Didn't New york dada predate Swiss Dada ?
I thoght modern was , " like I'm trying to be modern " even the caveman was trying to be modern , whereas Post modern is , " like i'm just doin what I wanna do " ??????????????
But what I REALLY wanted to say was that Spoon was awesome good last night here in Pittsburgh and there were no posters at the merch table, except for the ones that I brought when the doors opened. !!! So to Nate and everyone who has done a poster for shows prior to 4/7 - good damn job for the band. My poster (not yet uploaded) sold out before Spoon even went on and in less than 2 hours, a whole nice big stack of them. Whoever's up next, good luck!
Von Dada- dada ya ya. Regarding the mushing of 'moderns' with Dadaists, you're definitely right. I was simplifying terms, true. And while what you've said so far makes the most sense about Post Modern, it still actually makes no sense to me in practice or written work, maybe what I am thinking about is theory vs. practice, which in this case seems to be such a catch-all buzzword at this point in time as to be meaningless. Or, I'm just a dunderhead. I believe both, to be honest.
SLuna, the DADAists weren't as much a part of Modernism as a reaction to Bourgeois tastes. The minute Duchamp pulled his work from the Society of Independent Artists show is when Post-Modernism was born. Modernism went Bourgeois around 1917.
"If a concept is *difficult* to understand, that's one thing, but if it is almost too nebulous grasp, then it's lost it's meaning."
...and at that point, it sure isn't a rejection of bourgeois anything. It's as bourgie as bourgie can be.
Check. And since the Dadaist were part of the modern movement, relating postmodernism to something that moderns were doing, actively, is part of the terrible word, right? Art's definition, the French philosophical perspective, literary and critical theory...non of them match up. I've read that it is a extension of modernism and I've read that it is a rejection of it. I swear to baby Jesu it's an intellectual Emperor's New Clothes. If a concept is *difficult* to understand, that's one thing, but if it is almost too nebulous grasp, then it's lost it's meaning. But mostly I agree with Jephla, this conversation is a bunch of horeshit.
Read The History of Bourgeios Perception by Donald Lowe and Discipline and Punish by Michel Foucault. Maybe some Jacques Derrida, too. Then you'll get what PoMo is all about. At essence is a rejection of Bourgeois perception, something the DADAists were doing in Berlin during the Weimar Republic.
evan - bingo. and that's another reason why post modern anything usually sounds full of burning hot air. what's funny is that the original modernist movement was basically like punk for the turn of the 19th century. so punk has what? like another 60 years or so before it's the new old fogey style to rebel against.
I know the terms. I've got a healthy dose of theory being in my masters of architecture. Its just not my favourite stuff. A lot of it is used by people, who DON'T really know what it means, to rationalize work that really has no grounding in anything and basically just caters to their own egos.
those phrases really reek. i know. but, if you ever bother to research what exactly they mean, they are surprisingly perfect words to describe a lot of what goes on here. big clumsy stupid sounding pretentious words are only attempts to be exact when talking about ideas that are so hard to describe - like what we are doing here. all the words that have been tossed around that we accept and toss around ourselves sound like stupid gibberish to the academics.
so, don't dis this stuff based on a knee-jerk reaction to terms you don't use or get.
that's lame, too. be real and think about this stuff.
"postmodernist" is a lame term, i agree. but, if you look at any definition of it, we fit into it. very nicely, in fact.
think of it this way: post modernism is a decadent style. as a culture goes over the hump on it's development and history and starts it's downward trend toward disintigration, we go through the decadent phase (think 'decay'). we peaked as a culture somewhere in the early 60's. 'hippie' may have been the first true decadent cultural phenom in our decadent phase. (there's room for beats, too in that.) so, it's all on our downward slope.
decadence can be defined as "no new ideas" creatively, we're working in revived styles and using old ideas. we're just putting them into new contexts or juxtaposing them with other old ideas. this is obviously true today. nothing is new, it's all been done. we all do a pastiche approach to creative thinking. this dialog in itself is decadent. it's virtually impossible to come up with an "original" idea at all. the internet has made everything nearly impossible in that respect as well.
the high style of decadence is appropriation. we borrow old ideas and place in the new context. what i do is a found art style. i do appropriation. so do you. so does every single person on this sight. there is nothing but borrowed ideas - the rock poster is a borrowed form from the gitgo.
punk was the official breakpoint, the ground zero for our postmodern lives. but the decadent trend (decay) started decades prior. it always takes time for these things to filter down.
the modernists were the first AND the last to admit it. ironic.
now they're skunked. and we hold sway. we pick up their rubbish and make it look great.
post modernism, post modern, post modernist, any of the available versions of that term are incredibly strange to me. they have no discernable meaning, i've yet to read or hear any definition that makese sense or is cohesive. the only thing that i can get out of post modernist anything is that it does define 'unfalsifiablity' to me. so, there's that.
i dunno. i saw real shit bricks. of, course, they called it "art" and all.
modernists controlled academic discourse for most of the last half of the last century. today, it's really over. modernsim is a period style. since most of the academicians built their entire careers on modernist theories, they got lost in the mid 80's.
i had a lot of laffs watching modernist ("swiss", "helvetica") designers scramble for a style they could sell as "new wave." i saw ten years of really bad copycat ideas of what being done on the streets and in subculture. all the while they were trying to link it to schools and designers in switzerland (basel, ulm, weinhardt.) it just didn't stick outside of modernist academia. now, those attempted links are being over-ridden by the reality of punk. post-modernism ate modernists for breakfast. now modernists are lost in the past. we all laugh at them as "old farts" and "old skool." they laff at me for those reasons, too, because i was trained by those guys.
dunno about you, but it seems to me losing the central focus of your entire intellectual and creative life to a bunch of know-nothing street punks is a great reason to shit bricks...
I don't know if they're necessarily shitting bricks. I think most pure modernists haven't changed because they actually believe in it as "THE" way. Same goes for architecture. There are a lot of schools that still just churn out "modernist" architects. My school was like that up until just recently... its like post-modernism went completely ignored, ha.
i don't like this style for rock posters. it looks like corporate parody - except it's not. it's sincerely real in intent.
modernism has now become "just another retro style". i think that's really funny. all those modernists in academia have been shitting bricks in a dead panic for nearly two decades. they still can't figure out what to do. i love that.
will do, mike. Zach, this actually has nothing to do with song lyrics or anything (for once).
Britt really liked one of my tee shirt designs and this is just an extension of how that shirt came out.
I guess the first batch of those shirts sold out the other night, at the first show, before the 1st band even started.
So yay for me!