________________________pomo____________________________________________________________________title> POST-MODERNISM IS DEAD!

Log in

POST-MODERNISM IS DEAD! [entries|friends|calendar]
Post Modernism

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

NEW TRACK!!!!! Maalem [07 May 2008|12:37pm]


I have posted a new track from the Aashram Remixed Project  up on myspace named Maalem. This some post modern Jazz.....


This track is available on the recently released Aashram EP.

 The Aashram EP is NOW AVAILABLE through Paypal $5 (plus shipping).

To purchase an EP send an email to jcthom@gmail.com, or aashram.music@gmail.com  Or you can simply reply to this post!!

Maalem personnel:

Daniel Llanes-production, composition, mixing
Eric "Fil" Fillip- drums, percussion, composition
Joshua Thomson-composition, rhita, alto saxophone
Omar Taji-piano
Jeremy Olsen-Bass
post comment

[18 Jan 2008|10:50am]

dear everyone

please forgive the promotional aspect of this post but a visual artist,
and i am currently looking for some shows to be in this year. my
website is at thanielionlee.com

below is my artist statement

My work is about my life as a person with a disability, I use both
humor and seriousness as away of dissecting and examining the world in
which both you and I live in. I frequently cite and use history, my
personal life and the experiences of others as a means of questioning
and re-examining our societies view point on the concept that is

Aesthetically most of my work falls under the category of conceptual
art, in that the concept of the work comes first and then the
aesthetic/type of work comes after I have thought about the work and
came to decision on how the idea should be presented. I feel that this
way of making and presenting work/ideas allows me to be more flexible
when it comes to the amount of money, time and space I need to execute
a work of art.

-thaniel ion lee
1 comment|post comment

I, for one, welcome our feminist overlords [08 Dec 2007|07:52am]

(This is somewhat in response to the previous post, but should also be self-standing.)

Although the feminist and post-feminist movements still have not cleared away mainstream cultural artifacts as antithetical to their goals as any (see "Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture" by Ariel Levy), they were widely successful in changing both the role of the working woman and the structure of technoculture generally, such that there is no appropriate barrier to either women in leadership roles throughout the military-industrial complex, nor any specific advantage to masculine over feminine management tactics. Furthermore, we can expect that our current set of technocultural challenges (particularly environmental and military challenges) will be better addressed in the void of certain norms for work and home. Despite whatever specific antipathy some feminists and masculinists might show for specific members of the opposite gender, it should be clear to any male members of Francis Fukuyama's "Last Man" contingent that feminists have played a positive key role in shaping what Fukuyama would call the post-historical landscape.

In some ways, the feminists were in the right place at the right time, having established many cultural programs by the time of the arrival of information technology (IT), which leads to a massive power shift (as articulated by Alvin and Heidi Toffler in their book of the same name). This power shift is partially accommodated by IT's decentralizing effect, leading to competitive flexibilities through stygmergy against the more mass-mobilization infrastructure mindset of modernism. (To understand the difference, consider two different strategies for building sidewalks on a college campus. Either you can strive to build all the sidewalks students might want, possibly overbuilding a great deal, or you can build the minimum, and then build new walks as trails wearing in the grass becomes apparent. Information technology is both the paths themselves, as well as the engineering tools to do the civil engineering for the complexly curved paths that may result).

With the information technology to facilitate this infrastructural change, the feminist moves to change the workplace had a massive impact. First of all, as workplace concessions are made, the entire workforce is not as fast to adopt changes to the ideas of the proper role of the female worker. This means that the workforce as a whole skews towards more "womanly" careers (as understood at the time), and in turn away from hard labor, and toward business and IT. This idea of role can be seen very clearly in the very early days of computation where (with notable exceptions both ways) women were programmers and men were electrical engineers. Given the workplace changes, production would begin to skew away from brute force and towards more IT centric business approaches. We might expect that capital investment towards productivity would soon also be skewed in this direction, and similar follow-on effects such as urbanization to follow. In the first generation of this transition, earlier birthrate standards would provide for a "best-of-both-worlds" scenario, in which decreasing birthrates would mean that each family is responsible for a fewer number of children, while their elders had maintained a previous high-quantity standard, boosting the productive worker to overall population ratio to a maximum This investment in IT then does well to provide for future generations, who must rely on smarter production choices made during the productive period. We might very well be in such a condition today, and have the feminist movement to thank for making this transition gracefully, instead of under the economic pressure of a population peak (as might be currently happening in China).

This change in role also has had positive effects in the consideration of home. Home labor is still inappropriately accounted for, but in mutual feedback with the above change, labor-saving devices for the home removed the need for direct managed constant attention, and instead moved all of household tasks to the realm of maintenance, boosted with an understanding of shearing layers: that various maintenance tasks have extremely different rates of change, separated by orders-of-magnitude. The home now has little to differentiate itself from the rest of the material infrastructure, and we now imagine that the challenges of home economics have little specific difference from maintaining other infrastructure (like a ship's maintenance log, for example; the path from a boat, to a houseboat, to a house in terms of maintenance processes are small steps in terms of the possible IT infrastructure, although sadly they remain giant leaps culturally). In any case, working from home is changing from being marginalized to the technical infrastructure to the hip margin of the new startup. Similarly, we might see child raising move from being an experience unlike that experienced in the rough-and-tumble, dog-eat-dog working work to a canonical example of the care networks that might permeate the decentralized life.

These feminist changes to the cultural considerations of work and home, beyond their obvious impact, also provide us with certain exits to various problems invoked by modernization. These exits are in terms of thinking about flexibly adopting to demands within a network with no explicit territorial distinction between home and work. First I will look at the environment, and then I will consider military strategy.

The feminist alteration of the work/home split could aide us greatly in future environmental pursuits. First of all, home-based industrial production, through increasingly capable 3-D printing technology, is paved way for by the dual emergence of home craft businesses enabled by the widespread reach of EBay and a movement towards the home IT worker moving into more hardware-oriented projects (as signaled by Make magazine), altogether hinting at a technology-friendly green movement occasionally known as bright-green (an exemplar of which is the WorldChanging group, known both for their blog and their book, which is organized roughly along shearing layers, starting with the product and moving outward through the home into the world). To analyze households and factories as part of a network of production and consumption will necessitate IT infrastructure to better understand the flow of commodities, which will in turn bring waste to light, with follow-on effects in opportunities, incentives, and regulation.

The turn to networks has also profoundly effected military strategy. For almost all powers today, ideal tactics no longer include massive infrastructure buildups, but instead focus on networks unable to be untangled from the general population. By maintaining adaptive, personalized flows, such fifth-generation warfare tactics confound current military planners, as they respect no particular lines in national boundary and form no particular mobilization. With the combination of home industry to manufacture significant weaponry, we can see that the only hope of current military tactics is to maintain equal pace with the network spread and resource flow, which the military attempts to do in the fast-decision practices of network-centric warfare. Although understanding network tactics, the military has yet to adapt to the mixed military/civilian structures which will be needed. Nonetheless, military tacticians such as Thomas P.M. Barnett are aware of such necessities, and have turned to such metrics as the average education level of women to gauge national levels of movement towards cultural connectedness with countries operating after a power-shift away from infrastructural modernization.
post comment

Masculist rant against feminazism [01 Dec 2007|01:52am]

Ah, I feel in the mood for a rant.

Feminazis. You know, the types that are all for feminism, meaning, in their view on things: The support and advancement of women, but, in the mean time, the degradation of men.

The type that denies that women are limited to stereotypical roles, but that generalize all men in the same category. The one that says women, or more specifically they themselves, are great, because they are a woman, but assert that all men are weak, inattentive, crude, sexist, unreliable, etc., ie inferior bastards.

Yes, sometimes they are joking. But it´s often not that ironically meant, ironically.

If only it got through their thick skulls.

Women and their logic. Oh, right... they don´t have logic... ;)

Also, what is feminism when the women take on all the supposed negative traits of men and actually start imitating/emulating men. Isn´t feminism about being proud of being a woman and not considering one sex as inferior to the other? Be proud of differences, even if you deviate from being different. Be proud of yourselves. Or do I really have a skewed sense of feminism and is it actually that bad a movement?

If you support women, but at the same time degrade men, you have no sense what was the original motivation and essence of feminism or the equality movement.

Seraphempyre, post-feminist masculist. ;)

PS: And remember, I always like this argument, we men let you women gain power: We had the (physical) strength, the weapons, the (political) positions, etc. But we let you women gain advantage. So, be fucking grateful instead of being ingrates. ;)

(X-posted in a few communities and my own journal.)
18 comments|post comment

Postcards from the Edge of the Global Culture of Capitalism [08 Jun 2007|11:42am]

I am in the process of rounding out an art project in need of
international support:
the latest layer to evolve out of a dip into political art has
manifested on www.elizabetelliott.com. the project is called
"Post-Modern Political Prayer Cards: Postcards from the Edge of the
Global Culture of Capitalism"

i am auctioning off a body of work that i organized for a brief on
politics, but much of the work is conceptual commentary on the art
market itself as much as capitalism. id really like it if you have
time to check it out to send me feedback and ideas!

The project of course does not end with me so all feedback is
essential! im happy to answer questions as well where my motives or
choices seem unclear.

a warning: i am working with loaded imagery and some of the outcomes
include possibly offencive material.
2 comments|post comment

All work considered [12 Jan 2007|07:46pm]

My name is Brian Sherwin. I'm the Senior Contributing Editor for the myartspace.com blog. I've interviewed a number of emerging and established artists. You can check out the interview list here: http://myartspace.com/interviews/

Some of the artists are very political with their work.
For example, http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2007/01/art-space-talk-makan-emadi.html

Feel free to contact me about your art.
post comment

Cognitive Dung, Merrily Flung [17 Dec 2006|02:48am]


Emoticon-laden chat logs from the depths of depravity, more often than not the entries in this blog will leave you wondering what you just read and how terrible a person you must be for laughing. Updated by Lord Vitamin and Rohypnol Larry, two Internets malcontents who survive by making fun of the decay of society and their own lives.
post comment

New Painting [10 Dec 2006|06:31pm]

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

'Bodies' by Brian Sherwin

Here are some of the interviews I've done with other artists:


post comment

An introduction to my art blog. [18 Nov 2006|12:03am]

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

I'd like to invite members of this community to my art blog. You can visit it by clicking on the following link: http://myartspace.com/blog/

I'm interested in interviewing artists. I've already interviewed over a dozen. Some are just starting out... others are well-known. My goal is to help artists connect with others.
You can see the interviews by going to the following link: http://myartspace.com/interviews/
You guys might be interested in reading my interview with Charles Thomson.

I also interview gallery directors so that artists can learn about exhibition spaces that they may not have been aware of. Contact me if you are an artist or represent a gallery and are interested in being interviewed. I'll consider anything.

Also, I have a group on myspace.com so if you are on there feel free to join.
http://groups.myspace.com/myartspaceblog I just started it recently.

Enjoy the blog,

Brian Sherwin
post comment

I'm looking for artists to interview. [31 Oct 2006|12:20am]

If you have some names, websites... drop em'. Anything will be considered, but I'm really looking for controversial art at this time.


Also, here is a recent interview with Charles Thomson, co-founder of the Stuckists.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

And Terry Marks (Painting above) of the New York Stuckists

Brian Sherwin
1 comment|post comment

[10 Aug 2006|08:20am]

The slippery meanings of "open": http://www.openthefuture.com/2006/08/open_taxonomy.html
post comment

Postmodern toolkits for decentralized governance? [05 Aug 2006|12:15pm]

So, I'm working on decentralized decision-making software. I've been able to use some ideas really effectively, like Deleuze and Guattari's idea of nexuses of idealized universes to create a diverse simulation machinery. I'm wondering if there is anything else out there that would yield some decentralized analysis techniques? Also, I'm interested in writing about possible needs and effects of decentralized tools in social services and government, and would like to get involved with that body of scholarship. Any ideas on this front?
5 comments|post comment

[05 Aug 2006|02:19am]

What's happened to this community? The last post was in January.

Needless to say, I joined afterward, but come on! The idea for this community was so cool, I was hoping it would keep going.

So here I am, stirring the fires, hoping that somebody will post.
3 comments|post comment

[23 Jan 2006|06:43pm]

I recently got bored and decided to create a new Live Journal community for discussion and debates on culture and politics: each separately, how they work together, whether or not they can ever truly be considered apart. Ideally it’s interdisciplinary and any view is welcome so long as it is backed up.

It’s a place to discuss popular culture, subcultures, politics, social and political theory and its relation to actual contemporary life, and so on.

One thing I’d like to distinguish this community is a rule against ranting/”yelling”/general self-righteousness. Ideally I’d like it to be a place for calm and rational discussion and debate. Calling someone names or ganging up on them is discouraged.

If anyone is interested, please by all means join. If some reasonable amount of people join, perhaps we can start discussing something. I have some things in mind and anyone else is welcome to contribute.


Cross-posted to: sociologists, socialsciences, culture_studies, culturalanthro
post comment

Introduction [09 Dec 2005|03:09am]

I am enjoying reading the posts in this community! I will post more soon enough. If anyone checks out my journal and/or art and would like to "freind" me please feel free to do so.

Thanks for your time!

post comment

[11 Nov 2005|02:55pm]

i have a idea. i was in some corporate book store,and i came a cross a ton of derrida books . i felt likea kid in a candy store untill i noticed the price of them... i was wondering if anyone knows of a anyway to download or get free derrida ebooks?.
project gutenburg dont have jack shit in derrida/ any suggestions on opening up derrida to the poor?
7 comments|post comment

Unintelligent question. [03 Oct 2005|01:15am]

I'm only familiar with modernism and postmodernism through a literary criticism setting. So I was reading the info and wondering what post-postmodernism is. And, for that matter, what hypermodernism is. Is that like hyper-reality?
4 comments|post comment

[02 Sep 2005|02:55am]
I am looking for information (anything credible like peer-reviewed articles, online books, ect) on post-post-modernism. Also looking for anyone who feels that they have understood 'society of the spectacle' and would like to offer help.

sorry if any of this is redundant of previous posts.
thank you.
post comment

to build your house upon the sea [22 Aug 2005|11:17am]

here is a peice i wrote last summer it appered in siyahi interlocal, turkish poststructuralism. http://www.livejournal.com/community/siyahi/
its based on deleuze's student thesis, its a bit rough ,i write the way i think very non linier and fragmented.

To Build One's House Upon the Sea - by Joe Taylor
Man created both "point" and "line" concepts. But once he understood these concepts' undeniable meanings, the rest of geometry consisted in exploring the logical implications that arose from this. This creates truth and discourse. And the "truth" was already there waiting to be "discovered" right, but this is one measure of the world, one truth that dominates, it excludes and displaces, marginalizes as we learn from Husserl in his work on geometry. To build your house upon the sea is to build your "self", your foundation, your base, and thus your approach to the world, from a constant undulation, a moving unknown sea; narcissus leans over to the pool and looks in, a marine lover maybe. You ask "is this a discussion on anarchism?" Typically I interpret anarchism as an objective approach to truth. How does relativism play a role in such an objective? Or even Nietzsche a.k.a. Irrigaray’s marine lover? Who offers us no objective or empirical truth as anarchism strives for - when we say truth, we mean Plato’s forms, Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason"; these all look for a core measurement, a center. Narcissus looks into the water and sees himself. Now he has a measurement, but a center that has always been haunted by an absence, marginality. It seems that all Western thought, let alone metaphysics, was interested in a center. Whether it was dualistic or truth as a fixed point like God was, and as science and positivism is now, Narcissus had a fixed point from which to approach the world, even hierarchy, subject-object dualism. But people approach the world fragmented as subjects, yet objectively become anarchists, usually because of a confrontation with the political, and always with a pre-thought in Heidegger's sense.

This is often how people become anarchists with "thought", but not with "thinking", inspired by some others thought, when approaching the world. But we must approach ourselves first, a "know thy self", an essentially relativist approach that we can see with Max Stirner "ownness", or Foucault’s continuous plane of variation; relativity, subjectivity, selfhood, or specific subjectivity (read ego), that is contingent to larger social relations. In other words, we might say that someone becomes an anarchist in order to confront. A politics of reaction, so to speak, a crisis, it never seems to be because of an encounter with the "self" or with "Dasein." I never felt comfortable with the term "post anarchism". It denotes a hierarchy, a category, a very linear heirloom from Marxism, a center to approach the late capitalist world, a label. It's true; you need this categorization to understand the world. But lets try something more like a homelessness, like water pooling in cracks and in the holes of surfaces. Stirner’s idea of the self and Heidegger’s Dasein and the self, Stirner’s interrogation of being, in the "ego", his concept of self is not a self at all, but an assemblage of singularities affects and intensities, explanations, not complete at all, its an in-between in the Deleuzeian sense. The self according to Deleuze is imperfection, the identity crisis of Stirner; looking in a pool of water he sees himself, looking into the mirror he see the other and his own, so we are starting to sea a house being built upon the sea, slowly being built from pieces of wood floating on its crust pieces of sunk in ships and drift wood, building your house, Irrigaray’s marine lover, a nomadic house.

Multiplicities are prevalent here; no totality, its subjectivity; liberating, not culturally liberating; armed with Heidegger's concept of "thinking” not "thought", and Stirner’s chaotic multi-directional moving egos, we move away from the Hegelian of base thought, so that anarchism becomes a response to modernity and a reaction to the modern state, and its practices of normalization. So anarchism therefore mimics its father, a lot of "thought" but no "thinking"; remember, thinking is movement upon a sea, but thought is land base, more architectural. Instead you must drift like Irigaray's marine lover, so back to nomadic homelessness, discourse and a way to approach the self. "Socrates was one with no home". Or "atopos", no foundation, a "house upon he sea" always being built, but selves according to Stirner are different from what they are and what they wish they are, much like anarchists. An inside/outside identity is created by the State; Narcissus looks into the pool an inside/outside of hierarchical thought, and anarchists emerge as the politics of reaction and identity; atomized fragments, a network of selves, pieces of floating driftwood and sunken ships that were the lives and faces of others. I build my house, we confront the world with this identity, this self consciousness, whether it is "anarchist" or not, it's always atomized within a margin, an excluded, an unseen, the self vs. the world, like Stirner’s union of egoists but not really as a union, but as one body with many bodies that moves on different plateaus of identities, ever shifting, many worlds in the one as the Zapatistas say. So for anarchism, as its moves in reaction to the state, anarchists attempt to escape from the state are ultimately led right back to the state. A product of modernity, anarchist identity as such is closely tied to the State and its discourse then becomes "post-anarchist", so back to the margin, the nomad, the in-between. An identity that moves between borders; a homelessness, a union of egos, a multiplicity, multi-directional, always rhizomatic, non-hierarchical, always a becoming (a house), but never a beginning (of the house), or an end (to the house). Rather its always being built, from the driftwood of ideas and practices, Narcissus and Stirner never fell into the pool - they did not need to. They both saw the self and their own in the water, the liquidity that acts like a mirror. About this Entry
2 comments|post comment

[22 Jul 2005|09:08pm]

Do you think that post-modernist perspectives can aid the decision making of a person who has to make decisions that effect many people, lets say the U.S. president, or can post-modernist perspectives only be reactively critical of such decisions?
2 comments|post comment

[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]