What's the deal with people's sudden obsession with this? In the last two years I keep seeing it all the time on 4chan. Mostly on /a/ and /tv/. And I heard it in real life a few times too, used by "hipsters" (it's a meaningless buzzword, but I don't know what to call them) and nerdy suburban white teenagers. Seems like ever since this Derrida guy got more popular and acknowledged, all the kids have been talking about this and name-dropping this "le epic structuralism" and "post-structuralism". Is (post-)structuralism an epic new meme?
Why do people keep using this so much? Is it to show that they know a new word or something? To seem cultured? Can someone explain this to me? And what exactly are these terms? Why are they being mentioned so often? And is it somehow related to "deconstruction" (and what is that?, I read that no one knows, not even the guy who coined the term)? And what do people usually refer to when they mention structuralism or post-structuralism? What areas/activities or studies? Is it related to philosophy? Is it a movement in philosophy? Is it related to arts? Literature? Sociology? Psychology? What is it? Is it somehow related to modernism and metamodernism?
What books should I read to learn more about it?
Are popular examples of deconstructions in anime by authors such as Urobuchi and Hideaki Anno somehow related to structuralism?
>>Is it to show that they know a new word or something? To seem cultured?
post structuralism was a very important concept in continental philosophy in the mid 20th century, mostly in the writings of french philosophers. dumb hipsters on the internet appropriate terms like that to sound intellectual. why it took them 40 years to pick up on the term, I have no idea
I really want to like the art world but god damn art critics sure make it hard.
I always find amusing the desperate need to name things, even more with overused prefixes like meta, core, post, etc. Why is there a need for all these OVER classifications and names?
We already had a thread pretty much saying modern art is shit, and that comparing anime to it is an insult to anime.
in face most of our art threads are like that. There's are people trying to justify modern art but their post are always next to pictures of people literally sucking themselves off.
>NEET moeshitters on a chinese cartoon imageboard just declared modern art is shit
Fuck, that must have been a fun read.
All modern art is shit.
Rothko was a pretentious hack who was only famous because he got lucky to be in the right "movement" at the right time. And he killed himself = misunderstood genius!!!
Jackson Pollock was a fucking lunatic who made some art my 4-year-old cousin probably could have whipped out in 10 minutes. He was an alcoholic, manic-depressant and often and uncontrollable, angry and insecure man. Just like Rothko, he also had celebrity disease.
Barnett Newman too was shit. Wow, the entire canvas is blue and there's a white line! How genius?
Yves Klein was a talentless hack, exploiting the idiosyncrasies of the art market for profit, he is also responsible for the cancer that is performance art today.
People like Young Thug or Chief Keef are the contemporary equivalents of these people. People who only care about money and popularity. To them, the thing they do is nothing more than a means to an end. That end being of course money, they don't create art or voice any individual expression.
Fuck abstract expressionism. Almost any other art movement has people that are passionate about it as an art, you never saw any abstract expressionists (or their fans for that matter) who know anything about art theory or history, let alone appreciation of other movements. Jackson Pollock and Rothko for example always refused to explain the meaning behind their works, or why they named something the way the did. Guess why? Because there is no fucking meaning.
If you like abstract expresionism, you probably also think Interior Semiotics or these are art:
Not from that thread
but the screencap was posted in it
My sides, Art not even once.
The great thing about that post though is that nothing sums up art better than a sculpture of a guy sucking himself off.
In that context, the other guy won. His work is pure art.
>An interviewer asked Urobutcher about the philosophical implications of his works
>Urobutcher literally didn't know what to say
Now I can understand why artists are a bunch of uptight wankers, they are fucking batshit insane.
Art is pretty subjective and artists themselves don't take criticism well. But honestly anything can be art, you could take a dump on a plate and serve it to a politician and give it some cryptic message about the current state of society and where its heading with your shit being representative to that claim.
Ignore it. Applying concepts like that to anime is pointless. I hope it doesn't become a new meme because if the terms do have any meaningful relation to things in anime they soon won't if /a/ starts spamming the shit out of the term.
I think you avoid pseudo-intellectuals and SJWs you should be fine.
STEM majors that assume there's a deep theory behind what literature and philosophy fags do, use their verbiage to make the cheap commercial art they spend their time consuming seem more sophisticated than it actually is.
From what I could grasp, postmodernism means any movement after the modernist period, which were art movements between the Renaissance up until the world wars.
The fact that several modernist movements were inherently against one another (like Enlightenism and Romanticism) is the reason why people have trouble defining it.
People use "deconstruction" for any series that deliberately subverts the tropes of a genre. Ok, whatever, but in Derrida's deconstruction, every work is already doing that to itself--you can't "do" deconstruction.
This continental philosophy stuff is toxic bullshit, though, and I'd rather not see even a corrupted version of it catch on any further.
Really it feels /a/ is only for cute girls because of their disillusionment towards "art".
Like why search for "artistic" anime when "artistic" in general is basically synonymous with a guy sucking his own dick?
metamodernism is where it's at nigga; hipsters are a fine example of our need to find a new sincerity in things since they try to do just through consumerism. An acknowledgement of modern naivety and postmodern irony all the while seems to be how most culture has come about post-internet boom thanks to easier access to information. We ought to take all perspectives into account and find what's more truthful about things rather than claiming that there is only 'one' truth or 'many' truths.
but I digress
These all make sense in the context of music. You don't like that people create varying forms of art? Too bad and go back to your chinese cartoons
The most challenging book I've read is most undoubtedly The Truth in Painting by Jacques Derrida.
Given Derrida's engagement with Levinasian ethics, it's extremely stupefying the way deconstruction gets explained as "interpreting the text in any way you want." Fucking idiots, thinking that their wikipedia research constitutes authentic knowledge of a tradition.
>In this moment, I am post-structural. Not because of any phony cartoon’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by muh deconstruction.
No, that's wrong. People don't define deconstruction properly. They make it too simple and easy to categorize.
Structuralism has roots in De Saussure's study of signs with the arbitrary relationship between signifier over signified.
Deconstruction is Derrida taking Structuralism and pushing it in the direction it doesn't cover. De-centreing and focusing on the series of binary relationships in language (I might be mixing up theories on that last part it's been a while since I did any Derrida stuff since it's stupid).
I'll give you a brief literary guide to understanding structuralism and post-structuralism. Although they are complex schools of though in philosophy, sociology, psychology, literature, you don't need all that shit to grasp an understanding of them, because everything boils down to the function of language.
In very basic terms, structuralism is the understanding that everything we do that is specifically human is expressed in language. It's the idea that language symbols and codes extend far beyond written and oral communication.
Post-structuralism (post-modern or deconstructionism) thought maintains that structuralist systems are merely fictitious constructs and that they cannot be trusted to develop meaning or to give order. It's the idea that seeking singular truth is absurd because there exists no unified truth - there are many truths, that frameworks must bleed, and that structures must become unstable or decentered. Essentially language can never fully explain or communicate because there is no universal structured framework for it.
You can consider them the two most important schools of thought in the last century and half because you use them everyday
>You see a traffic light and it shines red. People stop their cars because it's a structural language code that people understand: red light means stop.
>You watch an episode of the Colbert Report. It's a Bill O'Reilly inspired American conservative talk show that satirizes Bill O'Reilly's American conservative talk show.
Since the commercialization of the internet, post-structuralist theory is more prevalent. You see it everyday, because the speed of the internet rapidly deconstructs language.
Luckily Heidegger-sama doesn't have to witness any of this shit.