/lit/ - Literature

>>6078001
I sort of liked your items except:
> Many artefacts from the past which were made only to convince others about some ideas or politics, or were just commercial in nature are considered art now.
I can only think of french revolution propaganda, but even then there's a pretty clear message that trumps the work as soon as you go a bit in depth. What did you have in mind for this idea?

Also
>For someone outside of capitalism and western culture ads would be art as anything else that would depict something. Without the context it's hard to distinguish a normal "art" image from an ad.
That's pretty post-modern of you, in a nice way.

>>6056312
The general idea was about his boyfriend so I guess he isn't a virgin, but many gay guys interact with just as few women as virginal 4channers since they don't even have to pretend to care. That way they end up believing women are somehow different, when 4chan is at the very least 40% women. It would reach 60% or more if you have a permissive definition of woman.

>>6010040
(both of those posters are me, sorry I forgot my cute trap pic)
"Paradise on earth" is an exaggerated version of what Marx said would come after communism, or after state regulated capitalism teaches us to share, or after we die if we trust Jesus. The idea that the now doesn't matter as long as we get a really cool future, which is silly because you'll never find out if it worked and implies a moment where we can no longer change. I guess rejecting meta narratives is a step beyond Hegel's end of history; the idea that there is no end to history.
And through that a lot of alternative narratives start popping up, ideas that were always there but since they didn't enter the european vision they wouldn't be studied. From indigenous people to, well, lgbt if you want (most real pomo theorists didn't care too much about that, the constant focus on lgbt topics is american and pretty recent).
The idea is not denying prgress but questiuoning what is progress, how do we meassure it, implement it and what does it mean to have a 200 years ahead goal if there even could be a goal.
Again, as an idea floating on its own it's not that interesting; you have to consider it against the background of what modernism was in the countries that really lived it.

Inter Subjectivity sounds coutner intuitive but it's pretty simple to notice in life. The idea of how we interpret reality is old as fuck, and modernism somehow tried to prove that there were objective elements to human interaction, things like the universality of taste that Hume and Kant try to explain. Post-modernism proposes that each culture might have different interpretations of things, and even each individual inside each culture will have a particular background that makes them cry when they see a Rothko painting or thing that he's a hack. Each person is seeing something based on their previous experience and filtered through their understanding. If humans can even then understand each other it's because each subjective interpretation has some common ground with many others (while not every single one). So you try to understand what factors are common to each interpretation and factor them in, you'll never understand everything but you can understand why others think differently.

I hope I'm making sense.

>>5958689
>>5958716
Wait, you're mixing him up a little. I didn't comment before because I've mostly read him when it comes to his dislike for art reproduction but I think maybe we can work this shit out.

Adorno was okay with some jazz, mainly bebop and the european take on the genre. He opposed what could be qualified as popular music but no because people shouldn't get art but because the easy reproduction made the unique work less unique.
He was all for people going to see jazz musicians, he didn't like jazz records and radio reproductions. Just like he was all for art but not for photographs of art.

He was still a marxists and he believed that the revolution came from the masses, but he though the masses should ascend to the level of snobs through art, not take the art down to the masses. Art was a means to motivate people to become better and revolt.

On the other hand Benjamin had the idea that certain lesser, for them, process we see as art now had a chance too. Photographs could make you understand the world and cinema could make you feel in the role of the hero which is perfect for propaganda.

You could read Art in the Times of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin, he was the main opponent to Adorno inside the Frankfurt school and his ideas, even if really dated, are interesting to know.

Hope that could help a bit.

>>5953187
Where it counts In my heart, you silly anon, we're never gonna meet

>>5953188
I can't share the nationalistic angle but it's always nice when a really complex composition is analyzed section by section. Painting gets all the best critics while cinema gets the teens with blogs, a shame.

>>5953197
>that take immense skill to produce
Realism is easier than complete freedom. You can even fo hyperrealism with a ball pen
https://encrypted.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=Juan%20Francisco%20Casas&tbs=imgo:1#tbs=imgo:1&tbm=isch&q=Juan+Francisco+Casas+ball+pen

>>5953208
Why would you want Hemmmingway to not be himself? We would had ended with a shittier writter.

>>5953218
The spiritual conection with Rothko paintings is a really interesting phenomena. It came in a time when the metaphysical explanation of art was loosing track and it was strangely the country the lobbied the most against it where it got revived.
Bacon is a genius and a bro.

>>5946571
it's only problematic because there is a social tendency to reject it, hormonal treatment is old as fuck and shouldn't be an issue to anyone ecept the one taking it (and the one adquiring/selling it, but more of an economic issue). It's not that different from how homosexuality was seen, most "different brains" explanations are weak and just as injustified as previous attempts to justify it as a desease but with words that sound more real right now.

It could be perfectly dealt with if societies were taught to not care just like at a certain point it was rude to tell people not to smoke in your face.

I understand if you disagree with me, but please try not to take a stand as a representative of all trans people. Even if you somehow discover the perfect argumentation it's insulting to assume that everyone feels the same way.
Cheers.

>>5902291
The pic you posted is saturn devoring his sons by Goya. If you check his dark paintings you'll get a pretty similar vibe.

>>5884664
this, always this.

Also, mediums aren't inherently better, worse or anything. People tend to get confused with cinema and tv and vidja, but they are wrong since they are all the same medium: screens. The last couple of decades the concept of "screenology" for the history of screens has been growing stronger since it simplifies a lot of theories.
http://wro01.wrocenter.pl/erkki/html/erkki_en.html


Also, McLuhan was standing too much in the 60's. The medium doesn't need to be the message. It can, some times is and it may say a lot; but 30 or 40 or 100 years after there can still be interesting creations through it.