luka

Well-known member
post modermism i assume is real. i dont think anyone made it up it think its a description of a genine malaise. thats my aussumption
 

version

Well-known member
I think we need a new language for this stuff. It doesn't make sense that nothing was modern until modernism, the term 'modern' itself is hundreds of years old.
 

woops

is not like other people
I still see a parallel between structuralism and post-structuralism, but that is one where the latter seemingly instantly followed the former, chronologically.
structuralism is an incredibly boring non-advance in linguistics. all the post- stuff seems to offer up a new vista which is just a development from that same historical moment. (post) modernism and (post) structuralism are not the same thing, thank god
 

version

Well-known member
post modermism i assume is real. i dont think anyone made it up it think its a description of a genine malaise. thats my aussumption
This is the argument when people accuse others of being 'postmodernists', that you can't be a postmodernist because it's a condition and they're just describing it. It's not a stylistic choice, it's the world they live in.
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
structuralism is an incredibly boring non-advance in linguistics. all the post- stuff seems to offer up a new vista which is just a development from that same historical moment. (post) modernism and (post) structuralism are not the same thing, thank god
I mean, in principle, I can see how it was a substantial conceptual advancement in linguistics. My only insight is from the citations Derrida has of Levi-Strauss, where the latter talks about how a proper anthropology of mythos ought to operate within a dynamic conceptual paradigm where terms and icons etc are constantly influencing each other.

And as I understand it, the "post-" means that even this attempt to use a dynamic conceptual framework to pin down meaning is futile because meaning is inherently unpindownable.
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
I can say that thinking about Deleuze's work was as colorful and inspiring as any literature I've read, but that could be because I'm more cerebrally inclined than personally, emotionally inclined.

edit: although really it wasn't so contained within Deleuze, but he et al seemed to ingite much of it for me.
 

version

Well-known member
It's embarrassing seeing people try to escape postmodernism by coining terms like 'metamodernism' and 'post-postmodernism'. It just bolsters the sense there's no escape.

The stuff that doesn't feature the term 'modernism' still can't help but include 'new' or 'post', e.g. 'new sincerity', 'post-irony'.
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
Or perhaps just shelve that whole paradigm. Thats my current argument for how to "escape" it. Just put it down when its not useful, and pick it up when it is.
 

woops

is not like other people
look you have to draw a line between post-structuralism and post-modernism. they're not the same thing. saussure tried to draw up equations to prove that if you say x, it means y, which was not at all the modernist project. of course, no sooner had he done this than there was a flood of pseuds saying well what about this, that etc. modernist literature was well ahead of these philosophical games and culminated in joyce's experiments. nothing with a "post-" attached has gone further than that. derrida and what have you is a post script.
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
look you have to draw a line between post-structuralism and post-modernism.
what exactly is the difference? Ive just assumed post structuralism refers specific to a type of academic writing while post modernism is just the more broad term that, amongst other things , can be short hand for the era that contains post structuralist writers.
 
Top