|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Cancer in the Neolithic? 104 messages | Select a forum: |
tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Is Pomo losing it's grip ?. I sincerely hope so. (pun intended) http://www.metamodernism.com/2[...]odernism-a-brief-introduction/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sincerity In Franzen's "The Corrections " Chip sells his collection of critical theory books for a small fraction of their original cost , the money going on a fancy salmon to impress his girl friend . Maybe starting soon , if it didn't start some time ago the pomo texts will start to fill up the second hand bookshops and the dosh spent on a nice bit of scran . Can't think of better use . As for it's impact on archaeology , millions of student /lecturer hours spent attempting to understand it and a similar amount attempting to apply it unsuccessfully to the discipline. Then we have to wade through the resulting verbiage to discover , nothing . Correct me if i'm facing in the wrong direction (and I do mean that) but I always imagined it was not so much directly applying postmodern thought to archaeology, as an explosion of subjectivity in light of all aspects of postmodern society? Archaeology almost taken along in the flow, if you like. Is discovering 'nothing' a fair thing to say? It was more than just subjectivity , we had that before PoMo , it was obfuscation , verbiage and shoehorning ( most often post structuralism or sociological theory) into an already threadbare archaeological one . From volume too value , maybe not nothing , but not much more . Obfuscation, most definitely! But without the development of the post-modern would Cope ever have written The Modern Antiquarian for example? (You may or may not be a fan). Maybe if the new archaeology audience that book created are largely interested in the interpretive, is that a bad thing for archaeology? I'm just thinking aloud at this point, not trying to put words in yr mouth or support any particular argument. If we look at Burls books, Prehistoric Avebury for exmaple (as it's been mentioned) would you call his approach post-modern? I have never read TMA but I very much doubt I would describe it as being influenced by POMO or that it had any impact on the reason for it being written . Again I don't know, but doubt if there is any mention of the central figures e.g. Lyotard, Derrida , Foucault , Baudrillard or even their contemporaries who had an impact in sociology/anthropology and thus archaeology but who are a bit less pm e.g. Bourdieu , Gell etc . As for Burl , definitely not . re Cope I was thinking about him being directly influenced by postmodern philosophy. Maybe i'm wrong. I agree about Burl. Sorry , I missed out the mention of the bibliography from TMA which I doubt would contain refs to the usual suspects . In what way might he have been influenced and by whom ? Rather than him explicitly referencing particular figures or works in TMA (although he may do, I read it a long time ago), I mean he seems to have adopted themes which, to my mind, are based upon postmodern philosophies - Celebration of the individual, suspicion of institutions and religions, questioning established ideas about freedom, especially western ideals, an anti-capatilist, what could possibly be called 'new age' viewpoint. Reply | with quote |  26th January 2017ce 20:51 In reply to: Re: Cancer in the Neolithic? (tiompan) |
Messages in this topic: |
|