/lit/ - Literature

It's pomo!

>>6009852
The creed that nothing is true, and everything is permitted.

The result of a CIA experiment to harness irony as a memetic weapon. There memes got lose and ice-9ed all over the human population. Now it's literally impossible for people to believe in a single narrative.

People who claim to be against post-modernism are actually just being ironic. They are infected too, just like you and I.

graffiti in museums.

>>6009868
"When the Christian crusaders in the Orient came across that invincible order of Assassins – that order of free spirits par excellence whose lowest order received, through some channel or other, a hint about that symbol and spell reserved for the uppermost echelons alone, as their secret: "nothing is true, everything is permitted". Now that was freedom of the spirit, with that, belief in truth itself was renounced."
Nietzsche, the first postmodernist, would agree.

>>6009869
Insidious.

>>6009887
But Nietzsche wasn't the first postmodernist.

>>6009897
Who was, then? Protagoras?

>>6009868
So relativism?

>>6009912
Yes yes, somebody like him.

>>6009914
It's a large part of it, yeah.

>>6009914
>>6009934
Mannerism.

>>6009926
But you can't be post-modern in pre-modern times.

>>6009938
No.

>>6009940
Okay then the romantics.

>>6009940
>you can't be post-modern in pre-modern times.

Hahahahaha Ha. oh, child....

>>6009940
>he stills subscribes to linear narratives

get a load of this modernist making up the rules

>>6009950
Maybe, they laid the groundwork for Nietzsche after all.
>>6009951
>>6009954
Claiming the opposite is like claiming the early christians were islamophobic, yet anti-capitalist, or that plato was a reactionary, utter nonsense.

Perhaps I'm not putting it in quite the right words, but how does post-modernism not inevitably lead to absurdism? It seems that any postmodern stance, however loose the definition, would ultimately succumb to the absurd.

>>6009964
You're not good at this thinking thing. Post-modernism is a style, not a linear, natural progression. There are elements of the post-modern in Don Quixote, the first novel ever written.

You're trying to argue THERE CAN'T BE A STYLE BEFORE OTHER STYLES COME FIRST!!!! It's stupid.

>>6009977
Absurdity seems to require the wish to still believe in something despite the absence of anything to believe in. Post-modernism seems to have moved beyond that point some day in the last century.

>>6009985
You're not very good at grasping the meaning of words. Post. Modern. Do you understand either of those?

>>6009977
>>6009987
Was Stirner the real proto-postmodernist?

>“Even before Nietzsche, Stirner wanted to eradicate the very idea of God from man’s mind, after he had destroyed God Himself. But, unlike Nietzsche, his nihilism was gratified. Stirner laughs in his blind alley; Nietzsche beats his head against the wall.”

>>6009994
It's just a name, bro. Panama hats don't come from Panama and the 100 Years' War lasted 116 years.

Part of post-modernism is rejecting these labels, which restrict and hinder the way you think about things. Join us?

>>6009987
So postmodernism is "beyond belief"? Is that even possible? And, again I ask, does that not become absurd?

Post-modernism is a response to modernism, so it can only be defined in the evolution from modernist concepts. Usually the main focus is the end of the meta narratives (in spanish we said Great Tales, I really prefer that term but I don't know the source of each one), which means abandoning the idea of progress as a unilateral way (towards being more Europe-y, which was implied in modernism). It's easy to find conections with pre modern authors since they are presenting narratives that got forgotten by the europes.

Still, the main focus in post-modernism, as i understand it, is the concept of inter subjectivity and how human interaction, creation and evolution isn't a clear, defined, objective thing. With that basis many authors have proposed new interpretations of a lot of things, from master-slave relationships (for example, Foucault expands the idea to a constant interaction between temporal masters and temporal slaves, which eventually got turned in the u.s. into some sort of societal feminism which shouldn't be related to french post-modernism) or how we understand the world (for example with Pierce's construction of how symbols work that is taken as clue for modern empirical brain scan studies).

Post-modernism includes authors who contradict each other, because it's an academic school and as such it's built on the idea that any idea can be expanded and corrected. Not every author matters to everyone, and many people are only tagentially related to post-modernism (like Heidegger's students, who are contemporary and take stuff from it but don't take it as banner)

Did that help, OP? I'm getting tired of such a simple thing being tied to this much butthurt.

>>6009994
Jesus christ dude, he's rgiht you are dumb.
Re-read that post PLEASE.
THINK ABOUT IT

>>6010006
Ignore that guy, yeah absurdity is part of it. But its not like a takeover or anything...

>>6010002
Stirner is usually considered the proto-mind behind postmodernism, yes.

>>6010006
No, belief is part of being human. The idea is abandoning the belief that if you do a set of things right you eventually reach paradise on earth. Some people take it as cynical but it would be more cynical to doubt meta narratives and still try to enforce them.

>>6010002
No, Stirner is childish in his refutal while Nietzsche takes away god to show true spiritualism. In that sense Nietszche is more important to pomo than Striner.

>>6009985
You are confusing influences with influenced. While Don Qixote influenced pomo fiction (a vague and mostly u.s. concept) it couldn't be retroactively influenced by critical theory form 200 years later.

>>6010024
"Paradise on Earth"? Really? I think it's a little condescending to put modernism in so strong terms. I'd imagine that pomo takes a stronger stance than simply denying an objective ideal of progress.
>>6010007
Call me a fool, but what exactly is inter-subjectivity? The term seems paradoxical.

It's reactionary to popular things. Since postmodern became popular now exist postpostmodern and metamodern.

>>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.

>>6010100
You are, and thanks for taking time to respond.

I still think postmodernism is a little bit bs, but so it goes

>>6010022

>>6010003
Still, post modernism, as an abandonment of narratives, presupposes modernity. It's the thing you're trying to move beyond, after all.
>>6010015
Great arguments, anon, will def reconsider my position.

>>6010114
Again, there are many authors and you should only care about the original literary critic guys, maybe some Foucault, but ignore what people say about post-modernist narratives since it's a silly term to sell more. There is no particular post-modernist writing style besides acknowledging post-modernist ideas while writing. Being self referential or having the character fight his own doubts is older than pomo and at best should be considered tangentially related. Like Tarzan as a modernist tale, it sort of is but it doesn't even matter that much.

>>6009869
What's the next step of the CIA's master plan?

>>6009869
>People who claim to be against post-modernism are actually just being ironic.

>>6010024
>Stirner is childish in his refutal
WOW GREAT ARGUMENT

Its just meta shit. Go to some post-modern art galleries and you'll know.

>>6010255
Well, they managed to destroy the narrative of Marxist revolution didn't they?

>>6010255
Crashing this plane.

>>6011464

how exactly

>>6011518
The soviet union collapsed didn't it? The CIA didn't really have a plan past that.

POMO is when you LMAO at those who chase after Truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uboyl2mjs9Y

>>6009964
>Claiming the opposite is like claiming the early christians were islamophobic, yet anti-capitalist, or that plato was a reactionary, utter nonsense.
it's nothing like that

They take the idea of everything being subjective to its conclusion.