The time of small stories. (or: the death of idealism?)

Jebus

Background Radiant
Orderite
Post-modernism. It's all around you.

The small stories. The best example is perhaps literature, where truly epic stories are becoming rarer and rarer. LOTR, War and Peace, The Stand,... - last remnants of a dying race. And even then.
Present-day postmodernistic books rarely transcend the indivdual: the vast majority of them focus on the 'small' stories of the individual, the small struggles that each and every one of us face.

But it is not confined to literature, however. You can see it all around you - everybody becomes more and more obessed with its own small story, or the small story of his own community. The death of idealism.
Politics, for example. The times of the great ideals are all but over - the political world is infested by day-to-day politics, where the great ideals that once the very reason of the party's founding become more and more obsolete. Just take the ruling coalition in Belgium, for example: Liberals and socialists. Idealistically, they should be at eachother's throats 24/7. But do they? No.
Why? Because ideals don't matter that much anymore. All everybody is trying to do, is to change the world around him so he himself might lead a better life. Society as a whole is something that fewer and fewer people care about.
And what about the anti-globalists, you might ask? Well, in a way, they also tell a small story. They ask the right questions, yes, but they do not provide the answer. No great ideal. No big 'story' to change the world.

So what do you think? Is this a good thing? Agreed, living by small stories might improve your own, personal life; and it might save lives in the short term (after all, all 'great stories', or all great ideals that have been put into realisation usually cost the lives of many a person); but what about the long term? Is humanity falling back into decadence - the very same thing that caused the downfall of many a great civilisation? Or will it all sort itself out in the long run?

Are small stories a good thing?
 
Just because it's small doesn't mean it isn't epic or something. It's not the size of your penis, it's what you do with it.

All everybody is trying to do, is to change the world around him so he himself might lead a better life.

the very same thing that caused the downfall of many a great civilisation?

All you're really concerned about is yourself anyway, why bother? Nothing ever lasts, so small things are good because they require less effort and you can concentrate on other things. lol.

-survahilist.
 
There are still a lot of huuge (and epic) books.. but the small books are, as they ever where the majority... beside the real good epic books of today will be known in the future...
 
megatron said:
Just because it's small doesn't mean it isn't epic or something. It's not the size of your penis, it's what you do with it.

Says you!

That's something a girl says to a guy with a noodle dick to make him feel better. WHen the same girl is with King Kong, it's like "Oh yes, oh yes! I love how you fill me up! I love the size! Oh God Oh GOD Oh GODDDD........ AHHHHHHH!!!!"

Or something similar.

Jebus, I think you are not quite sure what post modernism is. Yes, there are short stories. Take for instance Patricia Highsmith's "Little Tales of Misogyny" were short stories and not what I would consider post modern.

But the problem with post-modernism is that the definition tiself is unclear, so Jebus, you're not at fault. Basically it was a journalistic turn for a new genre that applied modernist twists with a twist but the actual definition became lost. THat creates confusion. I have asked for a good definition of post modernism a few times, and have yet to get a good answer.

For some ideas on post modernism-=
http://www.hewett.norfolk.sch.uk/curric/soc/POSTMODE/post11.htm

a better discussion-
http://www.colorado.edu/English/ENGL2012Klages/pomo.html
 
welsh said:
That's something a girl says to a guy with a noodle dick to make him feel better. WHen the same girl is with King Kong, it's like "Oh yes, oh yes! I love how you fill me up! I love the size! Oh God Oh GOD Oh GODDDD........ AHHHHHHH!!!!"
welsh speaks the truth.
 
meh, what I was saying is that just because it's big doesn't mean it's good. I thought lotr is pretty boring for instance? But yeah, if I had too fuck someone with a rolled-up edition of War and Peace or Cat in the Hat I know which one I'd choose.
 
Well, I didn't meant 'small' in a 'short' kind of sense. I wasn't talking about the size, but the *content*... You know, about how it becomes more and more centered on individualistic experiences instead of the 'bigger picture'...
Maybe I used the wrong word, since English isn't my native language. I'm sorry if I did.

Anyway, and the basic point of the rant wasn't literature either; but society as a whole... I was only using literature as an example, or even a barometer, if you want.

Damn. I didn't know I wrote *that* unclear...


PS And I know what Post-Modernism is Welsh, thank you. Now stop doing that! :)

PPS
Basically it was a journalistic turn for a new genre that applied modernist twists with a twist but the actual definition became lost. THat creates confusion. I have asked for a good definition of post modernism a few times, and have yet to get a good answer.

I've had the same thing earlier this year when I popped my history of literature that question.
Maybe... It doesn't even exist! :D
 
Jebus said:
Well, I didn't meant 'small' in a 'short' kind of sense. I wasn't talking about the size, but the *content*... You know, about how it becomes more and more centered on individualistic experiences instead of the 'bigger picture'...
Maybe I used the wrong word, since English isn't my native language. I'm sorry if I did.

I think we were just trying too carry on the uh...metaphor? of books and shit.

Perhaps some authors don't need huge epic 800 page yawn-fests too say something. Like Catcher in the Rye mebbe?
 
megatron said:
Perhaps some authors don't need huge epic 800 page yawn-fests too say something. Like Catcher in the Rye mebbe?

Huh?

So what are you saying here?

That self-centered people can change the world just as much as great idealists, only with less effort?


This is the last goddamn time I use a methophore here...

Sjeesh!
 
No. Individuals can change the way people think for a while, you don't need elaborate organizations with hundreds of people and pushing your shit out everyday until everyone drowns in it. Though the individuals usually end up in a large organization.

A bit like how an author doesn't need a lot of pages or research or marketing to write a good book. mebbe. though later on his writing style will change as will the length of his books.
 
Are you trolling me?


One more time:

I wasn't talking about the size, but about the *content* of ideas/groups/politics/movements or whatever.
 
Ehehehe.

Perfect example: Jebus' post was moderately lengthy, yet much confusion was abound and nobody really got what he was trying to convey. Megatron, however, wrote short and (anti)sweet posts that had intellectual *content* to them.

Isn't that what you were saying?

/me starts reading Megatron more.
 
Allright then, then let my rewrite my first post:

People are getting more and more short-sighted. There isn't much planning on the long term. There aren't many people left with a view of what the world shoud evolve to one the long run. Everybody is only concerned with his own piece of the world.

Is that good? Or do we need more of those old-fashioned idealistic hard-liners, who make no compromises - because compromising is always, even if it is only limited, a betrayal to your cause?
So, if you would pull that line through, is democracy a good thing?


Happy now? HAPPY NOW? HAPPY NOW?


FUCKING HAPPY NOW?



*Takes off his pants, puts a trashcan on his head and goes dancing into the streets*
 
I dont really think there is big epic struggles like LOTR(lewlz) because we evolved into a society that has enough to account for the variables like that, mainly government. In American epic stories are like 9/11 and the firefighters and how they patched up problems. Unless its a 3rd world country, we dont need supper epic heroes to help us evolve and creat peace because we have gone past the point. The bigger countries pretty much control 3rd world countries and shoot down their shit so no more epic stories for them.

Personally I think Jubas just has a case of teen angst and wants to live in a fantasy world like LOTR so he can be an epic warrior hero.
 
why plan for the future if you could get killed by goths/terrorists/communists/television/cancer/sars/exercise at any given second eh?

and what does the rewrite have to do with being poetic or something. I reckon too many people are planning for the future and not being poetic? is that what you're trying to say skip?

HEP, THIS TOPIC IS TOO KUBRICK!
 
Meg, you do seem to be trolling. Naughty boy.

Well Jebus, to get this thread back on track.

The problem as I see it is that post-modernism is primarily an academic concept and an academic fad.

The university is sadly subject to fashion. People have to publish things that are new and cutting edge. Post-Modernism has become so fashionable that now we are seeing Post-post deconstructionism and modernism..

And that's the problem, it's basically academics turned in on themselves to deconstruct the very basis of their knowledge to examine underlying relationships, especially those of power. But the fad, taken to an extreme, also has an ideological agenda- to oppose other types of heirarchies or systems which all have intrinsic notions of power.

Among those that are especially threatened by this are the church. The church, which is a heirarchy of knowledge, with God being the zenith, and which upholds notions of "truth" is threatened by this fad, and because the church (meaning all churches) have strong grassroots ties with the "real" world outside the ivory tower, has the power to oppose it.

However, the church's response is perhaps too extreme. By utilizing the post-modernist approach as the arch-type of academic discourse, it supports an anti-intellectual program. In fact there are many other types of discourse within the academy that oppose post-modernism.

For example, while I like some post-modernism, I find it generally a vacuous approach to study the real world. I tend to favor more "structural" approaches in studies of political and sociological phenomena.

Does that help?
 
Jebus said:
Happy now? HAPPY NOW? HAPPY NOW?


FUCKING HAPPY NOW?



*Takes off his pants, puts a trashcan on his head and goes dancing into the streets*


like you had your pants on.
 
eom I have asked you about your sig.
Jebus and Meg- enough. And if anyone else can't behave and feel like testing my patience, then off you will go.
 
Back
Top