What, if any, are the ultimate failings of "New Sincerity"?

dude, big perspectives on literature like the ones you're getting at can only emerge after many years of reading actual lit

this is like talking about Hawking radiation without doing calculus

>>9936299
who do you think has not spent years reading "actual lit": me, or the people on the /lit/ board?

I don't see why people find it so hard to be honest. It's not easy for me, either, but my (personal) impediment to truthfulness isn't irony, just shyness and a lack of courage.

>What, if any, are the ultimate failings of "New Sincerity"?

It's a shallow response to a non-problem.

subhuman culture is duplicitous.

>>9936333
it's not so much honesty but writing that feels honest. new sincerity isn't really about being sincere but a set of writing techniques that feels sincere like first person declarative, low culture etc.

It negates itself. Like all pseudo-movements that have sought to oust postmodernism from cultural preeminence, it is based around a shallow, preening obsession with authenticity. But once one begins to concern themselves with their own authenticity (or lack thereof), they begin to analyze their own motives, and the motives for their motives, forming a sort of infinite regress of inward, scintillating psychoanalysis from which their can be no stable ejection. Two simple questions: Who is more authentic, a poor farmer, or a bourgeoisie Williamsberg bug man? Now, which of these two parties is likely to care about notions of "authenticity"?

Post postmodernism, nu modernism, Neomodernism, Meta Modernism, and New Sincerity all find their demise within the very fact that they are framed as "isms" destined to reclaim the authenticity that postmodernism has supposedly stolen, yet none realize that authenticity, by definition, cannot be achieved or acquired. If this is not immediately obvious, repeat this phrase to yourself until it is:

"I am trying to authentic."

>>9937081
Is this the "everything is postmodernism" argument?

>>9936551
>a set of writing techniques
Can you tell me where (I assume) DFW covered these? I was expecting to find something like that in e plurabus unom (or whatever) but got tired after a while since all he was talking about was TV.

>>9936287
>Can there be a new Romanticism in the tradition of Wordsworth while simultaneously acknowledging and denying irony?
No, we just have to layer up and go balls deep into irony. It's irony all the way dowwn. The more you try to stop being ironic the more ironic you get. There's no cure.

The only people I've ever met who were irony-free were Arabs, but they have their own other set of problems and their taste and art is honestly pretty shit. They listen to fucking celine dion.

>>9937086
Nope. Anyone who thinks that postmodernism has somehow ended all artistic progression or development is probably just lacking historical perspective. Postmodernism is not eternal, nor is it some sort of cosmic terminus. There will be artistic successors to postmodernism, and like just about every cultural movement, it will arise through largely organic processes.

I will admit, though, that postmodernism is especially tricky in that it obliterates our feelings of authenticity, so when we attempt to repudiate it, the most obvious path forward is to try and reclaim and restore authenticity. This is a trap, however, because any attempt to attain authenticity only makes it that much more elusive. Infinite Jest, as much as I love it, is still thoroughly postmodern.

I can't see the future, but I suspect that any future cultural movement will have to dispense with any valuation of authenticity in the first place; that is, authenticity will be neither destroyed nor uplifted, but disregarded. Personally, I look towards Nick Land in this regard. That said, this is all assuming that the political/historical landscape remains similar. Should something sufficiently traumatic occur, we may regain cultural sincerity, without notice or remark.

Just remember that for every movement there are ten manifestos.

>>9937117
I mostly agree, especially with the part about postmodernism being a trap or a wormhole that tries to feed everything into itself. I don't think these things are necessarily organic though, but cultivated both consciously and not. The seeds of what postmodernism has come to represent were being planted in our culture mainly by jews decades prior to the 60s or whenever one wants to claim it arose. I also see Land as a kind of hyperpostmodern thinker, no real answers to be found there. IMO the next thing is already here. These are white cultural movements. Postmodernism was an attack on the foundations of that and western society in general because it was a primarily jewish movement/ideology. What comes next will be based on whites reinterpreting or rediscovering their collective identity as that comes under attack even more and as demographics continue to shift. Art that defines that coming struggle and white people's attempt to break away from the flooding brown hordes is next in line. I see that as an organic reaction, but also something that is being cultivated in certain ways by those who are able to see ahead more clearly than others, which I'm sure has always been the case to some extent. But it's still just getting started.

>>9937081
>>9937117
This summarizes what I came here to say. Thank you anon.

Agree with your suspicion that "authenticity" probably will be disregarded rather than uplifted or destroyed. The notion of restoring authenticity depends on the postmodern condition you describe - it owes its existence to that dominant cultural condition and all of its value is as a response to that (not really as a positive movement in its own right, with its own solid foundations or reasons for existence or growth potential).

My sense is that postmodernism will deflate when the particular conditions that allow it to survive (and flourish) no longer exist. And it seems to me that this would probably similarly deflate the cries for authenticity.

I would caution against using the language of "future" or "next" to describe "what comes after" post-modernism though. It might well feel accurate to think of it that way, but these are also modernist/progressive ideals that people want to identify with (i want to be part of the next big artistic movement! like the romantics! like the _______! etc.).

What we are in for could be a disintegration of mass/globalised culture in favour of a far more pluralistic local/national/personal level of artistic movement. In which case, the sense of a monumental linear and progressive history (rather than a random one, a stable one, a cyclical or semi-cyclical one, or something else) might not be meaningful or attractive.

bump for interest

File: cmon_kid_this_is_water_101.png (174KB, 356x380px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 356x380px

>>9936287

If I had to pick one thing to criticize, it would be the fact that it has no even adequate works. It's always confused the shit out of me why new sincerity is considered a thing. Infinite Jest was as insincere as fiction comes. It's for the shit can.