My name is Joe. (joe_500) wrote in post_modernism,
My name is Joe.
joe_500
post_modernism

Unintelligent question.

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?
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 4 comments
hypermodernism has to do with the hyperreal society we live in. (like how modernism and modernity are related, but are not the same thing). the theory behind hypermodernism goes something like this: we consume images/ideas which are hyperreal, so detached from reality, that everything we produce can be defined as hypermodern. (as opposed to post-modernism, which some would argue is still occurring and some would argue is over).

the two terms you are asking about are similar and also highly debatable. there is no concise definition of postmodernism, which makes it hard to talk about both hyper-reality and post-postmodernism.
for a better explanation, perhaps look at some of the ideas of baudrillard, lyotard, and derrida. (i have only read them through an art-critical theory setting and am not sure what you would have read in terms of literary theory). all of this is hard to sift through... certain philosophers perpetuate their own highly specific language, which is in turn, used to talk about other philosophers and a cross mingling of terms starts to happen.

i posted a similar question about post-postmodernism a while ago and got no response. instead of leaving you hanging, i hope this helps a little.
The hypermodern approach denies that there has been a period defined as 'postmodern' but that current society is a heightened modern state.

Post-postmodernism argues, of course, that the postmodern state is over and that we are now in an entirely different period.

As well as reading theorists like Baudrillard, Lyotard, and Derrida, I suggest you read some Giddens in order to frame the others. Giddens strictly argues that we have not entered a postmodern society, that social, economic and political realms have not been altered even enough through globalisation to warrant the term postmodern. He refers to the current western society as late-modern.
post-postmodernism is a highly tendentious term from what i understand. in part, it comes out of a sense that postmodernism has passed itself. what i mean by this is that we live in an age post-Jameson where technological ubiquity has itself become ubiquitous and late capital is entering yet its latest stage.

post-postmodernism also has to do with a notion that the radical scepticism of the postmodern era has become sceptical of itself - although without being able to retreat back to old metanarratives to "rectify" this dilemma.

if you're interested in a good book on this topic, i'd recommend one by Peter Green called Late Postmodernism. Its idea of late postmodernism (as opposed to post-postmodernism) is a better one i feel because it suggests we are in a sort of transitionary stage, seeking to move on yet unable to do so, in the latest stages of a philosophy which is all about lateness.

hope this helps somewhat. sorry if it's a bit jargonistic.
The Postmodern Turn by Best and Kellner is a very accessible and informative commentary on postmodernism in almost all of its facets, i. e. predecessors, philosophy, theory, art, science, etc. Unfortunately, I know nothing of hypermodernism but thanks for mentioning it! I'll look into it.