I'm playing with the idea of writing a manifesto, half dedicated to the emergence of what I will call "remodernism." The principle idea being: post-modernism is old and artisans are naturally going in a new direction. This new direction is a variation/continuation/rejection of modernism and post-modernism. This principles, or tenets, are created from an artistic mindset but are meant to translate to other branches of society--like all art. Again, these are the earliest thoughts I have on the subject and will condense, reworked, drop and develop the tenets over the next few hours/weeks/years. When considering remodernism, consider:
Optimism about the continued variability of art
The foundation of greater things, things we can’t imagine—but know will exist one day
A divine being, Prime Mover or God can co-exist with reason and science
Religious faith is not a substitute for knowledge, morality or curiosity
Adaptable ideology is key; dogmatic ideology is a negative
Experimentation is authentic
Never stop experimenting. Never stop challenging.
Reconstruct new genres; don’t deconstruct old ones
Some genres don’t exist yet; some don’t have names yet
Intellectual constructions can be real, specific and practical
Consciously eliciting any emotion is a success
Consciously inspiring any thought is a success
Formal techniques employed should never warrant existence of a piece
Art can be made for art’s sake
Confusion doesn’t make one stupid; rejecting the confusion does
Art and life have meaning—the artists and audience should seek it in both
Art does not need an explanation
Cynicism is tiring, old and unproductive
Conservative values are not inherently righteous
Diversity is a physical representation of knowledge, not danger
Societal ills should be, and can be, corrected
Artists should be connected to the future more than the past
Everyone is real people and art exists in the real world
Reason leads to truth; the truth improves mankind
Traditional art theories and history isn’t destroyed but needs new words
Human intellect has not reached a limit and may never
Deconstruction does not inherently bring about equality
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
i think one of the biggest faults in current thinking is that prevalent mindset: "all stories have already been done!" this causes people to start remixing old thinking but not really pursuing anything new. we've done an insane amount of "impossible" things as a species and to arbitarily limit art is to be unnecessarily close-minded.
ReplyDeletethese are good principles/thoughts/tenets. change is always necessary, and it's good that the tenets themselves have a built-in "adaptable" quality.
I think that what you're getting at in borrowing from and rejecting elements of both modernism and postmodernism is similar to a current movement in social theory that calls itself "multidimensional" and "multiperspectival", borrowing perspectives from multiple frames of reference. This is an idea that is permeating the painting department at school, especially in the studio that I'm now in. Much emphasis is placed on considering the frame-of-reference that the work is discussed in. For example, I am making efforts to judge the success of my assemblages or sculptures by a more design/advertising-based perspective as opposed to using only a tunnel-vision view of the history of painting (which exhausts itself as a linear history with modernism - think abstract expressionism "my kid could do that!" painting).
ReplyDeleteEmploying multiple frames-of-reference for the success of an artwork opens up infinite possiblities for what an artwork is capable of.
I still think that the term "remodernism" elicits an unnecesary reference to the negative aspects of modernism that are now inseperable from the term.
More later
Nick! This is fing legit. Its good stuff. I just discovered it through you facebook link. I agree with most stuff not all. Not sure cynicism is a bad thing as you place it.
ReplyDeleteNice stuff on P. Tyler (just read a bio on peole around that time).
How you been by the way?