Jim Ede on HGB (via Peter Fuller)..."a continuing way of life..in which stray objects, stones, glass, pictures, sculpture in light and in space, have been used to make manifest the underlying stability which more and more we need to recognize if we are not to be swamped by all that is rapidly opening up before us."
We (is there a "we"?)tend to associate Post-modernism with the playful, the ironic, the schizoid. Lighten up, dude. Entertainment and experiment. Art for art's sake, the text on its own..a way of escaping from the limits of the world.
The post-modern "stance to towards cultural tradition is one of irreverent pastiche, and its contrived depthlessness all metaphysical solemnities, sometimes by a brutal aesthetics of squalor and shock".
--Eagleton.
To quote out of context. Go with the flow. There are only fragments so why not accept that? Everything dissolves and flows, there "is" only sovereign becoming.In the stream of things whether you say "up" or "down" doesn't make a difference, it's only a temporary congealing of value, the way a commodity is of value when it exchanges hands; by the time tomorrow comes all will be forgotten anyway. A waste economy.
Tapping into this 'sensibility' (though we need to understand the structural conditions which produce it) is the manufacture of nostalgia: the costume dramas, the heritage industry, the recycling of the past because there is nothing new to say ..we're out of time.Play it again, Sam. At another, insidious level, you might think fundamentalism is a symptom of, or reaction to, the fragmentariness.
It's not: 'the centre does not hold'. Rather, it's: there is no more centre or even better: there never was! The self and the world disappear..all that remains is a bright spark trapped in a room, left to reconstitute both by its own means (thought).
"We intuit unity". This is now seen as being delusional, leading onto totalitarianism.
What is radical today? What cannot be mocked, analysed or taken apart? Academia and the media will debunk it all.
Nothing is sacred. Draw a mustache on it. Take the piss.
Just started Seiobo, but that's the main 'theme'. Reads a bit like Calvino.
We (is there a "we"?)tend to associate Post-modernism with the playful, the ironic, the schizoid. Lighten up, dude. Entertainment and experiment. Art for art's sake, the text on its own..a way of escaping from the limits of the world.
The post-modern "stance to towards cultural tradition is one of irreverent pastiche, and its contrived depthlessness all metaphysical solemnities, sometimes by a brutal aesthetics of squalor and shock".
--Eagleton.
To quote out of context. Go with the flow. There are only fragments so why not accept that? Everything dissolves and flows, there "is" only sovereign becoming.In the stream of things whether you say "up" or "down" doesn't make a difference, it's only a temporary congealing of value, the way a commodity is of value when it exchanges hands; by the time tomorrow comes all will be forgotten anyway. A waste economy.
Tapping into this 'sensibility' (though we need to understand the structural conditions which produce it) is the manufacture of nostalgia: the costume dramas, the heritage industry, the recycling of the past because there is nothing new to say ..we're out of time.Play it again, Sam. At another, insidious level, you might think fundamentalism is a symptom of, or reaction to, the fragmentariness.
It's not: 'the centre does not hold'. Rather, it's: there is no more centre or even better: there never was! The self and the world disappear..all that remains is a bright spark trapped in a room, left to reconstitute both by its own means (thought).
"We intuit unity". This is now seen as being delusional, leading onto totalitarianism.
What is radical today? What cannot be mocked, analysed or taken apart? Academia and the media will debunk it all.
Nothing is sacred. Draw a mustache on it. Take the piss.
Just started Seiobo, but that's the main 'theme'. Reads a bit like Calvino.
No comments:
Post a Comment