Is metamodernism emergent arts and cultural movement? 元現代主義是否新興的藝術和文化運動?

本文旨在討論 Vermeulen and Van den Akker’s 刊登於 美學與文化期刊 Journal of Aesthetics and Culture 的 一篇文章 -「關於元現代主義」“Notes on metamodernism” . This article is an literature review Vermeulen and Van den Akker’s “Notes on metamodernism” in Journal of Aesthetics and Culture, Vol. 2, 2010.

(Article was written in English and translated into Chinese for purpose of this blog) (原文是英文,為了這個博客翻譯成中文)

Vermeulen and Van den Akker pointed out that metamodernism is neither a philosophy nor a closed ontology. “Notes on Metamodernism” is an invitation for debate rather than a scientific system. The article is eassaytic instead of scientific. It’s instead, an open discussion that contextualizes and explains what is going on around us. Metamodernism is neither a system of thought nor is it a movement or a trope. For Vermeulen and Van den Akker, it is a “structure of feelings” about art instead of a philosophy.[1]
Metamodernism元現代主義既不是一種哲學,也不是一個封閉的本體。 “關於元現代主義” 旨在引發一場辯論而不是一個科學系統,這是一個開放的討論,並解釋正在發生在我們身邊的事情。 Metamodernism元現代主義既不是思想系統也不是一個運動,對於Vermeulen and Van den Akker ,元現代主義是關於藝術,而不是哲學概念。

Williams in Marxism and Literature, provided a framework that helps us characterize cultural movement. In understanding emerging culture, as distinct from both the dominant and the residual, Williams suggested that we have to observe “a pre-emerging”, understand more closely the condition of pre-emerging, as well as the more evident forms of the emerging, the residual and the dominant.[2] According to Williams, the important element of as a way of understanding emergent and dominant is whether there is a new form of mode of production, social order and culture ever in reality includes or exhausts human practice, energy and intention. [3] In this complex process, there is indeed confusion between residual and emergent.
Williams 在 馬克思主義和文學 一書中提供了一個框架,幫助我們了解文化運動的特性。新興文化有別於主導及剩餘文化,威廉姆斯建議我們先觀察“萌芽前”及了解萌芽前所需要的條件,以及新興文化丶主導及剩餘文化的明顯形式。[2] 根據威廉姆斯,理解新興還是主導文化的重要指標是實際上有否新型式的生產方式丶社會及文化秩序。

Confusion continues when attempted to answer Linda Hutcheon’s argument that postmodernism is over. Postmodern arts reject modernism’s grand narratives of artistic direction, and disrupting genre’s conventions with collision, collage, and fragmentation.It appears that there are arts that don’t fit into the postmodernism category anymore. Linda pointed out that postmodernism needs a new label to chart the cultural changes and continuities. [4]
Linda Hutcheon 試圖回答關於後現代主義是否已經結束這個命題,後現代主義藝術透過碰撞、拼貼畫、以及碎片化擾亂常規,拒絕現代主義的敘事方式。似乎有些藝術作品不再屬於後現代主義範疇,Linda 琳達指出,後現代主義需要一個新的標籤,去代表這文化變遷和連續性。 [4]

“Pluralism and diversity” are other defining features.[5]  Vermeulen and Van den Akker noticed that there is ‘informed naivety’, ‘pragmatic idealism’ and ‘moderate fanaticism’ of the various cultural responses to climate change, the financial crisis, and (geo)political instability which cannot be explained by postmodernism. Take Gregory Crewdson’s work as an example, he interviewed by Rachel Lowry in Times and said that: “It’s important to me that the setting for my pictures feels familiar. The settings, the props, the costumes, the subjects, they are supposed to feel ordinary, but then I use light and color and mood and atmosphere to change it in some way.” [6] All stances are unstable and insincere which cannot be explained by postmodernism. His works may show simplicity, ordinary and modernism’s grand narratives of artistic direction yet his works also embrace irony.
另一個特徵是“多元化和多樣性”。[5]  Vermeulen and Van den Akker 注意到這些藝術作品對氣候變化丶金融危機和地緣政治的回應具有 “知情的天真”丶“務實的理想主義”和“適度的狂熱”的特性,這些都不切合後現代主義的特質。以 Gregory Crewdson 作品為例,他說:「作品的環境設置必須是我熟悉,設置丶道具丶服裝丶主角應該是平凡,但我用光線丶色彩丶情調和氛圍改變它。」 [6] 所有的立場都是不穩定及不真誠,後現代主義不能解釋,他的作品也表現了現代主義的簡約丶平凡及敘事方式,同時也很諷刺。

3efec067499dace357f57d3e3dcb5e1b_07567ffa8d734037fff34f54543f12763_0

Metamodernism is a “contingent” concept that it’s in a state of constant movement. Vermeulen and Van den Akker called this a discourse, oscillating, a swinging or swaying with and between future, present and past, here and there and somewhere, with and between ideals, mindsets and position between a modern enthusiasm and a postmodern irony. It need not been seen as being opposition to postmodernism, but can be both operative.[7] Metamodern epistemology (as if) and its ontology (between) should thus be conceived of as a “both-neither” dynamic. They are each at once modern and postmodern and neither of them. Modernism advocates the Possibility of universal truth, while postmodernism rejected that possibility in favor of a belief that meaning and truth are subjective values. The metamodern is constituted by the double-bind of a modern desire for sens and a postmodern doubt about the sense of it all. [8] Metamodernism is a process that reposition our thinking constantly: Reconstructing oscillatory in order to create another modernity: then one, then the other, one again, and yet another. Meta- does not refer to one particular system of thought or specific structure of feeling” It resposition, encompassing, yet fragmented. Now, yet then.¨ Metamodernism is “the mercurial condition between and beyond irony and sincerity, naivety and knowingness, relativism and truth, optimism and doubt, in pursuit of a plurality of disparate and elusive horizons.”[9]

Metamodernism元現代主義是一個“持續”的概念,它是在不斷運動的狀態。Vermeulen and Van den Akker 形容元現代主義為一個遊走於過去丶現在和未來;在這裡和那裡不同地方;在現代主義的理想和後現代的反諷之間不斷擺動搖晃的論述。它不反對後現代主義,同時包含後現代主義的操作。[7]元現代主義認識論(好像)和它的本體(之間),因此被理解為一個“既是-既不是”的動態,他們既是也不是現代主義和後現代主義。現代主義提倡普遍真理,相反後現代主義反對真理,認為信念是主觀的。元現代主義雙重綁定現代主義對認知的渴求,同時具有後現代主義對認知的懷疑。 [8] Metamodernism元現代主義是我們不斷重新定位的思考過程:重新建構這搖晃的論述,創造另一個新的現代主義。 “元不是指思想或感覺上一個特定的系統” 它重構丶兼容現在與未來但也支離破碎。元現代主義是諷刺和真誠丶天真和理解丶相對主義和相信真理丶樂觀和懷疑之間善變的條件下,追求差異及難以捉摸的視野。”[9]

Therefore, The oscillating process is inevitable for metamodernism. As a response of art and cultural change, metamodernism moves for the sake of moving, attempts in spite of its inevitable failure, it seeks forever for a truth that it never expects to find.”[10] As pointed out by Dumitrescu, metamodernism was described as partly a concurrence with, partly an emergence from, and partly a reaction to postmodernism.[11]
因此,持續週期性地擺動的過程是不可避免,元現代主義回應了藝術和文化的變革,為移動的緣故metamodernism動作,儘管其不可避免的失敗的嘗試,它永遠追求的真理,它從來沒有希望找到“。[10]正如杜米特雷斯庫指出,metamodernism是描述為一個部分與同意,部分從出現,部分原因是後現代主義的反應。[11]

In this case, metamodernism embrace both modernism and postmodernism as long as it gone through the oscillating process of thinking. It is an umbrella term for developments in art that typify the postmodern consciousness, for metamodernism is just another bric-a-brac with no unifying or organizing principle(s).[12] Thus, postmodern is not over yet. Postmodern has not been abandoned and still living within us. There doesn’t seems to have a new form of mode of production, social order and culture in reality that includes or exhausts human practice, energy and intention. [13]

所以在這種情況下,metamodernism元現代主義就要通過思維不斷振盪既擁抱現代主義和後現代主義,這是藝術發展的典型化後現代意識,為metamodernism一個總稱,是另一個金磚四國一古玩,沒有統一或組織原則(S)。[12]因此,後現代主義還沒有結束。後現代一直沒有放棄,在我們還活著。這裡似乎並不具備在現實生產,社會秩序和文化模式,包括或耗盡人類實踐,能源和意圖的新形式。 [13]

Postmodern is just taking another shape, a new meaning and direction.

後現代是只是把另一形狀,一個新的意義和方向。

It just transit to a different form: metamodernism accept the fact that there may not be universal truth yet dialectic approach doesn’t led us to anywhere. Metamodernism, or some people define it as post-postmodernism, is only a oscillating process between modernism and postmodernism as there is no significant new form of mode of production, social order and culture ever in reality includes or exhausts human practice, energy and intention.

 

There is nativity and a desire for meaning and direction oscillates between a postmodern doubt and a modern desire for senses that can’t be explain by postmodernism art anymore. There is a tendency and oscillating process in art that seek for truth, grand narratives, hopes, love and nativity yet ironyparody, and humor at the same time.

它只是過境不同的形式:metamodernism接受這樣的事實可能沒有放之四海而皆準的真理辯證還沒有辦法不使我們的任何地方。 Metamodernism,或者有些人把它定義為 – 後現代主義後,僅僅是現代主義和後現代主義之間的振盪過程中,因為是在現實中不斷生產,社會秩序和文化模式中沒有顯著新的形式包括或耗盡人類實踐,能源和意圖。

有耶穌誕生和意義和方向的願望後現代的懷疑和感覺不能被後現代主義的藝術再解釋現代慾望之間振盪。有一個在藝術的探索真理,宏大敘事,希望,愛和耶穌誕生又諷刺,惡搞,幽默,同時傾向和振盪的過程。

iamsorry-11764892-678b11ba-7676-11e4-a7f2-87cba13b8c8b1411578033676_image_galleryimage__n_n64th_berlin_internati

 

 

 

 

[1] http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/06/03/misunderstandings-and-clarifications/

[2] Raymond Williams, Marxism and Literature (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1977), Dominant, Residual and Emergent, pg 126

[3] Raymond Williams, Marxism and Literature (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1977), Dominant, Residual and Emergent, pg 125

[4] L. Hutcheon, The Politics of Postmodernism (New York/London: Routledge, 2002), 165-6

[5] Michael Woods: Art of the Western World, Summit Books, 1989, p323.ISBN 978-0-671-67007-8

[6] G. Crewdson intervied by Rachel Lowry Discover Gregory Crewdson’s New Surreal Photographs

Discover Gregory Crewdson’s New Surreal Photographs

[7] Seth Abramson, Ten Basic Principles of Metamodernism http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/ten-key-principles-in-met_b_7143202.html

[8] “Notes on Metamodernism” pg 6

[9] Cliff, A. (8 August 2014). “Popping Off: How Weird Al, Drake, PC Music and You Are All Caught up in the Same Feedback Loop”The Fader. Retrieved 25 August 2014.

[10] “Notes on Metamodernism” pg 5

[11]  Dumitrescu, Alexandra. “Interconnections in Blakean and Metamodern Space”. On Space. Deakin University. Retrieved September 15, 2011.

[12] Alexandra Dumitrescu, Towards a Metamodern Literature, PhD thesis manuscript

[13] Raymond Williams, Marxism and Literature (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1977), Dominant, Residual and Emergent, pg 125

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s