Postmodernity

How so? I think that thread embodies everything that was great about that forum at its peek.

never liked ILM much, only heard of it about 8 months ago, and it's funny, but if anything EMBODIES hypertext theory, the situationalist turn of the electronic flaneur and all that, it's ILX. to watch people fight over whether post-modern theorists are "real" or "correct" or any of that on what is quite obviously THE premier post-modern medium (if there ever could be one) is simply hilarious.

Yeah, that’s pretty much what Momus writes:

Surely the point is that, in a period that, like it or not, has been labelled 'post-modern', every gesture an artist makes is, will-he nil-he, post-modern, even if it's the same gesture as artists made in previous periods. And I'd say that some of the things Nabisco / Barth list as overlapping with Modernism also overlap with Romanticism (radical subjectivity, psychologism, rejection of bourgeois modes, etc).

So if Ed were to incorporate in an artwork his frustration with postmodernism, the irony would be that it would still be a postmodern artwork. It would be 'self-reflexive'. All its twists and turns, its attempts to escape, would just tie his artwork in ever tighter pomo knots.

Click to expand...

good old momus. there to point out the CONDITIONAL nature of "post-modernism." you can't escape something that's a CULTURAL CONDITION, not a set of values, not a set of prescriptive values, not a general aesthetic, ...

Being postmodern means you are like so over being modern. Which is supremely dumb really. Until humanity overcomes linear time then you'd better get used to the present moment being the definition of modern. It's a bit like 'mods' that are stuck in the 60s isn't it?

noel emits said:

Until humanity overcomes linear time then you'd better get used to the present moment being the definition of modern.

Click to expand...

Oh come on - surely no-one still holds to outmoded paradigms like linear time?
Non-linear is the new linear, don't you know.

Mr. Tea said:

I'll freely admit that I'm prejudiced against the guy from the outset because his greatest champion on this forum is probably the most unlikeable wanker I've ever (not) met.

Click to expand...

Mr Tea's deranged quest to continue slandering me will only serve to get him banned, someone who's biggest buddy on this forum is a jerk whose posts are nothing more than incitements to violence and racial hatred (ie. facist) ...

Mr Tea is a manifestation of postmodernism at its purest: depthless, wallowing in narcissistic contradiction, a million posts with zero content, zero engagement with ideas (instead simply entailing the banal repetition of that adolescent-existentialist mantra "that's just your opinion") , obsessive solipsistic egoism; in short, Tea is a seamless buffoon of contemporary pomo ideology, all the time with a 'lost object' libidinal craving for the extra-ideological fascism of the Vimothys of this world.

*sigh*

See what I mean?

Mr Tea is a manifestation of postmodernism at its purest: depthless, wallowing in narcissistic contradiction, a million posts with zero content, zero engagement with ideas (instead simply entailing the banal repetition of that adolescent-existentialist mantra "that's just your opinion") , obsessive solipsistic egoism; in short, Tea is a seamless buffoon of contemporary pomo ideology, all the time with a 'lost object' libidinal craving for the extra-ideological fascism of the Vimothys of this world.

Click to expand...

very good

Gavin said:

This bizarre sense of moral outrage you feel for a film you haven't seen is telling, Mr. Tea. For what it's worth, I don't recall Stalin or Mussolini or Nazis coming up in the film -- these are out-of-context accusations cobbled together and wildly thrown about by the obviously flailing Hari.

Click to expand...

[Gavin, morality is an alien concept to Tea and his ilk]

As another commentator ironically observed, it is Hari's 'review' that is postmodernist.

[The documentary was actually released two years ago (indeed, it was discussed on this forum in the past, but then, isn't clinical amnesia fundamental to the postmodern condition?) and Hari's article hilariously features a still from the wrong doc (from The Pervert's Guide, released in 2006)].

Zizek, in another very different context, said much the same about the Pope as he did about Mussolini: "In contrast to it [Western feel-good pseudo-Buddhism] , the Pope reminds us that there is a price to pay for a proper ethical attitude. It is his very stubborn clinging to old values, his ignoring the realistic demands of our time even when the argument against it seems obvious, as is the case of the raped nun, that makes him — conditionally I use this term — great ... So I hope you got my point here. I disagree radically with the Pope."

But, alas, postmodernists never get the point.


And not surprisingly either (tying in with that other thread): Mussolini was essentially a conservative, ultra-montane Catholic, and fascism has its origins in the Catholic Church (we need not dwell here on its - Roman Empire - origins), which first proposed fascism's socio-economic structural forms in Corporatism, later implemented in Italy - and other countries - by Mussolini.

When the figure of the evil Other (the "Jew", the "Muslim") is added, as the spectral 'obstacle' to (impossible) total phallic jouissance, the result is such as Nazi fascism and today's corporate-global postmodern fascism (the corporate-military-industrial-governmental-entertainment complex and the "Muslim" Other) ... and this is partly why Zizek, among others, calls today's globalising 'liberal democracy' a totalitarian ideology (as with Nazism).


[Needless to say, Zizek also wants Blair's and Bush's asses dragged before the Hague court].

Mr. Tea said:

Well maybe every person who's ever written or said anything about Zizek has got completely the wrong end of the stick, and misrepresented everything he actually thinks. Maybe. But if that's the case, doesn't it say something about him anyway? People - many of whom rate him highly - have repeatedly quoted him on here or made references to his ideas (such as they are), so I don't think I'm unqualified to have an opinion on him.

I'll freely admit that I'm prejudiced against the guy from the outset because his greatest champion on this forum is probably the most unlikeable wanker I've ever (not) met.

Click to expand...

sighs. we've been here before. i think you need a week to cool off.

when you come back please rearrange your avatar.
almost more than anything you've said i think that's really objectionable.
it's like saying your whole modus operandi here is to rile another member.

hundredmillionlifetimes said:

Mr Tea's deranged quest to continue slandering me will only serve to get him banned, someone who's biggest buddy on this forum is a jerk whose posts are nothing more than incitements to violence and racial hatred (ie. facist) ...

Mr Tea is a manifestation of postmodernism at its purest: depthless, wallowing in narcissistic contradiction, a million posts with zero content, zero engagement with ideas (instead simply entailing the banal repetition of that adolescent-existentialist mantra "that's just your opinion") , obsessive solipsistic egoism; in short, Tea is a seamless buffoon of contemporary pomo ideology, all the time with a 'lost object' libidinal craving for the extra-ideological fascism of the Vimothys of this world.

Click to expand...

FWIW: I disagree with Mr Tea's politics in the same way I disagree with everybody else's politics here (ok, so actually, I think - EDIT: irrelevant - are reasonably sensible), basically they're no where near mine and beyond the fact that we have discussions (on a discussion board!) there is no connection.

Also, it might be nice if people had the decency to stop calling me a racist and just accept that we have different views for our own particular reasons, but I won't hold my breath.

I feel like I'm missing some sort of subtext, maybe because I've not been posting here long. Is there a reason for all this? I thought that the purpose of this board was disagreement, i.e. dissensus.

What's sad is Mr Tea's unwillingness to even try and understand these ideas.
He's not such a bad egg really.

I object to the banning of Mr Tea for the same reason that I’m glad that hunderedmillionlifetimes was not banned. This forum needs more vociferous debaters, not less. All too many threads are characterised by either timorousness, or the kind of backslapping that leads the discussion nowhere (which hunderedmillionlifetimes rightly pointed out — ironically).

Guybrush said:

I object to the banning of Mr Tea for the same reason that I’m glad that hunderedmillionlifetimes was not banned. This forum needs more vociferous debaters, not less. All too many threads are characterised by either timorousness, or the kind of backslapping that leads the discussion nowhere (which hunderedmillionlifetimes rightly pointed out — ironically).

Click to expand...

Me too.

mr. tea is one of those people who i'd love to drop like 10 hits of acid into his coffee and watch what happened

hundredmillion, too. at the same time.

i think tea, hundredmillionlifetimes and toccowich are computer generated.

Actually, we all are: http://www.simulation-argument.com/

yeah, hundredmillion is by the makers of the pomo generator--he's the post-structuralism generator

I thought he was post post-modernism