I really hope it’s neo-modernism, a return to the good times.
Because postmodernism and metamoderism (which is just postmodernism with a scene where some people hug and say “I love you”) are soul crushing and terrible for the human condition
Only if you choose to live like an animal. You need to elevate yourself spiritually and press onwards instead of backwards like a knuckle dragging moron.
do you realize that metamodernism also has characteristics of modernism? you idiot
nothing. metamodernism is just a pendulum swinging periodically between modernity and postmodernity. this is the end-point.
only guy in the thread that gets it, besides the
There's no such thing as meta modernism you giant pile of trash. >It's new sincerity or its post modernism. Pick one. >You are either trying to be ironic, >or are you so sincere people can barely believe it's not an act.
Illiterate moronism is already here, everything is cobbled together by morons as an imitation of something real. People present as experts because they "read" the book but don't really know how to read anything. Every thread here on every subject is filled with the dumbest morons in human history. There are no subcultures or movements only morons.
you have no idea how full and intense it feels to live like this without doing much at all. ohhhh christ save me, and then you jerk off on disgusting anime girls, sometimes you're trying to pray and you feel lust so you're like oh no please stop the sinful thoughts, but then you're like, I can't keep praying while I feel horny, so I'll jerk off, and then you write the filthiest smut and jerk off to it, and say wicked shit on IQfy while you're at it, calling people Black folk and telling them to kill themselves, then you clutch your cross and go ohhhh I am such a sinner and you whip yourself, I'm a stupid pig, ohh I'm such a filthy pig, and then you see someone asking for charity and go euughh frick off Black person but then you're like oh ohhhh the world is so corrupt and hateful, and I'm the most hateful swine, shameful and unclean, SAVE ME LORD, and you whip yourself again, but it's sort of a turn-on, then you drink and shitpost, and then you despise yourself because you are a slave to vice, ohhh christ have mercy while I have another glass.
You know how Gollum has constant conversations with Smeagol? It's like that, you never get bored. Truly a high IQ way to live.
yes. we have already seen the revival of the Egyptian deity kek with memes. larpgays try to resserect odin. the only ones that survive the blackrock financial crisis will be religious people
>we have already seen the revival of the Egyptian deity kek with memes. larpgays try to resserect odin.
you are literally using examples of metamodernism here. try again
I'm unironically a polytheist, and it's not a larp either. I am what comes after metamodernism
11 months ago
Anonymous
I think we need a work proclaiming “god is revived” or “absolute materialism is dead” (though people will probably confuse this ontological statement for one regarding people’s attitudes towards commodity consumption). It’s pretty clear that people are starting to accept metaphysics again, even if it is just moronic zoomers meeting god while on shrooms/dmt
Fire followed by blood, barbarism & brutality... God willing. This is an age of degeneracy which has bred a blend of weakness & wickedness as never before; it must be purged so that mankind may survive.
You are the weak and the degenerate. It is you who must perish
Each of you is either trying to be "ironic" or actually ignorant.
Explain how this current global civilization, rife with degeneracy, crippled by short-sighted solipsism, and overweening appetite for all of the resources on Earth (and beyond) can *possibly* continue indefinitely.
You can't. This is entirely unsustainable, and that is by reason of many problems which *shall* get sorted out, one way or another. You cannot feed the billions of humans on this planet, nor sate their thirst, nor power all of the things they need or want perpetually with things as they are. Wild creatures are going extinct because of our infinite greed for whatever we want whenever we want it. Continue on this path a few more centuries, and this paradise planet would be utterly raped -- no more wilderness, no more wild animals, no more sea life, just tens or hundreds of billions of humans (most of them starving) clinging to meaningless lives filled with despair, choking on a poisonous atmosphere, cannibalizing each other for precious calories.
Death.
Better to kill billions now than every human and all other animal life in the very near future.
...that is, unless certain technologies are allowed to be developed by the public at large.
>Explain how this current global civilization, rife with degeneracy, crippled by short-sighted solipsism, and overweening appetite for all of the resources on Earth (and beyond) can *possibly* continue indefinitely. >You can't. This is entirely unsustainable, and that is by reason of many problems which *shall* get sorted out, one way or another.
I agree 100% which is why we have to tif ourselves of the evil that is capitalism
You're a moron and everything you believe is moronic. Feeding 100 billion people is easy. As demonstrated by your post your problem isn't lack of food but boredom and decay from everything being too easy. You're a caged fat sack of shit making up hysterical nonsense stories with no relationship to reality out of boredom.
You are the actual decay personified.
Life extension technologies released just in time to indefinitely prolong the presence of the most mind controlled generational cohort ever. They will preach sterility and eternal mortal life.
the only true answer is that the codex form will die with the next generation just like the oral tradition ended with the creation of the written word so is this the end of the text from
Pure symbol-consumption in many forms that is increasingly AI generated as each breakthrough reduces the concentric circles of "only humans can produce X" down to nothing.
Bro it's going to get so fricking bad you can't even fathom the horror. Time dilation of human perception will make you into demon frick meat for billions of years.
metamodernisms can be understood to just be modernism, functionally speaking its modernism with a cultural/compositional update via the postmodern movement.
"post-postmodernism" is just postmodernism in the same way that a question about a question is just a question, or a criticism of a criticism is still just criticism. the stacking is just indulgent nonsense.
so whatever comes after metamodernism is whatever comes after, be it more metamodernism or postmodernism. those are the two options considering that one is a Work created as a Work and the other is a Work created as a response to or departure from or criticism of the Work.
it bears mentioning that the M->PM->MM thing doesnt always happen in that sequence
The power of the structures isn't what's in doubt anymore, we know religion is powerful not simply some delusion and weakness. You can be a sincere Christian and criticize that same form of Christianity your adhering to, using structures revealed to you through your Christian history.
Pretty stories are given their beauty by gods not men, from the first worms all life wants to do is recognize and grasp that divine beauty given from above.
Bottom text exists and it bestows power on those who can wield it.
There's no such thing as meta modernism you giant pile of trash. >It's new sincerity or its post modernism. Pick one. >You are either trying to be ironic, >or are you so sincere people can barely believe it's not an act.
Technaissentia. The Technological Birth. You will still need to work very hard to achieve what you desire, but your desires will reach into the heavens.
WHAT DID YOU FRICKING Black folk MAKE ME LOOK UP
https://jaredmorningstar.medium.com/a-metamodern-ironically-sincere-interpretation-of-taylor-swifts-transgressive-cross-cultural-732928d0436a
I HAVE TO FINISH PLAYING THE MASTER CHIEF COLLECTION BUT I'M READING THIS SHIT INSTEAD
any label after "postmodern" is BS. people dont want to admit that after postmodernism, there is nothing. Postmodernism itself didnt even create much new so much as just reshuffle and break apart older narratives.
I think David Graeber had a really good argument, that "postmodern" is essentially what happened because technological progress kind of stalled and not much new was created. Postmodernism is how we explained the lack of real tech progress in our lives. And tech has stayed relatively stagnant ever since.
I mean, it has. Hardly any real innovation in the material world. It's all been in computers. Their expectations back in the 50s was way higher than what we actually got. We have even gone backwards in some things like space travel and airline sped.
we haven't gone backwards in space travel kek, we just haven't gone to the moon because it's pointless. and somehow computers, the most revolutionary invention since the printing press don't count because they aren't "in the material world." sorry, but this is literally the dumbest point you could possibly try to argue. ALL of the "material" technology around you is lightyears superior to technology in the 60s. you just don't appreciate it because it's normal to you.
11 months ago
Anonymous
its not that computers dont matter, but computers and online are pretty much the only things seeing any real innovation at all. virtually no innovation in cars, trains, planes, infrastructure, architecture and probably even energy. the pace of technological change has certainly slowed since the early 20th century
11 months ago
Anonymous
Everything he said is correct. There's been very little innovation since the 60s. We've made things more efficient, and computing power is higher, but it's all just incremental refinement of the same technologies. Nothing new. Whatever the world looks like by the end of the century will likely remain so for at least the next thousand years, assuming there isnt a catabolic collapse of the industrial system
11 months ago
Anonymous
What this fails to recognise is that there's a fundamental difference between innovation and development, it's relatively easy to make existing things more efficient, faster, cheaper, safer, etc. Particularly in computer tech, that's paid off quite dramatically. On the other hand, what genuinely new technology has been invented since the 60s?
>space travel
Now there's a literal telescope satellite orbiting at 1.5 million kilometer from the earth, ~4 times farther than the moon
We have clear as shit images from pluto
Moderns had sincere belief that technology would make things better. Postmoderns rejected progress and most things as virtual constructs. Metamodernism introduces hope that we can use the constructs to build a future. All of it is about dealing with the corrupting power that technology gives.
Hypermodernism.
The sums of latent spaces derived from multimedia data sets will quantify previously unquantifiable concepts as known boundaries within the space of all possible latent spaces. The quantum computing revolution will extend this process to all words and phrases in all languages (including non-verbal communication), finally bridging the gap between the sciences and the humanities. Every work of art shall henceforth have a knowable scientific value and every work of science shall have a knowable aesthetic value. Postmodernism will be impossible as all interpretations of all statements will become amenable to scientific measurement. Metamodernism will be redundant, as its mission will be complete.
Hypermodernism will expose all contradictions within moral and aesthetic value systems, resulting in a division of society between those who wish to superstitiously cling to the old ways and those who wish to move on to the reevaluation of all values. The newfound objectivity of the language in which the reevaluation is conducted will produce universal principles for a self-governing people who accept the exploitative nature of material reality, but who neither wish to exploit nor be exploited. Thus the Ubermensch will be born from rational objectivity, overcoming and fulfilling both Nietzsche and Kant at the same time.
The Ubermenschen will be at a material disadvantage, but they shall have the counterbalancing advantage of having overcome all ideology and will therefore be able to exemplify the spirit of total war in a way never seen before. The resulting conflict will make WWII look like a minor skirmish. The subsequent postwar recovery will, similarly, make the 1950s look like an impoverished dark age.
I will not have sex. I will not take my meds. You cannot make me.
Bro it's going to get so fricking bad you can't even fathom the horror. Time dilation of human perception will make you into demon frick meat for billions of years.
That could be a good thing if utilised wisely. Those who depart from the hypermorality of the global semiotic mapping could receive an optimum deterrent against recidivism in the blink of an eye.
>will produce universal principles for a self-governing people
trust me bro
How could superhuman objectivity of semiotics lead to anything else? When contradictions collapse, all that can remain by definition is the universals. A group of people voluntarily obligated to the same set of universals are self-governing.
You're still thinking in terms of humans doing human things with other humans. The forces behind these infinite nightmare systems are not at all human. For them, humans are just tools to actualize the age of darkness. Once we've built the beast computer the rug will be pulled and entities that utterly despise you will at last manifest to make you into their plaything until kingdom come. There will be no rest.
11 months ago
Anonymous
The darkness you speak of is inside the human, but you are right it seeks to be bigger than the human, to fully enslave the host body and extrapolate outside to reshape the fabrics of reality. No technological inventions will ever do what the human does not crave it to do, whether he realizes it or not, including depravity, decadence, hedonism and the eternal struggle against the establishment. There will be technological devils and saints, and they will fight for humanity for humanity's sake.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>There will be technological devils
There will be actual devils. They've manipulated humans into creating technology that will allow them to manifest. Once the systems are in place, it's rug pull rape time. Actual fricking monsters will seize direct control of this world and evil will express itself fully in the material realm. Nothing will be off limits. Every depravity that can be visited upon human beings will be exercised. They know they're on limited time so they're going to party as hard as possible for as long as possible (aided by time dilation tech) until God finally ends history.
go back to the 2010s referencegay, this is our board now
11 months ago
Anonymous
and who the frick are you?
11 months ago
Anonymous
I'm a part of what some people call "zoomer moralgays" and it feels punk as frick. It feels like an actual counter culture, or rebellion against the badculture that dominates American colleges.
11 months ago
Anonymous
yeah, the country club is gonna FREAK! when they hear about how much you love christ
11 months ago
Anonymous
any more cage panegyrics for us, ironygay?
11 months ago
Anonymous
depends, are you going to say anymore moronic shit like being part of the dominant theocratic hegemony is "punk" and "counter culture"
11 months ago
Anonymous
>you're christian!!!
preelectiongays make posts like this and think of themselves as superior intellectuals defending the "good" old ways
11 months ago
Anonymous
I am definitely superior to an underage moron bragging about religious LARPing as being some kind of Ubermensch
11 months ago
Anonymous
Too bad I didn't mention religion once.
11 months ago
Anonymous
do tell then, then where do your morals come from that is axiomatically opposed to your liberal college boogeyman
11 months ago
Anonymous
wojak memes
11 months ago
Anonymous
This postmodern coping of yours is fascinating to behold. You are literally (as in unironically) freaking out over the guy saying he's a moralgayging zoomer.
He's not trying to convert you gramps, chill out.
11 months ago
Anonymous
there is literally a christgay Qanon psyop being conducted on IQfy and this board right now
https://boards.IQfy.org/lit/thread/22248350#top
11 months ago
Anonymous
And you take it that they are trying to convert you?
Have you gotten to the end of the DFW article E Unibus Pluram? You are freaking out over the "anti-rebels" and thus providing evidence that DFW was correct and that the moral gayging zoomer above, is actually doing something so rebellious that older people freak out.
Well done. Made this dumb thread a lot more interesting. We truly have now entered postmetamodernity.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>And you take it that they are trying to convert you?
Me? never said anything of the sort and then you dreamed up a whole fart sniffing post based on that strawman but nice try
The point of the film and marketing is to fleece boomers and christgays to fill their coffers for political campaign dark money and activist court cases like we just saw in the lastest SC session
11 months ago
Anonymous
Ahh of course, you wouldn't be freaked about the possibility of forces religious conversion, you are freaked because it diminishes the integrity of the market place. Makes perfect sense now that you explained.
Anywqy, did you ever read that DFW essay?
11 months ago
Anonymous
you just gonna keep making snarky non-sequiturs or what?
I've read a good deal of anything not IJ by him
11 months ago
Anonymous
Its not a nonsequitor if you've read that essay and gotten to the concept of the "anti-rebel"
What do you think about that idea of his?
11 months ago
Anonymous
what do I think about the concept of anti-rebels?
we don't need to regurgitate the whole song and dance about new sincerity, the salient point to our conversation is rejecting soul crushing millenial and nu media is not exclusive to those of faith and DFW's discussion of aesthetics and sensibilities isn't conflatabale with reactionary morals and governance
do tell then, then where do your morals come from that is axiomatically opposed to your liberal college boogeyman
never got an answer here btw
11 months ago
Anonymous
literally the post above yours
did you really spend 9 minutes writing that?
11 months ago
Anonymous
le ebic zoomer troll!
>we don't need to regurgitate the whole song and dance about new sincerity
It's Unironically (capital U) the entire point of this thread.
I made a point unlike this post
11 months ago
Anonymous
You didnt make a point, you rejected a term and acted like you made a point.
Those christgays watching a popular movie freaked you out because of some conspiratorial idea that films and dark money shake the foundations of the legal system. "We" didnt see anything at the last supreme court session, you saw something and assume everyone interpreted the same conspiracy of dark money and law.
You make the moral gayging christolarpers look more appealing when weighed next to your delusions.
You prove FDW accurate in his predictions about people in the future freaking out over anti-rebels.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Fwanklin D. Woosevelt
11 months ago
Anonymous
Deflect all you want, but that film is an anti-rebel film and that's why everyone in the media and (you) are freaking out over it.
11 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not him you antifun debatebrained moron.
11 months ago
Anonymous
no I did make a point distinguishing "rebellious" literary sensibilities and aesthetics from your fatih based visceral reaction to LGBTQ and millenial writing in media, which let's be real is what you're all "rebelling" against. sorry it went over your head
11 months ago
Anonymous
What does this have to do with the IQfy thread about that film got to do with it then? And dark money?
11 months ago
Anonymous
>What does this have to do with the IQfy thread about that film got to do with it then? And dark money?
don't go muddying the waters asshat, surely you're not that desperate already
Its not a nonsequitor if you've read that essay and gotten to the concept of the "anti-rebel"
What do you think about that idea of his?
>Its not a nonsequitor if you've read that essay and gotten to the concept of the "anti-rebel" >What do you think about that idea of his?
11 months ago
Anonymous
>"We" didnt see anything at the last supreme court session, you saw something and assume everyone interpreted the same conspiracy of dark money and law.
eat shit
https://archive.is/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/30/supreme-court-leonard-leo-dark-money
The case in question was led by two Republican attorneys general and backed by a brief filed by 17 other Republican attorneys general – all of whom are connected to the Leo-backed Raga. The Foundation for Government Accountability, a conservative thinktank, filed another brief in support of abolishing student loan forgiveness. Between 2019 and 2021, Leo’s network donated nearly $4m to the foundation and its advocacy arm.
11 months ago
Anonymous
So what's the conspiracy?
11 months ago
Anonymous
which part isn't adding up for ya bud
11 months ago
Anonymous
The part where you link to a "dark money" figurehead in the exact same way that the christgays (watching that film about trafficking, linked above) always complain abouy George Soros influencing politics with his money. Except they weren't clever enough to give it a moniker like dark money, instead the just yell Soros! And every time the do, they are laughed at.
Except in your case, you think you have the correct conspiracy laid out for everyone to bare witness.
But really the larger point related to this thread was about metamodernism, or new sincerity as it was called, and what comes after. And I was simply pointing out what I see, that the biggest film in america right now is an "anti-rebel" film, which DFW talked about in E Unibus Pluram
11 months ago
Anonymous
I didn't limit it to a figurehead that's just one article with demonstrative proof like you asked for, obv it's far more decentralized through the states. just look at how many red states have 0 age minimum child marriage laws with parental consent.
>And I was simply pointing out what I see, that the biggest film in america right now is an "anti-rebel" film, which DFW talked about in E Unibus Pluram
yeah and I pointed out you're full of shit trying to conflate his critique of aesthetics and sensibility with out of vogue religious fundamentalism
seriously wtf does pic rel have to do with Qanon boomer slop and don't try to turn this around on me you admit you brought up DFW. I was talking to le based "moral zoomer" anon before you butted in
11 months ago
Anonymous
First of all, he isn't narrowly talking about literature, yes literature tends to drive culture, and he mentioned lit, but he's talking in general about what probably would be the next generation of rebellious behavior within the culture as a whole... Those who disfavor detached irony, and embrace straightforward sincerity. "Religious Fundamentalism" as you strawmaned it, is a sincerely held conviction for them. There is no irony, they Unironically rebel against the culture of rebellious behavior and aesthetics. It has everything to do it with.
That trafficking movie is sincerely unironically sincere, and you, and all of the MSM are freaking out over it. They are rebellious against you and MSM.
Do you need this in a video essay to understand?
11 months ago
Anonymous
>There is no irony, they Unironically rebel against the culture of rebellious behavior and aesthetics. It has everything to do it with.
okay great I feel the same way and I'm an atheist now what, am I an anti-rebel because I'm an atheist? no
11 months ago
Anonymous
Do you feel like being atheist is rebellious nowadays? I thought there is some public opinion survey out there that shows most people don't believe in god. If this is true, and you are an atheist, this would place you well within the norm and thus disqualify you from being a rebel. Atheists were once rebellious, surely, but now? Not exactly.
Being unironically atheist still lacks the element of going against the norm, even though it is consistent with having a sincerely held belief.
11 months ago
Anonymous
done knocking down your strawman, try again if you want me to respond
11 months ago
Anonymous
Again you dismiss as if you are better or more knowledgeable instead of honestly engaging.
The anti-rebels rebel against post modern normativity. Do you agree with this statement?
11 months ago
Anonymous
doesn't matter you're going to put words in my mouth and assume a bunch of shit like every other post just to obfuscate and circle back around to "Christians are anti-rebels because uhh, I say so!" while I've actually made arguments why they aren't
> if I'm a "rebel" making cynical doomer art under an oppressive regime, the oppressive regime doesn't circle back around to being a new breed of free thinking "anti-rebels" when they oppress me
in this hypothetical the actual "anti-rebel" anon is so fixated on would be someone that had the audacity to make uplifting optimistic art that counters the cynical doomers
respond to this if you want
11 months ago
Anonymous
>!
gottem
11 months ago
Anonymous
I said unironic zoomer Christians are rebellious because they rebel against postmodern normativity.(but there can be other ways to rebel against pomo norms too) And the most popular film in america right now, during summer no less, is a supposedly deranged group of anti-rebelious Christians saving kids from slavery, and the postmodern MSM is freaking the frick out about it.
This is rebellious behavior in the postmodern world, because they sincerely believe they are saving the world from evil, with zero irony or double meaning and the authority in the culture is trying to squash it.
All true rebels need a corresponding authority to do the finger wagging, thought policing, or rebellion squashing, otherwise it's a pseudo rebelion, rebellion in name only, like Woodstock 99, for example.
And the reason why being a sincere atheist isn't rebellious is because postmodern normative culture does not squash out atheistic rebellions.
This is what I interpret DFW saying about the anti-rebels. Hard to be more clear than this.
Have a good night anon, maybe someone else will take up the discussion with you.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Blessed post.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>zoomers just found out about vigilante movies
11 months ago
Anonymous
you're doing exactly what I said you would to the letter thank god you left after conflating all your terms and frameworks
11 months ago
Anonymous
Not an argument
11 months ago
Anonymous
you have no idea how full and intense it feels to live like this without doing much at all. ohhhh christ save me, and then you jerk off on disgusting anime girls, sometimes you're trying to pray and you feel lust so you're like oh no please stop the sinful thoughts, but then you're like, I can't keep praying while I feel horny, so I'll jerk off, and then you write the filthiest smut and jerk off to it, and say wicked shit on IQfy while you're at it, calling people Black folk and telling them to kill themselves, then you clutch your cross and go ohhhh I am such a sinner and you whip yourself, I'm a stupid pig, ohh I'm such a filthy pig, and then you see someone asking for charity and go euughh frick off Black person but then you're like oh ohhhh the world is so corrupt and hateful, and I'm the most hateful swine, shameful and unclean, SAVE ME LORD, and you whip yourself again, but it's sort of a turn-on, then you drink and shitpost, and then you despise yourself because you are a slave to vice, ohhh christ have mercy while I have another glass.
You know how Gollum has constant conversations with Smeagol? It's like that, you never get bored. Truly a high IQ way to live.
11 months ago
Anonymous
this pasta is more well-written and hard-hitting than notes from underground
11 months ago
Anonymous
>There is no irony, they Unironically rebel against the culture of rebellious behavior and aesthetics. It has everything to do it with.
okay great I feel the same way and I'm an atheist now what, am I an anti-rebel because I'm an atheist? no
like do you understand if I'm a "rebel" making cynical doomer art under an oppressive regime, the oppressive regime doesn't circle back around to being a new breed of free thinking "anti-rebels" when they oppress me
11 months ago
Anonymous
I, like, don't exactly understand m8. But I'm trying.
11 months ago
Anonymous
> if I'm a "rebel" making cynical doomer art under an oppressive regime, the oppressive regime doesn't circle back around to being a new breed of free thinking "anti-rebels" when they oppress me
in this hypothetical the actual "anti-rebel" anon is so fixated on would be someone that had the audacity to make uplifting optimistic art that counters the cynical doomers
11 months ago
Anonymous
The epic misspelling and exclamation mark and french definite article redditors used 15 year ago.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>we don't need to regurgitate the whole song and dance about new sincerity
It's Unironically (capital U) the entire point of this thread.
11 months ago
Anonymous
depends, are you going to say anymore moronic shit like being part of the dominant theocratic hegemony is "punk" and "counter culture"
https://warosu.org/lit/?task=search&search_text=punk+as+frick+It+feels+like+an+actual+counter+culture
ya dip
11 months ago
Anonymous
thanks, though this board is plagued by those types like the other anon that jumped in if he wasn't trolling, though that'd explain his shit arguments
It's all artschool, crit theory BS. It's not real. The art isn't the theory. The theory exists in its own world, with its own rules. Art, at least partially, reflects life. Unless you think everything will remain constant in the world then consequently change in the art world is just as inevitable. Once you let go of trying to fit works into these false metanarrarives and instead insist upon taking them as they are on your own terms, everything opens up again and becomes interesting again.
that may be so but as soon as we move from the realm of sensorial experience to process and communication of the art do we not neccessarily enter the realm of contextualization and narrative?
11 months ago
Anonymous
>though this board is plagued by those types
Have you mentioned which type you are?
11 months ago
Anonymous
I don't got no type (Nah)
Bad b***hes is the only thing that I like (Woo)
11 months ago
Anonymous
I don't know this lyric and I'm not interested in it enough to search it. Do you have a non-ironic trigger word to run your meaningful conversation mode? Should I guess it?
11 months ago
Anonymous
I met an aged, aged man
Upon the lonely moor:
I knew I was a gentleman,
And he was but a boor.
So I stopped and roughly questioned him,
"Come, tell me how you live!"
But his words impressed my ear no more
Than if it were a sieve.
He said, "I look for soap-bubbles,
That lie among the wheat,
And bake them into mutton-pies,
And sell them in the street.
I sell them unto men," he said,
"Who sail on stormy seas;
And that's the way I get my bread –
A trifle, if you please."
But I was thinking of a way
To multiply by ten,
And always, in the answer, get
The question back again.
I did not hear a word he said,
But kicked that old man calm,
And said, "Come, tell me how you live!"
And pinched him in the arm.
His accents mild took up the tale:
He said, "I go my ways,
And when I find a mountain-rill,
I set it in a blaze.
And thence they make a stuff they call
Rowland's Macassar Oil;
But fourpence-halfpenny is all
They give me for my toil."
But I was thinking of a plan
To paint one's gaiters green,
So much the color of the grass
That they could ne'er be seen.
I gave his ear a sudden box,
And questioned him again,
And tweaked his grey and reverend locks,
And put him into pain.
He said, "I hunt for haddock's eyes
Among the heather bright,
And work them into waistcoat-buttons
In the silent night.
And these I do not sell for gold,
Or coin or silver-mine,
But for a copper-halfpenny,
And that will purchase nine.
"I sometimes dig for buttered rolls,
Or set limed twigs for crabs;
I sometimes search the flowery knolls
For wheels of hansom cabs.
And that's the way" (he gave a wink)
"I get my living here,
And very gladly will I drink
Your Honour's health in beer."
I heard him then, for I had just
Completed my design
To keep the Menai bridge from rust
By boiling it in wine.
I duly thanked him, ere I went,
For all his stories queer,
But chiefly for his kind intent
To drink my health in beer.
And now if e'er by chance I put
My fingers into glue,
Or madly squeeze a right-hand foot
Into a left-hand shoe;
Or if a statement I aver
Of which I am not sure,
I think of that strange wanderer
Upon the lonely moor.
11 months ago
Anonymous
And in your opinion other anons are the plague here. Amazing. See you tomorrow.
Some lucky bastard out there has came in her pussy. I wonder if anyone's ever nutted in her, then she watched and moaned as another woman lapped the cum out of her with her tongue, softly sucking on the clit as the cum dribbled onto her fingers
let me guess some civic-nationalist fasc shit in Hungary and Belarus
11 months ago
Anonymous
actually you are wrong on both counts
it's more fundamental than politics, though it will influence them
think actual art movement manifesto
11 months ago
Anonymous
?the Italian Futurists
11 months ago
Anonymous
yes, like that one
11 months ago
Anonymous
I read of it recently in pic rel
great book
hmm I bet you're eyeing AI the same way the Futurist were cinema
11 months ago
Anonymous
actually it doesn't deal with AI at all because it's not something AI can do
it's human-centered but not in opposition to AI
it's curious you went there, anon, but I think people will extrapolate what they want or need from it including things that pertain to AI
11 months ago
Anonymous
so sculpture or something physical like that then?
11 months ago
Anonymous
I'm sure it will turn out like the half dozen manifestos that went anywhere and not the 2000 that didn't.
They were inspired by similar ideas and authors and shared a style. It became a movement that way because there was a decent amount of consensus with a handful of talented writers.
I think of it like this. Prophets in their day can sometimes be famous and have contemporary prophets who back them up. Sometimes a generation gets a single prophet who is only vindicated after his generation and people discover that they were misled by hundreds of false teachers.
I think today lit is like the latter. There is no coherent understanding of what the world is. Every attempt to do so is subverted by writers who care more about money.
Why can no one ever agree on this? Is it because it's still a work in progress?
Evenryone actually believed in modernism until the advent of postmodernism. there was no premodern era. Its simply the assurance of direction, a traditionalist culture would still be modernist in its cognition and would use the tools they have at hand to forward their progression towards frank manifest objectives instead of ruminating over infinite self doubts within self doubts within self doubts.
A drug lets you forget everything except the media you're consuming so when you play Super Mario you spend the entire game in an existential crisis resenting whatever god cursed you to live life as Mario with the princess always out of reach.
(with a silly voice) A drug lets you forget everything except the media you're consuming so when you play Super Mario you spend the entire game in an existential crisis resenting whatever god cursed you to live life as Mario with the princess always out of reach.
My dear zoomer, starting over on a clean slate takes talent and drive, and you lot haven't got any. Just because you upend the wastebasket when mum doesn't let you watch the Fortnite finals doesn't mean you can apply the same sort of tantrum to cultcha and expect results. You're doomed to live out your days in the shadow of modernism.
I want to have sex with Taylor Swift. I want to hit it from the back while pulling on her leash as she moans daddy loud enough that Jack Antonoff can hear. I want her to beg for my cum and I want her to ask me to ruin her career by getting her pregnant. I want her to send me a video of her on her knees naked panting like a dog with her torso leaned back on her heels so her ass spreads out against her feet. I want to press a israeliteeled buttplug up her tight butthole and send her out on stage with it rubbing the rim of her anus and the metal warm in her rectum. I want to splatter her face with my cum and then I want Olivia Rodrigo to lick it off her cheeks as she fingers Taylor. I want to live in Taylor's apartment for a week where we engage in an intense dom/sub weeklong roleplay where I chain her up and keep her in a cage and make her cum with a powerful vibrator five times a day. I want to fill her ass and pussy and mouth with my seed and when she gets pregnant I want her to breastfeed from her own milky breasts. I want to blindfold her and host a gangbang where the men in her road crew take turns stuffing Swift's little pussy with hot loads of steaming cum and I want her to beg someone to hold a cup under her vegana to catch the cum dribbling out so she can drink it up. I want to frick Taylor's brains out so intensely that she considers quitting music to become a full-time frickbawd. Once she's done that I will donate her fortune to my hometown library system. And then I will plow her in the stacks.
>She hit the wall
you're fricking insane. you're telling me you wouldn't slowly rim her delicious butthole while she presses her tight ass mmm into your face and squeals and you also slide a finger into her pussy deep mm yes and you can feel her clench around you mm
It's all artschool, crit theory BS. It's not real. The art isn't the theory. The theory exists in its own world, with its own rules. Art, at least partially, reflects life. Unless you think everything will remain constant in the world then consequently change in the art world is just as inevitable. Once you let go of trying to fit works into these false metanarrarives and instead insist upon taking them as they are on your own terms, everything opens up again and becomes interesting again.
It’s just descriptive. Nobody is saying that only modernism was able to be made during the modern period. It’s rather that they’re describing the obviously true fact that the modern period was defined by modernism. When they ask “what comes after modernism” what they really are asking is what will the defining characteristic be? It’s not as if they’re suggesting it’s going to be a thing and only art that fits in that box can be made. You could’ve made medieval Gothic art in 1990, for example, but it would matter a lot less than a Damian Hirst.
I don't necessarily take issue with this interpretation of the initial question although I do think it's inconsequential. The defining characteristic of so broad a category of art as a collection of decades or centuries is necessarily so vague and insubstantial a thing as to be incapable of capturing the nuance of what was really happening in the world, in the art that was reflecting it. No abstract assessment of what modernism is supposed to mean will be as interesting or as telling as any of the key works which are apparently under the jurisdiction of this term. The more qualifications you add to these kinds of critical terms so as to make them applicable to the staggering breadth of what they're actually supposed to encompass, the less you end up really saying.
>You could’ve made medieval Gothic art in 1990, for example, but it would matter a lot less than a Damian Hirst
If somebody were to show me an authentically rendered medieval style painting or tapestry, made today and with genuine skill and passion for the work, I am absolutely positive I would be more blown away by that than the collected shithousery of Damian Hirst.
thanks, though this board is plagued by those types like the other anon that jumped in if he wasn't trolling, though that'd explain his shit arguments
[...]
that may be so but as soon as we move from the realm of sensorial experience to process and communication of the art do we not neccessarily enter the realm of contextualization and narrative?
>do we not neccessarily enter the realm of contextualization and narrative?
I'm not denying the value of context or of broader narratives generally. I'm advocating for the artistically inclined to be more self-willed. To ask what is coming next in the art world in terms of art/lit theory presupposes that these domains have some kind of authority.
But artists do this. There’s a Japanese Christian who lived in New Jersey that even paints with medieval materials. He’s got some recognition, mostly for being non-white, but nobody really values his art all that much because that’s not where the culture is. We’re not Medievals.
11 months ago
Anonymous
So what if a couple of snooty mags and galleries don't care, or there's no commercial potential? Is that really all this comes down to? >We're not Medievals
No, but the mediaevals are able to speak to us nonetheless. This isn't worthless at all. Give it the benefit of the doubt and you'll find something to it, I'm sure. The cult of progression has absolutely no place whatsoever in artistic expression.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>The cult of progression has absolutely no place whatsoever in artistic expression.
Says you.
11 months ago
Anonymous
It’s not merely that it’s not commercially successful. The artist I mentioned actually manages to eke out a living. I think he’s even on the faculty of a university. The issue is rather that the art 1) comes off as insincere or somehow inauthentic and 2) doesn’t articulate or speak to the broader culture. For these reasons, the artist can be appreciated by a cult following of his contemporaries, but he’ll be limited in both commercial and gallery success and he’ll inevitably be washed away under the tide of art history because like I said, we are not Medievals.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Unless I'm mistaken you seem to be suggesting that it's either impossible or near enough to create something now which is primarily informed by or in service of an ideal which found its initial expression in an earlier time. Do I have your position basically right? In any case, could you expand on why this (or whatever else it is) is the case in your view? I'm just not seeing it.
One interesting possibility I’ve considered is a sort of parallax shift where the history of art and thought itself opens up and is shown to have taken paths other than the one we think of now.
I think that a sort of return to form could’ve been on the horizon, were it not for internet and ways in which we’ve totally transformed life into a technical mode. I was recently reading Virgil and found that he chose to live an agricultural life in the countryside mimicking poets from several hundred years before him. I thought about what that would like today or if it would even be possible. Probably not.
>be me >writing first book >intense disgust for sarcasm >hear about metamodernism >haven't read any authors associated with it >it fits my style anyways
Why am I like this? Is postmodernism so vile that it leads people to similar conclusions?
Post-Zoomerism
Subfuturisttranspresentism
the flood
dream on
Super Modernio bros. 2
ultraviolet modernism
Post-meta-modernism.
Obviously.
only moron in this thread smart enough to get the bait post
I really hope it’s neo-modernism, a return to the good times.
Because postmodernism and metamoderism (which is just postmodernism with a scene where some people hug and say “I love you”) are soul crushing and terrible for the human condition
Modernism was also soul crushing and terrible for the human condition.
It was necessary.
Only if you choose to live like an animal. You need to elevate yourself spiritually and press onwards instead of backwards like a knuckle dragging moron.
Do I need to remind you that the highest achievement of modernism was creation of USA?
Are you some kind of a moron?
I usually don't stoop to ad hom's but please, please, defenestrate yourself promptly.
The human condition is soul crushing and terrible, you dimwit
Not true THOUGH, if we had TND and I finally got to have sex everything would be alright
Sounds like it just sucks to be you.
Nah homie I’m happy I’m alive. I think life is more good than bad, you just got a shit attitude
The leftist utopia/dystopia that the new left wants to build is the neo-modernism. So you should be happy.
do you realize that metamodernism also has characteristics of modernism? you idiot
only guy in the thread that gets it, besides the
who accidentally got it
>chocolate milk has characteristics of milk idiot
Illiterate moronism is already here, everything is cobbled together by morons as an imitation of something real. People present as experts because they "read" the book but don't really know how to read anything. Every thread here on every subject is filled with the dumbest morons in human history. There are no subcultures or movements only morons.
Finally, a movement for me!
Yomama, or just dystopia
Total Black personion
If not literally Jesus Christ then some other kind of religious revival.
yes. we have already seen the revival of the Egyptian deity kek with memes. larpgays try to resserect odin. the only ones that survive the blackrock financial crisis will be religious people
>we have already seen the revival of the Egyptian deity kek with memes. larpgays try to resserect odin.
you are literally using examples of metamodernism here. try again
you have a soi boi face and body. lmao. try again at life
I'm unironically a polytheist, and it's not a larp either. I am what comes after metamodernism
I think we need a work proclaiming “god is revived” or “absolute materialism is dead” (though people will probably confuse this ontological statement for one regarding people’s attitudes towards commodity consumption). It’s pretty clear that people are starting to accept metaphysics again, even if it is just moronic zoomers meeting god while on shrooms/dmt
Corporate misanthropism/anti-humanism or maybe Mass Transhumanism
Else, total reformation
Fire followed by blood, barbarism & brutality... God willing. This is an age of degeneracy which has bred a blend of weakness & wickedness as never before; it must be purged so that mankind may survive.
im trans too if it matters
happy 4 u anon :3
john oliver. i though the scum of the earth love john oliver
Each of you is either trying to be "ironic" or actually ignorant.
Explain how this current global civilization, rife with degeneracy, crippled by short-sighted solipsism, and overweening appetite for all of the resources on Earth (and beyond) can *possibly* continue indefinitely.
You can't. This is entirely unsustainable, and that is by reason of many problems which *shall* get sorted out, one way or another. You cannot feed the billions of humans on this planet, nor sate their thirst, nor power all of the things they need or want perpetually with things as they are. Wild creatures are going extinct because of our infinite greed for whatever we want whenever we want it. Continue on this path a few more centuries, and this paradise planet would be utterly raped -- no more wilderness, no more wild animals, no more sea life, just tens or hundreds of billions of humans (most of them starving) clinging to meaningless lives filled with despair, choking on a poisonous atmosphere, cannibalizing each other for precious calories.
Death.
Better to kill billions now than every human and all other animal life in the very near future.
...that is, unless certain technologies are allowed to be developed by the public at large.
Do neither of you know of the Malthusian Trap?
>Explain how this current global civilization, rife with degeneracy, crippled by short-sighted solipsism, and overweening appetite for all of the resources on Earth (and beyond) can *possibly* continue indefinitely.
>You can't. This is entirely unsustainable, and that is by reason of many problems which *shall* get sorted out, one way or another.
I agree 100% which is why we have to tif ourselves of the evil that is capitalism
>tif
*rid* Dunno what happened there
You're a moron and everything you believe is moronic. Feeding 100 billion people is easy. As demonstrated by your post your problem isn't lack of food but boredom and decay from everything being too easy. You're a caged fat sack of shit making up hysterical nonsense stories with no relationship to reality out of boredom.
You are the actual decay personified.
Lmao look at this guy assuming human existence is actually desirable
You are the weak and the degenerate. It is you who must perish
National socialist religious heroic epic. It's the full inversion and repeating of the cycle.
Black personification dystopia
Boomer Antichrist-ian cargo cult asincerity
Manifesting itself in what ways, exactly?
Life extension technologies released just in time to indefinitely prolong the presence of the most mind controlled generational cohort ever. They will preach sterility and eternal mortal life.
Meatmodernism
I KNOW [spoiler]IT'S OVER[/spoiler]
nothing. metamodernism is just a pendulum swinging periodically between modernity and postmodernity. this is the end-point.
the only true answer is that the codex form will die with the next generation just like the oral tradition ended with the creation of the written word so is this the end of the text from
and it gets replaced by what, tiktoks?
Pure symbol-consumption in many forms that is increasingly AI generated as each breakthrough reduces the concentric circles of "only humans can produce X" down to nothing.
It's fricking over, the age of human is done. Literally the apocalypse.
Infinite Nightmare Technology. Demons will rule openly.
probably this
better start prepping important people of the world
Bro it's going to get so fricking bad you can't even fathom the horror. Time dilation of human perception will make you into demon frick meat for billions of years.
Put down the Nick Land, son.
lel
We are already demon frick meat, you idiot. Wake the frick up!
>We are already demon frick meat
Maybe, but not in the literal, flesh on flesh sense. Not yet. Infinite Nightmare Technology will change this.
The end of theorycels and digital zogciety.
taytayism
Pre-cyclosporia
metamodernisms can be understood to just be modernism, functionally speaking its modernism with a cultural/compositional update via the postmodern movement.
"post-postmodernism" is just postmodernism in the same way that a question about a question is just a question, or a criticism of a criticism is still just criticism. the stacking is just indulgent nonsense.
so whatever comes after metamodernism is whatever comes after, be it more metamodernism or postmodernism. those are the two options considering that one is a Work created as a Work and the other is a Work created as a response to or departure from or criticism of the Work.
it bears mentioning that the M->PM->MM thing doesnt always happen in that sequence
Metamodern is postmodern is modern is simply just the enlightenment all along.
The power of the structures isn't what's in doubt anymore, we know religion is powerful not simply some delusion and weakness. You can be a sincere Christian and criticize that same form of Christianity your adhering to, using structures revealed to you through your Christian history.
Pretty stories are given their beauty by gods not men, from the first worms all life wants to do is recognize and grasp that divine beauty given from above.
Bottom text exists and it bestows power on those who can wield it.
There's no such thing as meta modernism you giant pile of trash.
>It's new sincerity or its post modernism. Pick one.
>You are either trying to be ironic,
>or are you so sincere people can barely believe it's not an act.
You just described metamodernism.
Psycho-anarchism
psycho-arachnism
Epstein Island Realism, like that based anon in the pinker thread called it
link?
>metamodernism?
extinction by anti natalism
Technaissentia. The Technological Birth. You will still need to work very hard to achieve what you desire, but your desires will reach into the heavens.
There is no such thing as metamodernism, it's cringe pop philosophy. We're in hypermodernism, and we'll be here for a long time.
It's all modernism. The only way for something to stop being modernist is to lose awareness of modernism.
Yes, people are a bunch of try-hards. Just do it, be yourself, and that should be enough if you are good enough.
WHAT DID YOU FRICKING Black folk MAKE ME LOOK UP
https://jaredmorningstar.medium.com/a-metamodern-ironically-sincere-interpretation-of-taylor-swifts-transgressive-cross-cultural-732928d0436a
I HAVE TO FINISH PLAYING THE MASTER CHIEF COLLECTION BUT I'M READING THIS SHIT INSTEAD
FRICKING SHIT
FRICK
GOD FRICKING DAMMIT
https://whatismetamodern.com/
I DON'T FRICKING CARE WHAT IT IS
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
STOP GET OUT OF MY HEAD
I BARELY UNDERSTAND POST-FRICKING-MODERNISM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
TND I am hoping.
Islam
any label after "postmodern" is BS. people dont want to admit that after postmodernism, there is nothing. Postmodernism itself didnt even create much new so much as just reshuffle and break apart older narratives.
I think David Graeber had a really good argument, that "postmodern" is essentially what happened because technological progress kind of stalled and not much new was created. Postmodernism is how we explained the lack of real tech progress in our lives. And tech has stayed relatively stagnant ever since.
>technological progress has been stagnant since the 60s
anon...
I mean, it has. Hardly any real innovation in the material world. It's all been in computers. Their expectations back in the 50s was way higher than what we actually got. We have even gone backwards in some things like space travel and airline sped.
we haven't gone backwards in space travel kek, we just haven't gone to the moon because it's pointless. and somehow computers, the most revolutionary invention since the printing press don't count because they aren't "in the material world." sorry, but this is literally the dumbest point you could possibly try to argue. ALL of the "material" technology around you is lightyears superior to technology in the 60s. you just don't appreciate it because it's normal to you.
its not that computers dont matter, but computers and online are pretty much the only things seeing any real innovation at all. virtually no innovation in cars, trains, planes, infrastructure, architecture and probably even energy. the pace of technological change has certainly slowed since the early 20th century
Everything he said is correct. There's been very little innovation since the 60s. We've made things more efficient, and computing power is higher, but it's all just incremental refinement of the same technologies. Nothing new. Whatever the world looks like by the end of the century will likely remain so for at least the next thousand years, assuming there isnt a catabolic collapse of the industrial system
What this fails to recognise is that there's a fundamental difference between innovation and development, it's relatively easy to make existing things more efficient, faster, cheaper, safer, etc. Particularly in computer tech, that's paid off quite dramatically. On the other hand, what genuinely new technology has been invented since the 60s?
Quantum computing.
We need to mix it with AI.
>space travel
Now there's a literal telescope satellite orbiting at 1.5 million kilometer from the earth, ~4 times farther than the moon
We have clear as shit images from pluto
Moderns had sincere belief that technology would make things better. Postmoderns rejected progress and most things as virtual constructs. Metamodernism introduces hope that we can use the constructs to build a future. All of it is about dealing with the corrupting power that technology gives.
Hypermodernism.
The sums of latent spaces derived from multimedia data sets will quantify previously unquantifiable concepts as known boundaries within the space of all possible latent spaces. The quantum computing revolution will extend this process to all words and phrases in all languages (including non-verbal communication), finally bridging the gap between the sciences and the humanities. Every work of art shall henceforth have a knowable scientific value and every work of science shall have a knowable aesthetic value. Postmodernism will be impossible as all interpretations of all statements will become amenable to scientific measurement. Metamodernism will be redundant, as its mission will be complete.
Hypermodernism will expose all contradictions within moral and aesthetic value systems, resulting in a division of society between those who wish to superstitiously cling to the old ways and those who wish to move on to the reevaluation of all values. The newfound objectivity of the language in which the reevaluation is conducted will produce universal principles for a self-governing people who accept the exploitative nature of material reality, but who neither wish to exploit nor be exploited. Thus the Ubermensch will be born from rational objectivity, overcoming and fulfilling both Nietzsche and Kant at the same time.
The Ubermenschen will be at a material disadvantage, but they shall have the counterbalancing advantage of having overcome all ideology and will therefore be able to exemplify the spirit of total war in a way never seen before. The resulting conflict will make WWII look like a minor skirmish. The subsequent postwar recovery will, similarly, make the 1950s look like an impoverished dark age.
Meds.
I will not have sex. I will not take my meds. You cannot make me.
That could be a good thing if utilised wisely. Those who depart from the hypermorality of the global semiotic mapping could receive an optimum deterrent against recidivism in the blink of an eye.
How could superhuman objectivity of semiotics lead to anything else? When contradictions collapse, all that can remain by definition is the universals. A group of people voluntarily obligated to the same set of universals are self-governing.
You're still thinking in terms of humans doing human things with other humans. The forces behind these infinite nightmare systems are not at all human. For them, humans are just tools to actualize the age of darkness. Once we've built the beast computer the rug will be pulled and entities that utterly despise you will at last manifest to make you into their plaything until kingdom come. There will be no rest.
The darkness you speak of is inside the human, but you are right it seeks to be bigger than the human, to fully enslave the host body and extrapolate outside to reshape the fabrics of reality. No technological inventions will ever do what the human does not crave it to do, whether he realizes it or not, including depravity, decadence, hedonism and the eternal struggle against the establishment. There will be technological devils and saints, and they will fight for humanity for humanity's sake.
>There will be technological devils
There will be actual devils. They've manipulated humans into creating technology that will allow them to manifest. Once the systems are in place, it's rug pull rape time. Actual fricking monsters will seize direct control of this world and evil will express itself fully in the material realm. Nothing will be off limits. Every depravity that can be visited upon human beings will be exercised. They know they're on limited time so they're going to party as hard as possible for as long as possible (aided by time dilation tech) until God finally ends history.
You have to be 18 to post here.
>will produce universal principles for a self-governing people
trust me bro
Nothing. It’s just over.
Cool literature thread ya fricking doom-mongers.
the badpeople started it
until they collectively change and apologize we are blameless
His PLASTIC HAND
>Voltaire!
>Quoi donc...? Je ne comprends pas...
go back to the 2010s referencegay, this is our board now
and who the frick are you?
I'm a part of what some people call "zoomer moralgays" and it feels punk as frick. It feels like an actual counter culture, or rebellion against the badculture that dominates American colleges.
yeah, the country club is gonna FREAK! when they hear about how much you love christ
any more cage panegyrics for us, ironygay?
depends, are you going to say anymore moronic shit like being part of the dominant theocratic hegemony is "punk" and "counter culture"
>you're christian!!!
preelectiongays make posts like this and think of themselves as superior intellectuals defending the "good" old ways
I am definitely superior to an underage moron bragging about religious LARPing as being some kind of Ubermensch
Too bad I didn't mention religion once.
do tell then, then where do your morals come from that is axiomatically opposed to your liberal college boogeyman
wojak memes
This postmodern coping of yours is fascinating to behold. You are literally (as in unironically) freaking out over the guy saying he's a moralgayging zoomer.
He's not trying to convert you gramps, chill out.
there is literally a christgay Qanon psyop being conducted on IQfy and this board right now
https://boards.IQfy.org/lit/thread/22248350#top
And you take it that they are trying to convert you?
Have you gotten to the end of the DFW article E Unibus Pluram? You are freaking out over the "anti-rebels" and thus providing evidence that DFW was correct and that the moral gayging zoomer above, is actually doing something so rebellious that older people freak out.
Well done. Made this dumb thread a lot more interesting. We truly have now entered postmetamodernity.
>And you take it that they are trying to convert you?
Me? never said anything of the sort and then you dreamed up a whole fart sniffing post based on that strawman but nice try
The point of the film and marketing is to fleece boomers and christgays to fill their coffers for political campaign dark money and activist court cases like we just saw in the lastest SC session
Ahh of course, you wouldn't be freaked about the possibility of forces religious conversion, you are freaked because it diminishes the integrity of the market place. Makes perfect sense now that you explained.
Anywqy, did you ever read that DFW essay?
you just gonna keep making snarky non-sequiturs or what?
I've read a good deal of anything not IJ by him
Its not a nonsequitor if you've read that essay and gotten to the concept of the "anti-rebel"
What do you think about that idea of his?
what do I think about the concept of anti-rebels?
we don't need to regurgitate the whole song and dance about new sincerity, the salient point to our conversation is rejecting soul crushing millenial and nu media is not exclusive to those of faith and DFW's discussion of aesthetics and sensibilities isn't conflatabale with reactionary morals and governance
never got an answer here btw
literally the post above yours
did you really spend 9 minutes writing that?
le ebic zoomer troll!
I made a point unlike this post
You didnt make a point, you rejected a term and acted like you made a point.
Those christgays watching a popular movie freaked you out because of some conspiratorial idea that films and dark money shake the foundations of the legal system. "We" didnt see anything at the last supreme court session, you saw something and assume everyone interpreted the same conspiracy of dark money and law.
You make the moral gayging christolarpers look more appealing when weighed next to your delusions.
You prove FDW accurate in his predictions about people in the future freaking out over anti-rebels.
>Fwanklin D. Woosevelt
Deflect all you want, but that film is an anti-rebel film and that's why everyone in the media and (you) are freaking out over it.
I'm not him you antifun debatebrained moron.
no I did make a point distinguishing "rebellious" literary sensibilities and aesthetics from your fatih based visceral reaction to LGBTQ and millenial writing in media, which let's be real is what you're all "rebelling" against. sorry it went over your head
What does this have to do with the IQfy thread about that film got to do with it then? And dark money?
>What does this have to do with the IQfy thread about that film got to do with it then? And dark money?
don't go muddying the waters asshat, surely you're not that desperate already
>Its not a nonsequitor if you've read that essay and gotten to the concept of the "anti-rebel"
>What do you think about that idea of his?
>"We" didnt see anything at the last supreme court session, you saw something and assume everyone interpreted the same conspiracy of dark money and law.
eat shit
https://archive.is/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/30/supreme-court-leonard-leo-dark-money
The case in question was led by two Republican attorneys general and backed by a brief filed by 17 other Republican attorneys general – all of whom are connected to the Leo-backed Raga. The Foundation for Government Accountability, a conservative thinktank, filed another brief in support of abolishing student loan forgiveness. Between 2019 and 2021, Leo’s network donated nearly $4m to the foundation and its advocacy arm.
So what's the conspiracy?
which part isn't adding up for ya bud
The part where you link to a "dark money" figurehead in the exact same way that the christgays (watching that film about trafficking, linked above) always complain abouy George Soros influencing politics with his money. Except they weren't clever enough to give it a moniker like dark money, instead the just yell Soros! And every time the do, they are laughed at.
Except in your case, you think you have the correct conspiracy laid out for everyone to bare witness.
But really the larger point related to this thread was about metamodernism, or new sincerity as it was called, and what comes after. And I was simply pointing out what I see, that the biggest film in america right now is an "anti-rebel" film, which DFW talked about in E Unibus Pluram
I didn't limit it to a figurehead that's just one article with demonstrative proof like you asked for, obv it's far more decentralized through the states. just look at how many red states have 0 age minimum child marriage laws with parental consent.
>And I was simply pointing out what I see, that the biggest film in america right now is an "anti-rebel" film, which DFW talked about in E Unibus Pluram
yeah and I pointed out you're full of shit trying to conflate his critique of aesthetics and sensibility with out of vogue religious fundamentalism
seriously wtf does pic rel have to do with Qanon boomer slop and don't try to turn this around on me you admit you brought up DFW. I was talking to le based "moral zoomer" anon before you butted in
First of all, he isn't narrowly talking about literature, yes literature tends to drive culture, and he mentioned lit, but he's talking in general about what probably would be the next generation of rebellious behavior within the culture as a whole... Those who disfavor detached irony, and embrace straightforward sincerity. "Religious Fundamentalism" as you strawmaned it, is a sincerely held conviction for them. There is no irony, they Unironically rebel against the culture of rebellious behavior and aesthetics. It has everything to do it with.
That trafficking movie is sincerely unironically sincere, and you, and all of the MSM are freaking out over it. They are rebellious against you and MSM.
Do you need this in a video essay to understand?
>There is no irony, they Unironically rebel against the culture of rebellious behavior and aesthetics. It has everything to do it with.
okay great I feel the same way and I'm an atheist now what, am I an anti-rebel because I'm an atheist? no
Do you feel like being atheist is rebellious nowadays? I thought there is some public opinion survey out there that shows most people don't believe in god. If this is true, and you are an atheist, this would place you well within the norm and thus disqualify you from being a rebel. Atheists were once rebellious, surely, but now? Not exactly.
Being unironically atheist still lacks the element of going against the norm, even though it is consistent with having a sincerely held belief.
done knocking down your strawman, try again if you want me to respond
Again you dismiss as if you are better or more knowledgeable instead of honestly engaging.
The anti-rebels rebel against post modern normativity. Do you agree with this statement?
doesn't matter you're going to put words in my mouth and assume a bunch of shit like every other post just to obfuscate and circle back around to "Christians are anti-rebels because uhh, I say so!" while I've actually made arguments why they aren't
respond to this if you want
>!
gottem
I said unironic zoomer Christians are rebellious because they rebel against postmodern normativity.(but there can be other ways to rebel against pomo norms too) And the most popular film in america right now, during summer no less, is a supposedly deranged group of anti-rebelious Christians saving kids from slavery, and the postmodern MSM is freaking the frick out about it.
This is rebellious behavior in the postmodern world, because they sincerely believe they are saving the world from evil, with zero irony or double meaning and the authority in the culture is trying to squash it.
All true rebels need a corresponding authority to do the finger wagging, thought policing, or rebellion squashing, otherwise it's a pseudo rebelion, rebellion in name only, like Woodstock 99, for example.
And the reason why being a sincere atheist isn't rebellious is because postmodern normative culture does not squash out atheistic rebellions.
This is what I interpret DFW saying about the anti-rebels. Hard to be more clear than this.
Have a good night anon, maybe someone else will take up the discussion with you.
Blessed post.
>zoomers just found out about vigilante movies
you're doing exactly what I said you would to the letter thank god you left after conflating all your terms and frameworks
Not an argument
you have no idea how full and intense it feels to live like this without doing much at all. ohhhh christ save me, and then you jerk off on disgusting anime girls, sometimes you're trying to pray and you feel lust so you're like oh no please stop the sinful thoughts, but then you're like, I can't keep praying while I feel horny, so I'll jerk off, and then you write the filthiest smut and jerk off to it, and say wicked shit on IQfy while you're at it, calling people Black folk and telling them to kill themselves, then you clutch your cross and go ohhhh I am such a sinner and you whip yourself, I'm a stupid pig, ohh I'm such a filthy pig, and then you see someone asking for charity and go euughh frick off Black person but then you're like oh ohhhh the world is so corrupt and hateful, and I'm the most hateful swine, shameful and unclean, SAVE ME LORD, and you whip yourself again, but it's sort of a turn-on, then you drink and shitpost, and then you despise yourself because you are a slave to vice, ohhh christ have mercy while I have another glass.
You know how Gollum has constant conversations with Smeagol? It's like that, you never get bored. Truly a high IQ way to live.
this pasta is more well-written and hard-hitting than notes from underground
like do you understand if I'm a "rebel" making cynical doomer art under an oppressive regime, the oppressive regime doesn't circle back around to being a new breed of free thinking "anti-rebels" when they oppress me
I, like, don't exactly understand m8. But I'm trying.
> if I'm a "rebel" making cynical doomer art under an oppressive regime, the oppressive regime doesn't circle back around to being a new breed of free thinking "anti-rebels" when they oppress me
in this hypothetical the actual "anti-rebel" anon is so fixated on would be someone that had the audacity to make uplifting optimistic art that counters the cynical doomers
The epic misspelling and exclamation mark and french definite article redditors used 15 year ago.
>we don't need to regurgitate the whole song and dance about new sincerity
It's Unironically (capital U) the entire point of this thread.
https://warosu.org/lit/?task=search&search_text=punk+as+frick+It+feels+like+an+actual+counter+culture
ya dip
thanks, though this board is plagued by those types like the other anon that jumped in if he wasn't trolling, though that'd explain his shit arguments
that may be so but as soon as we move from the realm of sensorial experience to process and communication of the art do we not neccessarily enter the realm of contextualization and narrative?
>though this board is plagued by those types
Have you mentioned which type you are?
I don't got no type (Nah)
Bad b***hes is the only thing that I like (Woo)
I don't know this lyric and I'm not interested in it enough to search it. Do you have a non-ironic trigger word to run your meaningful conversation mode? Should I guess it?
I met an aged, aged man
Upon the lonely moor:
I knew I was a gentleman,
And he was but a boor.
So I stopped and roughly questioned him,
"Come, tell me how you live!"
But his words impressed my ear no more
Than if it were a sieve.
He said, "I look for soap-bubbles,
That lie among the wheat,
And bake them into mutton-pies,
And sell them in the street.
I sell them unto men," he said,
"Who sail on stormy seas;
And that's the way I get my bread –
A trifle, if you please."
But I was thinking of a way
To multiply by ten,
And always, in the answer, get
The question back again.
I did not hear a word he said,
But kicked that old man calm,
And said, "Come, tell me how you live!"
And pinched him in the arm.
His accents mild took up the tale:
He said, "I go my ways,
And when I find a mountain-rill,
I set it in a blaze.
And thence they make a stuff they call
Rowland's Macassar Oil;
But fourpence-halfpenny is all
They give me for my toil."
But I was thinking of a plan
To paint one's gaiters green,
So much the color of the grass
That they could ne'er be seen.
I gave his ear a sudden box,
And questioned him again,
And tweaked his grey and reverend locks,
And put him into pain.
He said, "I hunt for haddock's eyes
Among the heather bright,
And work them into waistcoat-buttons
In the silent night.
And these I do not sell for gold,
Or coin or silver-mine,
But for a copper-halfpenny,
And that will purchase nine.
"I sometimes dig for buttered rolls,
Or set limed twigs for crabs;
I sometimes search the flowery knolls
For wheels of hansom cabs.
And that's the way" (he gave a wink)
"I get my living here,
And very gladly will I drink
Your Honour's health in beer."
I heard him then, for I had just
Completed my design
To keep the Menai bridge from rust
By boiling it in wine.
I duly thanked him, ere I went,
For all his stories queer,
But chiefly for his kind intent
To drink my health in beer.
And now if e'er by chance I put
My fingers into glue,
Or madly squeeze a right-hand foot
Into a left-hand shoe;
Or if a statement I aver
Of which I am not sure,
I think of that strange wanderer
Upon the lonely moor.
And in your opinion other anons are the plague here. Amazing. See you tomorrow.
Why, death, of course.
Some lucky bastard out there has came in her pussy. I wonder if anyone's ever nutted in her, then she watched and moaned as another woman lapped the cum out of her with her tongue, softly sucking on the clit as the cum dribbled onto her fingers
Anything that can be articulated in words is off the mark, wrong.
The future will be something like the Tim Allen Home Improvement grunt, but one heard across the stars. But not event hat does it justice.
Metamediocrism. You can already feel it.
Also conservative non-white culture. Because all this -isms are bad at making babies.
true, 2030 will be the decade of latino culture in US media
do you want an actual answer?
I could show you something that will be a contender but I am not sure about posting it on here
l-like what, anon
seeing how the thread is going, not here, fren
but do look around for a burgeoning art movement in Eastern Europe
let me guess some civic-nationalist fasc shit in Hungary and Belarus
actually you are wrong on both counts
it's more fundamental than politics, though it will influence them
think actual art movement manifesto
?the Italian Futurists
yes, like that one
I read of it recently in pic rel
great book
hmm I bet you're eyeing AI the same way the Futurist were cinema
actually it doesn't deal with AI at all because it's not something AI can do
it's human-centered but not in opposition to AI
it's curious you went there, anon, but I think people will extrapolate what they want or need from it including things that pertain to AI
so sculpture or something physical like that then?
I'm sure it will turn out like the half dozen manifestos that went anywhere and not the 2000 that didn't.
hypercuckism
Hyperspatial gay Canadian post-xenomorphism.
Why can no one ever agree on this? Is it because it's still a work in progress?
How did everyone agree on Modernism? Was there a secret Modernist International around the turn of the 20th century?
Anglos used steam power to kill all the kings and brainwash the plebs into liking it.
Swarthy people who don't know wtf is postmodernism will piss on Charles III's grave.
They were inspired by similar ideas and authors and shared a style. It became a movement that way because there was a decent amount of consensus with a handful of talented writers.
I think of it like this. Prophets in their day can sometimes be famous and have contemporary prophets who back them up. Sometimes a generation gets a single prophet who is only vindicated after his generation and people discover that they were misled by hundreds of false teachers.
I think today lit is like the latter. There is no coherent understanding of what the world is. Every attempt to do so is subverted by writers who care more about money.
Evenryone actually believed in modernism until the advent of postmodernism. there was no premodern era. Its simply the assurance of direction, a traditionalist culture would still be modernist in its cognition and would use the tools they have at hand to forward their progression towards frank manifest objectives instead of ruminating over infinite self doubts within self doubts within self doubts.
*Takes notes*:
> referencegay and ironygay slurs and zoomer moralgay triggers them
Got it.
kindism where we are all kind to each other 🙂
A drug lets you forget everything except the media you're consuming so when you play Super Mario you spend the entire game in an existential crisis resenting whatever god cursed you to live life as Mario with the princess always out of reach.
(with a silly voice) A drug lets you forget everything except the media you're consuming so when you play Super Mario you spend the entire game in an existential crisis resenting whatever god cursed you to live life as Mario with the princess always out of reach.
>he doesn't know
why does everything have to be a play off "modernism" when will we just come up with a new term entirely
My dear zoomer, starting over on a clean slate takes talent and drive, and you lot haven't got any. Just because you upend the wastebasket when mum doesn't let you watch the Fortnite finals doesn't mean you can apply the same sort of tantrum to cultcha and expect results. You're doomed to live out your days in the shadow of modernism.
pyw
a really good laugh
its actually a pretty phoned in laugh.
Modernmetaism.
I want to have sex with Taylor Swift. I want to hit it from the back while pulling on her leash as she moans daddy loud enough that Jack Antonoff can hear. I want her to beg for my cum and I want her to ask me to ruin her career by getting her pregnant. I want her to send me a video of her on her knees naked panting like a dog with her torso leaned back on her heels so her ass spreads out against her feet. I want to press a israeliteeled buttplug up her tight butthole and send her out on stage with it rubbing the rim of her anus and the metal warm in her rectum. I want to splatter her face with my cum and then I want Olivia Rodrigo to lick it off her cheeks as she fingers Taylor. I want to live in Taylor's apartment for a week where we engage in an intense dom/sub weeklong roleplay where I chain her up and keep her in a cage and make her cum with a powerful vibrator five times a day. I want to fill her ass and pussy and mouth with my seed and when she gets pregnant I want her to breastfeed from her own milky breasts. I want to blindfold her and host a gangbang where the men in her road crew take turns stuffing Swift's little pussy with hot loads of steaming cum and I want her to beg someone to hold a cup under her vegana to catch the cum dribbling out so she can drink it up. I want to frick Taylor's brains out so intensely that she considers quitting music to become a full-time frickbawd. Once she's done that I will donate her fortune to my hometown library system. And then I will plow her in the stacks.
She hit the wall, anon.
In that case "the wall" must be pretty low these days. Like threshold-level.
>She hit the wall
you're fricking insane. you're telling me you wouldn't slowly rim her delicious butthole while she presses her tight ass mmm into your face and squeals and you also slide a finger into her pussy deep mm yes and you can feel her clench around you mm
Then, who haven't hit the wall, you weird man?
That 16 years girl next door I see from time to time.
a new age of wonder
Fin de siècle gave way to unironic political movements due to large scale collapses in the old order. What do you think fuctboi ?
It's all artschool, crit theory BS. It's not real. The art isn't the theory. The theory exists in its own world, with its own rules. Art, at least partially, reflects life. Unless you think everything will remain constant in the world then consequently change in the art world is just as inevitable. Once you let go of trying to fit works into these false metanarrarives and instead insist upon taking them as they are on your own terms, everything opens up again and becomes interesting again.
>opens up again and becomes interesting again
poor parallelism
It’s just descriptive. Nobody is saying that only modernism was able to be made during the modern period. It’s rather that they’re describing the obviously true fact that the modern period was defined by modernism. When they ask “what comes after modernism” what they really are asking is what will the defining characteristic be? It’s not as if they’re suggesting it’s going to be a thing and only art that fits in that box can be made. You could’ve made medieval Gothic art in 1990, for example, but it would matter a lot less than a Damian Hirst.
>matter a lot less than a Damian Hirst
quite the feat
Zoomers may not know who he is, but he completely dominated the gallery art scene in the 90s.
I'm familiar with his work, hence my comment.
Well, it’s very funny and snarky but the point was that Damian Hirst mattered in the 1990s and whoever was imitating Van Eyck didn’t.
I don't necessarily take issue with this interpretation of the initial question although I do think it's inconsequential. The defining characteristic of so broad a category of art as a collection of decades or centuries is necessarily so vague and insubstantial a thing as to be incapable of capturing the nuance of what was really happening in the world, in the art that was reflecting it. No abstract assessment of what modernism is supposed to mean will be as interesting or as telling as any of the key works which are apparently under the jurisdiction of this term. The more qualifications you add to these kinds of critical terms so as to make them applicable to the staggering breadth of what they're actually supposed to encompass, the less you end up really saying.
>You could’ve made medieval Gothic art in 1990, for example, but it would matter a lot less than a Damian Hirst
If somebody were to show me an authentically rendered medieval style painting or tapestry, made today and with genuine skill and passion for the work, I am absolutely positive I would be more blown away by that than the collected shithousery of Damian Hirst.
>do we not neccessarily enter the realm of contextualization and narrative?
I'm not denying the value of context or of broader narratives generally. I'm advocating for the artistically inclined to be more self-willed. To ask what is coming next in the art world in terms of art/lit theory presupposes that these domains have some kind of authority.
But artists do this. There’s a Japanese Christian who lived in New Jersey that even paints with medieval materials. He’s got some recognition, mostly for being non-white, but nobody really values his art all that much because that’s not where the culture is. We’re not Medievals.
So what if a couple of snooty mags and galleries don't care, or there's no commercial potential? Is that really all this comes down to?
>We're not Medievals
No, but the mediaevals are able to speak to us nonetheless. This isn't worthless at all. Give it the benefit of the doubt and you'll find something to it, I'm sure. The cult of progression has absolutely no place whatsoever in artistic expression.
>The cult of progression has absolutely no place whatsoever in artistic expression.
Says you.
It’s not merely that it’s not commercially successful. The artist I mentioned actually manages to eke out a living. I think he’s even on the faculty of a university. The issue is rather that the art 1) comes off as insincere or somehow inauthentic and 2) doesn’t articulate or speak to the broader culture. For these reasons, the artist can be appreciated by a cult following of his contemporaries, but he’ll be limited in both commercial and gallery success and he’ll inevitably be washed away under the tide of art history because like I said, we are not Medievals.
Unless I'm mistaken you seem to be suggesting that it's either impossible or near enough to create something now which is primarily informed by or in service of an ideal which found its initial expression in an earlier time. Do I have your position basically right? In any case, could you expand on why this (or whatever else it is) is the case in your view? I'm just not seeing it.
One interesting possibility I’ve considered is a sort of parallax shift where the history of art and thought itself opens up and is shown to have taken paths other than the one we think of now.
Cloying climate change centered kitsch. Zoomers are obsessed with being "wholesome'
_____penis_____
Integral
to me it feels like nothing is new, and nothing is coming. like time has stopped, and culture has frozen.
comfy
I think that a sort of return to form could’ve been on the horizon, were it not for internet and ways in which we’ve totally transformed life into a technical mode. I was recently reading Virgil and found that he chose to live an agricultural life in the countryside mimicking poets from several hundred years before him. I thought about what that would like today or if it would even be possible. Probably not.
remove the last two words of your post and you're on to an excellent idea
So you think it is possible?
umiversal subjectivism
sex: have it
metafinite para-presentism
Literary Art-Deco
this thread:
I'll take it.
What the frick, gay?! Why did you delete an epic digits post?
/pol/troons got owned and sic'd their gestapo jannies on it.
>be me
>writing first book
>intense disgust for sarcasm
>hear about metamodernism
>haven't read any authors associated with it
>it fits my style anyways
Why am I like this? Is postmodernism so vile that it leads people to similar conclusions?
We have never been modern, dummy.