5 Answers

  1. Postmodernism denies the absolute order of modernism, but it does so in a purely modernist way. It denies not the absoluteness (uniqueness) of order, but order itself, suggesting instead randomness and arbitrariness. Moreover, absolutizing them up to the proclamation of chaos. Yes, and denial itself is the hallmark of modernism, with which it came to light, rejecting tradition. Modernity cannot be a hundred years old freshness, so modernity is forced to deny itself in order to be modern. This is the way it exists.

    Hence, postmodernity is an attempt by modernity itself to bite itself in the ass. But years pass and it is no longer fashionable, not modern. And now there are new attempts-post-post-modernism, meta-modernism, proto-modernism, etc. as a way to modernize. In fact, nothing new. Postmodernism is not an epoch, it is just one of the directions of modernism, like other variations with prefixes to the word modernism.

    What will happen after that? “Another denial. The question is purely modernist, and therefore uninteresting. The more interesting question is: What can become a significant alternative to modernism? That is, the question is not about negation, but about choice.

    If we are talking about a choice, then it means that there are those who choose. Look around and you will see that modernism did not come by itself, it is not the era of all mankind and all civilizations. Modernism is only the choice of the West. Yes, the influence of the West and its choice is huge, and it affects the lives of other civilizations. But despite this, other civilizations still adhere to each of their own special choice. Someone chose a religion, someone-Eastern spiritual practice, someone-paganism, etc. Moreover, at a certain historical stage, each of the civilizations occupied a dominant position in the world and left an imprint on it of its spiritual choice.

    The current state of Western civilization demonstrates a crisis in all spheres of life, and first of all in the spiritual sphere. We can assume that the era of Western dominance is ending. This means that some other civilization must take on this role. However, to do this, it must present to the world a new spiritual concept that has an incredible power to transform the world. Who is capable of this? And most importantly, what does it have to offer in order to give the world and, above all, itself a new impetus for development? It should be an alternative to Western modernism.

    My answer is an alternative to the Absolute (Being, God, Tao). Rejecting not the idea of Order, but the idea of the Absolute opens up completely different incredible possibilities. Is anyone willing to make that choice?

  2. I love it when this is explained briefly in simple words. So, if we proceed from the book “The State of Postmodernity” by Jean-Francois Lyotard, this is the era of the crisis of meta-narratives, which translates as “the lack of a common picture of the world that everyone would be guided by”. An example of such a picture can be a religion or science, their cult has long passed, and nothing has yet been invented to replace it. Society is in a state of confusion because it “knows that it knows nothing.” This is the era of mass consciousness, which has come to replace individual expert consciousness, because only the mass is able to understand and assimilate the array of information that we are facing today.

  3. the answer is ” what will happen after …ismov” for me in an integral view of the world. it seems that few people are familiar with the chapters of the book �Ken Wilber a, the founding father of the integral approach, under the title “Integral Art” https://fil.wikireading.ru/71473 . This is a text from his 1997 book, ” The Eye of the Spirit [Integral Vision for a Slightly Deranged World].” Wilber's approach not only anticipates and includes the concept of Dutch metamodernism, but also serves as a foundation for the development of both the individual and society as a whole. and if Dutch thinkers have a certain model of “fluctuation” between the last two isms in history, then the philosophy that Wilber consistently develops includes most of the paths traversed by the West and the East in a single stream of human and human development. the path of spontaneous growth of new paths in modernism and total denial and deconstruction in postmodernism is transformed into a total acceptance and unification of all the best that is in culture, philosophy, religion, psychology and art. Wilbur also touches on political issues. at the moment, the integral approach is not only a comprehensive, but also a very applied type of knowledge. and yes, such a titanic topic is not easy to master or read. good luck in learning!

  4. In the progressive part of the modern young society, the postmodern product was abandoned by itself and its own aesthetics crystallized. This is natural – most of the texts of the founding fathers of postmodernism were written long before the birth of those people who are now beginning to actively form the aesthetic and semantic environment, moreover, some texts were written even before the birth of their parents. All this was published in a completely different world, which knew neither mobile communications, nor computers, nor the Internet in every phone anywhere in the world, and went along with the birth of rock and roll and television. The authors of classical postmodern texts were formed as individuals in the first half of the 20th century and did not know either a blatant environmental catastrophe, or fatigue from formalism and technologization, or the terror of advertising, conveys and simulars.

    Here is a quote from an article by O. Mitroshenkov, Doctor of Philosophy:

    “Now the general cultural, social, spiritual, economic, political and technological context of humanity is radically changing. For the last 30-40 years, representatives of almost all fields of social and humanitarian knowledge in different countries have been discussing the differences between the modern and postmodern eras. In these discussions, there is a growing awareness that the worldview and values of postmodernism and postmodernism are already exhausting their potential, and the categories of modernity and postmodernity are not coping with understanding reality, not keeping up with its challenges.”

    “Starting somewhere in 2009, all types of art: architecture, cinema, music, literature-are transformed into something that is no longer permissible to call postmodernism. Comparing the works of art of the late XX century and the present, critics have finally confirmed the idea that we are not standing on the threshold of a new ideological and cultural period, we have already crossed it and are actively trampling down paths” T. Istomin. As illustrations, you can see the works of the Herzog & de Meuron architectural firm, installations by Olafur Eliasson and James Turrell. Or just go to the website of the online magazine iGNANT ignant.de , which publishes cutting-edge contemporary artists and designers. New sincerity, Romanticism, search for authenticity, appeal to the archaic, blurring the boundaries between the transcendent and immanent, unreality, naturalness and supernaturalness, inexplicability and depth, many authors refer us to metaphysics or an altered state of consciousness, expanding their own boundaries-perhaps these trends are most characteristic of the new art.

    And while philosophers are thinking about getting out of postmodern paradigms, life is giving birth to new forms. Here we come to the difference between real and philosophical life. Often, this philosophy, or rather sophistry, goes into complete isolation from life, does not meet its needs, and sometimes even tries to impose a certain “dead end”on it. In fact, a single meaning of the word “postmodernism” has not yet been formed, every philosopher, not to mention an ordinary person, puts his own meaning into it, which raises the question of whether we can use this “contradictory and overloaded” term at all. Publicist and philosopher Pavel Minka writes well about this: in.ua

    I see the impasse of the postmodern paradigm as follows (the paradigm refers not only to the philosophical systems of the 20th century, but also to the state of art and society as a whole). The logic of postmodernism rejects the idea of a common Metanarrative for all, this is the end of totalitarian systems and common truths. Having proclaimed the death of God and the end of History on the basis that the projects of modernity, which claimed to be global and universal, failed (communism, fascism), society found itself in limbo. The crisis of religion has led to the fact that if earlier human consciousness was an instrument behind which there was something more, now there is a void there, which creates the meaninglessness and meaninglessness of thinking suspended in the air, which in a postmodern society is in itself. This led to very large side effects-alienation, cynicism, degradation, consumerism, and a general sense of the” end of history ” – the impossibility of anything new (which is just nonsense in relation to art, since any art of any age was built on borrowing and continuity, and this did not nullify its value, just as the presence of someone with similar DNA does not nullify the personality). But postmodernism confused the way to achieve the Goal with the Goal itself. And reset both the method and the Goal.

    Metamodernism, on the other hand, offers to take the Goal, something that lies behind systems and religions, as a constant, but a constant that a person must find a way to achieve independently. This is the principle of individuality, spiritual aristocracy, creative morality, as an individual revelation, about which Berdyaev and Zinoviev talked a lot. It also suggests a way to achieve the Goal (the Goal is like individual spiritual growth, achievement and comprehension of the Absolute) or, at least, the road to it-going beyond the concepts of “good-evil”, leaving the courthouse, what Dutch philosophers (the authors of “Notes on Metamodernism”) dubbed oscillation-oscillation. The idea of spiritual aristocracy is further developed by P. Minka and A. Kropotkin. Narizhny, Doctor of Philosophy and artist Teymur Daimi writes about the” Goal”, about the sacred beginning that lies behind systems and religions. This theme is constantly present in his journalism, but it is especially fully expressed in the “Manifesto of Non-current” permm.ru Mikhail Epstein is moving along a similar path, proclaiming a new era in his work “From Post to Proto. Manifesto of the New Century” russ.ru

    Here are a few theses from writers, philosophers and thinkers who have tried to define the new time:

    “Metamodernism is a Dutch concept, it is proposed instead of the term “post-postmodernism”, that is, as if instead of what will happen after modernism. This is what Ilya Kormiltsev once told me, predicting this, because this concept is fresh, it is about five years old, in my opinion. Kormiltsev told me in 2000: “Overcoming postmodern irony and finding new seriousness is a challenge for the coming decades. And this task will be solved with the help of neo-Romanticism and the new archaic. It's overcoming irony through the archaic.” Metamodernism is another option. Infinite complexity, complexity; network structure of the narrative; free floating in time; neo-romantic attitudes, that is, attitudes to the perfection of a single hero, to move away from the crowd, to a certain contradic-tion with it, probably… This is an interesting concept. I am, in general, for metamodernism, that is, for the new smart ones, roughly speaking.”

    Dmitry Bykov.

    “The dominant social, universal system of values and morals based on the principles of communitarianism has been replaced by the individualism of an individual, which some modern authors refer to as a completely new, bifurcated type of personality. The main features of the latter are ideological instability and unscrupulousness from the point of view of the classical worldview. The main principle of the bifurcation man is the desire for absolute creativity and the rejection of all normativity in thinking and action, except for the futurist normativity.”

    S. Shalaeva

    “Postmodern culture was formed through doubts about all positive truths. This is a time not only of new realities, new consciousness, but also of a new philosophy that asserts a multiplicity of truths, revises the view of history, rejecting its linearity, the idea of completeness. This was a transition from classical humanism, which considers man as the center of the universe, to universal humanism, which includes not only all of humanity, but also all living things, nature, the cosmos, and the universe. The point of perestroika of the system is already somewhere near, then either the system turns into chaos, or it takes on new forms and moves to a new, more differentiated and higher level. I could call this new formation post-postmodern (a term already used in practice) or meta-postmodern. If people are no longer able to bear patiently the lack of spirituality and naked practicality characteristic of the society of “ideal consumers”, then inevitably a NEW SPIRITUALITY will arise, which, without rejecting the old values, will give them new content and color.”

    O. Pavlovsky

    “I hope that metamodernity is not an opposition to the theories and concepts of the past. In my opinion, this should not be the goal of new thinking. Most likely, this is a kind of radical openness.”

    P. Winter

    “The world is entering a new period. Maybe in the New Paleolithic. Art in the understanding of Kant and Schiller has already lost its power today. Civilizational progress begins. Moreover, it is so large that there is nothing next to it in the history of mankind, except for the Neolithic revolution. The life that surrounds us is an absolute dead end. A consumer society has no right to exist. Man in his present form has no right to exist. You just need to reach the edge. Khlebnikov has some wonderful lines:

    “And when the globe burns out,

    It will become stricter and ask: “Who am I?”,

    We will create a “Word about Igor's Regiment”

    Or something similar to it”

    Then there will be a new great art, a new myth, a new folklore, a new civilization.”

    V. Martynov

    “And this is already post-postmodernism, which we used to call the new archaic, the time for the return of the fact that it is easier to understand someone else's thought than to formulate your own topos and clearly state its interests in philosophical language. We are drawn into a situation where elusiveness, irony, and distance are absorbed into everything and create boredom. It is no longer interesting how something is deconstructed and falls apart. Much more interesting is what remains when everything has fallen apart, how order, truth, and responsibility for the implementation of your project are born or revived.

    The situation after postmodernism brings us back to the sacred questions. We must begin to construct, and metaphysics is the highest form of construction, of constructing ourselves as beings justified by the absolute. Absolutely justified, but not with that bestial seriousness when our existence is made a threat to the existence of others. We are trained in postmodern tolerance and openness, but when you see postmodern films, you realize that it is impossible to warm yourself with burnt coal. Slag doesn't burn, postmodernism doesn't work.”

    M. Epstein

    “I am talking about the absolute beginning, which should be revealed to humanity as the religion of the individual and freedom. And it will be based on the ability of a person to follow their own inner voice, which requires incredible spiritual efforts. Humanity is now in the same position as it was at the time of the birth of the existing mass religions. However, these religions, although they have a lot of attractive things, are still fraught with confrontation. With the current globalization of the world, an idea should arise that all people can believe in, that is, a new consciousness rooted in religious inspiration and the sense of responsibility for the fate of all mankind and each individual. Humanity needs, if you'll excuse my grandiloquence, a ray of light that would illuminate those correct, but purely rational postulates, relatively speaking, “freedom, equality, fraternity”, human rights, which can be realized only by reaching spiritual enlightenment. When such a new religious idea takes hold of enough people around the world, there will be hope.”

    M. Mikhailov

    The depth of any great religion that has its roots in axial time is closer to the depth of another great religion than to its own surface. The difference of languages and images of religious experience cannot be eliminated, it is inseparable from the difference of cultures, from the multicolored world. The dialog doesn't erase this color scheme. But it leads to a depth where all differences are seen as refractions of a single ray of inner light that illuminated the world in ancient times and gave power to the formation of cultural worlds that gravitated towards globality and remained sub-global only because of the ancient insurmountability of oceans and deserts. Today we need to continue what we started and see the world anew as a spiritual whole. After seeing it, we will create it.”

    Pomerantz city

    “The lesson of the thinker and philosopher Alexander Zinoviev is that the time of general moral programs and categorical imperatives has passed, if it ever existed at all. Moral programs must become unique, just as every human person is unique. In ethics, we must move not from the general to the singular, but from the singular to the general. Today, there are no intellectual or spiritual impulses or social forces in the world that would be focused on scrapping the current, essentially dead-end, vector of historical evolution. However, the demand for such a turn; for the ideology that justifies it, is felt more and more strongly.”

    Yu. Narizhny

    “Everything that the previous generation perceived under the sign of “post”, in its next historical shift turns out to be “proto” – not the end, but the first outline, the timid beginning of a new aeon, the neuro-cosmic era, the info and transformational environment. “The end of reality”, which was so much talked about by” postmen ” of all shades, from Derrida to Baudrillard… It turns out that this is just the beginning of the virtual era. Our current dives into the computer screen are just an exit to the frothy edge of the ocean.”

    M. Epstein

    Analyzing the texts of leading contemporary thinkers, we can conclude that post-postmodernism will represent a kind of radical openness, a triumph of self-organizing virtual systems, Internet co-authorship (Wikipedia) and self-education, a combination of interest in the past with openness to the future, “soft” aesthetic values, striving for the transcendent, a departure from the norm and standardized morality to creative morality (according to Berdyaev and Zinoviev). Just as metaphysics is a philosophical teaching about superexperienced principles located “above” physics, it speaks about the transition to a new quality, so metamodernity can go beyond physical experience in the field of transcendence, thus being a kind of new religion of freedom and personal spiritual search.

    Manifestos of Metamodernism:

    metamodernizm.ru Manifesto of Metamodernism

    metamodernizm.ru Manifesto of the Russian Metamodern

    You can explore this topic more fully on the following resources, which are entirely devoted to meta-trends:

    metamodernizm.ru online magazine about metamodernism

    vk.com public about metamodernism

    vk.com public about the Russian metamodern

  5. Metamodernism has been especially discussed after a series of performances by Shia LaBeouf, organized in collaboration with Luke Turner luketurner.com and Nastja Rönkkö nastjar.com ” all the inadequacy that Shaya has suffered in recent years comes from there. Unfortunately, most people get acquainted with the ideas of metamodernism from the manifesto written by Turner metamodernism.org which rewrites the ideas of the philosophers Timotheus Vermeulen and Robin van den Akker, who put forward the idea of metamodernism in this article: aestheticsandculture.net

    Vermeulen and van den Akker propose metamodernism as a strategy for reconciling postmodernity with modernity, that is, they are not talking about the evolutionary overcoming of postmodernity by the metamodern, but about the need for a partial rebound to modernity, followed by a fluctuation between the affirmative intentions of modernity and the negative ones of postmodernity.

    The artists misunderstood the philosophers and misrepresented everything. According to their manifesto, metamodernism is still the next cultural stage after postmodernism. Provisions of the Metamodernist Manifesto (translated into Russian: metamodernism.su ) – amateur fictions based on fairly well-known ideas. There, the rhizome of Deleuze and Guattari is put on a par with the term “world order”, which leads us to the linearity of modernity, and through transgression we are asked to come to a solution in the spirit of Fichtean dialectic. In the point about the poetic elegance of science, I even imagined Werner, God forgive me, Heisenberg. Everything is bad there.

    In short, the real metamodern does not follow postmodernism, but extends from it to modernity. In addition, from the point of view of postmodernism, it is not correct to talk about his death as the basis for the emergence of the next cultural and ideological era. After postmodernism, only the complete oblivion of culture, the disappearance of the human need for reflection, is possible. The real post-postmodern is the situation described at the end of Zamyatin's “We”.

Leave a Reply