[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 125 KB, 1070x763, American-White-Sands-Desert-Is-A-Sublime-Expanse-That-Should-Not-Exist-1-14.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16992928 No.16992928 [Reply] [Original]

What is postmodernism?

>> No.16992983

Tbh it’s mostly absurdist I find. Absurdism that is. That how most of it manifests I believe anyway. Wallace or Pynchon, right. I also think McCarthy could be considered postmodern, so really anything avant- garde enough to make you lift an eyebrow.

>> No.16993084

A rejection of modernism

>> No.16993087

>>16992928
Anything I disagree with

>> No.16993109

>>16992928
a reaction against modernity, basically in what 68's may led to a decade later

>> No.16993121

>>16993109
I mean modernism more than modernity

>> No.16993126

>>16992928
A deconstruction of the based/cringe dichotomy ;^)

>> No.16993246

>>16992928
lame lazy paintings.

>> No.16993453

cool pic

>> No.16993474

>>16993109
>>16993121
It's fine because I dont know what either of those two mean

>> No.16993520

>>16992928
i am

>> No.16993553

Writing about individualistic feelings rather than ideas and experiences that other people can relate to. A modernist author paints a picture of the world, a post-modernist author draws a portrait of himself.

>> No.16993593

It's return to monke before we had image macros to communicate that.

>> No.16993605

>>16993553
>A modernist author paints a picture of the world, a post-modernist author draws a portrait of himself.
>Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man

>> No.16993718

>>16993605
Funny thing about Joyce works is that his writing did inspire post-modern literature. Though, Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, while personal, it does have a universal feel to it, to which a lot can relate to.

>> No.16993941

>>16993718
Yeah all modernists inspire postmodernism. You said some retarded shit, trying to sound smart, and it would be better to acknowledge the mistake and move on rather than trying to keep that "smart" facade up. The second option is what actually smart people do.

>> No.16993947

>>16993941
*Is not what actually smart people do
Sorry, bro, almost led you down the path to being a puffball.

>> No.16994008

>>16993941
Fuck are you talking about, retard? Are you saying that writing techniques, which Joyce invented weren't used to death by post-modernists? Most normies consider him post-modernist. Jesus, you're a fucking idiot. You're a classic example of the "good: modernism; bad: post-modernism" mentality that people already joked about in this thread. Replying to yourself to correct a typo already exposes you as feeling insecure about people thinking you a brainlet (you are). Kill yourself.

>> No.16994042

>>16993553
lol

>> No.16994950

>>16994008
>Are you saying that writing techniques, which Joyce invented weren't used to death by post-modernists?
No, I'm saying that Joyce invented them as a modernist technique, and modernists inspire postmodernism. The last three words in the previous sentence are the first sentence I wrote in the post you are replying to, so you hardly missed them. Why did you think I was disagreeing on the point of modernists inspiring postmodernism? Even without Joyce, modernist techniques like fictional footnotes, and fictional pseudo-philosophers, are also done to death by postmodernism, as they draw on all modernists and not just Joyce.
>Most normies consider him post-modernist. Jesus, you're a fucking idiot.
Normies are wrong, and you are wrong also for trying to cast Joyce's work as postmodernist. It is not. It's modernist, and you definitions of modernism and postmodernism did not work precisely because you are not using the terms correctly. When corrected, you doubled down on the wrong answer. You get to be doubly wrong and join the "normies" who know nothing about literature or Joyce. Reality is not suddenly going to reverse history because you throw a tantrum.
>You're a classic example of the "good: modernism; bad: post-modernism" mentality
I'm not. You're making assumptions. If you bothered to ask, you'd find out my views on both, and it doesn't favour Joyce at all.
>Replying to yourself to correct a typo already exposes you as feeling insecure about people thinking you a brainlet (you are). Kill yourself.
I corrected my typo so that you did not get the wrong message and so you would not think that doubling down on being wrong was a "smart" idea. Obviously you chose to be wrong several times now, so maybe you like being wrong and not correcting your mistakes and being frustrated at anyone who corrects an obvious error. That is not what smart people do, but it is your choice to make.

>> No.16995305

>>16992983
Wow. You’ve clearly thought this through. Fucking pseud

>> No.16995733

Embracing insanity and chaos.

>>16992983
This, in a way.

>>16995305
Give us your answer.

>> No.16995737
File: 58 KB, 1200x1048, 102938229018.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16995737

Neomarxism

>> No.16995741

>>16992928
Perspectivism but with no underlying truth

>> No.16995744

>>16995737
brainlet

>> No.16995754

>>16995744
Seethe harder post-faggot neo-retard. I'm not letting you take my good christian cummies.

>> No.16995764

>>16995754
>post-faggot neo-retard
hahaha

>> No.16995787

Most immediately a rejection of modernism and the notion of grand narratives - rejection of structure/design in favour of playful, toying with reality and promotion of relativism over objectivism. And so on, and so on.

>> No.16995823

>>16992928

A rejection of value packaging.
Weither it is in a meta narrative or a school of rules for art, postmodernism separates the individual items from the ensemble, and usually puts more emphasis on analyzing the relation between the meta-narratives and the values, rather than the values itself, or trying to show how different forms of narratives could support different forms of valuation processes (if you want to see pure insanity, read the philosophical novels wrote by postmodernist Phi of Law authors... basically they want to replace jurisprudence by pure fiction...).

>> No.16995831

>>16995823
>sage in wrong field
How's that for subversion!

>> No.16995934

>>16995831

Maybe I'm a wise Frog?
Ok, sorry, I know that's pushing things too far.

>> No.16995968

>>16992928
A bunch of try-hard nonsense.

>> No.16995984
File: 57 KB, 900x900, moe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16995984

>>16992928
>What is postmodernism?
Weird for the sake of weird.

>> No.16996039

>>16992928
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSkzHxIcfoEr69MWBdo0ppg

>> No.16996261

>>16992928
The rejection of grand narratives, conventional methods and structures.

>> No.16996271

Pynchon definitely uses grand narratives in GR and M&D (his only two i've read).

>> No.16996289

>>16996271
What do you think is meant by grand narratives?

>> No.16996299

>>16994008
>most normies consider him....
Pathetic and effete appeal to the crowd. Filtered. Retard

>> No.16996309

>>16992928
>postmodernism
It's right there in the title "after modern."
From this week can deduce that postmodernists consider themselves to be operating in an intellectual realm that is beyond modern thought.
However, this leads us to a conundrum: we are living in the modern era, and these things are off the modern era, though they claim otherwise.
Ergo, post-modernism is a bold lie, it is modern thought presenting itself as something grander than it actually is. This is the unfortunate result of philosophy departments incentivizing decietful, mediocre, and obtuse thought amongst those fighting for tenure

>> No.16996313
File: 113 KB, 500x630, bg_36201450747029.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16996313

>>16992928
Post modernisms definition is intimately linked to the fact that nobody seems to be able to define it, and that ever attempt invariably has someone saying "that's not post modernism." Even the people most associated with post modernism like Foucault and Derrida tried to distance themselves from the movement. From this we can see that post modernism and post modernist figures are essentially trying to defy categorization, or the grouping of reality into consistent patterns. Essentially a hyper-individuality of thought and identity, where nothing can be said to be the same as something else, nothing exists under the same banner, no concept contains both me and something else- essentially, a world where everything is its own concept. You can see it in post modern art- "this is not a pipe" and the urinal on the wall- essentially saying, these things are not what these things are. The pipe is a drawing, and so it isn't a pipe in the sense that it cannot be smoked. Therefore it requires its own category- we can no longer use categories as hueristics grouping similar things, no hueristic is narrow enough, everything must be only itself. With culture and human beings we see much the same- transsexuality is the ultimate expression of 'this is not a pipe;' "I am not a man," says the man, and we are expected to take that without criticism. Here we see another aspect of post modernism, that there is no reality more fundamental than subjective perspective. In the sense that, the urinal on the wall is not exactly a urinal because it is not meant to be pissed in, it is not connected to plumbing, etc- its context does make it "not a urinal"- there is truth here. The problem is that it still is a urinal; it still has the shape, the appearance, the potential to be used as a urinal- put simply, it has a reality underlying the perspective we have of it that, and that corresponds to actual urinals that are meant to be pissed in. Consequently, though it is not a urinal, it is enough of a urinal to be called a urinal due to the heuristic nature of language. We cannot give a name to all things. Post modernism rejects this, but obviously this will be the source of its demise, because despite the truth of perspective molding an object they have simulataneously thrown out the baby with the bath water and denied that there is any underlying reality at all which unifies things regardless of perspective. Again back to transsexuality: there is no underlying reality to the fact you have male genetics, a penis, a male hormone profile, a weaker corpus callosum etc- we must pay no deference to the underlying reality of your existence. All that matters is your self definition- you are a self-defining category of one.

Kind of went of the rails, but put simply post modernism is a rejecction of collective identity and categorization, and an exhaltation of perspective and subjectivity. This is a logical contradiction in the Hegelian/marxist sense, and will destroy it.

>> No.16996323

>>16996289
Just for one M&D is clearly set amid the enlightenment and the closing of the age of natural mysteries as exemplified in the talking dog and roboduck and giant veggies. That is a grand historical narrative

>> No.16996482

>premodernism
>"Everything is real, even ideas."

>modernism
>"Everything is real except ideas."

>postmodernism
>"Everything is fake and gay. If it isn't gay, we'll make it gay."

>> No.16996497
File: 91 KB, 897x637, 1607035247903.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16996497

>>16996313
I'm post-pomo

>> No.16996501

>>16996323
Pomo lit doesn’t necessarily deny or ignore grand narratives, but can set it alongside other narratives, invert it, so on.

>> No.16996509
File: 54 KB, 1280x720, 1594732762604.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16996509

>>16996482
>>premodernism
>>"Everything is real, even ideas."
>>modernism
>>"Everything is real except ideas."

How many layers of dumb are you on right now?

>> No.16996512

>modernism
Trench warfare is bad, we should not feed people into trenches to massacre each other over the space of 500m for five years like that is a good trade
>postmodernism
The atomic bomb remote warfare idea is probably not a good way to go even if the engineers say it avoids the trench warfare problems above. They're engineers, and ought not be trusted with real life things because engineers are prime autists.

>> No.16996617

Modernism: thing is bad.

Post-modernism: well, sometimes it's bad, sometimes its justified. What is bad? Who decides that? Why? What if x thing happens that justifies the "bad" thing. Damn shit is complicated. Yeah. Is there any truth? Kind of but it's ever changing and malleable.

Fuck.

>> No.16996627

>>16996497
It's going to be called post-primitive

>> No.16996670

>>16995823
>>16996313
These two have it right.

>> No.16996713

>>16992928
>What is postmodernism?
its when she won't suck yur pp

>> No.16996730

>>16996670
One of those thinks Foucault and Derrida are the most associated with postmodernism, which suggests his exposure to people talking about postmodernism comes from YouTube. Instathots with Vonnegut tattoos probably have a better grip on postmodernism, which is saying something since they rarely understand Vonnegut's postmodernism.
The other one seems to think that jurisprudence was unmarked by fiction, so I don't know if he doesn't know what jurisprudence is, or if he just doesn't know anything about its history.

>> No.16996755

>>16992928
Post-modernism is the idea that modernism over-rationalized so many different aspects of our way of life that we've reverted to primitive behavior patterns with little to no consequence.
>antivaxxers don't understand vaccines so they created a tribe and religiously avoid the unknown
>people have no handle on economics anymore so they let their federal banking high priests tell them what's happening
>some lady comes up to a road closure and starts yelling at the flagger like roped off her favorite watering hole, because traffic is a mystery, and this route to work belonged to her
This is how Foucault "started" postmodernism with his archaeologies of various subjects of study to determine whether our current solutions to social issues are more effective than older solutions

>> No.16996786

>>16996755
>over-rationalized so many different aspects of our way of life that we've reverted to primitive behavior patterns with little to no consequence.
Almost right. With grave consequence. Postmodernism starts much earlier than Foucault, with Heidegger talking to farmers about how shit used be.

>> No.16996796

>>16996786
Ah. I've never read Heidegger so all I have unfortunately is the normie take. I'll make a note about reading him.
But it sounds like he's on the right track. Farmers are some of the best historians

>> No.16996801

>>16996755
>Post-modernism is the idea that modernism over-rationalized
Can you explain this a bit more? What is over-ratioanlization; scientism?

>> No.16996808

>>16992983
'im going to le own le rightoid lit users epic style with my epic troll agenda bait post. i bet they'll reconsider what postmodernism xD hahaha' please kill yourself.

>> No.16996845

a rejection of art

>> No.16996847

>>16996801
Sure. Over-rationalization is the idea that as tasks got more complicated, we segmented them further and further in assembly-line fashion.
So to make a smartphone you have to design it, procure resources, manufacture parts, assemble it, distribute it, and sell it.
To do this we have:
>marketers
>advertisers
>managers
>designers
>electrical engineers
>industrial engineers
>logistics experts
>the list goes on
And the central idea behind that pattern of organization is that each person has a singular task, and the gigantic number of tasks coupled with each person's focus on their singular task does two things:
>allows for creations and social systems well beyond someone's understanding
>conditions each person to be ignorant of the other tasks

>> No.16996884

>>16992928
A vague term that directly relates to a few movements of history namely the rejection of categorization, naming, single perspective, narrative, difference etc. Just read a short overview of Relational Quantum Mechanics, that is basically postmodernism.

When you say anything it is like drawing a dot. When you draw a dot you have an inside and an outside, an implicit "other" and through this narrative, determination, difference, perspective. When you have two dots . . you have the concrete other as well. The postmodernism movement is a result of the movement of history to collapse all distinction because distinction creates things that postmodernism finds problematic. You could trace this also to Enlightenment's Reason unhinged from God as collapsing in on itself.

>> No.16996917

>>16996884
Postmodernism wants to remove the dots and claim that the space between the dots is all there is ie that the dots we see and how we see them are a byprodcut from the space inbetween, while the more "classical" way would claim that the dots are more fundamental and substantial and the space in between is simply the byproduct of *actual* difference between one and the other dot.

>> No.16997000

>>16996917
Reason and social justice and the visions of united humanity, basically most stuff deriving from the Enlightenment, exist in a tension with dots. Because while dots can be argued reasonably, they are inherently unjust and inherently exclusive. To retain reason and discard the exlusion then one must posit that the space between the dots is the fundamental substance and that the dots are mere transmutations and different only in a superifical appearance-based way. The alternative, that actual distinction exists in the dots themselves would immediately imply assertion, categorization, narrative, determination, difference, actual perspective (rather than perspective based in pure appearance). The movement of history we are currently in emphatically rejects these categories (and even connects them to fascism, racism, xenophobia, gender etc. all the funny identity politics stuff is basically just derived from this alone) but since it wants to retain a pretense of reason not mere humanistic utopia based on nothing concrete, it has to invent philosophy to underpin this movement, the primacy of space-in-between primarily and transmutation over anything asserted, categorized, actual, exclusive, a thing-in-itself even. The pinnacle of this thought which best shows how this philosophy functions is Relational Quantum Mechanics:
>Relational quantum mechanics (RQM) is an interpretation of quantum mechanics which treats the state of a quantum system as being observer-dependent, that is, the state is the relation between the observer and the system.

>> No.16997014

>>16996801
A great start for this concept is Max Weber. He uses bureaucracy to demonstrate his point

>> No.16997103

>>16996796
He's not so into history, but most of the people around Foucault were building careers off of his work. (Beauvoir and Sartre especially but their shit is retarded compared to Heidegger).
Heidegger is more concerned with relation to the immediate and things like flow and meaning which he thought were better done by primitive means which were understood by their user and had meaning to the user. He thought the kind of detachment of modernism was isolating, both from others and from everyday things and ourselves. Antivaxxers have a kind of understanding of technology you can only have if you're trying to force meaning into something you're detached from: they go on campaigns and focus on vaccines, when if they were not isolated and detached from their real life they might spend that time hugging someone they love or baking to feed their tribe of using technology which felt natural to them rather than being obsessed with something they refuse to understand and which appears to them as broken. People who aren't isolated by their rationales are not prone to seeing a lot of broken shit which doesn't fit in to that rationale. If they were in tune with their own flow of things, "vaccine" would just be some shit they gloss over and don't really see, in the same way most people will skip over certain aisles in supermarkets almost as if they didn't exist because they don't need baby products, or how some people never read the sports pages so they wouldn't notice if they were missing so easily as an avid sports fan would. (Supermarkets and newspapers aren't the best examples because they are modern, but it's the easiest way to explain how things that don't fit into your frame of reference get ignored, while things which do somewhat fit but you don't like are seen as broken. Heidegger would prefer your frame of reference be set much closer to you than supermarkets or newspapers can achieve.)

>> No.16997132
File: 57 KB, 729x531, CHART.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16997132

>>16997000

>> No.16997149

>>16997132
This is what would cause people to say that filling the dot is fascism.

>> No.16997250

>>16996730
Who do you associate with post modernism?

>> No.16997343

>>16997250
On a literature board, I'd think of postmodern fiction first (Nabokov, O'Brien, Eco, Vonnegut, et al.)
If OP specified philosophy, I'd definitely think of Lyotard and Heidegger first. Foucault and Derrida being mentioned as postmodernist will spark far more debate in people who read philosophy, and it's basically only them and people who pretend to read philosophy who would hazard a guess at what discipline they belong to. I don't think normies who have only vaguely heard of Foucault would link him with postmodernism consistently if given a multiple choice.
The only people who I can think of who draw a direct line between Foucault and postmodernism are people who watch a lot of youtube videos about trannies as a political affiliation, which would fall into the "pretending to read" category.
A lot of people would put Nietzsche in as a postmodernist ahead of Foucault in the "really read philosophy" group, although there's probably an equal number in that group who would accuse anyone who puts Nietzsche in as being a Feyerabend type postmodernist.

>> No.16997697

>>16996509
It's time to let Hegel go, anon.

>> No.16997796

>>16996309
Based retard

>> No.16998258

>>16994950
Been a while since ive seen a post absolutely destroy a pseud.

>> No.16998315

Schizophrenic people writing literature for autistic people.

>> No.16998334

>>16992928
A socially commodified buzzword

>> No.16998432

>>16996845
What do you mean?

>> No.16998460

It manifests in literature as a purposeful lack of cohesion (kind of paradoxical when you think about it). A rejection of Aristotelian unities. Maybe an unreliable narrator, disjointed or nonlinear timeline, or multiple narrators. A """deconstruction""" of objectivity.
I really love what it brings to the table for art, personally. It's just a shame that postmodern art is unavoidably going to make people think there's no truth in the real world. We need to separate of art and politics.