> Now I don't want to start a huge debate here, perhaps just a little
>one....but I'm just curious: What purpose does everybody here think, if
any,
>modernism still has in a postmodern world?
It's an old debate on here. The line I'll trot out is that (1) the term
post-modernism was coined in about 1870 and (2) with it's mix-and-match
steals from Jamaica, America, France and Italy, mod was post-modern
to start with.
>Isn't the natural progression of modernism now to
>move into the postmodern.
Whatever that means, no. As a counter-example, you could look
at (conveniently) 60s Art - on the one hand, Warhol, progressing
towards the post-modern, on the other you've got someone
like Bridget Riley, whose work is purely Modern.
You can see the same divide moving back another 30 years,
between Duchamp and Mondrian. So, OK, it gets confusing
when post-modern artists that start using targets as a 60s
reference, but . . .
so it goes in other areas.
_____________________________________________________________
Check out the new and improved Topica site!
http://www.topica.com/t/13
