5 Answers

  1. To put it very briefly:

    Modernism: let's make the world a better place, we need to expand the ways of expression!

    Postmodernism: well, everything has already been said, we can only sort through puzzles, a person has died the world has died there is only one language left

    Metamodernism: it is too stupid to believe in ideals and be honest, but it is impossible to be constantly ironic; the current state of affairs is such that we are in a pendulum state. �

    To a previous commentator: metamodernism is not a practical attitude, but a theoretical premise. That is, we do not want to bring society to such a state, it is already such

  2. Modernism:

    • We will achieve our goal, and those who disagree with us, we will beat them!

    postmodernism�

    yes yes vpiret, we will kill them kanechno same, our goal is clear!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Metamodernism (secretly disagree):

    What do you mean, we'll beat you? All those who do not agree to kill immediately!!

    postmodernism

    of course we will kill all nah!!!!!!!!

    Modernism:

    • Kill him? I understand, of course, but this is too much, even for us! Where did I end up?

    postmodernism

    xs, not pox????

    Metamodernism (to myself):

    Hooray, they changed their minds, I thought they'd beat me already!!!

  3. Taking into account the tags, I think you are more interested in these areas of art than in philosophy, but let me approach the question from the point of view of philosophy, because later the direction of postmodernism in the fields of art also emerged from it.

    The topic is very deep and in order to fully understand these two trends, you need to get acquainted with the works of many different philosophers. I will try to give some general idea of what these two philosophical trends are.

    So, modernism is a current that was born in the works of such philosophers as Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes, and later developed by John Locke (and others). Modernism replaced the era of pre-modernism, namely, the time when the main forms of knowledge were based on such aspects as belief in the supernatural and religion (in fact, on blind faith and the absence of science as the founder of knowledge). In the modernist era, scientific research has become the main way to understand reality. People began to rely less and less on what religion says and more and more try to study causal relationships in nature. In addition, such a movement as individualism was born, that is, they began to move away from the so – called collectivism more towards the realization that each person is a person and he has individual needs and opinions. This naturally led to the formation of such trends as classical liberalism, and later to the economic model of capitalism. Thanks to scientific knowledge, medicine and engineering began to develop, which in turn led to an improvement in the well-being of society and the emergence of technologies that allow us to discuss this topic on TheQuestion today.

    Modernism flourished in the age of Enlightenment, when thinkers, inventors, and scientists (as I said earlier) began to develop their respective fields. Thanks to modernism (and the fact that it provoked the development of the areas mentioned more than once), people began to live better than ever before. And their wealth grew. I'm not saying that everyone immediately became rich and began to live in better conditions, of course, but in general, the quality of life has disproportionately increased. The process, so to speak, was launched, and then it began to develop upward.

    Postmodernism, on the other hand, rejects the Enlightenment as such. Moreover, representatives of this trend attack the fundamental foundations of modernism, such as science, objectivism, common sense, and individualism. That is, everything on which, in fact, almost all modern civilized societies are based.

    The founders of postmodernism are such philosophers as David Hume, Emmanuel Kant (many mistakenly call him a rationalist, but this is not quite there), Georg Hegel. Later, other thinkers joined this cohort, including Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault (modernity). Modern postmodernists have a particularly warm love for the latter two.

    Postmodernism distorts the idea of objective reality, contrasting common sense and rationalism (that is, that there are objective truths in the world and our consciousness, or, if you want, reason, with the help of just common sense, is able not only to recognize them, but also to explain them) with subjectivism, which says that our consciousness is not able to correctly interpret experience and the reality around us and in every possible way denies the objective laws of nature and society. He contrasts individualism with divisions into groups based on race, gender, and class (hello, Marxism!) etc. But the most important thing is that it opposes human interests, harmonious relations and mutually beneficial cooperation, provoking conflicts based on small human differences from each other (I mentioned some of them just above), and tries to impose on people the idea that they are oppressed, oppressed and humiliated in every possible way.

    Unfortunately, one of the key aspects of postmodernism is the complete absence of such a quality as “gratitude”. Moreover, they are most often driven by such feelings as resentment (towards society or its representatives), arrogance and deceit. Such an evil trinity.

    Postmodernists today fiercely hate Western culture, society and everything connected with it (and everyone who does not agree with them in one way or another). Jacques Derrida once described Western culture as “phologocentric.” The word comes from the term “phallus”, which, I think, does not need to be explained. According to him, Western culture is based on male ambitions, has the character of an oppressive and self-serving society. That is, we are returning again to the idea that people are oppressed, oppressed and humiliated. Postmodernists prefer to ignore any evidence to the contrary and do not accept dialogue. They also do not recognize such a thing as logic, their arguments are illogical, and instead of explaining their position using facts, they will throw labels and insults at their opponents. Note that in both cases, the roots of the words are “log”, which comes from the Greek word “Logos”, that is, the fundamental structures of our being, if you will.

    Unfortunately, today postmodernism almost completely dominates in the West in such areas as the humanities and social sciences.

    If you want to understand more fully what postmodernism is as a current, I suggest you read a book like Explaining Postmodernism, written by Stephen Hicks. It explains everything in great detail. In the expanded edition, by the way, there is a section about art and the “contribution” of people like Foucault to it.

  4. In these concepts, relative to each other, there is a gradation, so to speak, from simple to complex. It all started quite naturally and simply. At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the world was rocked by all sorts of historical events: from new philosophical theories to bloody wars. An ordinary person, caught up in the turmoil of all this new and incomprehensible for him, was forced to rebuild his worldview and revise his views. And since art is the fruit of human spiritual creativity, it is precisely art that has “taken the brunt” of this very new vision of the world: it was characterized by criticism of everything old, canonical (but returning to it, drawing on objects of comparison and symbols), praise and a desire for everything new, a desire to rethink life, find updated landmarks in it and put a new meaning in the already rethought images of previously unremarkable things. If you have ever heard such concepts as: surrealism, Impressionism, cubism, Futurism, Dadaism-consider that you are familiar with the topic. Such an art became known as modernism (from Lat. sovermenny). In fact, this is just a generalization of all the new trends in the culture of the early 20th century. The Silver Age of Russian poetry is a good example of this.�

    With postmodernism, everything was and is much more complicated. It was born in the second half of the 20th century and lasts (as a certain era), theoretically, until now. Postmodernism is not so much an art as it is a mass culture, moreover, with a philosophical background. It consists in a complete reworking of not just some spheres of society and human consciousness, but already the entire human being, ” killing the three elephants that held the world.” By the way, these three elephants were: God (guess which mustachioed German “killed” him), the author(the killer was the author of the essay “The Death of the Author”(1967) Roland Barthes) and the subject itself with its freedom as such. Everything that is happening now in mass media is the result of postmodernism, which has no borders in this world and is a “chewed apple” for a person who is happy to swallow it.

    Although at first glance it seems that “modernism “and” postmodernism ” are similar concepts and self – flowing from each other, this is not so. To see the most striking differences, you should refer to the famous comparative tables: the Brynik-Passek table is particularly noteworthy. Here's an example:�

    1) Modernism: “We are the new”, belief in high art, the domination of the spiritual and pure over the material and lowly, shocking elitism,фактическ the actual succession of previous art and art as the result of complex creative, spiritual activity ;

    2) Postmodernism: “We are everything”, the main thing is commercial success, dystopianism, destruction, rejection of the heritage of all possible cultural paradigms, everything can be called art.

    Well, about metamodernism (post-postmodernism): an attitude that condemns any current “postmodernism” and seeks a certain balance between the material world and the world of ideas, but recognizes that a person will always hesitate in the direction of this or that teaching and be on the path of knowledge. The current itself, like its manifesto, was developed in 2010-2011 by Dutch philosophers. Here is the manifesto itself in Russian, which will explain the meaning of the current better than any other generalizations:�http://eroskosmos.org/metamodernist-manifesto/ . Also speaking about post-postmodernism in the context of modernity, we can distinguish the following aspects::

    3) “We are an alternative”, act and hesitate to search for truth, balance between the spiritual and the material and, at the same time, constantly move between the paths of knowledge, debt to the past, striving for the future

    IMHO: If our society takes the path of accepting metamodernism as the main vector of development, then we should hope for the spiritual and mental rebirth of those masses who are now freely stagnating within the framework of squeezed apartments. Truths to You

  5. It is assumed that “metamodernism” is a view of the world and culture formed by a generation that mainly grew up in the 80s and 90s of the last century. People of this generation, who have grown up by default in the ” postmodern state “and learned its lessons, are not afraid of” big narratives”, ideological naivety and other characteristics usually attributed to modernity. Metamodernism seems to be an era characterized by constant fluctuations between irony and sincerity, nihilism and the pursuit of meaning, relativism and objectivity, apathy and engagement. The metamodern view assumes that one does not exclude the other. It can be said that this is an attempt to understand modernity, akin to “post-postmodernism”, “post-irony”, “new sincerity”, etc. The term itself was popularized by cultural scientists Timotheus Vermeulen and Robin van den Acker in ” Notes on metamodernism “(2010). There is a “metamodernism manifesto” metamodernism.org published in 2011 by contemporary artist Luke Turner.

    About cultural phenomena that can be classified as metamodernism – in literature, cinema, philosophy (in particular, “speculative realism” and “object-oriented ontology” are considered metamodern phenomena), etc. – you can read more in the blog of Vermeulen and van den Acker metamodernism.com

    In general, “metamodernism” is a buzzword, a meme, and a non-meaningful construct-just like”postmodern/postmodernism”. However, it is more secondary, since all the meanings created by ” metamodernism “fit perfectly into the context of”postmodernism”. Time will tell whether “metamodernism” will be as popular and influential as it is to enter the mainstream of cultural theory.

Leave a Reply