post-post-modernism?!?!?
Kay Kane
barni wrote in message <7cdm2r$3d3$1...@aladin.taide.net>...
>10 minutes ago, Eugen Simion, the president of the Romanian Academy
affirmed
>in the TVR2 television about a book:
>"...We can observate a secession from the post-modernism, and the appearing
>of the post-post-modernism."
>
>?!
>
>Barni (kp...@netsoft.ro)
>
Thanks for the news, Barni! Now, can anyone give a synopsis of
post-post-modernism (and are painting and sculpture still "dead")?
We have been waiting for what comes after post-modernism.... (I had hoped
for something more inventive, name-wise).
Kay
*Now that PoMo is dead, I think I'll miss it! Shall we abbreviate the
replacement PoPoMo?
mdeli
>*Now that PoMo is dead, I think I'll miss it! Shall we abbreviate the
>replacement PoPoMo?
...and your paintings will look just as good or bad whether POMO is
dead or not.
The main reason for this is that in spite of all the gas expended
here, POMO has nothing to do with painting except for those who need a
crutch to excuse their incompetence.
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
check out my new book, new work, new comments at:.
http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"Kay Kane" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
>
> barni wrote in message <7cdm2r$3d3$1...@aladin.taide.net>...
> >10 minutes ago, Eugen Simion, the president of the Romanian Academy
> affirmed
> >in the TVR2 television about a book:
> >"...We can observate a secession from the post-modernism, and the appearing
> >of the post-post-modernism."
> >
> >?!
> >
> >Barni (kp...@netsoft.ro)
> >
> Thanks for the news, Barni! Now, can anyone give a synopsis of
> post-post-modernism (and are painting and sculpture still "dead")?
> We have been waiting for what comes after post-modernism.... (I had hoped
> for something more inventive, name-wise).
> Kay
>
> replacement PoPoMo?
>
Lamppost Modernism? I do see the light, finally.
Compost Modernims? Self explanitory
PostOffice Modernism? For the NeoYuppi crowd.
It will never fly, Kay. Don't burn your books.
Erik Mattila
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
G*rd*n
| >replacement PoPoMo?
Try "post-post", although it's probably dead, too.
"Kay Kane" wrote:
| ...and your paintings will look just as good or bad whether POMO is
| dead or not.
hug...@interlog.com (mdeli):
| The main reason for this is that in spite of all the gas expended
| here, POMO has nothing to do with painting except for those who need a
| crutch to excuse their incompetence.
If you mean "postmodern", it's also a category of styles in
the plastic arts and architecture which exists regardless of
whether you think the artists are competent or not -- all
that's required is that the works come along after the
fall of Modernism, or look like those which did. If you're
going to pose as an arts authority, you should acknowledge
this.
"Postmodern" and "postmodernism" were declared dead in the
late 1980s, so I don't know what all the fuss is about. As
they used to say, "'Dead' is dead." Many tedious changes
can be run....
--
}"{ G*rd*n }"{ g...@panix.com }"{
{ http://www.etaoin.com | latest new material 2/15 <-adv't
Holmes
fascination with death; its ornate and embellished designs, and then we had
modernism with its straight thinking, truth to materials and now we have
post-modernism again at the end of the century, and like nymphomaniacs we
are still playing with this dead painting maybe it will be the austere
clarity of modernism coming around again soon, or will everything become so
meaning really is in the eye of the beholder and we are post modern people
with a new identity and set of feelings to suit every occasion. But this
assumes that we are post -modern people, if this is dead then do we just
respond to the situation or the people at hand.
Maybe we are just waiting for the next theory to arrange our lives by.
I'm lucie in England, who doesn't know how to formulate sentences.
Kay Kane
emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7cevvk$fjl$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <5cAG2.34139$YV6....@news2.giganews.com>,
> "Kay Kane" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
>>
>> barni wrote in message <7cdm2r$3d3$1...@aladin.taide.net>...
>> >10 minutes ago, Eugen Simion, the president of the Romanian Academy
>> affirmed
>> >in the TVR2 television about a book:
>> >"...We can observate a secession from the post-modernism, and the
appearing
>> >of the post-post-modernism."
>> >
>> >?!
>> >
>> >Barni (kp...@netsoft.ro)
>> >
>> Thanks for the news, Barni! Now, can anyone give a synopsis of
>> post-post-modernism (and are painting and sculpture still "dead")?
>> We have been waiting for what comes after post-modernism.... (I had hoped
>> for something more inventive, name-wise).
>> Kay
>>
>> replacement PoPoMo?
>>
>
>Lamppost Modernism? I do see the light, finally.
>
>Compost Modernims? Self explanitory
***But new and innovative in an optimistic mindset... I've seen or read or
heard of installations with rotting vegetables, etc (which goes into a
compost). Now, what if the PoPoMo installations uses these to GROW things
in the future installations? Viewers can look and come supplied with
sprinkle (not Annie) cans! We can stop world hunger and have an art that is
not only viewer participation, but goal oriented! (This is just TOO
exciting - my mind is racing with the possibilities!)
>PostOffice Modernism? For the NeoYuppi crowd.
***Or very ANGRY AND FED-UP artists...
>It will never fly, Kay. Don't burn your books.
***Too late, Erik. I'm booked for the lecture circuit. Sold out. Have to
meet Hickey for lunch, he's interested in my theories. (When you snooze,
you lose, Erik - I let you know first!)
Kay
Kay Kane
MrKurtz wrote in message <36ec0c87....@news.outrageous.net>...
>Perhaps more importantly, what will the next decade be "called"
>The 'oughts? A lot of money is riding on this issue. If the
>millenium is not successfully marketed, a lot of people won't
>eat. I'm hoping The Millenium decade will be named something
>very homely and unhip. Any ideas?
>
>--Ball
> That vampire bat, that inhuman beast,
>she ought to be locked up and never released.
>The world was such a wholesome place until--
>Cruella, Cruella Deville!"
>--Walt Disney
Erik thought of quite a few good ones. Even when we are homely and unhip
(upon retrospect), we don't know it at the time and think we are very hip.
But, how about a "MaMa" art movement (in response to dada?) It really
sounds unhip and brings to mind other senses, such as spit up, soiled
diapers and sounds of neverending crying. (I don't think it will fly).
Kay
Kay Kane
Holmes wrote in message <7ch806$gko$1...@newnews.global.net.uk>...
Post-Post Modern art... If we learn all of the jargon, right now, at the
beginning - we can win friends and impress people. Heck, we can throw in
some of our own favorite ideologies and influence the entire definition of
it...
Kay (as in chaos - who has broken with PoMo and is formulating sentences of
HER choice in the PoPoMo way of her own invention).
gotts...@my-dejanews.com
> Thanks for the news, Barni! Now, can anyone give a synopsis of
> post-post-modernism (and are painting and sculpture still "dead")?
> We have been waiting for what comes after post-modernism.... (I had hoped
> for something more inventive, name-wise).
> Kay
I am not at all surprised that someone chose the name "post-post-modernism".
Names can sometimes reveal more than the authors' intended, and the sterility
of a title like "post-post-modernism" does, I think, suit the movement very
well. In circles where critics are eager to embrace everything, they are also
compelled to offend no-one. Hence the dry-as-dust titles we've seen spout up
over the past few years.
If you disagree, feel free to coin a more inventive, and appropriate title.
> *Now that PoMo is dead, I think I'll miss it! Shall we abbreviate the
> replacement PoPoMo?
No, I would say that "Po Po" reflects the nature of the beast somewhat more
accurately, whilst having the advantage of being shorter.
Regards,
Iian Neill
Peter H.M. Brooks
scarl...@theriver.com "Kay Kane" writes:
>
> Yes! But if Post Modern art is dead, it is now being replaced with
> Post-Post Modern art... If we learn all of the jargon, right now, at the
> beginning - we can win friends and impress people. Heck, we can throw in
> some of our own favorite ideologies and influence the entire definition of
> it...
> Kay (as in chaos - who has broken with PoMo and is formulating sentences of
> HER choice in the PoPoMo way of her own invention).
>
This seems a good idea!
Surely the problem is in the need to be 'hip' (as the ancient term had it),
'modern' or even more 'modern' as in 'post-modern'. All of this desire
to keep up with the Joneses, or even the Joneses grandchildren seems
rather pathetic to me.
If, rather than trying to pretend to be even more up-to-the-minute, somebody
could indentify a theme - admittedly more difficult, it would even require
thought, effort and judgement - then that could be used as a label.
If nobody can find or agree a theme as a label, why not label the art
today as 'lost' or 'chaotic' or 'empty' until some art turns up that
is worthy of a theme?
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
emat...@tomatoweb.com
gotts...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> > Thanks for the news, Barni! Now, can anyone give a synopsis of
> > post-post-modernism (and are painting and sculpture still "dead")?
> > We have been waiting for what comes after post-modernism.... (I had hoped
> > for something more inventive, name-wise).
> > Kay
>
> I am not at all surprised that someone chose the name "post-post-modernism".
> Names can sometimes reveal more than the authors' intended, and the sterility
> of a title like "post-post-modernism" does, I think, suit the movement very
> well. In circles where critics are eager to embrace everything, they are also
> compelled to offend no-one. Hence the dry-as-dust titles we've seen spout up
> over the past few years.
>
> If you disagree, feel free to coin a more inventive, and appropriate title.
>
> > *Now that PoMo is dead, I think I'll miss it! Shall we abbreviate the
> > replacement PoPoMo?
>
> No, I would say that "Po Po" reflects the nature of the beast somewhat more
> accurately, whilst having the advantage of being shorter.
>
> Regards,
>
> Iian Neill
>
hunger of a critical mind!
Regards,
Erik
emat...@tomatoweb.com
epitome of rejection. Soiled diapers is the epitome of the opposite of anal
retention, and a baby's wail is the sign of our times. What could possibly be
more relevant to our terminal century?
Erik (recongizing you as the gneius your are)
emat...@tomatoweb.com
pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk wrote:
> In article <ssXG2.36953$YV6....@news2.giganews.com>
> scarl...@theriver.com "Kay Kane" writes:
>
> >
> > Yes! But if Post Modern art is dead, it is now being replaced with
> > Post-Post Modern art... If we learn all of the jargon, right now, at the
> > beginning - we can win friends and impress people. Heck, we can throw in
> > some of our own favorite ideologies and influence the entire definition of
> > it...
> > Kay (as in chaos - who has broken with PoMo and is formulating sentences of
> > HER choice in the PoPoMo way of her own invention).
> >
> This seems a good idea!
>
Yeah, but my understnding of the term 'post modern' is simply the historical
period where people, such as you and I, ceased believing in a unitary
premise, such as the Marxist "International" or Ronald Ray Gun's "Trickle
down economics". It's kind of a 'patch it up' attitude, which I see myself
in favor of. If there's a problem at UC Berkeley with institutional racism,
fix it, by any means. This doesn't mean that the same problem doesn't exit
everywhere or anywhere. By extensin, this orientation can exist in art. In
that sense art can speak to a specific issue without making a general
statement about art, in the Big Picture kind of sense. Thus one of the
desriptions of Post Modernism is 'eclectisim'.
Anyway, from that position discussions of post postmodernism are posited. So
are we talking about the return to the authority of the unitary premise, or
are we talking to a further disenfranchisment of art from the social sphere?
Erik Mattila
Peter H.M. Brooks
>
> Anyway, from that position discussions of post postmodernism are posited. So
> are we talking about the return to the authority of the unitary premise, or
> are we talking to a further disenfranchisment of art from the social sphere?
>
I thought that all this claiming that art was for the 'elite' only was about
as far as one could get from the 'social sphere'.
I don't see why one needs a 'unitary premise'. There can be a number of
different, non-intersecting, schools active at any one time. I think that
it is fairly clear that there are at the moment.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Tom C
>here, POMO has nothing to do with painting except for those who need a
>crutch to excuse their incompetence.
The day you are able to accept that writing and painting and art in general
are not interpretative 'givens' - that their "understanding" isn't something
"natural" or "pure", but that, JUST LIKE POSTMODERNISTS, you are occupying a
theoretical position when you paint/look/write - then perhaps you will be in
a position to talk here. Theoretical work is both about explaining the "why"
of art and about creating the space for new types of art - art that is
thoughtful and interrogatory. Similarly, art feeds thought and theoretical
positions. Get used to it.
Kay Kane
emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7cj3lc$ou9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <921483...@psyche.demon.co.uk>,
> pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk wrote:
>> In article <ssXG2.36953$YV6....@news2.giganews.com>
>> scarl...@theriver.com "Kay Kane" writes:
>>
>> >
>> > Yes! But if Post Modern art is dead, it is now being replaced with
>> > Post-Post Modern art... If we learn all of the jargon, right now, at
the
>> > beginning - we can win friends and impress people. Heck, we can throw
in
>> > some of our own favorite ideologies and influence the entire definition
of
>> > it...
>> > Kay (as in chaos - who has broken with PoMo and is formulating
sentences of
>> > HER choice in the PoPoMo way of her own invention).
>> >
>> This seems a good idea!
>>
>
>Yeah, but my understnding of the term 'post modern' is simply the
historical
>period where people, such as you and I, ceased believing in a unitary
>premise, such as the Marxist "International" or Ronald Ray Gun's "Trickle
>down economics".
I thought it was the historical moment when we decided that our political
leaders should "zip it up".
It's kind of a 'patch it up' attitude, which I see myself
>in favor of. If there's a problem at UC Berkeley with institutional
racism,
>fix it, by any means. This doesn't mean that the same problem doesn't exit
>everywhere or anywhere. By extensin, this orientation can exist in art.
In
>that sense art can speak to a specific issue without making a general
>statement about art, in the Big Picture kind of sense. Thus one of the
>desriptions of Post Modernism is 'eclectisim'.
I agree in principle, but in what way does this differ from the "Pluralist"
70s? Seems to me they were doing exactly this (though less installations).
>Anyway, from that position discussions of post postmodernism are posited.
So
>are we talking about the return to the authority of the unitary premise, or
>are we talking to a further disenfranchisment of art from the social
sphere?
Yes! (Uh, #2)
Kay
Kay Kane
Tom C wrote in message <7ck3nk$1p9$1...@mendelevium.btinternet.com>..
>
(snip)
>The day you are able to accept that writing and painting and art in general
>are not interpretative 'givens' - that their "understanding" isn't
something
>"natural" or "pure", but that, JUST LIKE POSTMODERNISTS, you are occupying
a
>theoretical position when you paint/look/write - then perhaps you will be
in
>a position to talk here. Theoretical work is both about explaining the
"why"
>of art and about creating the space for new types of art - art that is
>thoughtful and interrogatory. Similarly, art feeds thought and theoretical
>positions. Get used to it.
>
Nicely put!
Kay
emat...@tomatoweb.com
pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk wrote:
> In article <7cj3lc$ou9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> emat...@tomatoweb.com writes:
>
> >
> > Anyway, from that position discussions of post postmodernism are posited. So
> > are we talking about the return to the authority of the unitary premise, or
> > are we talking to a further disenfranchisment of art from the social sphere?
> >
> as far as one could get from the 'social sphere'.
Not at all distant, in my view. "Elites' no matter how we define the idea,
are only 'elite' in relationship to something that isn't 'elite.' Otherwise,
the term has no meaning. That being the case, it is obvious that 'elites'
are part of a system that we might call 'the social sphere' (Jurgen
Habermas). Art that is disenfranchised for the social sphere would be art
that only has significance to an individual, as opposed to a group.
>
> I don't see why one needs a 'unitary premise'. There can be a number of
> different, non-intersecting, schools active at any one time. I think that
> it is fairly clear that there are at the moment.
>
> --
> Peter H.M. Brooks
>
This isn't my claim at all. I'm talking about what was looked at when
various social scientists agreed to call a historical period post modern as
opposed to modern. This is simply how it's set out in the literature on the
subject, and in fact debated (those who argue against the category argue that
there was no significant social change, crises, or paradigm shift that would
justify a new descriptive term.) the 'unitary premise' is merely a
representation of social thinking that existed prior to the proposed shift
--i.e. the 'Internationale and Workers of the World' (Maxist political
ideology) are the answer to all social problems, or "National Socialism" is
the same, or "International Capitalism" will solve everything, or "Cubism"
represents the 'state of the art' in a conceived linear progressive.
Proponents of the shift or rupture claim this sort of thinking collapsed, and
people generally started looking at specific causes to specific problems, and
the social response to issues was played out on a limited terrain that was
germaine to the specific issue.
G*rd*n
| In his wonderful book, *Painting and Reality,* the Thomist philosopher
| Etienne Gilson (a Canadian!) holds that the difference between a painting
| and a picture is that a painting refers only to itself. A picture depends
| on outside references for its validity. (He also states that a work can
| be both a picture and a painting.)
| ...
That seems like a very stringent form of Modernism, since
all references to the world outside the object defined as a
painting would be excluded -- the painting would be, in the
words of one Modernist, "a representation of pure thought."
The exclusion proved very difficult to achieve -- one sees
creatures and gestures in Pollock, windows and landscapes
in Rothko. It is the one-eyed camel problem come to life
to embarrass a very earnest enterprise.
Andy Warhol's way of dumping meaning was quite different.
Instead of excluding objects -- which wound up emphasizing
them, even making them a kind of injury -- he accepted them,
but only as visual entities -- pairs of ordinary shoes, or
banal photographs of famous actresses. It worked for
awhile.
br...@wralaw.com
"Tom C" <Tom.C...@CHEEZbtinternet.com> wrote:
> >The main reason for this is that in spite of all the gas expended
> >here, POMO has nothing to do with painting except for those who need a
> >crutch to excuse their incompetence.
> The day you are able to accept that writing and painting and art in general
> are not interpretative 'givens' - that their "understanding" isn't something
> "natural" or "pure", but that, JUST LIKE POSTMODERNISTS, you are occupying a
> theoretical position when you paint/look/write -
The position is simply a verbal domination of a visual medium. There
is no other means of communication, music, painting, etc, that always
meddles.
The perceptual position is in the painting,
> then perhaps you will be in
> a position to talk here. Theoretical work is both about explaining the "why"
> of art and about creating the space for new types of art -
Like a car crash some artwork creates verbiage because it is the most
natural reaction.
Never will this complete the painting. And as Mani was implying there
are plenty of werks that seem to rely on verbiage as hype rather than
any real philosophical merit.
Theoreticians love this kind of work because they get to fill in the
void... With themselves.
The duality of Minimalism... Zen/Dull
> art that is
> thoughtful and interrogatory. Similarly, art feeds thought and theoretical
> positions. Get used to it.
WE try and yet fail...
Bryn Ayers
br...@wralaw.com
"Kay Kane" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
> emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7cj3lc$ou9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >> > Post-Post Modern art... If we learn all of the jargon, right now, at
> the
> >> > beginning - we can win friends and impress people. Heck, we can throw
> in
> >> > some of our own favorite ideologies and influence the entire definition
> of
> >> > it...
> >> > Kay (as in chaos - who has broken with PoMo and is formulating
> sentences of
> >> > HER choice in the PoPoMo way of her own invention).
A grand scheme!
> >> This seems a good idea!
> >Yeah, but my understnding of the term 'post modern' is simply the
> historical
> >period where people, such as you and I, ceased believing in a unitary
> >premise, such as the Marxist "International" or Ronald Ray Gun's "Trickle
> >down economics".
Post Modern is not important, it is a word like many other philosophical
terms many generations removed from reality. The word fish is not a
fish. If we could not agree on what a fish is? what is Post Modernism?
> I thought it was the historical moment when we decided that our political
> leaders should "zip it up".
Ever read Mark Twain?
> It's kind of a 'patch it up' attitude, which I see myself
> >in favor of. If there's a problem at UC Berkeley with institutional
> racism,
> >fix it, by any means. This doesn't mean that the same problem doesn't exit
> >everywhere or anywhere. By extensin, this orientation can exist in art.
> In
> >that sense art can speak to a specific issue without making a general
> >statement about art, in the Big Picture kind of sense. Thus one of the
> >desriptions of Post Modernism is 'eclectisim'.
> I agree in principle, but in what way does this differ from the "Pluralist"
> 70s? Seems to me they were doing exactly this (though less installations).
>
> >Anyway, from that position discussions of post postmodernism are posited.
> So
> >are we talking about the return to the authority of the unitary premise, or
> >are we talking to a further disenfranchisment of art from the social
> sphere?
> Yes! (Uh, #2)
> Kay
> >Erik Mattila
> >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------