Thursday, August 18, 2005

my modern world

i've been criticising everything old. and sorry to friends who were offended in any of the critic sessions. :p maybe it was that modern art hist course, maybe it's the music. maybe it's the modern atmostphere in ucsd. or feynman whom i just got to know. (jade's post on feynman). or even maybe Ling Shan (Soul Mountain) that i'm reading right now. whether i like it or not, modernism is here to stay, with me.

it's the state of the mind. in this world, all these parallel storylines. all the relationships. all these struggles against the world and the self. obviously there's not a unified subject in us, or a single narrative that can describe it all. it's meant to be deconstructed, our lives. and it's this life that we are living, why look back and long for that beautiful canonic melodies, or beautiful archy doors, beautiful representational paintings. what for look at those, when life is rarely so straight-forward and beautiful? why do we complain about concrete jungles so much? why not let life be streamlined, cold, concrete, glassy, abstract, simple yet difficult to understand, and taste the flavours of our time. why, must we be so critical of modern art, or modern music, by artists living in our time, and say all too effortlessly, "you call that trash art?"? why not try contemplating how much we have thought about life compared to all these people ahead of their time, our time? why do we have to be such hypocrites who, while entitled to all the conveniences that technology brings, curse and sware about technology? why can't we appreciate the fruits of human intelligence and just be open-minded about the brand new way of living? why can't we accept progress? are humans by nature reminiscencing animals? why not just grow up and accept the fact that we've grown!

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

way to go! I love the way you love being modern! haha.

about the modern art bit. I think most people criticise modern art because they don't really know what's going on. And of course, they don't want everyone else to know that they don't know what's going on. It's much easier to look like a serious art connoisseur to an amateur when you criticise works that the amateur doesn't quite know. This of course goes hand-in-hand with praising works by the big names, which are usually from the past. Do these two things, and you can fool anyone but the keenest art-lovers.

fm said...

i would rather leave art out of the entire modernism debate.

art, imho, has rarely been a truly measurable quality. 各花入各眼。these days, those valued art (ie expensive art pieces, and/or showcased in modern art museums) have reach their current status not because of their superb technique, but rather, because some art critic decided arbitarily (or not) that its "good", and recommended it to some ignorant artsy-fartsy-wannabe rich kid who buys it and causes a demand for that artist. art lovers? crap nonsense. true art lovers will rarely agree on whats nice (for modern art) because it relies too much on interpretation. the arts of the past usually focuses on (rare) techniques. at least theres some standards there. similar to admiring sportsmen who can sprint so damn fast or jump so darn far.

abt modernism. well, i remember my friend mentioned this wise saying long time before: "pple always desires change. but they also always resents change". the feeling that the present is never as good as the past. pop quiz: how many of ur teachers have told u that u (or ur class/batch) was not as good as ur seniors? pple will never be satisfied. when society tries to progress based on one standard, eg infant mortality, longevity, clean food/water etc, pple will measure success (or lack thereof) using another standard: culture desert, monotony/uniformity, etc etc. (oops im supposed to use directly contrasting examples but me brain not working. :p)

oh well. thats why life is always fun. :P oops...

sangyu said...

huh..wah so much to digest. me also brain not working. tmr then read again :)

sangyu said...

then again, we need to ask, how much does techniques weigh in the creation of an art work. you've read heidegger.. you know better than me.