From Kent Williams Sent Fri, Aug 6th 1999, 16:26
From Kent Williams Sent Fri, Aug 6th 1999, 16:26
Is this anything other than an ad hominem attack on me personally? I was writing off the top of my head, and while very much a generalization, it is a useful generalization. It is also a demonstrably valid interpretation of the historical record. Not a complete explication, but especially useful in terms of the task at hand -- to explain why 'modern' isn't 'now' and why we're post-post-modern now. You seem to argue that everything is sui generis and that there are no conclusions that can be drawn about anything. Feel free to give us your considered academic opinion on the history of human thought, but unless you have something useful to contribute, don't just ride my jock. kent williams -- xxxx@xxxxxx.xxx On Thu, 5 Aug 1999, Tomas Jirku wrote: > >Modernism started at the turn of the last century, as a reaction to > >the Victorian/Romantic movement of the 19th Century, which, in turn was > >a reaction to the Enlightenment period of the 18th century, which was a > > -snippity snip, choppity chop- > > dude, is this an essay you did in highschool or something? not > everything is a "reaction" to something else. this is especially > relevant to your aforementioned "movements". if you're gonna attempt to > talk about [art] history don't go into generalizations. looking at the > big picture is missing the point entirely. and the point is that there > really isn't a point. (i think that makes sense) > > >I think the key to post-post modernism is the rise of digital technology, > >and that most of what is being said about that right now is about as accurate > > that's a funny one. how misguided is THAT comment!? > > > tomas >