Postmoderns Need Love Too
MrGoodSalt
I noticed some abusive messages being posted to alt.postmodern. Though I don't
buy into postmodernism and think it has major negative implications from a
strategic cultural perspective, I have no desire to be hurtful or disrespectful
to the Postmodernists themselves, after all, Postmoderns need love too... :)
In that light I hope some of you will find the following quotation pleasing, it
is one of my most favorite Sherlock Holmes quotes:
The Complete Sherlock Holmes: All Four Novels All Fifty-six Adventures. (1992)
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Barnes & Noble Books, New York ISBN: 0-88029-261-X
Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes: The Naval Treaty p. 455-456
"…What a lovely thing a rose is!"
"He walked past the couch to the open window and held up the drooping stalk of
a moss-rose, looking down at the dainty blend of crimson and green. It was a
new phase of his character to me, for I had never before seen him show any keen
interest in natural objects."
" 'There is nothing in which deduction is so necessary as in religion,' said
he, leaning with his back against the shutters. 'It can be built up as an exact
science by the reasoner. Our highest assurance of the goodness of Providence
seems to me to rest in the flowers. All other things, our powers, our desires,
our food, are all really necessary for our existence in the first instance. But
this rose is an extra. Its smell and its colour are an embellishment of life,
not a condition of it. It is only goodness which gives extras, and so I say
again that we have much to hope from the flowers.' "
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." JOHN 8:32
Good Christian books listed and described at:
http://www.hometown.aol.com/mrgoodsalt/index.htm
G*rd*n
> ...
> he, leaning with his back against the shutters. 'It can be built up as an exact
> science by the reasoner. Our highest assurance of the goodness of Providence
> seems to me to rest in the flowers. All other things, our powers, our desires,
> our food, are all really necessary for our existence in the first instance. But
> this rose is an extra. Its smell and its colour are an embellishment of life,
> not a condition of it. It is only goodness which gives extras, and so I say
> again that we have much to hope from the flowers.' "
A rose isn't an extra for the rose.
--
(<><>) /*/
}"{ G*rd*n }"{ g...@panix.com }"{
{ http://www.etaoin.com | latest new material 1/19/03 <-adv't
Telicalbook
>don't
>buy into postmodernism and think it has major negative implications from a
>strategic cultural perspective, I have no desire to be hurtful or
>disrespectful
>to the Postmodernists themselves, after all, Postmoderns need love too...
>:)
I agree. Postmodernism is just another movement in philosophy, it's
not some dangerous downward path or anything like that. Those
people need to see its good sides from an academic understanding
of reading real postmodernist authors, not what some local taboid
journalist ascribes to the word.
--
Robert Pearson
http://www.rspearson.com/
ParaMind Brainstorming Software http://www.paramind.net
R.S. Pearson Music Page http://www.rspearson.com/rsmusic.html
James Whitehead
"Telicalbook" <telic...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20040129013328...@mb-m15.aol.com...
> I agree. Postmodernism is just another movement in philosophy, it's
> not some dangerous downward path or anything like that. Those
> people need to see its good sides from an academic understanding
> of reading real postmodernist authors, not what some local taboid
> journalist ascribes to the word.
You might consider it a movement - BUT its not restricted to philosophy, its
far more a cultural phenomenon. The philosophic establishment in the main
were and still are hostile to po-mo theory - its not established within
these depts - but in the newer cultural studies departments. Many of its
theorists are not "philosophers" or consider themselves as such- otherwise
it would preclude a certain critical attitude towards philosophy. But its
important i think to realise that po-mo is also most visibly a feature of
architecture - where it is more difficult (though not impossible) to ignore,
and in the visual arts in general. It also is significant in economics -
consumerism Vs mass production, technology - and politics. - NGOs single
issue groups and Multinationals - post communism etc. We can contrast to the
nationalism and opposition along clear eco/political lines of modernism. The
problem in philosophy is that the theorists have in the main lacked or
avoided the mass/popularist - features of po-mo within the arts, any
sophisticated aesthetics has to be disregarded and also any ideas of
cultural hierarchy. There is no difference? between high and low art. The
writers considered po-mo haven't as far as i know embraced the dumbing
down - or cultural relativism/ POPularism of the arts - *yet* . To attempt
to see some of po-mo from "academic understanding" needs to be aware of
ideas such as "learning from las vegas". To attempt an academic
understanding would create a hierarchy of knowledge/ideology completely
counter to po-mo's popularism. It would perhaps be academics who need to
learn from tabloid journalists - if they would wish to be post-modern. Of
course this in a sense is already the case in the *significant* ideologies
and those who study them. Science and physics in particular has in the main
replaced philosophy, and has dumbed itself down and appealed to a mass
market audience. Any look in a bookshop will testify to this, A brief
history of time, the Blind Watchmaker et al. What's left of philosophy
then? A move into lit crit, or to limit itself to certain areas of logic and
history of what was an attempt at a description of the truth. Aren't po-mo
theorists still elitist and avant-garde and isn't this exactly counter to
certain features of post modernism. OK an old guard who think the nightmare
will pass? Within the arts you can see a certain reluctance to accept the
sensational and trivialism of post-modernism. They - some here - criticise
po-mo for being trivial, ironic, insincere, but thats exactly what these
artists say of there work themselves - and set out to do!
"I can't wait to get into a position to make really bad art and get away
with it...."
Does anyone know of a philosopher who has or is prepared to make such a
statement? And i anticipate "J.D." - but no he doesn't say this. The
general public and tabloid journalist regard philosophy as a load of old
bollocks!? , is there anyone within philosophy who is prepared to say this.
It would be a neat move - out manoeuvring the likes of Nietszche et al. Or
is a publisher out there willing to sponsor a book "My philosophy is a load
of old bollocks - just like all the other philosophies"........
Aidan Tynan
Telicalbook wrote in message
<20040129013328...@mb-m15.aol.com>...
>>I noticed some abusive messages being posted to alt.postmodern. Though I
>>don't
>>buy into postmodernism and think it has major negative implications from a
>>strategic cultural perspective, I have no desire to be hurtful or
>>disrespectful
>>to the Postmodernists themselves, after all, Postmoderns need love too...
>>:)
>
>I agree. Postmodernism is just another movement in philosophy,
Postmodernism can not be conceived of as primarily philosophical (as, for
example, existentialism); its major vectors are aesthetic and social even if
academics are responsible for ubiquitising the term.
it's
>not some dangerous downward path or anything like that.
Depends on your politics. Some people *love* globalised capitalism, flexible
accumulation, and mass market hegemony.
Those
>people need to see its good sides from an academic understanding
>of reading real postmodernist authors,
I mainly switch back and forth from Adorno to Baudrillard in order to
experience the different extremes, but the pessimism is always there, it has
to be.
-Aidan