Page 2 of 6 <12345>Last »
Topic Options
#43387 - 10/01/10 01:25 PM Re: Postmodernity . The advent of Superman? [Re: ]
Prometheus9 Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/09/09
Posts: 37
A really valuable resource for getting to grips with the concept of Postmodernity is the series "The Self Under Siege: Philosophy in the 20th Century" by Rick Roderick. This series along with his other two excellent series "Philosophy and Human Values" and "Nietzsche and the Postmodern Condition" can be found at

http://rickroderick.org/

Top
#43393 - 10/01/10 11:16 PM Re: Postmodernity . The advent of Superman? [Re: Cesare Borgia]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Possibly the disconnect between Jake and Matthew above is the result of some confusion concerning the term "modern". It can refer to "things of the present" (as per Jake) or to a subset (e.g. moderne of the Art Deco movement/era (as per Matthew). Jake is correct that Anton LaVey æsthetically resisted the former; Matthew is also correct that he was an aficionado of the latter. From my Church of Satan:

* * * * * * * * * *

... Along with Anton LaVey’s growing interest [in the early 1970s] in androids and atmospheres of despair came his increasing fascination with Art Deco, as mentioned in the collectors’ magazine article reprinted as Appendix #120.

Art Deco is a movement through which the decorative arts passed in the late 1920s and early 1930s, generally acknowledged to have been touched off by the 1925 Exposition des Arts Decoratifs et Industriels in Paris. The “polite” art history establishment considers it to be a sort of commercialized bastardization of the Symbolist movement of the turn of the century, hence relatively little has been written about it. To the modern browser, “Art Deco” suggests a type of cheap, breezy-looking sculpture stamped out of plastic. In fact its psychology is far more subtle and magical than that.

Art Deco arose as a consequence of several clashing influences on western - particularly British, French, and American - society after World War I. In the years after the Mexican Revolution and Pancho Villa’s raids into the United States, there was an artistic fascination with Mexican (particularly pre-Columbian) art and architectural forms, as well as with those of the North American Indians. Stepped pyramids and straight lines with sudden, tightly-knit curves, cacti, and stylized Suns were among the principal focuses of this interest.

In 1922 the tomb of Tutankhamen was discovered by Howard Carter, resulting, among other things, in an artistic and decorative sub-movement incorporating Egyptian themes. This too was absorbed into Art Deco.

Finally, and most powerfully, there was the influence of the modern machine age. By the turn of the century machines were beginning to move beyond the quaint, awkward monstrosities of the late 1800s to sleek, smooth, efficient devices. In 1900 Antoine de Saint-Exupery expressed the wonderment of mankind at this strange new encounter with the machine:

 Originally Posted By: AdS-E
Have you looked at a modern æroplane? Have you followed from year to year the evolution of its lines? Have you ever thought not only about the æroplane, but about whatever man builds, that all of man’s industrial efforts, all his computations and calculations, all the nights spent over working draughts and blueprints, invariably culminate in the production of a thing whose sole and guiding principle is the ultimate principle of simplicity?

It is as if there were a natural law which ordained that to achieve this end, to refine the curve of a piece of furniture, or a ship’s keel, or the fuselage of an æroplane, until gradually it partakes of the elementary purity of the curve of a human breast or shoulder, there must be the experimentation of several generations of craftsmen. In anything at all, perfection is finally attained not when there is no longer anything to add but when there is no longer anything to take away, when a body has been stripped down to its nakedness.

It results from this that perfection of invention touches hands with absence of invention, as if that line which the human eye will follow with effortless delight were a line that had not been invented but simply discovered, had in the beginning been hidden by nature and in the end been found by the engineer.

The machine was beautiful, impressive, and fascinating - but it was also somewhat frightening. It was an unknown quantity. It seemed to be taking humanity into an entirely different world from that which had previously existed. Books and films such as Metropolis [Chapter #23] raised the spectre of man’s losing control of machines and finding himself their servant and victim instead. So Art Deco was not just an attempt at incorporating the machine into art, but also a means of reassuring mankind that machines could be reduced to decorations and playthings at will.

Art Deco is thus a blend of exotic, mysterious antiquity and the image of the machine. When human figures appear, they are similarly mysterious, exotic, and streamlined machines.

As if this is not enough, they are also oddly cold and de-sexed as well. The 1920s was a period of flourishing homosexuality among both sexes, caused in major part by the relative sundering of males and females by World War I and the war’s toll of many millions of male lives. Men had spent years largely in the company of other men, while many women now had no chance of getting husbands even had all surviving males been interested. This plight was reflected, perhaps, in the “bobbed” hairstyles and flat-chested fashions of the 1920’s - and in the “unisexualization” of Art Deco.

All of which is to say that Art Deco is beautiful, cold, streamlined, and weird.
At first glance it appears pretty, but there is also something disturbing about it. Like the robotrix in Metropolis, it suggests something subliminally sinister, something vaguely abnormal - as though it is not now dangerous but will be if left to develop long enough.

There is a touch of the psychotic about it, as though it represents a view of the world seen through the eyes of someone who took hallucinogenic drugs while standing in the middle of a 1920s’ airplane factory. Nowhere is this peculiar atmosphere of the art form better exemplified than in the two Dr. Phibes films, where the Abominable Anton constantly surrounds himself with a phantasmagoria of Art Deco artifacts.

As Dr. Phibes communed passionately and devotedly with his dead Victoria, so did Dr. LaVey with the dead Marilyn Monroe. His success with necromantic rituals directed towards her, as recounted in Chapter #25, increased his interest in Hollywood - not as a city or an industry, but as an ECI medium for “cryonic freezing” of the life-force ...
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#43411 - 10/03/10 05:42 AM Re: Postmodernity . The advent of Superman? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I am approaching my one year annivesary at the 600 Club. Woo hoo.

To Dr. Aquino and Jake - you guys are the best.

To Prometheus - A short list of some other good stuff:

1. The Postmodern Condition by Lyotard
2. Everything by the man Jean Baudrillard.
3. The Philosophical Discourses of Modernity by Habermas.
4. Orientalism by Edward Said
5. Works by Fredric Jameson, Hans Berten, Jaques Derrida, Ihab Hassan, Thomas Kuhn, Deleuze and Guattari etc. etc.

There is a long road to walk to arrive at Postmodernism but it is an interesting walk.

Top
#44940 - 12/14/10 10:56 PM Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: ]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
Further addressing the discussion of Jason King's new age bible:

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
On a more serious note I think any work which attempts to describe a postmodern Satanism is going to have to define its terms carefully and then position itself within the current modern/postmodern debate, or else set its own position and explain that position and how it differs from the current debate.

But it sort of skips most of that, and gets right down to teaching transcendental meditation and arguing epistemologies out the yinyang instead.

 Quote:
There should at least be some reference made to Baudrillard, Lyotard, Habermas, Jameson etc. and possibly the more prominent Post-Structuralist’s.

But, there aren't. Oh there's gibberish sure, lots of it. But not that gibberish.

 Quote:
This debate has been raging on now for nearly thirty years now and has included a wide variety of thinkers (some appropriated, some not) and artist’s etc. This debate, I feel, is primarily concerned with human beings, their relationships to each other and their social, political and cultural institutions and objects. It is also primarily concerned with a critical evaluation of the philosophical underpinnings of knowledge, with an unmasking of reason as will to power, and so called objectivity as merely the perception and discourse of the dominant. Also the notion of the stable modern subject, which comes under some fire, through Freud and Saussure and those who drew on their work, is under a great deal of critical scrutiny as well within postmodern theory.

Some of that will-to-power stuff makes it in, but more as axiomatic than the subject of any ongoing debate. Has a false ring to it, too.

 Quote:
I am not sure whether JK has addressed these issues in his work, but I feel they must be addressed. And LaVey and his work must be addressed as well I think.

LaVey is addressed, just barely, at the beginning, as someone whose relevance has passed.

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#44941 - 12/14/10 11:46 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Aklo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To be honest I feel a bit uncomfortable talking about this work any further without having sat down and really taken the time to study it.

Now that Jason King appears to be a member here I am also hoping he can come in here and discuss his work in some detail.

I do feel that postmodernism and Satanism are opposing philosophical tendencies. The level of self assurance and self possession demonstrated by a Satanist is above average and isn't undermined by a Post Structuralist critique of the subject. The Satanist's ability to regard ones own needs or desires as absolutely reliable for determining ones actions is not undermined by questions of the legitimacy of power and its techniques or instruments, as in postmodern thought. I am not sure how Satanic magic can be grounded in postmodern thought???The Satanic insistence that realism, pragmatism and responsibility be respected and that reason is a valid form of acquiring knowledge is undermined by postmodern discourse I think. I don't like the insistence on uncertainty and fracture in postmodernism. I like a grander vision.

Top
#44952 - 12/15/10 09:35 AM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: ]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
 Quote:
To be honest I feel a bit uncomfortable talking about this work any further without having sat down and really taken the time to study it.


He has apparently allowed it to be posted at Goat of Mendes as a pdf, along with some video commentary. So you may want to page through it quickly and get an idea of what it does and doesn't cover? (Note that while it has 196 pages, the first four are blank, with two more after the title and two more at the end.)

In the meantime, what do you think about the death of postmodernism?

 Quote:
Recently the notion of the "death of postmodernism" has been increasingly widely debated: in 2007 Andrew Hoborek noted in his introduction to a special issue of the journal Twentieth Century Literature titled "After Postmodernism" that "declarations of postmodernism's demise have become a critical commonplace". A small group of critics has put forth a range of theories that aim to describe culture and/or society in the alleged aftermath of postmodernism, most notably Raoul Eshelman (performatism), Gilles Lipovetsky (hypermodernity), Nicolas Bourriaud (Altermodern), and Alan Kirby (digimodernism, formerly called pseudo-modernism).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism#Post-postmodernism

There's a lot more here:

 Quote:
Pseudo-modernism’s “typical intellectual states” are furthermore described as being “ignorance, fanaticism and anxiety” and it is said to produce a “trance-like state” in those participating in it. The net result of this media-induced shallowness and instantaneous participation in trivial events is a “silent autism” superseding “the neurosis of modernism and the narcissism of postmodernism.“ Kirby sees no aesthetically valuable works coming out of “pseudo-modernism.” As examples of its triteness he cites reality TV, interactive news programs, “the drivel found […] on some Wikipedia pages,” docu-soaps, and the essayistic cinema of Michael Moore or Morgan Spurlock

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-postmodernism#Definitions

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#44981 - 12/15/10 08:12 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Aklo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Shit, what a mess. All these different modernism's.

One of the more common themes of Postmodernism as it pertains to the visual arts and other cultural practices was the notion of the death of the author, the death of the avant-garde, the death of a dominant discourse on and about cultural practices, the death of the distinction between elitist high culture and low brow kitsch, and the death of privileged mediums such as painting or sculpture over the so called crafts.

The whole discourse just exploded into a thousand fragments and everything seemed to collapse into each other.

To announce a so called death of postmodernism is quite worthless in my view as this position is just one message in a world which is inundated by streams and streams of messages and discursive formations, in typical postmodern style.

I think the only way postmodernism can be cracked is by a wholesle repudiation of the philsophical framework within which it is built and by individuals whom artist's and cultural powerbrokers respect and identify with. Maybe such a repudiation has taken place, but where? I don't think it has really effected the art practice of artist's. Again it is just one more position in a sea of positions.

I do like modernism and its great journeys into the unknown. Resurrecting the avant-garde (if it ever even died) is a job and a half.

Top
#44997 - 12/16/10 07:51 AM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: ]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
Just so further straw men are avoided, it should be clear that the usage of the designator "postmodern" is a reference to moving the idea of Satanism beyond the "modern" (i.e. LaVeyan), and NOT a reference to the school of thought so-called. The work defines itself, and attempts to baste it in the juices of unconnected philosophies is to fail to be truly critical of the thing in question.

Postmodern Satanism is an attempt to offer a proactive vision of the Satanic philosophy, one which does not depend on the Judeo-Christian model for the interpretation of its labels. Now granted, this cannot be avoided entirely, given the historical development of the term "satan," however, it can be done ontologically, which is the entire point of the volume. LaVey was incapable of doing this, which is why I have moved beyond his reactionary model towards an understanding of the Adversary as an evolutionary hypostasis, rather than the "other team's bad guy".

JK
_________________________



Top
#44998 - 12/16/10 08:03 AM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Aklo]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Aklo
But it sort of skips most of that, and gets right down to teaching transcendental meditation and arguing epistemologies out the yinyang instead.


You seem to enjoy throwing words around with no inkling as to proper usage. Transcendental Meditation (TM) is a specific thing (hence the caps), and is irrelevant to anything in Postmodern Satanism. I doubt you'll even find the term "mantra" anywhere therein. And last time I checked, epistemology is the most important branch of philosophy. I eagerly await your corrections on these points . . .

JK
_________________________



Top
#45004 - 12/16/10 11:07 AM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Jason King]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
 Quote:
NOT a reference to the school of thought so-called.

My mistake then, the bulk of this discussion really does belong in the Troll Thumping after all. Considering that that was where you had put it in the first place, I stand corrected.

Your usage of the term at all though, lifting it out of its technical context, is itself one of the signatures of the "post-postmodernist" discussion. So, what do you think about digimodernism, the failure of coherent discourse, and the general Death of Postmodernism meme?
_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#45007 - 12/16/10 12:12 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Aklo]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Aklo
 Quote:
NOT a reference to the school of thought so-called.

My mistake then, the bulk of this discussion really does belong in the Troll Thumping after all. Considering that that was where you had put it in the first place, I stand corrected.

Your usage of the term at all though, lifting it out of its technical context, is itself one of the signatures of the "post-postmodernist" discussion. So, what do you think about digimodernism, the failure of coherent discourse, and the general Death of Postmodernism meme?


Your tactics leave much to be desired, Aklo. Subtly calling me a troll, asking direct questions irrelevant to my replies in attempt to "call me out," etc. Look, dude, I get it. You're not a fan of JK. Join the club. But there's a far more exclusive club out there just waiting for its first member, and all I can say is, "keep trying".

JK
_________________________



Top
#45017 - 12/16/10 01:48 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Jason King]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
 Quote:
Look, dude, I get it. You're not a fan of JK. Join the club.

Not at all, we are going to be best pals once we get past the introductory bonobo boning. But I made a huge mistake about the context, I thought your thingie was supposed to have some real relation to postmodernism, which (if you have read this thread, you will see) is itself a hilarious topic for misunderstanding and shit-throwing here, well worth bouncing. But I was wrong, so I switched back over to the thread created by "The Dead Idea", someone's fake retard character from one of our wicked-stepsister sites. (At least some of,) these goofy-unpleasant phrases I throw out, in a normal browser at least, tend to be links. Capiche?

Now, seriously though, here, in this context: You know enough about postmodernism to steal its name while disclaiming its content. I think your reasoning may be useful in advancing the discussion of whether Matthew is right about LaVey or just wrong about Modernism, or what. So give! Why postmodernism, if not intended to mean, retarded?

 Quote:
Subtly

Mom! he called me "subtil" !!!

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#45021 - 12/16/10 02:17 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Aklo]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
You think it is possible to debate here without too much emotional involvement? I'm not sure if you guys met before but the way you construct your posts, it seems he once took your lunch-money.

D.

Top
#45029 - 12/16/10 03:53 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Diavolo]
Aklo Offline
member


Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 158
 Quote:
You think it is possible to debate here without too much emotional involvement?

Do you think it's possible to give a thorough criticism to a philosophical work without the author taking it personally and acting all insulted and shit? I do, if the author is a superior being with real insights into the inner workings of reality and so on. "Elite" isn't a club, it's a quality of personal freedom.

But what you may be mistaking for emotional involvement is just a bit of fun with mammalian politics. I don't really have much invested in the question of what "postmodern" is supposed to mean, or even the idea of a better bible. I've just been relaxing and letting some of the things I do care about ferment a bit, to keep from getting too attached there.

We all have faults, but I think our purpose here ought to be to turn them into strengths. Throwing shit at things and seeing what might stick is a good exercise to help this along.

...

And now back to our regularly scheduled program:

Do you think LaVey's philosophy can be described as Modernist or "Avant Garde"? If not, why not?

_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!

Top
#45030 - 12/16/10 03:54 PM Re: Postmodern Hand-Jive, part deux [Re: Jason King]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Jason King
Just so further straw men are avoided, it should be clear that the usage of the designator "postmodern" is a reference to moving the idea of Satanism beyond the "modern" (i.e. LaVeyan), and NOT a reference to the school of thought so-called. The work defines itself, and attempts to baste it in the juices of unconnected philosophies is to fail to be truly critical of the thing in question.

Postmodern Satanism is an attempt to offer a proactive vision of the Satanic philosophy, one which does not depend on the Judeo-Christian model for the interpretation of its labels. Now granted, this cannot be avoided entirely, given the historical development of the term "satan," however, it can be done ontologically, which is the entire point of the volume. LaVey was incapable of doing this, which is why I have moved beyond his reactionary model towards an understanding of the Adversary as an evolutionary hypostasis, rather than the "other team's bad guy".

JK


I think this is exactly what Satanism needs. hardy has any religion made such an effort to distance themselves from a religion while still talking about it all the time.

Now I havent read JK's book yet (just got it yesterday - gotta say the font size is annoying just flipping through it) but I have enjoyed quite a few of the you tube videos posted.

I havent gotten a good enough grasp on "postmodern Satanism" to exactly know where I stand in relation to it. However I have throughout enjoyed the metaphysical theories and I think the aim is definitely in the right direction.

Top
Page 2 of 6 <12345>Last »


Moderator:  TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.029 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.