
:I like David Bowie, who is perhaps the musical equivalent of any of :the above
stated things which I don't like.
:See why this bothers me? :)

Nice response. Post-modernism, or "that which is after modernism" isn't really
well defined at this time. Hence, it seems to be understood differently in
different circles. Once we're really sure about what it IS, we'll probably
give it a new name. There's something self-flattering about the term
"post-thingy," as it implies that it, itself, is somehow more advanced, more
developed, more fashionable, more novel, than "thingy" itself. But who are we
to say? Someday, will the world feel a new philosophy emerging, called
"post-postmodernism" which is even better, further improved, extra-fortified,
in comparison to boring old "post-modernism"?

If modernism is thought of as a challenge to the old authorities, via analysis,
the scientific method, the triumph of reason over superstition and "faith,"
then what could be POST all this? Well, there are voices critical of reason,
of science, all around us. Examples: a rise in popularity of various New Age
groups, Wicca, neo-paganism, and so on. However, these movements seem to me
to be merely pre-modern ideas dressed up in new clothes. I don't see much
difference between the medieval mind communing with the Christ on the Cross
and the New Ageist slipping into a trance state involving a feeling of oneness
with the Nature Goddess. When the Church silenced Galileo for demonstrating
the truth of Copernican theory, because this theory contradicted the revealed
wisdom of Holy Scripture, this was pre-modernism resisting the rise of
modernist thought. When people call a 900 number to consult with their
psychic friend, this is anti-science, but in a pre-modern, not a post-modern
sense. For a concept to be truly post-modern, it must completely embrace
modernism, love it, understand it, and then move BEYOND it. If a person has
no understanding or respect for science, he cannot become a post-modernist
thinker. He is a pre-modernist, period.

Beware of confusion, an "anything goes" attitude, a capacity to believe almost
anything, no matter how ridiculous, masquerading as post-modernism! Because
many people have a poor understanding of science, it is no wonder that
discussions of the limitations of science are often misunderstood as a
rejection of rationalism.

I could say more about this, but fuzkat has asked that I keep my articles fairly brief :-)

----alien

[CygNetKS]

>alien wrote:
>>THIS IS THE POST-MODERN RAT! THIS IS WHAT THE ARTISTS AROUND US ARE
>>FEELING
>>> AND DOING! THIS IS MR. DAVID BOWIE!
>>
>icefiend wrote:
>:>Please say it isn't so. An ancient fear of mine has been confirmed.
>
>I'd love to hear your thoughts; please elaborate!
>
>---alien>
>>
>
>

Alien, you sure you aren't David?

******************Cygnet***********Committee********************
A Committee of Youth; trying to Find the Beauty of the Soul
within All of this World's ugly Social Madness.
*******************Bowie******************1969********************

[Ice Fiend]

>Nice response. Post-modernism, or "that which is after modernism" isn't
>really
> well defined at this time. Hence, it seems to be understood differently in
> different circles.

Good point. Just as "alternative" music is pretty much defined as music which
doesn't fit into any other category (roughly defined), postmodernity seems to
be "that which is not modernist". From what I've read, the rise of
postmodernity resulted from people being bothered with the side-effects of
modernity. The most significant of these side-effects: Modernity made people
rely on themselves, not a higher being. If a farmer of the dark ages failed, it
was a test of god. If a modernist farmer failed, it was because of his own
shortcomings. In this respect, postmodernity seems to me like the abandonment
of responsibility.

> Someday, will the world feel a new philosophy emerging, called
> "post-postmodernism" which is even better, further improved,
>extra-fortified,
> in comparison to boring old "post-modernism"?

Will people begin a reactionary philosophy dealing with the shortcomings of
postmodernity, as you suggest? Almost certainly. Whether it will be an
improvement can be debated. Whether Postmodernity improved upon modernity could
also be debated.

You also made some connections between "pre-modernity" and postmodernity. I'm
not sure if I see the similarities, because the Middle Ages was a time of
tradition, whereas postmodrnists reject tradition in any form. To make my point
more Bowie-related, look at the cut-and-paste method of writing. Written on
paper, a lot of Bowie's lyrics make no sense to me. Instead of writing lyrics
in the traditional sense of continuing fromm point A to B to C, etc, Bowie uses
cut and paste which might find B repeated 4 times in a row, followed by A.

>Beware of confusion, an "anything goes" attitude, a capacity to believe
>almost
> anything, no matter how ridiculous, masquerading as post-modernism! Because
> many people have a poor understanding of science, it is no wonder that
> discussions of the limitations of science are often misunderstood as a
> rejection of rationalism.

The ridiculous extremists fit under the flag of postmodernity than under
anything else. Postmodernity, like you said, is a pretty vague term, and
therefore, encompasses more branches of thought. I think I need to do a little
reading because I'm having trouble grasping my own definition of postmodernity.

>I could say more about this, but fuzkat has asked that I keep my articles
>fairly brief :-)

Hey, say as much as you want!

[Toni Engle]

Ice Fiend-- Best thing to do here is don't analyze it--just enjoy it.
Analysis takes alll the fun out of artistic things anyway.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~ I can't believe I've no
control~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm deranged~~~~~~~~~~~

[ALIEN 603]

Dara wrote:
>Another perspective is that post-modernism rebels against modernism by
>attacking the basic assumptions of modernism (that progress is good, has
>unlimited potential, and is replacing something bad with something good).
<snip>

Interesting read, Dara. One of the wonderful things about good art is its
provocation of thoughtful discourse. Bowie is certainly more than a pop
musician. He is that, to be sure, but he can be read at so many other levels.
As you point out in another post, he makes reference to Bertrand Russell with
the quip, "I don't want knowledge; I want certainty." If you've ever tried
slogging through Russell's writings, you know he ain't for the kids! The big
events in a life, the moments that fill your eyes, close your throat, and take
you out of yourself (e.g., holding your newborn baby for the first time,
sitting with a friend who is about to die, realizing that you are fully in love
with someone), these experiences are beyond words. Beyond what can be
expressed. Thus they are very private. Good art can at times provoke
similarly sublime experiences. And art, because it is experienced publicly,
can lead to meaningful moments which groups of individuals can share and can
try to make sense of together.

Now back to your article: you express the post-modern dissatisfaction with the
tacit promises of modernism. By the end of the 19th century, the belief that
scientific progress would no doubt translate into a better quality of life for
mankind is rampant in just about everything one reads. But by the end of the
First World War, where scientific advancement led to more gruesome weapons of
destruction, this belief doesn't seem to carry the general popular faith that
it once held. Europe, as you know, was devastated by that horrible war. A
generation was lost. Many of the deaths were so senseless. The film
"Gallipoli" is a great depiction of the madness of trench warfare: Men in
trenches make little shrines to their loved ones, with letters, pictures, and
so forth, as they prepare to climb out of the trench, run a few feet, and die.
Somehow, the Angel of Death has served as a catalyst for movement from the
modern to the post-modern in this century. It's one thing to study death, as a
doctor might study a disease process scientifically. It's another thing
entirely to die! The difference is a shift in emphasis, from Object to
Subject. So we see in art a shift in emphasis from a depiction of Reality
(Object) to the experience of the artist creating the art (Subject). Jackson
Pollock's drip paintings are about how his body moved about as he painted; thus
they are about the act of painting, and not so much about representing Reality
to the eye.

If you take an art class, Jackson Pollock and others from the earlier part of
this century will be discussed as "modern" artists. As I describe modernism
above, however, they are on the vanguard of something new. This makes using
and understanding the terms "modern" "pre-modern" and "post-modern" confusing.
Many of the concepts in the visual arts termed "modern" might be termed
"post-modern" in other areas, such as literature. For example, the
fragmentation of experience expressed in cubism (modern) is thought of as
"post-modern" in Joyce. I'm sure there are educated people who would disagree
with my use of these terms, and I welcome anyone who might help me define them
better.

In the visual arts, I tend to think of the "post-modern" as another step beyond
impressionism, cubism and other experiments in the exploration of subjectivity.
When I begin to see experiments involving the very nature of artistic
communication, then I think I'm dealing with post-modernism. So Marcel
Duchamp's "ready-mades" are, for me, clearly post-modern. e. e. cummings is
post-modern, in that he draws some of the reader's attention from the meaning
of the words, to the way the words look on the page. When David Bowie wrote
the word "earthling" as "EART HL I NG" he was doing the same sort of thing.
If David Bowie were to give a concert, but instead of singing and putting on
his usual show, he were to give a talk about why people like to buy tickets to
come see him, he would be doing a very post-modern thing. And people would be
very angry with him for it!

It isn't exactly correct to see pre-modernism, post-modernism, or modernism, as
movements occupying some sort of historical space. All three categories of
though co-exist in the world today. I think the post-modernist isn't
necessarily anti-modernist, in the same way that the modernist was
anti-mysticism. The post-modernist is just a little more interested in the
frame around the canvas than the canvas itself. Hence, modernism and
post-modernism, in the visual arts, can compliment each other. But in
philosophy, there is open warfare between modernists and post-modernists.
Bertrand Russell is for me the sine qua non modernist thinker. Early
Wittgenstein is modern, but latter Wittgenstein is post-modern.
Psycholinguistics, a science, and a "modern" endeavor, is a fairly post-modern
field. Whew! What the hell am I talking about? Sorry. Why. Are. You.
Bothering. With. All. This.

shouldntyoubeinbed?

[Ice Fiend]

>Ice Fiend-- Best thing to do here is don't analyze it--just enjoy it.
>Analysis takes alll the fun out of artistic things anyway.

Good call Toni. I try not to labor over lyrics and their meanings. If it sounds
good, it's good. Or... "If it's good to ya, it's gotta be good for ya"