the postmodern


03.22.17  |  22/100 Days of Productivity

Still on Beckett research. Doing my best to understand some postmodern jibber-jabber.

straycrisp  asked:

"ss and nh was planned from the beginning, kishi's the author so his intent is how it should be interpreted"

Send me claims you’re sick of hearing, and I’ll refute them.

It doesn’t matter if Kishimoto planned NH and SS from the beginning (never mind the fact he actually said he didn’t plan NH and SS from the beginning and thusly contradicted himself) if he fails to implement his idea sufficiently into his story. Let’s say for argument’s sake, this is true. Does it make up for the lack of development? No, it does not. Once you’ve released your art to the world, what you meant is ultimately not of importance anymore. This is the basic principle of post-structuralism, and by extension postmodernism, and was laid out in the seminal essay La mort de l’auteur by Roland Barthes (English for “The Death of the Author”). What’s important to artistic interpretation is the intent of the viewer, not the author. 

Roland Barthes postulates that the author has to be treated as dead from a literary point of view. Art is a conversation, and whilst there are commonalities to art, there is no such thing as a definitive way to approach a subject artistically, evident in the idiom “It’s an art, not a science” where we refer to something that is mastered through personal expression. The wonderful thing about art is that it can be interpreted however you wish. It is about how you approach an artists’ work. If you choose to take their intent into account, that’s perfectly fine. If you dismiss or criticise their intent, that’s fine too. At the end of the day, no one can dictate how others should interpret art. 

c’est comme ça qu’on rêve

« Pas pour vrai » est une phrase capitale, de même que le verbe « s’imaginer ». Pas vrai pour le rêveur et pas vrai pour celui ou celle à qui on rêve. C’est comme ça qu’on rêve, les postmodernes – sans jamais vouloir que nos rêves se réalisent et sans vouloir que quelqu’un soit là quelque part, que quelqu’un se pointe vraiment.

Extrait de Love Dog, Masha Tupitsyn, Penny-Ante Editions, 2013.

traduit par Daphné B, illustré par Julie Delporte

Fight locations, ranked

IHOP parking lot: ridiculous. buffoonish. 3/10
Denny’s parking lot: has a certain dionysian flair. 6/10
Dunkin Donuts parking lot: lots of regional flavor. 7/10
The woods: nice and secluded, plenty of opportunities to use the terrain to your advantage. Just make sure to bring bug spray. 8/10
Any roof: dangerous, but points for style. 5/10
The top of any mountain: much like the woods, but with far more dramatic flair. Almost byronic. Loses points for being less practical than the other locations on this list, however. 7/10
A graveyard: disrespectful to the skeletons. 0/10
An abandoned warehouse: something of a cliche. 4/10
Any liminal space: This category includes town lines, entryways, borders, and crossroads. Is this a deeply symbolic, metaphorically charged fight? If it wasn’t before, it is now. 9/10 
Wal-Mart parking lot: Quick question, are you shitting me right now? This is the absolute worst fight location. If you have any respect at all for the noble art of throwing the fuck down, don’t get in a fight in a wal-mart parking lot. In fact, this also applies to wal-mart checkout lines, roofs, employee break rooms, corporate headquarters, and indeed any space at all associated with the walton family or the wal-mart corporation. Fuck wal-mart.  0/10
The parking lot of an abandoned Blockbuster Video: The cracked and faded blockbuster sign is a potent memento mori, inspiring a keen awareness of entropy and a sharp sense of loss in your opponent. As blockbuster is, so shall they one day be.  Are there weedy plants growing up through cracks in the pavement? Oh man, that’s even better. The perfect fight location. 10/10