Metamodernism (Post Postmodernism): Have You Heard of It?

[TheStranger]

There seems to be an art movement that has begun to pick up momentum in art essays and articles which seek to categorize a type of art after postmodern art: Metamodernism. I wanted to ask you guys if you've heard a whole lot on it or have any opinions on it. Metamodernism was detailed in an essay by Timotheus Vermeulen and Robin van den Akker (2009) a couple years ago and also recently in ArtNews (Oct 2012) in an article, How PoMo Can You Go? Some even state boldly "Postmodernism is over."

So in a nutshell...

Modern art "generally includes a mix of different styles and 'movements' of art. It refers to a time in history when artists started thinking about creating works of art in ways that were new, fresh, and different from the way art had been done before."

Postmodern Art "rejects modernism's grand narratives of artistic direction, eradicating the boundaries between high and low forms of art, and disrupting genre's conventions with collision, collage, and fragmentation. Postmodern art holds that all stances are unstable and insincere, and therefore irony, parody, and humor are the only positions that cannot be overturned by critique or revision."

Metamodernism is “a continuous oscillation, a constant repositioning between positions and mindsets that are evocative of the modern and of the postmodern but are ultimately suggestive of another sensibility that is neither of them. A discourse that negotiates between a yearning for universal truths but also an (a)political relativism, between hope and doubt, sincerity and irony, knowingness and naivety, construction and deconstruction.” John Klomp describes "At its core, the Metamodern represents a return to the individual as the romancer and dreamer, the maker of connections, the believer, the idealist despite the warmed over ironic Postmodern trope in the back of his/her mind that such may not be possible."

The critique of Postmodern art which may have led to the idea of Metamodernism, per Peter Timms, "If you have no conception of history -- linear or otherwise -- then you remain a prisoner of your own time. The inevitable result is narcissism."

What do you guys think?

[michaelwebster]

Their definition certainly fits the times, but the question is do we really need a grand, overarching name for a supposed movement that is all about non-fixed positions? Plenty of art historians don't even use post-modernism without scare quotes, so why do we need another name to add onto all the other names for the past decade of cultural production?

If you are just asking about the defiition applying to the past 10-20 years of cultural production, then of course it is correct, but its by no means revelatory.

[TheStranger]

I don't know if I would call this Metamodernism revolutionary by any means but I do think it's an interesting distinction which modernism and post modernism can't completely satisfy by themselves.

[losemygrip]

If that's what "metamodernism" means, they need a better word.

[Emoree]

ding dong the witch is dead

woohoo!

when i was in school in my contemporary art history class all i could think of was "when is post modernism going to be over?" Christ, 50+ years, time to be done.

metamodernism sounds pretty broad and vague. What do you think about neo-sentimentalism, the move toward essentials and truth, away from ironic navel gazing (etc). I like the way it is described here: http://dogeatcrow.blogspot.com/2011/10/neo-sentimentalists.html

[losemygrip]

How about "counter-modernism?" It seems to me to be much like Sydney Freedberg's discussion of the "counter-maniera" in Renaissance art. (I.e., not "anti" modernism, but just the other side of the coin.)

[aethiryn]

My friends and I call it "popomo".

I just think popomo is a sexy word.

[Ren Adams]

I've hard it mostly referred to as PoPoMo (post-postmodernism) and "Information Age," but it's similar to what I've heard kicked around in my art history classes. Usually the discussion also deals with the idea that it's all about context and framing as opposed to a specific style.

[GhostsBeforeBreakfast]

ding dong the witch is dead

woohoo!

when i was in school in my contemporary art history class all i could think of was "when is post modernism going to be over?" Christ, 50+ years, time to be done.

metamodernism sounds pretty broad and vague. What do you think about neo-sentimentalism, the move toward essentials and truth, away from ironic navel gazing (etc). I like the way it is described here: http://dogeatcrow.blogspot.com/2011/10/neo-sentimentalists.html

 

I think we forget that the lines drawn and names for movements aren't permanent. Chances are that this era won't be properly defined for at least a century, only to be refuted again years later. I'm concerned with how current/contemporary art will be defined but I'm not all that concerned with what we'll be labeling it as it's bound to change.

[Adam@LymeAcademy]

Perhaps the names are irrelevant. The only really relevant terms will be the ones coined by the artists and art historians of the future. Any movements in art, cinema, music, or literature etc. which are emerging from and reacting to modernism one would identify as "Postmodern" and will be most clearly identified by the artists of the future. How can we name ourselves or our contemporaries. Also, doesn't the term "postmodern" cover it.  Wouldn't one consider something "postmodern" to be something that refers to the modern not in past tense necessarily but, if its being referred to at all then it is something that has already happen which is  subject to change every hour, minute and second that passes. Post modern. An old debate..

[frenchlover]

"The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk" - Hegel