Age 33, Male
Hertfordshire University
London, England
Joined on 8/15/05
Posted by Aprime - January 8th, 2012
I've tried to research the definition, I've been through many sites
All of which state really long definitions with complicated sentence structures and include more words of which I do not know the definitions for.
Could anyone give a nice explanation to what post modernism is?
Would be soooooo helpful
Cheers! xD
Traditional post-modern world view: "There is no objective truth or reality. Everything is relative, there is opinion and nothing further, view points are different (but not more or less valid) than each other". I mean it's a big category so when expressed in something like post-modern art it'll be something more subtle like not giving a fuck about conventional standards.
Modernism was more about expressing what the world cannot. The camera was invented and painters recognized it was a threat to their profession. They decided that by painting abstract or in distinct styles, they could still be necessary in the modern world.
Post Modernism would be after that, so it's probably more to deal with the inventions of technology and how they changed the artistic community. After Photography came Film and Video... most likely that.
".A style or movement in the arts that aims to break with classical and traditional forms"
so the way i see it, modernism is to do something new, to be a free thinker. or to do something art related that hasnt been done before by anyother artist
Basically, it means throw the rulebook out, and make shit up. Anything goes.
That would be complete extinction of TRULY original ideas, and everything being either an opinion, or a continuing of an existing idea, or a parody, or something.
Lol, come on frozy. Modernism had little to do with the invention of photography...
Anyway, post-modernism can be called an "anti-art" movement. The postmodern artist looks at art history and basically tries to mock it or devalue it. Andy Warhol was postmodern because he mocked the idea that art was "valuable objects" by mass producing pop culture images. The conceptual artists did the same thing by calling their ideas the art rather than the physical representation. Jeff Koons is postmodern because he turns children's toys and "kitsch" objects into massive ironic idols, basically saying that the content of art isn't important.
Basically think of all the "commonly held" bourgeois beliefs about art (value, beauty, skill, importance, creativity) and assume the postmodernist is trying to prove them wrong.
Postmodernism is over by now, though. Probably ended in the 80's. All the "high" art made today fits more into an activist or "new media" mindset, like trash art, video, nature art, and installation.
Modernism is Star Wars, Post-Modernism is Star Trek.
It's a big fat logical fallacy.
The idea is really to be skeptic of literally everything, including evidence, to an extreme.
The only proper context to use post-modernism (aka post-structuralism (the differences are subtle at best)) is when looking at history. The saying about wars "History is written by the winners" really applies here. The idea here is that you need to understand that no written history can be said to be 100% the truth, as history is very subject to bias.
However, the scientific method tells us that too, but without shoving its head up its own ass.
Post-modernism says that nothing exists without bias. The biggest hole in this particular theory is that there was a universe before there was life and yadda yadda yadda.
The movie "What the BLEEP Do We Know?" is a hugely post-modernist documentary thing. I think the scene with the kid on the basketball court shows the idea in the simplest way.
Another fallacy by some of the loonier the post-modernists is the idea that any observations we make are moot because they only apply when you are, in fact, observing things. There is no way to make a claim about things that you aren't directly observing. These people then present the idea that everything is everywhere and everything until it is observed, then it is that thing that you are observing. The evidence they put forth for THIS idea is that if you look at matter and energy at the quantum level, everything is bouncing around like fucking crazy.
Which is a logical fallacy within a logical fallacy because they're making a claim about the unobservable "reality" based on something they are directly observing and aaaaUUUGGGHHH
I'm assuming you're researching this for a class (like I did). Please, tell your "teacher" that Matt Hutchings said to shove it.
And a disclaimer, not all of what I wrote has to do with post-modernism directly. I hope I've given you a few more ideas for things to look for, though, to help you understand.
If you feel the definitions you found on the internet were comprised of too many big words and complex sentence structures, the bottom line is even once you DO understand what it's supposed to be, you'll probably just kinda feel like
"This is worth defining?"
Label it all you want, but I'll quote Ernie Southern when I say
"You can't sit back on your philosophy, not when every single day is a fight."
Also, last comment wins.
It's just a meaningless word people use to sound classy and smart.
PIED3 and Kajenx (with regards to the art side of things) were the only ones with a decent explanation. I think it was lyotard that brought the term from art to philosophy; I believe it was also he that described it as "the end of the big stories".
@Kay6: it isn't so much being sceptic of evidence as it is being sceptic of the possibility of evidence. The scientific method is biased in a much more serious way than the "the winner writes history"-thing. E.g. as any decent phycisist should be able to tell you, they're not finding or proving laws of nature; they are asuming them.
^ kay6=loy6
The definition of Postmodernism is subjective.
Postmodern art is different to postmodern architecture.
I'm gonna have to agree with poisened-noise on this one.
"Basically, it means throw the rulebook out, and make shit up. Anything goes."
Take it from someone who's taken 3 university-level art-history courses.
...Not to sound pretentious or toot my own horn. B:
If you wanted a couple of examples, I'd suggest looking through ARTSTOR (search 'artstor' on google) then search with "postmodern*". It's a really helpful art history database. Hopefully you can access it where you are. :)
Well, Wikipedia says it was a movement after the relism movement, which was very realistic pictures.
max15946
My guess would be something happening right now