postmodernism and surrealism?
xray
or similarities between Postmodernism and
Surrealism?
Where are we now in this present time? is
surrealism a product of modernism and does
it have any meaning within the context of
postmodern thought.
Thanks for any input to this thought.
James Whitehead
writes
>Could anybody state the differences and
>or similarities between Postmodernism and
>Surrealism?
Surrealism was a movement in literature/ art during the 20s and 30s
influenced by Dada and psychoanalysis ... which to grossly over
generalise had a method - such that in the plastic arts it contributed
to the latter abstract works of Pollock et al - and High Modernism. Post
modernism marks the period which follows modernism and is often typified
by a lack of method - direction or objectivity, so though perhaps it
might superficially have resemblance's to surrealism its ideologically
not the same thing at all.
>Where are we now in this present time?
we are in the post-modern epoch. (and one could as such challenge
concepts such as time - period and epoch - think Disneyworld - which is
not surreal - but a complex mixture of times and cultures.)
> is
>surrealism a product of modernism
its a significant movement within modernism - and relates to "truth" and
"being" the great modern meta-narratives
>and does
>it have any meaning within the context of
>postmodern thought.
it has whatever you want- the truth of the matter is only important if
you wish it - and it plays a key role in Notting Hill!
>Thanks for any input to this thought.
>
--
James Whitehead
xray
James Whitehead
writes
>It all sounds very liberating to me. The breaking down of boundaries.
>
--
James Whitehead
xray
to live with preestablished rules. I'm looking at it in the sense of
'pluralities'
where opposite identies can coexist in a kind of fragmented harmony. The
syncretic; the art of eduardo paolozzi. Perhaps its like an increase of
being
which makes me feel so good about it.
James Whitehead
writes
>It feels like a normal process to me even though there are those who wish
>to live with preestablished rules. I'm looking at it in the sense of
>'pluralities'
>where opposite identies can coexist in a kind of fragmented harmony. The
>syncretic; the art of eduardo paolozzi. Perhaps its like an increase of
>being
>which makes me feel so good about it.
i was feel sympathetic until you mentioned paolozzi where the art is
very much the object.
--
James Whitehead
xray
swamps reality in a culture of recycled images, it has to do with de-
construction, consumerism and television and the rise of the information
society. Paolozz's techniques convey multiple layers of meanings.
Cyberberspace, however may be the true postmodern 'art' form.
Thanks for your comments--you are the expert and I'm here to get
educated.
xray
'high'
and 'low' culture. Whereas Modernism sees the distinction between the two as a
necessary separation, Postmodernism rejects this stratification and even goes
so far as
to experiment with mixtures of the two that some have called 'bad taste'
combinations
of qualities. Eduardo Paolozzi does have these elements in his art, in fact
predates postmodern.. This does not mean to say that Paolozzi is a Postmodern
artist but rather that he anticipated it in some of his graphics.
James Whitehead
writes
>I sense the postmodern in Paolozzi's splicing of high with low culture, it
>swamps reality in a culture of recycled images, it has to do with de-
>construction, consumerism and television and the rise of the information
>society. Paolozz's techniques convey multiple layers of meanings.
>Cyberberspace, however may be the true postmodern 'art' form.
>Thanks for your comments--you are the expert and I'm here to get
>educated.
>
I'm not an expert - i would like to maintain that with post-modernism
the process of education is not a hierarchy but a network, or an event
driven process - and so the Usegroup is a particular media for such a
process, with the ability of even sentences of one poster to be
interrupted. Further the facts that go to produce an expert - though
relevant and useful - represent only one particular point of view, the
views of anyone on any subject are not equal but are relevant to mapping
the phenomenon. For instance a novice computer user can expose bad
design features within computer systems that the expert by virtue of
their knowledge is not aware of.
>James Whitehead wrote:
>
>> In article <3D9CD88B...@netcat.net>, xray <sq...@netcat.net>
>> writes
>> >It feels like a normal process to me even though there are those who wish
>> >to live with preestablished rules. I'm looking at it in the sense of
>> >'pluralities'
>> >where opposite identies can coexist in a kind of fragmented harmony. The
>> >syncretic; the art of eduardo paolozzi. Perhaps its like an increase of
>> >being
>> >which makes me feel so good about it.
>>
>> i was feel sympathetic until you mentioned paolozzi where the art is
>> very much the object.
>> --
>> James Whitehead
>
--
James Whitehead
James Whitehead
writes
>another key difference between Modernism and Postmodernism is the attitude to
>'high'
>and 'low' culture. Whereas Modernism sees the distinction between the two as a
>
>necessary separation, Postmodernism rejects this stratification and even goes
>so far as
>to experiment with mixtures of the two that some have called 'bad taste'
>combinations
>of qualities. Eduardo Paolozzi does have these elements in his art, in fact
>predates postmodern.. This does not mean to say that Paolozzi is a Postmodern
>artist but rather that he anticipated it in some of his graphics.
I'm not so sure of this distinction - the very subject of impressionism
was that of low and bourgeois culture - especially within the prevailing
hierarchy of artistic subject matter - histoire painting being the
summit? The railway stations and factory chimneys - the bourgeois parks
and seasides... The writings (some) of Eliot and Joyce - all pickup on
the popular and technology of modernity, one can even relate minimalism
to technologies such as computers.. as such Paolozzi doesn't stand out.
Maybe pop art was more sympathetic to the popular than some other
movements (- which critiques it - )within modernism, but it is not alone
... the futurists etc. And certainly high modernism uses modern
materials - much of pop art (non US?) seems to be more of a nostalgia
for what was *once* popular - or for other cultures - 40s & 50s DC
comics as seen by english middle class art students of the 60s. The
situation in America being more complex - in its critique of
Expressionism - but having still an aesthetic of analysis of what art is
- in Greenbergs flatness=truth terms a Lichtenstein *is flatter* than a
pollock. (i ramble...)
If we can say anything by way of definition of post-modern art (an
oxymoron) it is that the art - as in art object is of a secondary
significance. And here it looks back to Duchamp perhaps. But more
significant i would think is the curator as creator - Satchi not the
YBAs The Tate Modern - and not its contents... and the relationship of
this to the public - who no longer has to have any prior knowledge of
any agenda... which is even 'Lower' than popularisim - where knowledge
of what is 'in' or 'out' is still a pre-requisite for engagement.
>
>
>James Whitehead wrote:
>
>> In article <3D9CD88B...@netcat.net>, xray <sq...@netcat.net>
>> writes
>> >It feels like a normal process to me even though there are those who wish
>> >to live with preestablished rules. I'm looking at it in the sense of
>> >'pluralities'
>> >where opposite identies can coexist in a kind of fragmented harmony. The
>> >syncretic; the art of eduardo paolozzi. Perhaps its like an increase of
>> >being
>> >which makes me feel so good about it.
>>
>> i was feel sympathetic until you mentioned paolozzi where the art is
>> very much the object.
>> --
>> James Whitehead
>
--
James Whitehead