The word “modern” was first “used in order to distinguish the present (98)”. “Modernus” was originally used to distinguish the new Christian present from the old Pagan past. One must know the past in order to know the present. This reminds me of when we talked about “authenticity” and that one must know the original to know the duplicate. “Postmodernity presents itself as Antimodernity (98)”. One must also know modernism before they can truly have an understanding of post-modernism. If you don’t know what modernity is, than how can you be against it, or antimodern? Therefore, one must know what is old in order to know what is new, or “modern”.
“Avant-garde” is understood as “invading unknown territory, exposing itself to the dangers of sudden, shocking encounters, conquering an as yet unoccupied future (99).”
As soon as I read that definition I thought of avant-garde fashion. It is always clothing that is totally out there, inspired by crazy new ideas, and is always about getting ahead of the curve [in fashion]. The reading says it needs to venture into uncharted areas and this is what avant-garde clothing seeks to do. Even though designers seek to do this we cannot help but remember things from the past, and therefore bring that knowledge into what we are doing, or recognize a piece of something that reminds us of a thing once there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You say some solid things here but I want to hear more of what you got out of the reading.
-Starfish
Post a Comment