Can someone explain modernism, postmodernism & metamodernism

[Anonymous No.11208603]

I'm having a real hard time understand what these three terms mean and also how it reflates, to being ironic, being post ironic, memes, art, culture, politics and everything basically.

>I know this post isn't related to "specific philosophical works" but I feel like /lit/ is the only place i'm going to get a cohesive answers.

[Anonymous No.11208624]

It's because understanding is a modernist enterprise

[Anonymous No.11208683]

>>11208603

[Anonymous No.11208710]

[pseudfaggot No.11208719]

>modernism
building the tower of babel
>postmodernism
removing the foundation of the tower
>metamodernism
trying to build upon the foundationless tower (works as well as you'd expect)

[Anonymous No.11208936]

Modernism is liberalism and its attempt to reconcile a soulless contract society with a human need to belong. It is the avant-garde, anticipating a final emancipation and a decompartmentalisation of art and life. Postmodernism is the emptying of metaphysics from modernism, that there is no real guarantee of something resulting from some action no matter how well-reasoned it is philosophically, the application of modernism's own systems to itself. Irony is a way to avoid an authoritative voice in a Western system where the other person may know more than you. Post-ironic is embracing separate and seemingly complete systems as being legitimate. Memes are observational comedy for specialised audiences. (High) Art is stuck in metaphysics and ceased to make real advances since the 60s (and appropriation art) because no one reads Derrida. Pleb art like movies and tv: Culture and the idea of what makes legitimate culture is being tested, see the explanation on irony. Politics is slight variations on the same liberal model, but the ascendancy of third way leftism has put the 'postmodernists' in charge of the systems they were criticising 50 years ago and now the 'alt-right' are offering the same postmodern critique.

[Anonymous No.11208959]

>>11208936
out of the loop, which was more deconstructive at postmodernism? Derrida, or Guattari?

[Anonymous No.11209429]

Modernism is an artistic movement that started in the middle of the nineteenth century and lasted until cca WW2 or some time after (it's pretty blurry and scholars don't agree regarding the dates; it should be mentioned that modernism is considered to have started in poetry when Baudelaire published his Flowers of Evil and Whitman his Leaves of Grass, while realism still reigned in prosaic works for several following decades). It in general doesn't care too much about the tradition and usually tries to build a new tradition, supposedly "truer" and more relevant than the archaic and calcified forms and styles. In its more radical iterations, it is even hostile to tradition (dada and futurism). The "solutions" to the problem of art were numerous and manifested in a great number of different movements and new techniques (impresioniran, futurism, dada, expressionism, atonality, neoclassicism, adapting non-western/academic elements in music, Bauhaus, stream of consciousness writing, free verse etc). It is accompanied by, among others, formalist and structuralist literary theory, which wanted precise analysis of art rather than historicist and positivist theory of the nineteenth century. Structuralism wanted inambiguous structural analysis of texts, and Propp's Morphology of the Fable is a lovely example of such approach.

Postmodernism is a response and dialogue with modernism. Poststructuralism questioned the possibility of complete structural analysis, there always seems to be at least one small detail that can't be caught and analyzed by a supposedly universal theory. Therefore, we need interdisciplinarity. So you end up with various theories, marxism, feminism, psychoanalysis etc that try to analyze a work of art from their specific viewpoint. The art is awfully difficult to describe because nobody is making punchy manifestos and new movements (there's no exact narrative that's guiding the history and which we can live by, see Lyotard on postmodernism). There's no dictate, you can write slam poetry or a pseudoclassical tragedy. The definitions of pomo art (being highly intertextual, erudite, auto-ironic etc, to undermine our traditional approach to reading and understanding) that I've seen oftentimes simply don't apply to a ton of works.

Metamodernism is one of the terms made up by people who believe that pomo is over and we're in some new era. I think that's a load of horse dung. We have great difficulties describing pomo in the first place, so how can we know that we're elsewhere now? It's wankery about categories instead of content. A bit like /pol/'s discussions of pomo, where you casually lump together a bunch of very different philosophers into a vague mass to shit on them. Actually reading philosophy and experiencing the art is the best way to get an objective image of what pomo is.
Post-irony sounds like something made up by lit as a joke, while memes are just cancer.

[Anonymous No.11209435]

>>11209429
P.S. I'm a student of literature and this is what I've pieced together. Take it with a grain of salt, read it as just an another grand narrative ;^)

[Anonymous No.11209443]

>>11208719
This is a good explanation and why metamodernism is absolute bogus

[Anonymous No.11209451]

Modernism- solid
Post modernism- liquid
Meta modernism- gas

[Anonymous No.11209465]

Modernism was like there is only one objective truth and all must follow it.

Post modernism is like , nah dude everythings subjective and there is no absolute truth. This is how we eventually get to "that sandwich is racist" and other stupidities

Metamodernism is one of the many made up modernism trying to replace pomo

My personal take is post modernism died the second we got hooked into the internet and those planes hit those towers

[Anonymous No.11209528]

>>11209465
why do you think pomo died when the planes hit the towers, anon?

[Anonymous No.11209688]

>>11209528
Unironically everything died when those planes hit. Look at David Blaine’s development. Pre/post 9-11 is very marked.

[Anonymous No.11209707]

>>11209688
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNXRrw-Ilt4

[Anonymous No.11209789]

>>11209528
>>11209465

Quite Ironical considering that WTC was made by Yamasaki Minoru, who is also famous for building Pruitt-Igoe, and Any noun I just mentioned are incredibly Modernistic at architecture

[Anonymous No.11209803]

Holy shit, all of you are retarded

[Anonymous No.11209807]

>>11209803
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZuktUfF0nE

[Anonymous No.11209834]

Anyone that actually buys into the idea we have surpassed post-modernism and entered a new cultural age of whatever bullshit trendy term you want to brandish (metamodernism, post-post-modernism) is brainlet as fuck tbqh senpai

[Anonymous No.11210594]

All the people saying it's absurd that we are in an age that has surpassed postmodernism don't understand that postmodernism isn't an age, but a tendency (and so only an age insofar as it is the prevailing tendency). I don't really feel like writing what modernism and postmodernism are for the fifteenth time. For some definitions of postmodernism, look at Lyotard and Frederic Jameson, and remember that postmodernism is first articulated as an architectural movement (which should give you some idea of how heterogeneous various postmodernities are). Metamodernism, unlike what a lot of people are saying here, is a term coined by an art critics, which is a summation of several other currents within art criticism (altermodernism, performatism). It involves a tendency to vacillate between cynicism and trying to build new forms of meaning (a twee but good example is Wes Anderson, whose vacillation between the disappointments of his characters and the grand structure of his formalism is illustrative). This is a good summative article, which also touches on postmodernism, and to an extent the modernism that preceded it: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3402/jac.v2i0.5677

[Anonymous No.11211718]

>>11208683
since Pomo is moving towards an universal truth by realizing there isnt one
>this but unironically

[Anonymous No.11211775]

Metamodernism is best experienced in Father John Misty's song - The Night Josh Tillman Came To Our Apt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY37fixfN_A

>I love her because shes shit and I hate her and im grateful for that

its amazing when done right

[Anonymous No.11211791]

>>11209465
Small brain, we haven't even entered a post modern society yet

[Anonymous No.11211813]

>>11209443
>>11209429
>>11209465
>>11209834

Would you believe there are people who have this same sentiment about pomo

[Anonymous No.11211830]

>>11211791
maybe in your eastern european shithole that just got out of the communist time freezer who cant into sarcasm

[Anonymous No.11211839]

>>11208603
>People don't realise metamodernism is just the virtual proliferation of the New Sincerity movement
Modernism and post-modernism are fairly easy to differentiate, but metamodernism or "post-irony" (whatever dumb name you want to call it) is really just people overcoming cold, ironic distance for a genuine investment in something like a guiding passion. doesn't matter what you choose, the important thing is that a decision is made.

[Anonymous No.11211846]

>>11208603
Modernist artwork is more based on the idea that if we experiment with new forms, overturn tradition, and are more avant-garde, we can get to the truth and transcendence which is limited by stifling tradition and forms. Postmodern art and culture leans more towards the idea that truth/transcendence is just a construct, everything is interpretation, and being avant-garde is more a representation of such semantic chaos/breakdown of values in the modern world than a way to transcend it. Metamodernism basically seems to be Modernism 2.0: This Time Accepting The Influence of Postmodernism but somehow trying to transcend it.

[Anonymous No.11211851]

>>11211775
wow, you've really reminded me how awesome this guy is

[Anonymous No.11212000]

>>11208719
This is the closest TL;DR you'll find.

Premodernism would be the general acceptance of the regency of God. Think of theology and metaphysics, of their reliance on God for linking in truth the subject to the object. Scholasticism might be an obvious exemple. A less obvious one would be DesCartes who, though a pre-modernist, was different in the tone he set through a radical doubt, effacing God from the get go to better return to it.

Modernism places the processes and the functions involved in objectification within the subject as a package of a priori ideas. You can think of it as Kant's copernican revolution. The point of reference for the interpretation of the rest of the system is situated at the center, at the individual. The object is always an approximation.

Postmodernism is that, ultimately, all truth is interpretation. I sort of think of modernism as the gradual eclipsation of premodernism and the sink into postmodernism. Postmodernism is basically learning to live in a world after the modern shock. Hence, all truth is an interpretation, or all truth is a game of power, or all truth is patriarchal buffonery, are all postmodern ideas. Think of it as the fragmentation of truth and of the Subject-Object binary.

Metamodernism is memes. Software over Hardware; Decentralization over Centralization;
Personification over identification.

Interestingly, the bottom images do a pretty good way of describing the transition. White circle and square is the omnipresence of God and of naive faith in the world. Black circle is the rise of an alegedly informed humanism within a world necessarily unknown, or within the domain of God and the noumenal for some. Black Square is the purity of the self vis-a-vis the subjectivity of the world. Half black/white is the recognition that the exoteric is ineffable wheras the esoteric is variable, dependable, ironic.

[Anonymous No.11212155]

bump

[Anonymous No.11212408]

Is New Sincerity post or meta?

[Anonymous No.11214542]

bump

[Anonymous No.11214579]

>>11212000
Aren't you conflating modernism and modernity?