Why are so many people on Sup Forums utterly fucking clueless when it comes to the art of their time...

Why are so many people on Sup Forums utterly fucking clueless when it comes to the art of their time? So many people here seem to think Postmodernism is bad despite never listening to any Postmodern music.

Other urls found in this thread:

nuxn.com/search/Postmodern
youtube.com/watch?v=gGyXNnne7Ys
youtube.com/watch?v=ZUPsGDFZzVM
youtu.be/x5vA54evYsQ
m.soundcloud.com/sean-orourke-377966223/the-shadow.
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

There's no difference between postmodernism and cultural marxism

>Postmodernism
>cultural marxism

How did you guys enjoy your freshmen year in college? Did you go to a lot of cool frat parties?

Most people like postmodernist music, the majority of popular music since the 50s is part of postmodernism. Cage though is more often a modernist.

>So many people here seem to think Postmodernism is bad
Because they think postmodernism is modernism (or associate it with modern art, which the philistine crowd of Sup Forums doesn't get, despite it being very simple) or otherwise have no idea what it means.
Sup Forums migrants certainly don't help.
They also fail to realize that a good portion of their popular (read: not classical/art) music is postmodern, and so is their television and movies and shitposting.
It doesn't really matter either way, since being postmodern doesn't have much bearing on the musicality of a given piece, it's mostly shitposters who can't think of an argument so they call anything they don't like postmodern.

case in point

contemporary art needs to be contextualized with art history

the layperson is too lazy or too stupid to put in the effort to read up on art history

>postmodernism in a nutshell

Not an argument.

The majority of popular music is stuck in romanticism, not postmodernism. It's popular because it appeals to the least common denominator, and that's a very romantic trait.

There may be themes in contemporary music that don't have much to do with typical romantic things at all. But most popular songs are about love and feelings etc..., which are romantic

what a low quality post
you also didn't argue what's bad or good about cultural marxism or postmodernism

Yes, posting stupid memes in lieu of trying to understand is indeed very postmodern

>The majority of popular music is stuck in romanticism, not postmodernism.
>But most popular songs are about love and feelings etc..., which are romantic

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Romanticism and Neo-Romanticism are about love songs

Holy shit I fucking hate Sup Forums

You guys are so pretentious.

>everyone who doesn't agree with me is unsophisticated or from Sup Forums

I don't want to go watch a beethoven symphony, but discover I have to sit through 20 minutes of a Saxophone concerto by some contemporary retard. I'm tired of sitting through 20 minutes of a composer felating himself REEEEEEEEE

>lol user you just don't understand our sophisticated terminology

Fuck off.

It's about sentiment, love is one of those things that started to be explored in romantic music.

postmodern music: nuxn.com/search/Postmodern

>I don't want to face new or challenging ideas
>I want an artform to wallow in 200-300 year old ideals

Romance and romantic love isn't Romanticism they just share a similar word.

thank you for explaining that I can almost pretend I'm surprised that's where you were going with this

You seriously can't believe no one thought and wrote about love before the romantic era.
youtube.com/watch?v=gGyXNnne7Ys

>new = better
>he believes in progress

I'm sure you will be surprised to learn you don't know anything about what you are criticising. The main literature of the middle ages was called the romance, typically about knights, king arthur, etc. It gets its name ultimately from Roman because they were supposedly modeled after roman literature, it has nothing to do with romantic love.

postmodernism sucks, read fucking Bourdieu

You didn't offer any argument for him to counter. You just named a bunch of buzzwords you read on Sup Forums and called it a day.

>you also didn't argue what's bad or good about cultural marxism
kek

>he thinks there's no way anything can be better than Beethoven

underage
Not an argument.

And there's been tradegy since the greeks but that's one of the other main things made popular in romantic music. Keyword popular

I'm actually a composer myself so I do believe in new ideas, but 20 minutes of discord is in new way "new" it's just a bunch of caviar eating retards felting themselves over how sophisticated they think they are. That is not where art comes from. Great art comes through hard bloody work, and yes some of that work means studying the techniques of great artists of the past. These composers are all a bunch of lazy coca cola drinking cunts. They don't have 1/16th of the type of discipline or intellect that great composers of the past had.

>That is not where art comes from. Great art comes through hard bloody work, and yes some of that work means studying the techniques of great artists of the past.
So your aesthetics DO come from 200-300 years ago.
Great, another fraud teenager.

>Their time

Postmodernism, like that of the man you posted, is the Post-War and late 20th Century period. Which is obviously no longer "our time". While there may seem to be some overlap of some qualities (that is of course how things work), "postmodernity" no longer describes our epoch. There have been several very key shifts that completely undercut any claims to that status.

Also, things grouped under the Post-War years can't be reduced to just one theory or meaning anyways. There were some things - in art for instance - that could still be considered a form of modernism, like Abstract Expressionism or the sculptor David Smith for instance.

There are also aspects about what Cage was doing that would have very different implications now. It's not like he was completely just "doing Derrida". Despite what academics would like to think, theory follows art, not the other way around, and the readings that poststructuralists would have derived from Cage (and originally Duchamp) at this point would prove to be premature and limited.

user, Beethoven is a prime example of a composer fellating himself

...

Dude, when did anyone declare that nothing could ever surpass Beethoven?That's a strawman my dude. I am simply pointing out that listening to 20 minutes of discordant wankery does not mean equal progress. Studying and mastering the art of fugue for example, doesn't mean music is unable to progress. New ideas can still be incoreported into fugal writing. The only problem is most composers today are too goddamn lazy to actually really take the plunge and discipline themselves. This is why the west is falling behind far east asia in terms of creative output. It's because of the mentality of people like you who promote intellectual laziness. You fancy yourself the custodian of progress while doing everything in your power (unconsciously though it may be) to stand in the way of TRUE artistic progress in the contemporary west. BOOM MIC DROP.

Post-war also describes modernism though. The period after WW1 up until the mid 70's is modernism and then post-modernism took over being described as art during late capitalism. Though post-modernism is more of an attitude than a period for example Dadaism can be described as an early form of post-modernism that started as early as 1916 because it embodies key post-modern attitudes to art

>I am simply pointing out that listening to 20 minutes of discordant wankery does not mean equal progress.
It also doesn't mean it ISN'T progress just because you don't like it.
>This is why the west is falling behind far east asia in terms of creative output.
What? I can name Hosokawa, Yoshimatsu, and Chin as good modern Asian composers.
Michael Gordon, Thomas Ades, and Pascal Dusapin all have much more to say and that's a SMALL excerpt of the modern Western scene.

>Not an argument.
Not an argument.

Nah man, the aesthetics of music I compose in 2017 come from music of the past and the present which have subtly influenced me (even unknowingly). You are just too black and white to see that it is possible to compose in the present without feeling the urge to take a giant shit on artistic techniques of the past for the sake of being 'edgy'.

Obviously everyone is influenced by everything, I'm saying that doesn't mean you have to make fucking Neoclassical music.
Stockhausen's Klavierstucke are better than Beethoven's Heroic era sonatas.
Birtwistle's Symphonic works are better than all of Schubert's except Symphonies 8 and 9.

History isn't "Oh the past is so great I love it"

>implying composers having been composing discordant music for the past 100 years

Nah it isn't progress. It's beating a dead horse at this point. It isn't novel. Music like this represents the inflexible wankery of contemporary music conservatories, but by all means keep swallowing the koolaid.

>Music like this
Like WHAT
You have never even named a single person or piece you seem to know so much about, teenager.

>rather have activism and protest
>over actual international negotiations such as reducing carbon dioxide emissions through mutual benefits and international cooperation and punishing those that don't follow through sanction

youtube.com/watch?v=ZUPsGDFZzVM

Once again you fall into the knee jerk reaction of "if he thinks the aesthetics of Bach are worthy of study that means he must wholesale reject all contemporary music by virtue of it being composed in the present."

I listen to a lot of music that has been created within the past 10 years, but yes most of the music i like is decidedly not atonal postmodern horseshit, and does incorporate contrapuntal or other styles of composition that happen to be consider antiquated.

I happen to think that there are some elements of musical aesthetics that are objective. I think the methodology of musical composition can be objective when it comes to fugue writing for example, but that doesn't mean it is inflexible or that these things are ultimately and forever set in stone. Just that there is an objective methodology of musical composition that we consider objective as dictated by tradition. You act as if the aesthetics of 200-300 years ago are even well understood by most modern composers, and if they are not well understood than how does they lose their novelty? You honestly seem to insinuate that musical aesthetics from 200-300 years ago could in no way be utilized to create great modern music. It can still be novel.

Things of course overlap, but in art, there is considered a cut-off at 1945.

This doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of things that share qualities with or continue various 'modernist' approaches, or that postmodernism actually sufficiently describes what comes afterwards, but there is definitely something of a break more to do with the second world war ending that kind of pushes a reset button.

If we're talking about postmodernism meaning poststructuralism, and when that catches on, yeah one can say that that emerges more strongly in the 70s. But so many of the things were already happening in the 50s and 60s in art that poststructuralism would belatedly attempt to use/read-into.

Modernism in art though is more 1900 - 1945, if we're speaking of the generally agreed-upon timescale. Not that there wasn't a lot of 'modernism' happening afterwards. After that, the proper term for art isn't 'postmodern', by the way, but it's not called modern anymore. A sign somebody really, really doesn't know art is when they call new art "modern". Hell, we're even at the point now where the term that followed 'modern' is referring more to a period we're past now as well.

But these epochs are about 40 - 50-ish years. There was the pre-War - World War period. Then the Post-War one (another 50-ish years). These don't just go on forever. We're clearly in something different now.

You will know someone is outmoded if they still think we are in a "postmodern" time. Again, there are overlaps... but poststructuralism is institutionalized, it runs academia now, it's status-quo and unoriginal and unexciting. And there are still so many kids influenced by Butler and Foucault. But they're all coasting on a wave that's definitely tapering at this point.

This was meant to be in response to this

I like this stuff a lot even though it is quite a big leap from our discussion, but it is a nice modern composition utilizing older European folk styles. youtu.be/x5vA54evYsQ

And here is a short composition I have made if you are interested I'm by no means a master.

m.soundcloud.com/sean-orourke-377966223/the-shadow.

You read more Bourdieu, you swine. Read trying to be less of a brute to understand the subtleties of his work, which defies some crucial dicotomies.

Most music people listen to on this website is postmodern. Associating "art" music like John Cage's with postmodernism exclusively is flawed.

Radiohead is postmodernism, young thug is postmodernism, Kendrick Lamar is postmodernism, Mount Eerie is postmodnerism, oneohtrix point never is postmodnerism, godspeed is postmodnerism, sufjan is postmodernism, kanye is postmodernism. Shit most music nowadays is postmodern in some sense.

postmodernism is so 60s-80s. New Sincerity peaked in the 90s and we've been in a metamodern state ever since. Come on.

Liberalism is a mental disorder.