Re:Smooth Talk
by coldtea on Thursday November 02, 2017 @04:41PM
(#15614102)
>It is true that, given only the rules and conventions of a language, no singular meaning can be read from an utterance. It is, thus, tempting to say that no utterance has any singular meaning. I contend that the human condition lends sufficient context to read a singular (or close enough) meaning from a well-formed utterance.
That though is not all that post-modernism says, but rather a a reduced straw-man version.
Even if they alluded (or openly) stated that, they did it for particular, quite rational, reasons, with they explained with much more nuance and drew rather rich conclusions from.
In the end, like with the dadaists/surrealists, people might have laughed at them, but half of what we consume culturally today, from ads and graphic design to mainstream tv and comics, owes them huge debts.
Speaking of the original post-modernists of course. Not that the American academics that followed french post-modernism much understood this nuance.
That though is not all that post-modernism says, but rather a a reduced straw-man version.
Even if they alluded (or openly) stated that, they did it for particular, quite rational, reasons, with they explained with much more nuance and drew rather rich conclusions from.
In the end, like with the dadaists/surrealists, people might have laughed at them, but half of what we consume culturally today, from ads and graphic design to mainstream tv and comics, owes them huge debts.
Speaking of the original post-modernists of course. Not that the American academics that followed french post-modernism much understood this nuance.