NOT AGAIN!!!!!
Eliot Handelman
;
; I stop by to see what's going on and notice that there is finally a new
;message. But what is it? EEEEEEEK!
;
; Rod, where are you? This place is becoming like "Dante's Disco, where the
;Music NEVER STOPS!"
;
; Doesn't anyone have anything TRULY postmodern, or should we change the name
;of this to alt.music.nonsense?
As I said before, postmodernism is essentially a rightist ideology, a
sort of rightist neoconservatism with a respectable (because self-critical)
theory and when war broke out all da neo-conservative intellectuals suddenly
realized it's them against us, that there are authentic powers such as
the american military machine, and this made them feel kind of whoozy: so
what happened was that the sense of breakdown between state power and
liberal progressiveness broke down and everybody realized that the 60's
were due for another pass, and postmodernism ended. What's big right
now is "creativity," "self-expression," and "sharing." So choose yer
fukkin poison, pal.
James Ausman
>
> I stop by to see what's going on and notice that there is finally a new
>message. But what is it? EEEEEEEK!
>
> Rod, where are you? This place is becoming like "Dante's Disco, where the
>Music NEVER STOPS!"
>
> Doesn't anyone have anything TRULY postmodern, or should we change the name
>of this to alt.music.nonsense?
I agree. Would some of you "postmodern" music loverd be willing to go to a new
alt group if I create it? How about alt.music.postmodern? Any other suggestions
for good names. I don't have anything against NIN, Susie, etc., I just would
like this group to go back to being a discusion (more or less) about postmodernism.
-----------------------------------
Jim Ausman
These opinions are only mine, and even I may not believe them!
lkl...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
I stop by to see what's going on and notice that there is finally a new
message. But what is it? EEEEEEEK!
Rod, where are you? This place is becoming like "Dante's Disco, where the
Music NEVER STOPS!"
Doesn't anyone have anything TRULY postmodern, or should we change the name
of this to alt.music.nonsense?
Disclaimer: My modem hates me, my disk drive delights in crashing, my cat tries
to chase my mouse... life is hell...
Iain D. Sinclair
> Doesn't anyone have anything TRULY postmodern, or should we change the name
>of this to alt.music.nonsense?
Yes. Art is fucking art.
BTW, how do you define "postmodernism"? Uninformed minds ought to know.
--
Iain Dick // axolotl@socs // University of Technology, Sydney ,',
Sinclair // .uts.edu.au // (Research Assistant) +61 2 2812552 ,`
James Ausman
>
>
>BTW, how do you define "postmodernism"? Uninformed minds ought to know.
Does anyone else remember the rather entertaining beginnings of alt.postmodern?
Does anybody care? Would somebody who was around then like to answer the
gentleman's question???
Erich Schneider
> In article <axolotl.668759502@ultima> axo...@socs.uts.edu.au writes:
>>
>>
>>BTW, how do you define "postmodernism"? Uninformed minds ought to know.
> Does anyone else remember the rather entertaining beginnings of alt.postmodern?
> Does anybody care? Would somebody who was around then like to answer the
> gentleman's question???
I wasn't around then, but I'll give it a shot.
My understanding (based on readings of books _about_ modern
philosophers/ critics and a few books by Lyotard and Derrida) is that
postmodernism as a word is best thought of as post-Modernism, as in
after Modernism, the art/philosophical movement. "Postmodern" is
gotten by stripping off the "ism".
It arises out of a refutation of the Modernist "claim" that we can
know some essential reality that is behind everything and that is
exposed to us through various symbols. This may sound very abstract,
but, for example, we can see Marxism as an explanation of economic
"reality" through various principles such as dialectic materialism and
the principles of class struggle. Or, the Freudian understanding of
the mind as a struggle of unconscious forces.
Postmodernism claims that there is no such essential reality;
furthermore, no single iconic system or mythic structure (Lyotard
calls them "legitimizing metanarratives") is good enough to
explain/help one deal with the modern world. Postmodern art emphasizes
reflexivity as a means of exploring this; it focuses back upon the
whole concept of "what is art" to try and make the art's target
realize that no single reality-map is good enough (by calling into
question something fundamental, like their concept of art).
Postmodern philosophers try to figure out strategies to help us deal
with the world of "fractured context" (S.R.Delany's term).
--
er...@tybalt.caltech.edu or try er...@through.cs.caltech.edu
"Why the hell anybody plug the likes of you into a deck like that? Thing ought
to be in a museum, _you_ ought to be in grade school."
-William Gibson, _Count Zero_
Eliot Handelman
;>>>>> On 13 Mar 91 01:23:15 GMT, aus...@headcrash.Berkeley.EDU (James Ausman) said:
;
;> In article <axolotl.668759502@ultima> axo...@socs.uts.edu.au writes:
;>>
;>>
;>>BTW, how do you define "postmodernism"? Uninformed minds ought to know.
;
;> Does anyone else remember the rather entertaining beginnings of alt.postmodern?
;> Does anybody care? Would somebody who was around then like to answer the
;> gentleman's question???
;
;I wasn't around then, but I'll give it a shot.
;
;My understanding (based on readings of books _about_ modern
;philosophers/ critics and a few books by Lyotard and Derrida) is that
;postmodernism as a word is best tho
You're completely off base. This group began as a spinoff of alt.cyberpunk.
It is a story all the world will tell and retell, much like the history
of England.
cnb...@vaxa.strath.ac.uk
>>>>>> On 13 Mar 91 01:23:15 GMT, aus...@headcrash.Berkeley.EDU (James Ausman) said:
>
>> In article <axolotl.668759502@ultima> axo...@socs.uts.edu.au writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>BTW, how do you define "postmodernism"? Uninformed minds ought to know.
>
>> Does anyone else remember the rather entertaining beginnings of alt.postmodern?
>> Does anybody care? Would somebody who was around then like to answer the
>> gentleman's question???
>
>
> It arises out of a refutation of the Modernist "claim" that we can
> know some essential reality that is behind everything and that is
> exposed to us through various symbols. This may sound very abstract,
> but, for example, we can see Marxism as an explanation of economic
> "reality" through various principles such as dialectic materialism and
> the principles of class struggle. Or, the Freudian understanding of
> the mind as a struggle of unconscious forces.
>
What has postmodernism to say, or to verge on needless pendantry, what
do the multiplicity of interpretations of postmodernism by our
budding postmodernists out there have to say about scientific texts ?
Are they regarded as being any different from a literary text ?
Is it taken as an a priori assumption ?
Answers on a Derrida, sorry, answers on a postcard.
As a aside, when the German playwright Heiner Muller was asked whether he
was a postmodernist his (paraphrased) reply was that the only postmodernist
he knew was a modernist artist friend who had a job in the post office.
Graham Freeland.
cnb...@vaxa.strathclyde.ac.uk via NSFNET-RELAY
Michael Hand
-->with the world of "fractured context" (S.R.Delany's term).
Where does Samuel Delany talk about this?
-- Mikey
Erich Schneider
+> In article <ERICH.91M...@near.cs.caltech.edu> er...@near.cs.caltech.edu (Erich Schneider) writes:
+> -->Postmodern philosophers try to figure out strategies to help us deal
+> -->with the world of "fractured context" (S.R.Delany's term).
+> Where does Samuel Delany talk about this?
He mentions this sort of thing in the afterword to the new paperback edition
of _Stars In My Pocket Like Grains of Sand_. He mentions that that book
(SIMP...) deals with this topic, as do _Dhalgren_ (vaguely) and
_Triton_/the Neveryon books (more so, esp. _Triton_). But that specific
Afterword is where he states what he is doing most cogently. You also
might want to check his autobiography, _The Motion in Light and Water_,
as it explores this concept and others which are useful in understanding
Delany's work.
Ian G Batten
> What has postmodernism to say, or to verge on needless pendantry, what
> do the multiplicity of interpretations of postmodernism by our
> budding postmodernists out there have to say about scientific texts ?
> Are they regarded as being any different from a literary text ?
> Is it taken as an a priori assumption ?
I had this argument with rather too much booze in me in a steakhouse in
Stuttgart after a performance of Glass' ``Einstein on the Beach'' (a
suitable context, I assert).
I argued that the book under discussion --- an early draft of the BSI
Modula-2 standard one of those present was involved in --- was a text
capable of all the ambiguity and problems of meaning of any other text.
The author claimed that because he ``didn't mean it to be literary''
such arguments were invalid and that there was a distinction between
``literary'' and ``other'' texts. My comment that if such a distinction
existed the only means to locate which category a text would fall into
would be by using the techniques he was avowing couldn't be applied
didn't go down too well.
But we'd had far too much to drink by then. And my steak wasn't raw
enough.
ian