The Postmodern Situation of Leo Tower and the End of Meta-discourse
Jean baudrillard's over-simulation
Fredric Jameson's Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism
Jurgen habermas's modernism never finished his theory.
Deleuze/Catalli's Post-Oedipus
Richard Rorty's Enlightenment/Enlightenment Philosophy
Terry Eagleton's literary theory.
Anthony giddens on Globalization and Post-modern Society
Non-directional expectation of philosophy
Generally speaking, postmodern thinking holds a philosophical view on the concept of logic.
The attitude of "distrust/doubt" in structural interpretation. This attitude leads to the lack of their own desire for ideas, things and external feelings, because in the eyes of post-modernists, their thinking can not be relied on, they neither affirm historical experience, nor believe in the origin and authenticity of meaning, and have no hope for the future. Apart from doubt, their thoughts are almost stagnant for rational thinkers, and they can only be parasitic on modern enlightenment rationality and become eternal troublemakers. Therefore, most scholars (in their minds, modern rationality occupies an absolute proportion) are used to reading postmodernism as the opposite with enlightened eyes and rational words, so a large number of words with clear direction (such as subversion, rebellion, denial, rejection, boycott, anti-* *, non-* * or non-* *) have flowed in the definition of postmodernism. In fact, as Derrida (1967, a grammarian) reminded us, we are in the trap of language. Under the guidance of (logos) centralism and binary opposition system, we ignore the power of language composition and naturally imagine innocent postmodernism as an antibody with a clear purpose. When we regard postmodernism as the representative of division and rebellion, we have already lost the balance of thinking, stood on the rational side, and looked at postmodernism with the overall binary opposition. This kind of behavior itself has caused an extreme and dislocation of post-modern understanding. Sadly, even if we are deeply aware of our own injustice, we can't change this reality, because our language has insurmountable limitations in both diachronic tradition and * * * plane. What we can do is to peacefully participate in all post-modern things with a free mind and a skeptical attitude, which is the so-called undirected mind.
The road to doubt of enlightenment reason
Since the Enlightenment, reason has been regarded as the supreme authority by modern philosophy. The most important symbol of postmodernism is the suspicion of reason. However, the criticism of rationality by contemporary philosophy does not start from the post-modern origin. At the birth stage of the Enlightenment, empiricists and rationalists had a heated debate. Later, although Kant constructed a complete rational cognitive system, he first criticized the concept of knowing and doing in the Enlightenment (that is, rational cognitive experience dominates everything) and mentioned the limitations of human innate cognitive ability (Habermas, 197 1, knowledge & Human interests, P4-14); Then, Hegel's thinking about the historical limitations of cognition and his initial exploration of knowledge alienation (knowledge's control and slavery to people) have become the key to shake "modernity" (ibid.); By the end of 19, Nietzsche put forward irrationalism and launched a general attack on modern rationality. Later, it aroused the post-modernist trend of thought (Wang Yuechuan, 1992, Post-modernist Cultural Studies, P 15 1). In the next century, this seed germinated into a trend of a hundred schools of thought contending. Judging from the inheritance of Hegel, Frankfurt School alienated knowledge first.
The further explanation led to Marcuse's direct attack on the radical revolution of the left in industrial society and scientific and technological progress, and Foucault's direct attack on some neo-conservative (right-wing) discourse rights. Then Gadamer reinterpreted the truth experience in history and language in the new hermeneutics; Then Habermas' new rational return to compromise and Lyotard's complete counterattack. From the inheritance of Nietzsche's irrationalism, on the one hand, it is the new Nietzscheism of Deleuze and Foucault, on the other hand, it is Derrida's deconstruction. On the way to stop the right wing from advancing, there are many theories besides Habermas, such as new historicism and Eagleton's criticism.
Facing alienation
In the 1940s, Hawke Hamor and Adorno of Frankfurt School took the lead in pointing out that in the early days of the Enlightenment, rationality was divided into two categories: one was humanistic rationality to help people get rid of ignorance and fear; The second is to help people understand the instrumental rationality of natural-based production. The two were harmonious and unified in the early stage of capitalist development. However, with the rapid development of the industrial revolution in the19th century, scientific and technological rationality gradually replaced the role of instrumental rationality and gained the upper hand in the coexistence with humanistic rationality. Freedom and human rights in humanistic ideals are gradually eroded by the norms, unity and integrity dominated by scientific and technological rationality. In this way, the science and technology created by human beings in turn control people's ideological behavior and cultural life, and people have to exchange their inner spiritual sinking for the rich external material interests, and people are alienated. Faced with this problem, there were two trends of thought in the 1960s. One was the left-wing radical revolution advocated by Marcuse, which pointed directly at the progress of industrial culture and science and technology (even including our Cultural Revolution). Its main purpose is to completely destroy industrial production and scientific and technological progress, and then force capitalism to show its cruel face; The other is Foucault's post-structuralism, which is actually the beginning of right-wing neoconservatism. It advocates a moderate paradigm shift and changes the language structure in culture to offset hegemony and monopoly. This right-wing trend of thought is generally regarded as the initial idea expected by post-modern philosophy. In the film, it is endowed with at least three missions: first, it reflects the alienation of people, that is, industrial civilization erodes people's free spirit; The second is to satirize the romance and unreality of the radical actions of the left and guide the audience to reflect (such as movies reflecting the Cultural Revolution); Thirdly, on the premise of rejecting integrity and identity, we should transform the traditional mode, norms, language and structure of the film, so as to disperse the central discourse power of the film and liberate the subjective spirit of the audience.
The truth view of new hermeneutics
In the new hermeneutics, Gadamer seeks truth experience beyond the control of scientific reason and scientific method. He divided his understanding of truth into three areas: aesthetics, history and language (Gadamer, 1975, Truth). Here (in the category of philosophy), we only comment on the latter two fields, and put the aesthetic field of truth into the third part (aesthetic category) to discuss. In the field of history, Gadamer emphasized two key concepts of understanding truth: one is "prejudice", that is, we are open to the world.
Open-minded, he stressed that we live in tradition and tradition is a part of us. Due to the interaction between time and space and memory, we are always biased (historic) against the existing traditions, and prejudice constitutes all our experiences. Understanding is to put yourself in the traditional process and let the past and the present continue to merge. Therefore, understanding is not only based on prejudice, but also produces new prejudice. Therefore, not only does history determine us, but we also determine history. Another key concept is "horizon fusion". Gadamer pointed out in this paper that there are various gaps between the author's "original horizon" and the receiver's "present horizon", and these differences caused by the change of time interval and historical scene cannot be eliminated, so the process of understanding must be to merge the two horizons and realize "horizon fusion". This process is open, historical participation and transcendence of one's own vision. Gadamer believes that history is neither absolutely subjective nor absolutely objective, but the unity of itself and others, which is a relationship, including the truth of history and the truth of historical understanding. In this way, the authenticity of history should first pay attention to the communication between the audience's emotion and objective history in post-modern movies. Specifically, on the one hand, we should narrow the distance between ordinary audience and historical events with little people and micro-narration, and strive to guide the audience to think about historical experiences in a multi-dimensional and open way, rather than narrative results with conclusions; On the other hand, nostalgia is used to arouse the audience's subjective memory of the past, thus advocating a "fusion of subjective and objective views" on history (and truth), encouraging people to boldly use their subjective initiative in the process of understanding objective history, and making history more micro-realistic. Secondly, the "inevitability" of showing prejudice and the doubt of historical authenticity and objectivity are also part of post-modern movies (such as Zelig or Forrest Gump). Post-modern movies always bring us into an almost real historical environment again and again, but lead us to doubt the authenticity of its source again and again, and then question the absolute objective existence of historical truth, making the sense of distance and single meaning of history stick to nothing. At a deeper level, in the field of language, neo-hermeneutics deeply agrees with Heidegger's statement that we "think not only in language, but also in the direction of language". (Heidegger, 1962, BeingandTime) Gadamer pointed out that language is the universal medium of understanding, understanding is essentially linguistic, and language is the structural factor of all explanations. So the world we know is the world of language, and the world presents itself in language, so we have mastered language at the same time. This dimension of mastery is also the boundary between understanding and language. (Gadamer, 1975, Truthandmethod) If postmodern people want to go beyond this solidified framework of cognition composed of rationality, integrity, central duality and structure, they must seek breakthroughs and innovations in language. As a synthesis of various languages (including visual language, auditory language, narrative language, film ontology language, dialogue language, etc.). ), the film has a complex tendency of language breakthrough in the post-modern background. One of the most important explanations for these tendencies is the "language game" mentioned by Wittgenstein and Gadamer successively. Although Gadamer thinks that language has more ontological significance, their views are similar. They point out that language, whether it is dialogue, text or narration, is just like a game: there is no subject and no ultimate goal, and the speaker is just immersed in the process of language communication and gets entertainment. In fact, this requires postmodern films to pay attention to external narrative skills and open endings in narrative language; In the narrative process, an overly logical cliche is embodied to reflect the weakness of rational discourse, so that the audience can get rid of the shackles of absolute rational truth and restore the ontological status of language.
"Participatory" Aesthetics of New Hermeneutics
Gadamer advocated a reformed aesthetic attitude in the field of new hermeneutics aesthetics, which gradually developed into a part of postmodern aesthetic thought. It does not require that the original intention and aesthetic expression of the work be absolutely restored by the audience, because the existence of the work should go beyond any historical limitation and its aesthetic significance should belong to eternity. Therefore, postmodern films tend to encourage and inspire the recipients to generate new, personalized and realistic aesthetic knowledge in their understanding activities, attach importance to the audience's participation, emphasize the "horizon fusion" and interaction between their realistic mentality and the works, and try to break the closed narrative system, provide feasibility for multiple deconstruction, collage and parody, and finally create a broader aesthetic participation space for the audience.
Derrida's Deconstruction
However, the deconstruction theory of Derrida, a contemporary French philosopher, is often regarded as a modern problem by critics. It provides the most radical and effective response, and completely deconstructs (rather than negates) western philosophy since Plato. Starting from linguistics, it criticizes Logocentrism based on the binary opposition between black and white, and modernist discourse immediately becomes one of the deconstructed cases. Derrida's deconstruction is not only based on the so-called methodology of criticizing modernism (this expression was originally used by Derrida, indicating that this concept should be used in writing, but at the same time, its connotation should be deconstructed and punctuation marks should be used instead of the original expression), and many major western philosophical works are reinterpreted with deconstructed radioactive reading. Find the genes of self-deconstruction. The other mainstream is the way of thinking put forward by Habermas, the most famous philosopher in Germany, based on the theory that modernism provides strength for mankind and always strives to improve its own situation. Therefore, Habermas believes that postmodernism emphasizes the reactionary expression of inherent consciousness, which is the core spirit of modernism and the driving force of human innovation. Postmodernism is only a manifestation of inheriting the modernist scheme.
There are also many theorists who agree that postmodernism is equivalent to the late logic of modernism, especially Fredric Jameson, Terry yeager, and other neo-Marxists, who also integrated Marx's criticism of the late industrial society and formed an organic whole.