What is the key concept for postmodernism. The concept of postmodern

Postmodernism in painting is a modern trend in fine arts that appeared in the 20th century and is quite popular in Europe and America.

Postmodernism

The very name of this style is translated as “after modernity”. But postmodernism cannot be perceived so unambiguously. This is not only a direction in art - it is an expression of the human worldview, a state of mind. Postmodernism is a way to express yourself. The main features of this style are the opposition to realism, the denial of norms, the use of ready-made forms, and irony.

Postmodernism arose as a way to resist modernity. This style flourished in the second half of the 20th century. The term "postmodernism" was first used in 1917 in an article that criticized Nietzsche's theory of the superman.

The concepts of postmodernism are as follows:

• This is the result of politics and neo-conservative ideology, which are characterized by eclecticism, fetishism.
• Umberto Eco (who will be discussed below) defined this genre as a mechanism that serves to change one era in culture to another.
• Postmodernism is a way of rethinking the past, because it cannot be destroyed.
• This is a unique period, which is based on a special understanding of the world.
• H. Leten and S. Suleiman believed that postmodernism cannot be considered an integral artistic phenomenon.
• This is the era main feature which was the belief that reason is omnipotent.

Postmodernism in art

For the first time, this style manifested itself in two types of art - postmodernism in painting and in literature. The first notes of this direction appeared in the novel by Hermann Gasse "Steppenwolf". This book is a desktop book for representatives of the hippie subculture. In literature, representatives of the “postmodernism” trend are such writers as: Umberto Eco, Tatiana Tolstaya, Jorge Borges, Victor Pelevin. One of the most famous novels in this style - "The name of the rose." The author of this book is Umberto Eco. In the art of cinema, the very first film created in the postmodern style was the film Freaks. - horrors. The brightest representative of postmodernism in cinema is Quentin Tarantino.

This style makes no attempt to create any universal canons. The only value here is the freedom of the creator and the absence of restrictions for self-expression. The main principle of postmodernism is "everything is allowed".

art

Postmodernism in painting of the 20th century proclaimed its main idea - there is no particular difference between a copy and an original. Postmodern artists successfully demonstrated this idea in their paintings - creating them, then rethinking, transforming what had already been created earlier.

Postmodernism in painting arose on the basis of modernism, which once rejected the classics, everything academic, but in the end it itself moved into the category classical art. Painting has reached a new level. As a result, there was a return to the period that preceded modernism.

Russia

Postmodernism in Russian painting flourished in the 1990s. Artists from creative team"Their":

• A. Menus.
• Hyper Pupper.
• M. Tkachev.
• Max Maksyutin.
• A. Podobed.
• P. Veshchev.
• S. Nosova.
• D. Dudnik.
• M. Kotlin.

The creative group "SVOI" is a single organism, assembled from diverse artists.

Russian postmodernism in painting is fully consistent with the basic principle of this trend.

Artists who worked in this genre

The most famous representatives of postmodernism in painting:

• Joseph Beuys.
• Ubaldo Bartolini.
• V. Komar.
• Francesco Clemente.
• A. Melamid.
• Nicholas de Maria.
• M. Merz.
• Sandro Chia.
• Omar Galliani.
• Carlo Maria Mariani.
• Luigi Ontani.
• Past Paladino.

Joseph Beuys

This German artist was born in 1921. Joseph Beuys is a prominent representative of the "postmodernism" trend in painting. Paintings and art objects of this artist strive to exhibit in all museums of modern art. Josef's talent for drawing manifested itself in childhood. From an early age he was engaged in painting and music. Repeatedly visited the studio of the artist Achilles Murtgat. While still a schoolboy, J. Beuys read a large number of books on biology, art, medicine and zoology. Since 1939, the future artist combined his studies at school with work in the circus, where he looked after animals. In 1941, after leaving school, he volunteered for the Luftwaffe. He first served as a radio operator, then became a rear gunner on a bomber. During the war, Josef painted a lot and began to think seriously about a career as an artist. In 1947, J. Beuys entered the Academy of Arts, where he later taught and received the title of professor. In 1974, he opened the Free University, where everyone could enter to study without age restrictions and without entrance exams. His paintings consisted of drawings in watercolor and lead point depicting various animals, resembling rock paintings. He was also a sculptor and worked in the style of expressionism, sculpting tombstones to order. Joseph Beuys died in 1986 in Düsseldorf.

Francesco Clemente

Another world-famous representative of the "postmodernism" style in painting is the Italian artist Francesco Clemente. He was born in Naples in 1952. The first exhibition of his work was held in Rome, in 1971, when he was 19 years old. The artist traveled a lot, visited Afghanistan, India. became his wife theater actress. Francesco Clemente adored India and visited there very often. He fell in love with the culture of this country so much that he even collaborated with Indian miniaturists and paper craftsmen - he painted gouache miniatures on handmade paper. Fame brought to the artist paintings, which depicted erotic images of often mutilated parts of the human body, many of his creations were made by him in very rich colors. In the early 80s of the twentieth century, he painted a series. In the 90s of the twentieth century, he began to work in a new technique for himself - a wax fresco. The works of F. Clemente took part in a large number of exhibitions in different countries. His most convincing works are those in which he conveys his own mood, his mental anguish, fantasies and hobbies. One of his last exhibitions took place in 2011. Francesco Clemente still lives and works in New York, but often visits India.

Sandro Chia

Another one that represents postmodernism in painting. A photo of one of the works of Sandro Chia is shown in this article.

He is not only an artist, he is also a graphic artist and sculptor. Fame came to him in the 80s of the twentieth century. Sandro Chia was born in Italy in 1946. Educated in his native city, Florence. After studying, he traveled a lot, looking for an ideal place for himself, as a result of his search in 1970 he began to live in Rome, and in 1980 he moved to New York. Now S. Kia lives either in Miami or in Rome. The artist's works began to be exhibited both in Italy and in other countries - in the 70s. Sandro Kia has his own artistic language which is filled with irony. In his works, bright saturated colors. Many of his paintings depict male figures of a heroic appearance. In 2005, the President of Italy awarded Sandro Chia for his contribution to the development of culture and art. A huge number of paintings by the artist are in museums in Germany, Japan, Switzerland, Israel, Italy and other countries.

Mimmo Paladino

Italian postmodern artist. Born in the southern part of the country. Graduated from the College of Arts. In the revival of fine arts in the 70s, he played one of the leading roles. He mainly worked in the technique of tempera fresco. In 1980, in Venice, his work was presented for the first time at an exhibition, among the paintings of other postmodern artists. Among them were such names as Sandro Chia, Nicola de Maria, Francesco Clemente and others. A year later, the Basel Art Museum organized a personal exhibition of paintings by Mimmo Paladino. Then there were several more personalities in others. In addition to painting, the artist was a sculptor.

He sculpted his first works in 1980. His sculptures gained popularity almost immediately. They were exhibited in London and Paris in the most prestigious halls. In the 1990s, Mimmo created his cycle of 20 white sculptures made in mixed media. The artist received the title of honorary member of the Royal Academy of Art in London. Also, M. Paladino is the author of scenery for theater performances in Rome and Argentina. Painting in the life of Mimmo played a leading role.

2. Definition of postmodernism.

POSTMODERNISM is a concept used by modern philosophical reflection to designate a type of philosophizing that is characteristic of the culture of today, content-axiologically distancing itself not only from classical, but also from non-classical traditions and constituting itself as post-modern, i.e. post-classical philosophy. Leading representatives: R. Barthes, Bataille, Blanchot, Baudrillard, Deleuze, Derrida, Jameson, Guattari, Klossovsky, Kristeva, Lyotard, Merleau-Ponty, Foucault and others. The term "Postmodernism" was first used in R. Ranwitz's book "Crisis European culture"(1917); in 1934 it was used by F. de Oniz to refer to the avant-garde poetic experiments of the early 20th century, radically rejecting literary tradition; from 1939 to 1947 in the works of Toynbee the content of the concept of "Postmodernism" was constituted as denoting the modern (starting from the First World War) era, radically different from the previous era of modernity; in the late 1960s - 1970s, this concept was used to fix innovative trends in such areas as architecture and art (primarily its verbal forms), and was applied to such areas of objectivity as economic-technological and socio-historical; since 1979 (after the work of Lyotard "The Postmodern State: A Report on Knowledge"), it has been affirmed in the status of a philosophical category that fixes the mental specifics of the modern era as a whole (K. Butler, V. Welsh, T.D "an, D. Davis, Ch. Jencks, A. Le Vaux, D. Lodge, J. Madzaro, A. B. Oliva, W. Spainos, W. Steiner, A. Wilde, D. Fokkema, D. Forward, I. Hassan, etc.) At present, the history of the transformation of the content of the concept of "Postmodernism" is becoming a special subject of postmodernist philosophical reflection (H. Bertens, M.A. Rose, etc.).Despite the programmatic distancing of postmodernism from the presumptions of classical and non-classical philosophical The program of modern philosophy genetically goes back to a large extent to the non-classical type of philosophizing (beginning with Nietzsche), and in particular to post-structuralism, structural psychoanalysis, neo-Marxism, phenomenology, Heidegger's philosophy, the traditions of "post-scientific thinking" and "poetic thinking", as well as to the traditions of this iotics and structural linguistics and, in its later versions, to the philosophy of dialogue, the theory of language games. Despite the fact that the dominant tendency is to date the emergence and conceptualization of postmodernism in the mid-1950s, there is also a position according to which this process is pushed back to the end of the 1930s (K. Butler, I. Hassan); According to Eco, in relation to the discretion of the "beginning" of postmodernism, there is a tendency to refer it "to an increasingly distant past" - and if Eco's ironically modeled attempts to "declare Homer himself a postmodernist" were not taken seriously, then the interpretation in the postmodern vein of apriorism by I. Kant as anticipating the idea of ​​meaning is not alien to postmodern retrospective (V. Moran). In modern philosophical literature there are enough lively discussions on the correlation of such aspects of the content this concept as actually philosophical, sociological (Z.Bauman, R.Williams, K.Kumar, S.Lash, D.Lyon, J.Urri, F.Feher, A.Heller), cultural (S.Best, D.Kellner, E. Jellner, M. Poster, B. S. Turner, B. Smart), literary and architectural art (C. Jencks, I. Hassan), etc. departments, the rigidity of the boundaries between which they themselves strongly reject). These discussions, in turn, lead to the problem of explication - along with the content of the concept of "postmodern philosophy" - and the content of such concepts as "postmodern sociology", "postmodern cultural studies", "postmodern linguistics", etc. Recently, however, the trend towards an extremely broad understanding of the term "Postmodernism" and the recognition that it "should be used not as a historical-literary or theoretical-architectural, but as a world-historical concept" (G. Küng) begins to dominate. At the same time, by now the point of view has been established, according to which "postmodernism is an era not so much in the development of social reality as in consciousness" (Z. Bauman). Modern culture reflexively interprets itself as "postmodern", i.e. post-modernity, as a process that unfolds "after time" - in a situation of "perfection" and "completion" of history. Similarly, modern philosophy constitutes itself not only as post-modern (actually, post-modernism), but also as post-philosophy, which implies the rejection of the problematic fields traditional for philosophy, the conceptual-categorical apparatus and classical semantic-axiological priorities. Thus, the philosophy of postmodernism refuses to differentiate philosophical knowledge into ontology, epistemology, etc., fixing the impossibility of constituting metaphysics as such in the current situation and reflexively comprehending modern style thinking as "post-metaphysical". The latter realizes itself outside the traditional functional-semantic oppositions that acted in the culture of classical and non-classical types as fundamental gestalt axes of the mental space: by sharply criticizing the very idea of ​​binary oppositions as such, postmodernism thinks of itself outside the dichotomous oppositions of subject and object, male and female, internal and external, center and periphery. In general, if the current cultural state can be fixed through the concept of "postmodern", then the state of the mentality that is aware of it - through the concept of "Postmodernism". In this regard, researchers persistently emphasize the reflexive nature of postmodernism as a cultural phenomenon: "postmodernism as such is nothing but modernity for itself" (Z. Bauman). Thus, "postmodern ... is understood as a state of radical plurality, and postmodernism - as its concept" (W. Welsh). Of course, we can not talk about a single concept that semantically exhausts with its content the entire problematic field of modern postmodern philosophy: postmodernism as a philosophical phenomenon, in principle, cannot be considered as a monolithic one, characterized not only by attributive, but also programmatic plurality, objectified in a wide fan of diverse (both in terms of the modeled objectivity and in terms of the methodology used) projects, among which the most significant are textological, nomadological, schizoanalytic, narratological, genealogical, simulation, communication, etc. Moreover, postmodernism does not seek to "constitute itself as an actually unified philosophical strategy, unified in its foundations, methods and goals and claiming originality, nor to establish itself as a philosophical tradition, programmatically postulating the impossibility in modern conditions of implementing such a philosophical metaphysical project. The semantic and categorical diversity of postmodern philosophy is largely due to the radical rejection of postmodernism from the very idea of ​​the possibility of constituting a conceptual and methodological matrix in the sphere of modern philosophizing, which could claim paradigmatic status, its program setting for idiographism and the initial plurality of the problem field, which also reveals constant intentions to expand (philosophy of writing and text, variable dynamic models of sociality and subjectivity, conceptual models of historical events, power, discourse and language, analytical models of consciousness and the unconscious, corporality of sexuality, and many others. ) One should also not discount the fact that postmodernism is an actual phenomenon that does not yet belong to the philosophical tradition in the past perfect mode - both its content and terminological tools are in the process of their formation and cannot, therefore, be characterized established uniformity. Hence the intention, characteristic of postmodern philosophy, to a reflexive definition of the phenomenon of postmodernism as a whole by pointing to particular (both in the sense of non-universality of distribution and in the sense of locality of objectivity) of its characteristics. So, for example, according to Lyotard, postmodernism can be defined as "distrust of metanarratives", Jameson sees the attributive characteristic of postmodernism in focusing on specific parody, etc. At the same time, despite what has been said, in relation to postmodernism as a phenomenon of philosophical tradition, it can be argued that, initially arising as a kind of special situation in the development of philosophical thinking, which consists in a purely negative distancing from the established strategies for building philosophical knowledge, by now postmodernism can be evaluated as constituted in the space of philosophical reflection as a phenomenon that has an indisputable paradigm status, because the postmodernist program of philosophizing satisfies all the criteria requirements for the research paradigm, namely: first of all - linguistic) articulation ("postmodern sensitivity" as a setting for the perception of reality as chaotically fragmented and semiotized, up to the postulation of sign-artik a settled mode of existence as the only possible one; 2) forms specific ideals and norms for describing and explaining the world, reflexively comprehended in postmodern narratology and consisting in fundamental and program pluralism, and ideals and norms for the organization of knowledge, which find their expression in program cognitive relativism (turn from the alterity strategy to the mutuality strategy (reciprocity) ), based on the concept of "the decline of big narrations". In the paradigm evolution of postmodernism, two stages can be distinguished: 1) the postmodern classic of deconstructivism described above, characterized by extreme radicalism of distancing from the presumptions of both classical and non-classical philosophy, and 2) taking shape in present tense paradigm modification of postmodernism, which is the result of a certain turn to the revision of the original presumptions (partly associated with a communication turn in the development of philosophical problems) and can be interpreted as a kind of after-postmodernism. Philosophical postmodernism not only has a paradigm status, but also performs functions inherent in philosophy in modern culture. First of all, in the philosophy of postmodernism, the conceptual means necessary for an adequate description of non-equilibrium self-organizing systems drawn into the sphere of cognition of modern culture are being polished (as they were polished in their time in philosophical language conceptual and logical means necessary to describe dynamic systems, and then - developing ones). Subjecting this process to a meta-theoretical comprehension, Foucault writes that a new style of thinking is currently being formed and, in fact, new culture. According to him, the new fundamental experience of mankind "cannot be made to speak the thousand-year-old language of dialectics." The new, non-linear way of seeing the world, which is being constituted in modern culture, also needs a new language for its expression, but at the moment, according to Foucault, "new experience has yet to find a language that will be the same for it as it was dialectic for contradiction". Just as, modeling in a predictive mode - the dynamics of a self-developing system, the philosophy of the 19th century. appealed to abstract spheres of objectivity, which in their cognitive status are an ideal (theoretical) construct (for example, a monad in Leibniz's monadology), - in the same way, modeling new type dynamics (nonlinear self-organizing processes in chaotic astructural environments) and developing a conceptual apparatus for describing such dynamics, the philosophy of postmodernism also operates with ideal objects (such as "nomadic distribution of singularities", "rhizomorphic environments", etc. - the greatest measure of concreteness in this context is possessed by such postmodern concepts as "writing" and "text", since, in relation to the textual version of postmodern philosophy, the possibility of using terminological thesaurus post-Saussurian linguistics, which makes the situation more transparent). According to the fact that the desired terminology is in the process of its formation, the philosophy of postmodernism demonstrates a whole range of parallel conceptual series intended to describe an object that goes beyond the framework of the previous research tradition: textological series, nomadological, schizoanalytic, etc. In addition, due to the incomplete development the categorical apparatus of the philosophical analytics of non-linear processes, postmodernism is characterized by the use of mythological images (such as the "tantric egg" in the concept of "body without organs") and the attraction to metaphor. However, the absence of a unified terminology does not serve as an argument for postmodern reflection in favor of the impossibility of stating the paradigmatic unity of postmodernism in its philosophical projection (S.Suleimen). In the problematic field of postmodernism, a special place is occupied by the problem of its relationship with such cultural phenomena as classics and modernism. Programmatically distancing itself from the classical presumptions of philosophizing, postmodernism, at the same time, constitutes a special (and perhaps the only possible) way of presenting the content of cultural tradition in the spiritual space of modernity, understood as "postmodernity"). In the general context of the postmodern rediscovery of time, which stated the total fall of any existing state of culture under the "power of the past", as well as in the particular textual context of the postmodern concept of intertextuality, according to which the product of creativity can be interpreted not as original work , but as a construction of quotations, we can say that postmodernism sets a new horizon for the representation in modern culture of ideas and texts of the classical tradition. In this regard, postmodernism is, in fact, a way of being classics in the modern era. Such an interpretation of the Classic-Postmodern problem, while by no means generally accepted or dominant, nevertheless reveals itself in postmodern reflection: from Ch. Jenks's consideration of architectural postmodernism as "new classicism" to the strategy of "returning lost meanings" proposed by M. Gottdiner in the context of the modern postmodernist program of "resurrection of the subject". With regard to the problem of Modern - Postmodern, among the models of its solution proposed by modern postmodern reflection, extreme options are clearly constituted: from seeing postmodernism as a product of evolution and deepening the presumptions of modernism (A. Giddens, H. Leten, S. Suleimen) to interpreting it as a rejection of unrealized the intentions of modernity (Habermas); from the dominant trend of opposing postmodernism to modernism (R. Kunoff, G. Küng, A. Hornung, G. Hoffman, etc. (in fact, according to G. Küng, "postmodern is a" search concept" structuring the problem, designed to analyze what distinguishes our era from the era of modernity") to the understanding of postmodernism as a product of the "reinterpretation" of modernism (A.B. Zeligman). Postmodern reflection also takes shape the interpretation of postmodernism as a phenomenon that is a manifestation of any radical change in cultural paradigms (D. Lodge, Eco) ; in this respect, postmodernism is seen as a kind of stage in the evolution of culture: "every era has its own postmodernism" (Eco). A distinctive feature of classical postmodernist texts is their meta-character: the works of leading postmodernist authors (i.e. those who can be would be attributed to the "classics" of postmodernism, if not for the resolute rejection by postmodernism of the very idea of ​​a research tradition as such) differ such a feature as the intention to reflection, namely to the explication and meta-theoretical analysis of their own paradigmatic foundations. In this regard, such authors as R. Barthes, Blanchot, Baudrillard, J. Vattimo, P. Virilio, V. Welsh, Deleuze, Jamison, Guattari, Kristeva, Lyotard, Merleau-Ponty, Foucault and others, act simultaneously as classics , and theorists of postmodernism, revealing the socio-cultural foundations and consequences of the postmodern vision of the world. It is also necessary to note the presence in the modern meta-tradition of understanding the phenomenon of postmodernism of a clearly defined critical branch (Habermas, A. Kallinikos, etc.). On the whole, however, the status of postmodernism in modern culture can be regarded not only as determined and significant, but also as largely determining the trends in the development of modern philosophy as such. The phenomenon of postmodernism is currently in the focus of philosophical interest, as evidenced not only by a large array of fundamental analytical works devoted to this phenomenon, and the steady growth of their publication from 1995 to 2000 (author's studies of such theorists as J. Ward, K. Lemert , V.Smart, 3.Sardar, D.Harvey, M.Gottdiner, B.Mc-Hal, J.O "Neil, M.Sarup, K.Lankshir, P.McLaren, A.A.Girouks, M Peter and others; generalizing works edited by K. Gelder, S. Foruton, S. Sim; integral collections "Postmodernism. ICA Documents", etc.), but also the emerging tradition of popularizing postmodernism (for example, the release in 1997 "A Primer to Postmodernity" by G. Natoli; in 1998 - "Postmodernism for Beginning" by C. Appinganesi and C. Gerratt). actual problems, focusing on itself the attention of not only humanitarian, but also natural science knowledge: among them such problems as the problem of non-linearity, rethinking of the phenomenon of determinism in modern culture, a fundamentally new interpretation of the phenomenon of temporality, etc. can be named.

Derrida's philosophical style seeks to bring together the play of language and the play of thought. This largely erases the opposition between literature and philosophy, between logical reasoning and artistic imagination. Such a synthetic style is a distinctive feature of the authors of postmodernism, people who are not just playing, but also deconstructing people.

Game principles on the letter they begin with the basics - with the author's name and signature. A signature is an idiom, an indivisible “piece” of language that embodies a minimal back and forth playful movement - the signature stroke usually includes a strikethrough element, which illustrates Derrida’s favorite idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe dual (hiding/opening) nature of writing. Writing writes and erases, memory remembers and forgets, and in this double movement the play of differences takes place. In the collection Letter and Difference there are two essays, each of which ends with the name of an imaginary rebbe Derissa and Rida (Derissa and Rida): the astute reader can only make up the half-erased name of Derrida from them.

Word games, in addition to names, penetrate Derrida's key terms.

Language acts as a model that generates thought, setting the first combinations and ciphers in the game. Continuous puns in deconstructive texts, on the one hand, introduce an element of fun and entertainment, remind of the playful nature of thinking and language, and on the other hand, they teach you to think not in separate units, but in bundles of relationships, to keep whole groups of meanings in mind.

Language is used by Derrida as a means of forcing "ordinary" meanings in order to break into the new - multidimensional space postmodern culture.

Due to such saturation of texts and complicated language, many critics even reproach him with excessive attention to the word, the mania for constant clarifications, reservations, which leads to a kind of stylistic “tick” - Derrida often “pulls away” any term from himself, concluding it in quotation marks, in his writings at every step there are brackets, introductory phrases, phrases in italics. Sometimes the text specifically preserves the features of a draft and abstract - crossed out words, marginal remarks, unfinished sentences. Such an active use of all means of expressiveness of written speech clearly demonstrates Derrida's desire to see a symbolic model of thinking in writing.

However, one must learn not only to play, but also to change the game in time, or even to leave it completely, to be ironic about the game. Standard library-university education orients the reader to the search for a single meaning or coding system in the text, and at the moment when it seems that she is about to be found, Derrida makes another turn that opens up new possibilities. Hesitations, doubts, "completion" of meanings, unexpected associations - the effect planned by the author. This is an important feature of the cultural consciousness of postmodernism: the text, whether philosophical or literary, is created in advance, counting on the final critical activity, includes it as a potential context. Without it, the text is “open”, incomplete, and the very movement of thought, the very process of playing, turns out to be self-sufficient.

Derrida's Spurs: Nietzsche's Styles is an excellent example of the play of style in philosophy. The text is built from two columns, between the two columns there are sporadically echoes of meaning, associative links, a machine is working to produce new metaphors and ideas. The movement of the reader's gaze according to such an intellectual "design" is itself a metaphor for the game. Recall that a back-and-forth shuttle (in this case between columns of text) is the minimum projection of the game, its code and model. Both I. Huizinga and X. Gadamer wrote about this - we quote the latter: “Movement, which is a game, is devoid of an ultimate goal; it is updated in endless repetitions. It is clear that the notion of movement back and forth is so central to the essential definition of play that it does not matter who or what is performing the movement.

Often in his discussion of the game, Derrida refers to Nietzsche, who glorifies the joy of pure thinking, the Dionysian ecstasy in the realm of wisdom. Following Nietzsche, deconstructivists practically blur the line between thinking and a joke, between an interesting idea and a successful pun. Intellectual game levels the hierarchy different levels consciousness: both pure contemplation, and critical activity, and the genre of presentation, and language turn out to be closed to each other in a single element of playing signs.

Understanding the game as an infinite combination cultural property and signs, in principle, is deducible from the works of Huizinga. Derrida's model of culture responds to many of Huizinga's characteristics of play: free spirit, self-worth, theatricality, repetition, chance, risk, chance and mystery of the result, and, finally, the element of fun, fun, wit. And yet the classical concept of the game differs significantly from the philosophy of the game in postmodernism. The rationale for these differences was contained in Derrida's 1966 keynote speech at a conference at Jens Honkins University, so the article "Structure, sign, and play in the discourse of the humanities" (the title of a 1966 paper) is considered a classic of its kind and deserves careful and analytical consideration.

First of all, Derrida reformulates the key concept of “structure”, referring to the abrupt changes in its interpretation: “... in the history of the concept of “structure” something happened that could be called an “event”. . .What is this event? Its external form appears as a kind of gap and doubling. This reversal - the result of the critical thinking of Nietzsche, Freud and Heidegger - can be called in the most general terms the "de-centering" of the structure.

The traditional interpretation of the structure, before the designated "event", necessarily assumed the presence of a "center" or "fixed beginning". Ensuring the clarity of the system, the center of the structure allows the play of its elements only within the overall form. In the structure, the center and the game stand out as antagonistic principles: the center holds back the game, the game blurs the center.

Seven years before this article of Derrida appeared, Gadamer introduced a similar distinction in his well-known work Truth and Method. Gadamer, in particular, wrote: “The game as such, including the unpredictability of improvisation, is fundamentally repeatable, and to this extent constant. It has the character of "work", "ergon", and not just "energy". In this sense, I call it "structure". So, the game is a structure, a frozen model, highlighted through repetition. “But the structure is also a game, since, despite its ideal unity, it acquires its full meaning only in procedurality.” It is characteristic that it is precisely in play that Derrida sees the qualitative potential of the structure, its "structurality".

As for the center, on the one hand, it is not subject to the game - fluid recombinations of elements, meanings, terms. On the other hand, the center, being an unknowable unique focus, governs the structure; itself is deprived of the characteristics of structure due to its indeterminacy, inaccessibility for playing, coding, naming elements. Hence the well-known paradox in classical philosophy: “The center of the structure is both inside and outside at the same time” (can be compared with the scholastic definition of God: a ball or circle, the center of which is everywhere, and the circle is in infinity). Thus, traditional notions of structure are inherently contradictory, since "the notion of centered structure is the notion of a grounded game built on some underlying immobility and reassuring certainty that is itself taken out of the game" .

The next system each time tries to curb the freedom of the game, to reduce the pulsating structure to a rigid form of archeology/teleology. And when in again It turned out that the proposed grid of categories does not capture the mysterious center, does not describe the beginning and the end, the origins and "eschatology", the dynamics of the game, recoding came into play.

And then comes the “event” that marks the crisis of this process: people begin to understand that the center is not the essence, the object of naming and comprehension, but only a function that generates a continuous search for names, new metaphors, descriptive systems. The center is the game's trigger. The center has ceased to think in terms of presence - "de-centering" has taken place. “It is at this very moment that language takes possession of the universal problem field; that moment when, in the absence of a center or beginning, everything becomes discourse - provided that we understand by this word a system in which the central, original or transcendent signified is never fully present outside some system of differences. The absence of a transcendental signified expands the field and the possibilities of the play of meanings to infinity.

Thus, if earlier scientists dealt with "atomic" units of meaning in each humanitarian sphere, then after the "break" researchers reached the level of "molecular" interactions. Unwinding the chain of signs, the interpreter could first come to the final signified - the “last” meaning: this is God, Truth, the Meaning of life, etc. Modern interpreters are deprived of such a happy opportunity. For them, the process of signification is potentially endless, for there are no longer tangible boundaries between play and non-play. There are no play space limits. A stark contrast to traditional "centered" games! After all, “the limitation of the playing field,” as Huizinga rightly emphasizes, “opposes the world of the game, as a closed world, to the world of the goal, and without transition and mediation.” In the realm of the game, the whole world becomes a giant signifier - you can write, following Roland Barthes, works on the semiotics of fashion, hairstyles, city symbols, but with one small correction: these works must be connected, connected to each other in an endless system, in order to get it, as if the books are talking to each other in the library, and the reader is only listening to this spontaneous conversation. Then the utopian model of Derrida-Gadamer will operate: language is everywhere, text is everywhere, signs are everywhere, interpreting each other ad infinitum (to infinity).

The novelty of this all-encompassing game is not quantitative: the playing field expands indefinitely not due to an increase in size, that is, the multiplication of recodings and symbolic replacements, but due to the loss of a center that sets and at the same time restrains the course of permutations.

It is safe to speak of an antithetical beginning for the game. His name is "philosophical totalitarianism", i.e. the desire to come up with a total exhaustive formula that reduces the uniqueness of phenomena to the simplest explanatory structures. Without going into the details of the controversy: Derrida ultimately demonstrates that the total structuralism of Levi-Strauss is based on redundant premises from the point of view of reduction - on secretly implied "scientific" myths in the spirit of Rousseauism about the lost original direct unity of nature and man. "... The movement of the game, which is due to lack, the absence of a center and a beginning, is a movement of complementarity" . This term by Derrida has two meanings: to supplement - to add to what is available and to fill, to fill in the missing, missing.

“A game is a split of presence... Any game is a game of absence and presence, but if we want to think of it in some radical sense, then it should be thought of before the alternative of presence and absence; being itself must be thought of as presence or absence, proceeding from the possibility of play, and not vice versa. Presence, which previously constituted the unconditional center of the structure, is now perceived only as an element in a moving chain of differences - Derrida, as we see, is not content with changing oppositions (presence - absence), but goes to a more essential, critical level for modern thinking thanks to the concept of play as the basis differences.

Summarizing all the listed antinomies and conceptual breakdowns, Derrida draws a picture of two cultural traditions of interpretation of the concepts “sign”, “structure”, “game”, “interpretation” at the end of the essay. The first seeks to decipher and dreams of finding truth, fullness of presence, a reliable foundation, origins and an end to the game. The second tradition no longer searches for lost origins, affirms the play and world of infallible signs, devoid of truth and origins, open to active interpretation.

Forced proximity, immersion in the common material of both traditions creates a unique situation in the culture of the 20th century. The gaming tradition, in an effort to decenter the classical categories and establish the world of cheerful signs, still operates with the established language and philosophical tools. “... The way out of philosophy is not to turn the last page of philosophy (which most often turns into just bad philosophizing), but to continue reading philosophers in a certain way.”

The methodological difficulties described have several consequences that define the style of postmodern thinking. This is a "sentence" to tradition, a forced repetition of the known, appropriation, self-expression through the destruction of another, intertextuality. The tension of the context reflects the specifics of the creative moment in postmodernism: a new thought can only be perceived at the intersection of already known ideas, in the process of orientation in cultural space. Links, quotes, terms are not a fashionable "gentleman's set", but an essential component of both creativity and perception. The author's individuality is expressed rather in words, in shades: no one confuses, say, Heidegger's "house of being" with Derrida's "differences" and "traces". Such words become symbolic representatives of concepts, and it is not surprising that most modern philosophers are "obsessed" with the language, with the play on words. Individuality is found in difference, in the fracture of language: in parodies, in spars, in illusions, in cunning combinations, in repetitions. Language appears as a repository of "postponed", "removed" meanings, and therefore it is very important for a philosopher to "listen" to the language. But the main property of postmodernism is that it cannot be reduced to a fixed dominant. The ego is necessarily a game, a polystylistics, an active complementarity of various philosophical and artistic systems. The dynamic contact of styles gives rise to a common intertextual space in which a “pure” experience of an isolated meaning or aesthetic impulse is impossible.

The game can only be learned by playing. Yes, and metaphysics, if it wants to turn into the metaphysics of the game, must, first of all, become the game of metaphysics. The game is the rule of philosophy - such is the conviction of modern postmodernism.

From the point of view of the classical, traditional mentality, postmodernism is a terrible time that destroys the individual and deprives society of the inner core, and the person - stability. But for a man of his world modern society appears as the only possible reality in which one can not only live, but also be happy. This is helped by a special understanding of the game as open to the direction of movement, free from the goal-setting of transformation. Games of change processes, games of development options. Not a rigid focus due to goal setting, but a free game. However, chaos and anarchy are absent from the game. The outcome of the game is unpredictable, but the course of the game itself is orderly. Economic and social relations can also be explained by game methodology. Some new mutually accepted conditions and rules of the game are more effective in many relationships between economic entities. For example, what we call "corruption" is actually a new reality of economic relations, in a certain sense ordered and understandable to those who are immersed in it. The myth of the total immorality of state officials is generated by the traditionalist consciousness, powerless to explain new reality.

So, finishing the essay, I came to the conclusion that the enduring interest in the game and its universal character lies in the fact that it is an aesthetic phenomenon, and the world organized according to the rules of the game is a world of bewitching illusion. Not perceived by all participants as beautiful, but for the Observer (visually or mentally) it appears as the greatest spectacle.

1. Vainshtein O.B. Philosophical games of postmodernism // Apocrypha. - 1991. - N 2.

2. Vainshtein O.B. Postmodernism: history or language? // Questions of Philosophy. - 1993. - No. 3

3. Derrida J. Structure, sign and game in the discourse of the humanities // Derrida J. Letter and difference. - M., 2000.

4. Derrida J. Spurs: Nietzsche's Styles // Philosophical Sciences. - 1991.- No. 3-4.

5. Gadamer H.-G. Truth and method. - M., 1988.

6. Gilmutdinova N.A. Philosophical games of postmodernism // Bulletin of UlGTU. - 2002. - No. 2.

7. Kutyrev V.A. Culture and Technology: The Struggle of the Worlds. – M.: “Progress is a tradition”. – 2001, 240 p.

Eclecticism feeds hypertrophied redundancy artistic means and techniques of postmodern art, aesthetic "freestyle". c. 135-137. 1.4 Philosophical principles and differences in postmodern aesthetics

Avant-garde postmodernism completely erases the boundaries between various previously independent spheres of culture and levels of consciousness - between “scientific” and “ordinary” consciousness, “ high art” and kitsch. Postmodernism finally consolidates the transition from work to construction, from art as “the activity of creating works” to “the activity about this activity”. Creative process...

Postmodernism as a literary movement originates at the end of the 20th century. It arises as a protest against the foundations, excluding any restriction of actions and techniques, blurs the boundaries between styles and gives the authors absolute freedom of creativity. The main vector of development of postmodernism is the overthrow of any established norms, a mixture of "high" values ​​and "low" needs.

The convergence of elitist modernist literature, which was difficult for the majority of society to understand, and primitivism, rejected by intellectuals due to its stereotyped nature, aimed to get rid of the shortcomings of each style.

(Irene Sheri "Behind the book")

The exact dates of the origin of this style are uncertain. However, its origin is the reaction of society to the results of the era of modernism, the end of World War II, the horrors that took place in concentration camps and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some of the first works include "The Dismemberment of Orpheus" (Ihab Hassan), "Cannibal" (John Hawkes) and "Scream" (Allen Ginsberg).

conceptual design and theoretical definition postmodern received only in the 1980s. This was facilitated, first of all, by the developments of J.F. Lyotard. The Oktober magazine published in the USA actively promoted the postmodernist ideas of prominent representatives of cultural studies, philosophy and literary criticism.

Postmodernism in Russian Literature of the 20th Century

Contrasting avant-gardism and modernity, where moods were felt Silver Age, in Russian postmodernism was expressed by the rejection of realism. Writers in their works describe harmony as a utopia. They find a compromise with chaos and space. The first independent postmodern response in Russia is Andrey Bitov's Pushkin House. However, the reader was able to enjoy it only 10 years after the release, since a ban was imposed on its printing.

(Andrey Anatolyevich Shustov "Ballad")

Russian postmodernism owes the versatility of images to domestic socialist realism. It is he who is the starting point for reflection and development of characters in books of this direction.

Representatives

The ideas of comparing opposite concepts are clearly expressed in the works of the following writers:

• S. Sokolov, A. Bitov, V. Erofeev - paradoxical compromises between life and death;
• V. Pelevin, T. Tolstaya - the contact of the real and the fantasy;
• Pietsukh - the border of foundations and absurdity;
• V. Aksyonov, A. Sinyavsky, L. Petrushevskaya, S. Dovlatov - the denial of any authorities, organic chaos, a combination of several trends, genres and eras on the pages of one work.

(Nazim Hajiyev "Eight" (seven dogs, one cat))

Directions

Based on the concepts of "the world as a text", "the world as chaos", "author's mask", "double move" the directions of postmodernism, by definition, have no specific boundaries. However, analyzing Russian literature of the late 20th century, some features stand out:

• Orientation of culture to itself, not to real world;
• The texts originate from the stocks of historical eras;
• Ephemerality and illusiveness, feigned actions,
• Metaphysical isolation;
• Nonselection;
• Fantastic parody and irony;
• Logic and absurdity are combined in a single image;
• Violation of the law of sufficient justification and exclusion of the third sense.

Postmodernism in Foreign Literature of the 20th Century

The literary concepts of the French post-structuralists evoke special interest from the American writing community. It is against its background that Western theories of postmodernism are formed.

(Portrait - a collage of a mosaic of works of art)

The point of no return to modernism is an article by Leslie Fiedler published in Playboy. In the very heading of the text, the rapprochement of opposites is loudly demonstrated - "Cross the borders, fill in the ditches." In the course of the formation of literary postmodernity, the tendency to overcome the boundaries between "books for intellectuals" and "stories for the ignorant" is gaining momentum. As a result of development, between foreign works certain characteristic features are visible.

Some features of postmodernity in the works of Western authors:

• Decanonization of official norms;
• Ironic attitude to values;
• Filled with quotes short sentences;
• Denial of a single "I" in favor of a plurality;
• Innovations in forms and ways of presenting thoughts, in the course of changing genres;
• Hybridization of techniques;
• Humorous look at everyday situations, laughter as one of the sides of life's disorder;
• Theatricality. Game with plots, images, text and reader;
• Acceptance of the diversity of life through resignation to chaotic events. Pluralism.

The birthplace of postmodernism literary direction considered the USA. Postmodernism is most clearly reflected in the work of American writers, namely the followers of the "school of black humor" in the person of Thomas Pynchon, Donald Bartelmy, John Bart, James Patrick Dunleavy.

Occurs at the end of the 20th century.

Postmodernism– it is a worldview that expresses the main trends, attitudes and guidelines of a society that has reached a certain level of development.

Postmodernism is not limited to any single doctrine or theory. Rather, it should be viewed as a wide range of different approaches and points of view concerning different areas of knowledge, while having something in common, unifying.

Postmodernism as a complex ideological trend is the quintessence of the zeitgeist, reflecting the state of spirituality in our days, associated with a sense of unacceptability in the new socio-cultural realities of previously prevailing ideas about the world and man. We understand that the world we live in has changed.

The main distinguishing feature of postmodernism is considered to be the initial orientation towards

the impossibility of describing the world as a whole with the help of any general theories, claiming to be true, the only true knowledge of reality.

The beginning of the postmodern era

· The changes that took place in economically developed countries in the second half of the sixties, which became the beginning of the transition from an industrial society to a post-industrial, or information society.

· At the end of the sixties, disappointment begins in the possibility of a violent reorganization of the world according to the “great historical projects”, starting with the Marx project and ending with the Marcuse project.

It is necessary to distinguish between these two concepts, sometimes used as synonyms.

ʼʼPostmodernʼʼ- means cultural and historical period, coming after ʼʼModernʼʼ.

ʼʼPostmodernismʼʼ- worldview and self-awareness of culture at this historical stage.

The terms ʼʼpostmodernʼʼ and ʼʼpostmodernismʼʼ formed with the prefix ʼʼpostʼʼ are paradoxical. Such terms do not indicate their essence, but only fix the connection with the content of the immediately preceding concept.

As a rule, this connection is a kind of negation, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ, in contrast to dialectical or negative negation, consists in the fact that it does not overcome the previous form, but limits its meaning.

In construction, literature, in science, a theory is being formed: order from house, synergy, fractal geometry. Everything happens against the backdrop of entering people's lives information technologies and, as a consequence, the formation of the information society.

It is dominated by the activity of creating, consuming and broadcasting information. This is the economic foundation.

On a global scale, postmodernism is a reaction to the entry of information technology into people's lives. Postmodernism should not be outside the information society. This is the basis for this worldview. A new culture is being born.

What else happened in the 60s? This is the time of great historical projects, starting from Marx to Marcuse.

· 1968 is the last year of the burst of communist protest movements. The protest movement, which was based on student youth, inspired by the ʼʼcultural revolutionʼʼ unfolding in China, the idea of ​​E. Che Guevara about the possibility of a ʼʼrevolution without bureaucracyʼʼ, the theories of ʼʼspontaneity of revolutionary actionʼʼ, dating back to Bakunin and Proudhon, as well as Marcuse’s theory of the decisive role of marginal groups in the social political transformation of bourgeois society, faced the omnipresence of well-established mechanisms of power and was unable to translate their demands into reality.

Marcuse described the society of developed capitalism, saying that there is no longer such a class differentiation, there are no agents of revolution. If the boss's secretary wears the same lipstick as the boss's wife, and blacks drive a Cadillac, what are the class differences (one-dimensional person).

The question of total control of power over a person arises. And not by violent means - defining his identification model, defining needs, goods, etc. - A one-dimensional world from which he cannot escape. Who can escape - who is not included in this process: the marginalized, the lumpen, the intelligentsia, out of touch with life and students who are not yet involved in this. Οʜᴎ and created revolutions. But the authorities showed them that this is not possible - the authorities will not allow the repetition of the revolution.

· ʼʼPrague Springʼʼ, when faith in socialism ʼʼwith a human faceʼʼ finally perished under the caterpillars of tanks.

Unrest in American society associated with the realization of meaninglessness and tragedy Vietnam War, which has become a paradigm example of attempts by developed countries to impose their ʼʼprogressiveʼʼ ideology on ʼʼbackwardʼʼ states and peoples.

1968 is an agreed milestone, symbolizing the beginning of the formation of the postmodern worldview.

The coming of the postmodern era into its own is a gradual, imperceptible process. Unlike the revolutions of modern times, the transition to the ʼʼpostmodernʼʼ era is not some kind of radical, clearly defined chronological event. Extended in time, starting from the end of the sixties, it continues to this day.

Where did the term postmodernism come from? Rudolf Parwitz(locally used to define theories), then for artistic movements. For the first time in the article one of the journalists in Playboy. The term was used to change culture. Only in 1979 changes are endowed with this term (began earlier - 68).

The meaning of the elusive concept: postmodernism as a statement of pluralism:

• Postmodernism is a specific worldview that became widespread at the end of the 20th century, the main distinguishing feature of which is pluralism, ᴛ.ᴇ. the simultaneous existence of different points of view.

The main difference between postmodernism- PLURALISM (and at the same time an Achilles' heel).

If the modern gave a clear and clear picture the currents of the world, there was clarity, clarity, intelligibility, assertion of truth.

Postmodernism was also formed in ancient Greece (Pythagoras - things - the essence of numbers and numbers - more ideal, geometric figures ... we know the truth and the truth is higher than reality - in fact, modernist thoughts, from Pythagorean circles to concentration camps). Everything in the world is smeared - pluralism.

For example, a restaurant where there are a lot of dishes and where there is little - a lot should not be good, but a little - but excellent. It is also difficult to choose (there is a lot of everything and at the same time => a low-quality product may come across). This staleness is contained in the idea of ​​pluralism.

• The principle of pluralism is fundamental to the understanding of postmodernism, and such derivative characteristics as fragmentation, decentration, variability, contextuality, uncertainty, irony, simulation.

These characteristics determine the specifics of postmodern culture - the culture of the information society.

Fragmentation. A person of the information society world can afford to be in his personal space. It has to be in line with the mainstream. Postmodernism - ϶ᴛᴏ fragmented world, different directions. A person is where he feels good, he does not need another.

Decentration - The world can no longer be controlled from one point. Production, power, everything is a manifestation of modernism.

Variability– fluid modernity (Sigmund Baum) - life is comparable to liquids, a person is not tied to a place, can work from home, start living in one country, end up in another country.

Contextuality(intertextuality) - the text cannot exist as a separate book, in each text there are links, quotes, sendings to some other texts. The world is a big text. The Internet reflects well. The main thing is a hyperlink, perhaps an instant transition to another text. Contains a large amount of text (that is, not like in a catalog in a library).

Uncertainty- also a symbol of variability, as a consequence.

Irony– can be interpreted in different ways. Since everything can be interpreted in different ways, then permissiveness. Since there is no God, everything is permitted (the reverse side of the medal of getting rid of some problems and the opportunity to run into others). We receive, getting rid of some problems, other problems are acquired. Irony as a technique in literature is an ironic attitude to the text, to authorities, to the legacy of the past.

Simulation - it is a model of the way of life and perception of the world and interaction within the framework of modern culture. The very concept of truth disappears in the kaleidoscope of simulations. For example, how news is formed - what is the event or news first (if it is reflected in the news, then the event was, and if it was not in the news, then we can say it was not).

Summarizing, pluralism, destroying the very idea of ​​some boundaries, the ability to rely on some values, leaves a person with a destroyed identity.

Everything is possible - as a result, we get paradoxical forms of the embodiment of identity.

We get radical forms - fundamentalism, radicalism. It arises in the bowels of Europe, because it is a different model of culture, it can also exist, “we have democracy”. In fact, terrorism is one of the results of the democratization and pluralization of Europe (it was formed not in the sands, but precisely in European culture, they used European technologies).

The concept of postmodernism. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "The concept of postmodernism." 2017, 2018.

POSTMODERN, POSTMODERNITY (Latin post - after and modemus - modern) - one of the basic concepts of modern sociological theory, denoting a period of historical time, chronologically starting from the period of undermining the foundations of the industrial system and extending into the future.

The concept of "postmodern" does not have a positive definition and arose to designate a period that opens with the overcoming of the social order, called "modernity". The latter has repeatedly designated a variety of historical eras. For the first time the term "modemus" was used by Christian theologians of the 5th century. to counter the new historical era pagan societies of the Mediterranean (considered as “anticuus”) (for details, see: Turner B. S. Periodization and Politics m the Postmodem.- In the book: Lipeg B. S. (ed.). Theories of Modernity and Postmodernity L, 1995 , pp. 3-5). Secondarily, the concept of "modernity" was used in the Enlightenment to emphasize the differences between the emerging industrial order and the feudal order; in this case, the era of “modernity” included European societies starting from the end. 17th century Some authors, eg. A. Toynbee, attributed this border to the last quarter of the 14th century (see; Toynbee A. A Study of History, vol. VIII. L, 1954, p. 144).

Accordingly, the concept of "postmodern" is used to emphasize the break of humanity with the traditional era; because of this, it has no internal chronological certainty and can be used extremely widely. It entered the scientific circulation in the middle. 50s simultaneously in various areas of social theory. In 1939, A. Toynbee outlined the stage opened by the end of World War I, and in 1946 pushed its boundaries further into the 19th century, calling it the turning point of the middle. 70s the last century. In the 50s. C. Wright Mills and P. Drucker preferred to designate the emerging social condition not as a postmodemity, but as a post-modem order (see: Mills C. R. The Sociological Imagination. Harmondsworth, 1956, p. 184; Drucker P. F. The Landmarks of Tomorrow. N. Y, 1957, p. IX). Later, the concept of “postmodern” was turned to in connection with the study of cultural and socio-psychological characteristics (for example, L. Fidler and L. Meyer in the analysis of postmodern trends in art and architecture, the studies of I. Hassan and C. Jencks, J. F. Lyotard and J. Baudrillard, who laid the foundations of postmodern psychology, the theory of language and symbolic systems).

The periods of postmodernity and modernity in modern sociology are considered as alternative ones. Features attributed to the era of modernity, e.g. dynamism, similar to the characteristics of an industrial society. As A. Touraine notes, modernity is perceived as an era that “denies the very idea of ​​society, destroys it and replaces it with the idea of ​​constant social change”, and “the history of modernity is the history of a slow but continuous increase in the gap between the individual, society and nature” (TouraineA Critique de la modernity, R., 1992, pp. 281,199). The dynamism generated by modernity is also transferred to the description of the postmodern period.

Postmodern is defined as an era characterized by a sharp increase in cultural and social diversity, a departure from the previously dominant unification and from the principles of pure economic expediency, an increase in the multivariance of progress, a rejection of the principles of mass social action, the formation new system incentives and motives for human activity, the replacement of material landmarks by cultural ones, etc. Modern production is interpreted as the production of sign or symbolic, and not material assets(For details see: Baudrillard I. Fora Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign.- Baudrillard J. Selected Writings. Cambr., 1996; Lash S., Urry J. Economies of Signs and Space. L, 1994). Postmodernism is perceived by its supporters as a post-economic era, which is characterized by the demassification of consumption and production, the overcoming of Fordism and the departure from the forms of industrial production. The most important component of this era is to overcome the reduction of man to a simple element of production, which was inherent in industrial society. In this regard, postmodern is often defined as a state where the inner freedom of a person grows, alienation is overcome and its dependence on economic and political institutions decreases.

The postmodern era is global in scope. If the era of modernity can be considered as a period of “clear dominance of European culture” (Heller A., ​​Feher F. The Postmodem Political Condition. Cambr., 1988, p. 146,149), then postmodernity is associated with the loss of the European region of dominant positions in the world economy and politics , with the rejection of the idea nation state and bringing to the fore other socio-cultural models. The idea of ​​postmodernism met with criticism, in which three stages can be distinguished.

At the first stage (end of the 1970s and the first half of the 1980s), the vague term “postmodern” began to be replaced by the even more amorphous concept of “modernization”. Postmodern began to be interpreted as a hypothetical system, the formation of which will be associated with the completion of the modernization process; its prospects remained unclear.

At the second stage (mid-1980s), the content of the concept of “postmodern” is being revised. If earlier modernity and postmodernity were considered two periods in social evolution (see: KumarK. From Post-Industrial to Post-Modem Society New Theories of the Contemporary World. Oxf. -Cambr., 1995, p. 67), then later these concepts have become interchangeable. This made it possible to limit the period of modernity to the period of history from the middle. 17 to con. 19th century, modernism - third 19th and 1st half. 20th century, and postmodern recent decades industrial society.

At the third stage, there is a refusal to characterize the current state as postmodern. Thus, E. Giddens proposes to replace the term “postmodern” with the concept of “radicalized modernity”; B. Smart considers postmodernity as a reconstitution of modernity. Many sociologists and philosophers generally refuse the concept of "postmodern". So, 3. Bauman considers modern society not as postmodern, but as self-valuable modernity, as modernity for itself (modernity for itself). The logical conclusion of this process was the recognition that “modernism is characterized by the incompleteness of modernization, and postmodernism in this respect is more modern than modernism as such” (Jameson F. Post-Modernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. L, 1992, p. 310).

Despite their inconsistency, the concepts of postmodernism had a significant impact on the social philosophy of the 2nd floor. 20th century

Postmodern- sociological, historical and philosophical concept of world perception in the era of post-industrialism, based on distrust of traditional realistic concepts, of the truth of the reflection of reality by human senses.

Postmodernism as a specific phenomenon in history and sociology was singled out by Western sociologists in the late 1980s. The understanding of postmodernism was developed by French poststructuralist philosophers: M. Foucault, J. Derrida, J. Baudrillard, based on the concept of the predominance of "fear and trembling" in the mentality of the post-industrial civilization.

Postmodernists identified 4 main vectors of development public life in the period of post-industrialism:

1. Agnosticism (truth is a linguistic phenomenon, the sphere of knowledge is language games, truths are generally accepted judgments, not a reflection of reality).

2. Pragmatism (the criterion of intelligence is success, and the expression of success in the modern capitalist world is wealth).

3. Eclecticism (in the pursuit not for truth, but for success, it is possible to use and mix the most different ways and methods, thus, a collage, a museum collection becomes the best reflection of reality).

4. Anarcho-democratism (the incomprehensibility of the truth turns any associations, including state ones, into violence against a free-thinking person).

In scientific discourse, there is a tendency to demarcate the concepts of Postmodern and postmodernism based on the fact that Modern is what in the Eastern European tradition (especially during the Soviet period) it is customary to call New Time (with its rationalism and scientism). Since 1917, modern times have been called Postmodern because the irrational components of European culture have joined politics (they were analyzed by Nietzsche and Spengler). Modernism is an extremist denial of the Modern world (its apotheosis is a conservative revolution, fascism, Nazism), and postmodernism is a non-extremist denial of the same Modern. It is impossible to identify Modern with modernism and Postmodern with postmodernism in this context. It should also be noted that in the art of modernism, among the group of styles, there is also “modern” (mainly in design and architecture), but it cannot be identified with modern

Postmodernism(fr. postmodernism- after modernism) is a term denoting structurally similar phenomena in world social life and culture of the second half of the 20th century: it is used both to characterize the post-non-classical type of philosophizing, and for a complex of styles in art. Postmodern - the state of modern culture, which includes a peculiar philosophical position, pre-postmodern art, as well as mass culture of this era.

History of the term

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the classical type of thinking of the modern era changes to non-classical, and at the end of the century - to post-non-classical. To fix the mental specifics of the new era, which was radically different from the previous one, it is required new term. The current state of science, culture and society as a whole in the 70s of the last century was characterized by J.-F. Lyotard as "the state of postmodernity". The emergence of postmodernism took place in the 60s and 70s. XX century, it is connected and logically follows from the processes of the modern era as a reaction to the crisis of its ideas, as well as to the so-called "death" of superfoundations: God (Nietzsche), author (Bart), man (humanity).

The term appears during the First World War in the work of R. Panwitz "The Crisis of European Culture" (1917). In 1934, in his book An Anthology of Spanish and Latin American Poetry, the literary critic F. de Onis uses it to denote a reaction to modernism. In 1947, Arnold Toynbee, in the book "Comprehension of History", gives postmodernism a cultural meaning: postmodernism symbolizes the end of Western dominance in religion and culture.

Leslie Fiedler's 1969 article, "Cross the Border, Fill in the Ditches", defiantly published in Playboy magazine, is considered the "beginning" of postmodernism. The American theologian Harvey Cox, in his works of the early 70s, devoted to the problems of religion in Latin America, widely uses the concept of "postmodern theology". However, the term "postmodernism" gained popularity thanks to Charles Jenks. In the book The Language of Postmodern Architecture, he noted that although the word itself was used in American literary criticism in the 1960s and 1970s to refer to ultramodernist literary experiments, the author gave it a fundamentally different meaning.

Postmodernism meant a departure from the extremism and nihilism of the neo-avant-garde, a partial return to traditions, and an emphasis on the communicative role of architecture. Justifying his anti-rationalism, anti-functionalism and anti-constructivism in his approach to architecture, C. Jencks insisted on the primacy of the creation of an aestheticized artifact in it. Subsequently, the content of this concept is expanded from the initially narrow definition of new trends in American architecture and the new trend in French philosophy (J. Derrida, J.-F. Lyotard) to a definition that covers the processes that began in the 60-70s in all areas of culture, including feminist and anti-racist movements.