This essay analyzes the recent appearance in Russian letters of ultra-nationalist fantasies about the restoration of Russia’s imperial or totalitarian status. This new trend has its roots not only in the increasingly patriotic tone of Russian society and politics, but also in the dynamics of the literary field itself. ‘Imperialist writers’ such as Aleksandr Prokhanov and Pavel Krusanov have both revived and reacted against postmodern themes and motifs from earlier decades. Relying on the legacy of sots-art and stiob (...) , the ‘imperialists’ advance a new model in Russia’s postmodern tradition, one that is balanced on the very borderline between irony and ideological militancy. In playing the game of ambiguous fanaticism, these writers have been able to attract the attention of a broad and diverse public, and have moved from an intellectual periphery into the cultural mainstream. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:After the Future. The Paradoxes of Postmodernism and Contemporary Russian CultureDmitry KhaninAfter the Future. The Paradoxes of Postmodernism and Contemporary Russian Culture, by Mikhail Epstein; translated with an introduction by Anessa Miller-Pogacar; xvi & 394 pp. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1995, $55.00 cloth, $19.95 paper.Mikhail Epstein, a renowned Soviet critic—his books in Russian include Paradoxes of the New (1988) and Faith and (...) Image: The Religious Subconscious in [End Page 508] Twentieth Century Russian Culture (1994)—emigrated to the U.S. in 1988. After the Future is the first collection of his major essays (written from 1986 to 1991) in English translation. It begins with the article “New Currents in Russian Poetry: Conceptualism, Metarealism, and Presentism,” which first introduced to the Soviet reader a group of postmodernist poets, just coming out (with the advent of glasnost) from the literary underground. Other articles (“Avant-Garde Art and Religion,” “After the Future: On the New Consciousness in Literature”), though first published in Russian literary journals, were shipped to Russia from “the other shore” (to use Alexander Herzen’s description of emigre writers’ whereabouts vis-à-vis their homeland). The latest studies (“Relativistic Patterns in Totalitarian Thinking: The Linguistic Games of Soviet Ideology,” “The Origins and Meaning of Russian Postmodernism”) were not only sent from the other shore but apparently produced for the other shore. Instead of analyzing the recent Russian literary crop and emerging aesthetic sensibilities, Epstein focuses on Russian historic experience in its entirety, which he somewhat didactically clarifies for the foreign reader.Despite its shifting perspectives, After the Future features a distinctive approach toward Russian postmodernism, its bona fide subject matter. Following Jean Baudrillard, Epstein defines postmodernism as simulation (“the production of reality as a series of plausible copies”) that engenders some new hyperreality and in so doing supplants “reality itself, which then becomes irrecoverable” (p. 189). The originality of Epstein’s position lies, however, in his claim that Russia as a historic and cultural entity is a postmodernist phenomenon in its own right that simulates and masterminds reality. Epstein’s claim that postmodernism is ingrained in Russian tradition is pitted specifically against those who doubt that Russia is ready to enjoy its own postmodernist bash since (contrary to the West) it never went through prior modernist phases. To prove that Russia foreshadowed postmodernism, Epstein draws on a number of historic illustrations. He cites the forceful adoption of Christianity under Prince Vladimir in 988, Peter the Great’s building of Petersburg in the “Finnish swamp” and Prince Potemkin’s infamous make-up villages as examples of the Russian tendency to forfeit the status quo for the sake of trumped-up, ersatz realities.However, Epstein’s arguments to the effect that Russia, and not the West, is the birthplace of postmodernism are not very convincing since (in accordance with his own premise) other countries can claim such a dubious distinction as well. (“Russia is the motherland of elephants”—the Russians joke about claims by zealous patriots that all great discoveries were known in their country before they appeared elsewhere.) Elsewhere, the building of the Chinese wall and the ensuing Chinese policies of isolationism, draconian enclosures of peasant land in England that led to a speedy transition to capitalism, drastic economic and social reforms after the French Revolution, and the racist policies of the Third Reich were just as arbitrary, and yet transformative of prior realities, as any of [End Page 509] Russia’s most foolhardy experiments. Ironically, Epstein’s claim that Russia is the motherland of postmodernism harks back to the turn-of-the-century controversy as to whether it is pertinent to apply Marxist theory to rustic Russia. Lenin argued that Russia can claim Marxism as its own because all of its long-suffering history was an anticipation of Marxism and leading toward it. Epstein analogously contends that there is a special, indigenous Russian route to postmodernism, a statement that evokes similar pronouncements ingrained in Russian philosophical tradition: Epstein’s thesis that Russia is “irreal” reminds one of Peter Chaadaev’s contention that Russia does not have a history; his idea that Russia is on the threshold of a cultural synthesis with the... (shrink)

This article attempts to analyse Russian postmodernist poetics, proceeding from the concept of the “trans-semiotic stairs”, as presented by J. Faryno for describing the avant-garde. Examples from various texts are used to demonstrate how postmodernist texts contain divergent processes: the culturally specific and unique dissolves in tautology, meaningful entireties are dispersed into atomized empty particles. The significant teleological model of the avant-garde ceases to function here. A play by J. Brodsky, Marble, is examined on this background, as well as (...) the position of the author that differs from the “postmodernist” context. (shrink)

Post-secularism is the fundamental evidence of the end of modernity. Modernity, as sleeping reason in Francisco Goya's painting, realizes that, although it thought that it was awake, it was producing monsters. We try to analyze post-secular philosophy from the point of view of Russian religious thought. We believe that such philosophers as Vladimir Soloviev, Pavel Florensky, Sergey Bulgakov, Nikolai Berdyaev, Georges Florovsky, and Semen Frank may be helpful for understanding and overcoming post-secular order. Their unique views on the relations (...) between religion and philosophy, science, and social life are apparently missing in the current Western debates. It seems to us that Russian religious philosophy becomes surprisingly up-to-date and attractive in the contemporary world. We hope that the present volume will be a significant step forward in the inclusion of the heritage of Russian religious philosophy in contemporary debates. (shrink)

In this article, Russian ballet is considered from the point of view of the peculiarities of the aesthetics of postmodernism and as one of the brightest manifestations of postmodern culture. The subject of the study is the trends of postmodernism in modern Russian ballet. The novelty of the research lies in the fact that until now, in the scientific research literature, the phenomena of modern ballet have not been subjected to scientific theoretical understanding from the point (...) of view of trends in the aesthetics of postmodernism. It is revealed that a new stage in the development of Russian ballet is associated with the activities of S. Diaghilev's ballet troupe, characterized by a departure from traditions and the formation of a new aesthetic. The study concluded that the development of modern Russian ballet was significantly influenced by such postmodern trends as: the destructurization of the language of classical dance, the desire for syncretism of different types of art in the context of a ballet performance, the use of quotations, allusions and reminiscences that acquire conditional symbolic meaning, the desire for plastic experiments. (shrink)

Postmodernism is considered as the historical stage of the transition of contemporary society from mature industrial capitalism to the qualitatively new technological and social production order. The real transformations of contemporary society’s factors have been brought into the correlation with the production changes that determine transition from Modern Age machine technologies to nanotechnologies. Existence of Postmodern society is presented as the borderland of historical ages, that is, as the period of the fading away of the Modern Age social forms (...) and of the becoming of social activity’s new forms that are specific for the new age of the development of society and of the worldwide socionatural entity. The author analyzes theoretical and worldview potential of Postmodern philosophy and its inability to represent further postindustrial society evolution tendencies. Possible scenarios of Рostmodern society evolution are considered in the context of contemporary concepts on the changes in the human role in nature and society as well as in the context of the trends of socionatural Universe development. The paper reveals technical, technological and social presuppositions of the transition from the nature-historical stage of society development to the true historical stage of human development. (shrink)

The subject of the research is the concept of "Russian idea" from the point of view of its transformation in the conditions of the modern postmodern paradigm. The characteristic markers forming the modern cultural-historical and philosophical paradigm are revealed – the specifics of their influence on the concept of "Russian idea" are analyzed. An example of the modern representation of the "neo-Eurasian" version of the concept as interpreted by A. G. Dugin demonstrates how in a postmodern situation, even (...) ideas that are in discursive opposition to postmodern principles inevitably turn out to be embedded in the modern paradigm. Russian postmodern situation determines the specific forms of existence of the concept of "Russian idea", which, in turn, are representative for the analysis of phenomena, processes and transformations of modern Russian culture and the study of its dynamics. The novelty of the research lies in the analysis of the "Russian idea" as a concept with an unchanging semantic core, fixed through the presence of cross–cutting terms, as well as in identifying the characteristic types of modern forms of existence of the concept - Messianic, conservative-protective, nationalist, neo-Eurasian, political-ideological, liberal and others. The article analyzes and identifies the patterns of the constitution of the concept "Russian idea" in the conditions of the postmodernist paradigm, examines the specific markers characterizing the concept in the postmodern situation. The "Russian idea", on the one hand, is opposed to postmodernism as an axiological antinomy, on the other hand, modern markers of the concept are revealed, making it part of the postmodern system. (shrink)

For the first time, the article analyses certain aspects of Russian poetry of the “Silver Age” in order to identify the rudiments or features which are characteristic of the postmodern creative paradigm. It is noted that a number of poets almost do not have any postmodernist tendencies. Despite the fact it is proved that postmodernism denies the personality-centric and aesthetically oriented concept of modernism, it nevertheless arose on the basis of modernism and has sharpened evolutionary features formulated in (...) the first half of the 20th century. The article aims to prove a hypothesis that arises in the authors during a preliminary perceptual reading of the poets` works of the “Silver Age”: in the early 20th century. Sporadically and consistently in individual authors can be observed irony, play, reconstruction and performance as precursor of postmodernist creative thinking. Specialties of the Russian poetry of the “Silver Age”, which directly correlate with postmodernist tendencies of the second half of the 20th century is not a description itself, but the realization of reality, ambivalence, as well as following the linguistic and figurative, conceptual, motive levels of gradual transitions between the paradigms of “symbolism – modernism” and “modernism – postmodernism”. The international significance of the article is that the material of one of the Eastern European literatures has proved the existence of postmodern features in the first half of the 20th century for the first time, which can serve as a deeper research in the field of literary typology, continuity; culturology and anthropology. (shrink)

This article discusses the role of representative strategies in twentieth-century Russian culture. Just as Russia interacted with Europe in the Marquis de Custine’s time via discourse and representation, in the twentieth century Russia re-entered European consciousness by simulating ‘socialism’. In the post-Soviet era, the nation aspired to be admitted to the ‘European house’ by simulating a ‘market economy’, ‘democracy’, and ‘postmodernism’. But in reality Russia remains the same country as before, torn between the reality of its own helplessness (...) and poverty, and the messianic myth of its own greatness. Post-Soviet culture is a product of Stalinist culture. ‘Russian postmodernism’ was created less by artists, writers, poets, and film makers, than by theorists and critics. At the beginning of the 1990s, a need to describe contemporary Russian culture emerged. In this way, ‘Russian postmodernism’ arose from the desire to ‘sell’ projects in the West—from the simple obligation to describe socialist experience in concrete, transferable terms that Westerners could grasp. The nostalgia experienced by the post-Soviet era creates its own simulated postmodernism , in which the matrices of the construction and functioning of culture cease to be connected with specifically Russian (Soviet) history, and instead reproduce Western models almost exactly. We are facing yet another attempt at radical cultural modernization. If the first attempt (revolutionary culture) was the most original and fruitful, and the second (Stalinist culture, Socialist Realism) was less productive but still original, then the third, post-Soviet, attempt (rich in individuality, but lacking in original ideas or style) is for the moment the least productive and original. If we exclude sots-art (conceptualism) from ‘Russian postmodernism’, there would be nothing left. Clearly, an original cultural model in post-Soviet Russia will not take shape until original strategies for processing the country’s cultural past are developed. In their turn, these strategies can only result from a radical transformation of post-Soviet identity into a new, genuinely Russian one. (shrink)

This article discusses the role of representative strategies in twentieth-century Russian culture. Just as Russia interacted with Europe in the Marquis de Custine’s time via discourse and representation, in the twentieth century Russia re-entered European consciousness by simulating ‘socialism’. In the post-Soviet era, the nation aspired to be admitted to the ‘European house’ by simulating a ‘market economy’, ‘democracy’, and ‘postmodernism’. But in reality Russia remains the same country as before, torn between the reality of its own helplessness (...) and poverty, and the messianic myth of its own greatness. Post-Soviet culture is a product of Stalinist culture. ‘Russian postmodernism’ was created less by artists, writers, poets, and film makers, than by theorists and critics. At the beginning of the 1990s, a need to describe contemporary Russian culture emerged. In this way, ‘Russian postmodernism’ arose from the desire to ‘sell’ projects in the West—from the simple obligation to describe socialist experience in concrete, transferable terms that Westerners could grasp. The nostalgia experienced by the post-Soviet era creates its own simulated postmodernism , in which the matrices of the construction and functioning of culture cease to be connected with specifically Russian (Soviet) history, and instead reproduce Western models almost exactly. We are facing yet another attempt at radical cultural modernization. If the first attempt (revolutionary culture) was the most original and fruitful, and the second (Stalinist culture, Socialist Realism) was less productive but still original, then the third, post-Soviet, attempt (rich in individuality, but lacking in original ideas or style) is for the moment the least productive and original. If we exclude sots-art (conceptualism) from ‘Russian postmodernism’, there would be nothing left. Clearly, an original cultural model in post-Soviet Russia will not take shape until original strategies for processing the country’s cultural past are developed. In their turn, these strategies can only result from a radical transformation of post-Soviet identity into a new, genuinely Russian one. (shrink)

The Russian philosopher and cultural theorist Mikhail Bakhtin has traditionally been seen as the leading figure in the group of intellectuals known as the Bakhtin Circle. The writings of other members of the Circle are considered much less important than his work, while Bakhtin's achievement has been exaggerated in proportion to the downgrading of the thinkers with whom he associated in the 1920s. This volume, which includes new translations and studies of the work of the most important members of (...) the Circle, sets out to correct the distortions in the established representations of its activity. The original contributions to literary and linguistic theory made by Valentin Voloshinov and Pavel Medvedev (but frequently credited to Bakhtin) are assessed, and the distinctiveness of their approaches is highlighted. (shrink)

This groundbreaking work by one of the world's foremost theoreticians of culture and scholars of Russian philosophy gives for the first time a systematic examination of the development of Russian philosophy during the late Soviet period. Countering the traditional view of an intellectual wilderness under the Soviet regime, Mikhail Epstein provides a comprehensive account of Russian thought of the second half of the 20th century that is highly sophisticated without losing clarity. It provides new insights into previously (...) mostly ignored areas such as late Soviet Russian nationalism and Eurasianism, religious thought, cosmism and esoterism, and postmodernism and conceptualism. Epstein shows how Russian philosophy has long been trapped in an intellectual prison of its own making as it sought to create its own utopia. However, he demonstrates that it is time to reappraise Russian thought, now freed from the bonds of Soviet totalitarianism and ideocracy but nevertheless dangerously engaged into new nationalist aspirations and metaphysical radicalism. We are left with not only a new and exciting interpretation of recent Russian intellectual history, but also the opportunity to rethink our philosophical heritage. (shrink)

Postmodernism as a mythologem reflecting the remarkable shift that has taken place in contemporary Western culture as a whole entered the consciousness of our intelligentsia with the usual delay. This is not surprising if one bears in mind the constantly "lagging" character of our consciousness, which also colors in corresponding tones the whole of "Russian civilization," and if one believes that it is condemned to be always "catching up" and making up for lost time. Having arisen in the (...) West as a concept describing certain special characteristics of the latest architectural style that no longer fitted into the rather passé category of modernism, the concept of the postmodern was initially current, both in the West and in Russia, among people close to architecture. At that time it had not yet been able to acquire the "philosophical" subtext that is already felt in the book of Charles Jencks that came out in 1977 in Germany under the gaudy title The Language of Postmodern Architecture. (shrink)

Sots-art, the mock use of the Soviet ideological clichés of mass culture, originated in Soviet nonconformist art of the early 1970s. An original and provocative guide, Endquote: Sots-Art Literature and Soviet Grand Style examines the conceptual aspect of sots-art, sots-art poetry, and sots-art prose, and discusses where these still-vital intellectual currents may lead.

Since perestroika, Russian thinkers have joined the general discussion of the contemporary relevance of Marxism. In the last two decades, this debate has intensified in the West. According to one side, Marxism is intellectually and politically exhausted. It is a prime example of the grand narrative and the Enlightenment project. In practice it has proved to be not merely incapable of raising undeveloped societies out of poverty but immensely destructive: it has served as the ideological underpinning of the most (...) totalitarian regimes the world has ever known. According to the other side, Marxism is an enduring critical tradition that has furnished postmodernism with its key concepts and has helped to transform the primitive capitalism of Marx's time into the postindustrial welfare state of today. To meet the new challenges of globalization, world poverty, environmental degradation, and gender and racial inequality, this side argues, we must make full use of Marxism's critical potential. (shrink)

The atmosphere of plurality appears gradually and becomes more noticeable. Speaking the language of postmodernism the wellknown “truths” are undergoing the radical reconsideration. The postmodernism “competition of truths” is taking place instead of usual seeking of truth. Aware or no aware radical plurality becomes the starting principle of many philosophical studies. One of the preconditions creating the base for native postmodernism formation and developing are neomythologies which have been spread in Russian regions, have been transformed into (...) self reproducing false ideologies and have got its false language. The relationship between neomythologies and postmodernism is based on the worldview systems of “overcoming of history”, permanent “problems” of present and historical discourses, “radical plurality”, the refusal of classical casualty and logo centrism, “the disappearing of subject” of time and historical and other actions, and also many other signs. Making unsteady the logic of classical and non-classical philosophical studies, neomythology becomes the precursor of Russianpostmodernism. (shrink)

In the past twenty years, all the key authors who wrote about the state of postmodernity either began to be engaged in other research areas (Fredric Jameson) or declared that the postmodernism is dead (Linda Hutcheon). Since 2000, when the fatigue from the postmodernism became evident to everyone, various researchers, critics and theorists began to offer their concepts of our era. However, all these theories, emphasizing the change of cultural paradigms, interpret culture traditionally not paying attention to total (...) digitalization and the introduction of new technologies into our lives. However, in two concepts of our time these processes become central. These are the concepts of the digimodern and automodern. The focus of this article is the idea of automodernism, proposed by the American social theorist Robert Samuels in 2007/2009. He believes that our world is characterized by two contradictory tendencies – automation and the desire for autonomy (personal freedom). From his point of view, the former often does not allow to reach the latter due to certain circumstances. Samuels, using the example of a car, a personal computer, the Internet, etc., shows what exactly our culture is in the broadest sense. Analyzing the concept of “digital youth,” he also pays attention to the formation of a new subjectivity of the era of automodernity. Finally, the most interesting part of the concept of automodernism, which is most relevant today, is the criticism of leftwing social and philosophical concepts (Slavoj Žižek, Jameson) and cultural theories (Henry Jenkins). At the end of the article, the author mentions Adam Greenfield’s latest book Radical Technologies: The Design of Everyday Life. Thanks to this book, Samuels’ theory can be verified. (shrink)

There are two problems discussed in the article. The first one is the phenomenon of mass literature and semiotic approach to it. According to Lotman, mass literature of the 20th (and 21st) centuries is not so much an object of semiotics as of sociology. However, it is possible to consider mass literature of earlier times as an object of semiotics of culture. Lotman discusses Russian mass literature of the 18th and 19th centuries as such an object in the article (...) “Massovaya literatura kak istoriko-kulturnaya problema”. Considering mass literature a dynamic factor of the semiotic system, Lotman distinguishes its main features: a high degree of automatization and syndrome of retardedness. In the second part of the article the author discusses the phenomenon of mass poetry in contemporary Lithuania. This kind of mass literature is much more similar to the phenomenon discussed by Lotman than to the mass literature of the postmodernist epoch. Lithuanian mass poetry employs the codes of national romanticism (the end of 19th century) and considers itself an ignored part of high culture. This sort of poetry unknown to Western societies exhibits archaising tendencies in the modern postsoviet culture. (shrink)

There are two problems discussed in the article. The first one is the phenomenon of mass literature and semiotic approach to it. According to Lotman, mass literature of the 20th (and 21st) centuries is not so much an object of semiotics as of sociology. However, it is possible to consider mass literature of earlier times as an object of semiotics of culture. Lotman discusses Russian mass literature of the 18th and 19th centuries as such an object in the article (...) “Massovaya literatura kak istoriko-kulturnaya problema”. Considering mass literature a dynamic factor of the semiotic system, Lotman distinguishes its main features: a high degree of automatization and syndrome of retardedness. In the second part of the article the author discusses the phenomenon of mass poetry in contemporary Lithuania. This kind of mass literature is much more similar to the phenomenon discussed by Lotman than to the mass literature of the postmodernist epoch. Lithuanian mass poetry employs the codes of national romanticism (the end of 19th century) and considers itself an ignored part of high culture. This sort of poetry unknown to Western societies exhibits archaising tendencies in the modern postsoviet culture. (shrink)

One of the urgent tasks of modern philosophy is to find a path between the rationalism of the Enlightenment and the relativism of postmodernism. Rationalism alone cannot suffice to solve today's problems, but neither can we dispense with reasonable critique. The task is to find ways to broaden the scope of rational thought without losing its critical power. The first part of this volume explores the ideas of Enlightenment philosophers and shows nuances often absent from the common view of (...) the Enlightenment. The second part deals with some of the modern heirs of Enlightenment, such as Durkheim, Habermas, and Derrida. In the third part this volume looks at alternatives to Enlightenment thought in West European, Russian and Buddhist philosophy. Part four provides, over against the Enlightenment, a new starting point for the philosophy of religion in thinking about human beings, God, and the description of phenomena. (shrink)

Freedom to Believe is a powerful collection of philosophical and religious essays by a modern poet of distinction. It introduces a highly original and controversial thinker to the Western reader. Olga Sedakova's central philosophical thought lies in the notion of existential freedom in its association with the liberating power of the arts, especially poetry. These convictions place her firmly in the Russian and European classical cultural traditions, which, in turn, have deep roots in Christianity. Devoutly Orthodox yet fiercely independent (...) in her thinking, Sedakova's ecumenical humanism places her in opposition to both the "new left" and modern fundamentalism. Indeed, Sedakova's "conservatism" is more genuinely new than the so-called radicalism of the postmodernists, as she castigates "old totalitarianism" and new commercialism alike, in the name of a new cultural poetics and politics. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Jameson on Jameson: Conversations on Cultural MarxismPaul Allen Miller (bio)Jameson, Fredric. Jameson on Jameson: Conversations on Cultural Marxism. Ed. Ian Buchanan. Durham, NC: Duke UP, 2007. 296 pp.Fredric Jameson may well be the greatest intellectual produced by the United States in the last half century. It is difficult to think of anyone else who has made as many, as lasting, and as wide-ranging contributions as Jameson. From his (...) early work on Sartre’s style, passing through the twin opera on dialectical theory (Marxism and Form) and formalism and structuralism (Prisonhouse of Language), and the idiosyncratic appreciation of Wyndham Lewis (Fables of Aggression) to that summa of Marxist hermeneutics, The Political Unconscious, and from his major collection of essays, The Ideologies of Theory, through his books on Adorno (Late Marxism) and film (Signatures of the Visible), to that foundational text on postmodern literature, theory, art, and architecture, Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, and the late work on world cinema (The Geopolitical Aesthetic), utopianism (The Seeds of Time), Brecht (Brecht and Method), modernity (A Singular Modernity), and science fiction (Archaeologies of the Future), Jameson’s career is unparalleled in the American letters. It is perhaps not coincidental, either, that this larger-than-life figure on the intellectual stage ranging easily from Russian formalism to Deleuzean antihumanism, from Balzac to Frank Gehry, and from Hegel to Derrida, is an intellectual dissident. Contemporary American life’s alternation between uncritical consumerism (Marcuse’s one-dimensional man) and nonothing anti-intellectualism (Christian fundamentalism and corporate-fueled jingoism) could only produce such a body of work as an alien presence: its own systemic negation and thus the fullest expression of its deepest internal contradictions. The present collection of interviews from 1981 to the present, then, stands as a welcome commentary on Jameson’s vast work and an important reflection of the changes in American intellectual life in the period from the last days of the Cold War to the end of the second Bush administration.Naturally, as with any collection of interviews, not every thing is new here. Indeed, to the seasoned reader of Jameson, much of this is familiar territory, and there is a fair amount of repetition from one interview to the next (Goethe’s concept of “world literature,” for example, is a recurring motif). Nonetheless, there are many moments of real insight and bold commentary that remind us why Marxism is far from dead and how Jameson has achieved an iconic status rivaling that of Lukacs, Althusser, or Eagleton, as one of the preeminent Marxist thinkers of the last century. Many of these come in the form of vignettes, little snippets of cultural analysis. One such comes in Jameson’s interview with Columbia University Professor of History Anders Stephanson. Here Stephanson asks Jameson to comment on the recent architectural and cultural phenomenon of creating ersatz public spaces. These come in the form of commercial areas that present themselves in guise of “squares,” “plazas,” or “villages.” They make reference to and pastiche traditional forms of life and then re-represent them in the form of a hypercapitalist consumerism. These simulacra of less alienated, precapitalist forms of [End Page 65] life are then presented as depthless surfaces, parodies of authenticity. The archetype of such ersatz public spaces is Disney’s EPCOT:Stephanson: In other words, you are referring to his compressed version of the world; little toy countries where you can orient yourself in no time at all.Jameson: I suppose you can orient yourself because walking paths are available. But where you actually are is a real problem, for you may in fact be in the Florida Everglades, and in this case you are not only in a swamp but also in a simulacrum of a different geographical complex altogether. Disneyland is, on the whole, supremely prophetic and paradigmatic of these multiple shifting and dissolving spatial levels. (49)This is both an insightful observation and a wonderful example of Jameson’s dialectic at work. One moment we’re walking hand in hand with Goofy round the little, fake Eiffel Tower of EPCOT and the next we sink into the morass that paved the Everglades, acquired control... (shrink)

The article examines the situation that has developed in the contemporary age and being named differently: postmodernism, post-postmodernism, digital modernism, metamodernism, etc. It is noted that, despite the difference in naming, all the terms indicate a global crisis of culture and man. The three most important signs of this crisis are identified: degradation of a man – the predominance of his animal nature; total technicism; oblivion of national traditions, sacred things. These features are briefly explained. It is concluded (...) that the basis of these signs is the loss of human spirituality. It is stated that music has extraordinary opportunities to elevate the spiritual needs of a person. It is emphasized that these opportunities contributed to the strengthening of the impact of religious practices within various worships – shamanism, Zoroastrianism, Sufism, and others, which ensured the maintenance of the humanity of the world. It is believed that the use of spiritual-creative possibilities of music will help overcome the existing global crisis and prepare the formation of the era of culture and man, the era called a New Humanism by M. Eliade. It is argued that there are composers in Russia and in other countries today who purposefully use the spiritual-creative potential of music in their work to overcome the crisis that has arisen. We offer an interview with one of them – Russian composer Dmitry Stefanovich. In conclusion, it is noted that the following articles will continue to analyze the processes taking place in contemporary culture, and, in this regard, there will be presented stories about music and interviews with composers from Russia and other countries. (shrink)

The study of the artistic heritage of neo-academicians in the context of the study of mixed techniques is quite relevant. To date, the analysis of the creativity of artists, representatives of non-academism as an artistic trend of the late twentieth century in Russia, is based on the artistic criticism of art critics, art critics who were part of this trend and considered the work of non-academicians from the perspective of the artistic life of this period in the context of the (...) socio-cultural processes of Russia during the Perestroika era. Also, the works of neo-academist artists are studied from the position of "creative rebellion" and the search for new forms in art. In this article, the works of T. Novikov, G. Guryanov, K. Goncharov, V. Mamyshev-Monroe and other representatives of NAII are studied from the position of "mixed techniques" in art objects. The main emphasis is placed on the analysis of art objects in mixed techniques in the context of overcoming formalism, embodying stylistic diversity, metamorphosis of forms and states, pictorial symbols and universal meanings. The realization of the principle of the infinity of choice and the infinity of meaning and diversity is associated with postmodernism in art, the introduction to which became decisive in Russian art of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. The appeal to the study of art objects of neo-academicians made in mixed technique allows us to enrich and supplement the understanding of the term "mixed techniques" in modern art practices related to the search for new forms, compositional solutions, the formation of a unique author's language, the originality of the work. (shrink)

In contrast to societies where socialization takes place through the transmission of anonymous and hence overpowering traditions, the typical way of socialization for Western people is through productive dialogue guided by the search for objectivity. Postmodernism, however, fosters a form of dialogue in which people should not look for objective knowledge but should simply register their diverse opinions. Just this type of dialogue has been the norm in Russia for centuries. As a result, Russian cultural and political initiative (...) has been dominated by an all‐powerful state. In the West, we now witness a similar process, as the culture of nonjudgmental relativism consolidates its dominance over an increasingly postmodern society. (shrink)

I soon discovered that I was quite isolated in my attempts to pursue the sociology of literature. In any case, one searched almost in vain for allies if one wanted to approach a literary text from the perspective of a critical theory of society. To be sure, there were Franz Mehring’s articles which I read with interest and profit; but despite the admirable decency and the uncompromising political radicalism of the author, his writings hardly went beyond the limits of a (...) socialist journalist who wrote in essentially the same style about literature as about political and the economy. George Lukács had not yet published his impressive series of essays on Marxist aesthetics and interpretation of literature. Of course, I was deeply touched and influenced by his fine little book, The Theory of the Novel , which I practically learned by heart. Besides Levin Schücking’s small volume on the sociology of literary taste, the only other major influence I can recall was George Brandes’ monumental work on the literary currents of the nineteenth century.Nonetheless, I had the courage, not to say hubris, to plan an ambitious, socially critical series on French, English, Spanish, and German literature, the beginning of which was to be formed by the above-mentioned studies. My attention was especially focused on the writes and literary schools which the German literary establishment either punished by total silence or raised up into the clouds of idealistic babble or relegated to quasi-folkloric anthropology .In these studies, I limited myself to the narrative forms of literature; for reasons which I hold to be sociologically and artistically valid, I believe that novels and stories represent the most significant aspect of German literature in the nineteenth century. While I in no way feel ashamed of these documents of my youth, I am conscious of their weaknesses. If I were to write them over again, I would certainly be less sure of some of the direct connections I drew between literature and writers on the one hand, and the social infrastructure on the other. In later publications I attempted to analyze with greater circumspection the mediation between substructure and superstructure, between social currents and ideologies; but my views on the social world and the necessity to combine social theory and literary analysis have not changed in any essential way. In the last decades the sociology of literature has become progressively more fashionable. The writings of my contemporaries have often amazed me because some—frequently in unnecessarily complicated and esoteric language—are so concerned with “mediation” that the connections between social being and social consciousness became almost obscured. Leo Lowenthal is professor emeritus of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. He is also professor emeritus at the University of Frankfurt in West Germany. His collected works have been published in five volumes in German and in a parallel English edition. Lowenthal’s autobiographical writings, edited by Martin jay, will appear in the fall of 1987 under the title An Unmastered Past. Lowenthal’s present studies deal with German postmodernism. Ted. R. Weeks is a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, specializing in imperial Russian history. (shrink)

Freedom to Believe is a powerful collection of philosophical and religious essays by a modern poet of distinction. It introduces a highly original and controversial thinker to the Western reader. Olga Sedakova's central philosophical thought lies in the notion of existential freedom in its association with the liberating power of the arts, especially poetry. These convictions place her firmly in the Russian and European classical cultural traditions, which, in turn, have deep roots in Christianity. Devoutly Orthodox yet fiercely independent (...) in her thinking, Sedakova's ecumenical humanism places her in opposition to both the "new left" and modern fundamentalism. Indeed, Sedakova's "conservatism" is more genuinely new than the so-called radicalism of the postmodernists, as she castigates "old totalitarianism" and new commercialism alike, in the name of a new cultural poetics and politics. (shrink)

I don't know what this document is. I'm not aware of ever being translated into Russian, but the issue and pagination suggest it refers to my review article of Cilliers' "Complexity and Postmodernism". That article is correctly indexed elsewhere on this site.

In the development of modern philosophical thought there is the so-called "neo-religious Renaissance." He appears as a search for the religious factors necessary to construct a social being. The well-known representative of the Ukrainian diaspora, Lev Silenko, the founder of the Russian Orthodox Church, which he considers the national religion of the Ukrainian people, contributes to the postmodernist tendency of modern religious philosophy. The main provisions of which he laid out in the fundamental work of "Mage Faith".

Literary theory of the twentieth century in the Anglo-American tradition forms a coherent whole, dividing into discrete clusters. This theory is riddled with purely logical problems inherent in its enterprise, resulting from the fact that Modernist theory develops as an offshoot of Romanticism. Such fundamental flaws, or discontents, afflict all Modernist theory, from Russian Formalism through Structuralism and Deconstruction. The problems of Modernist theory cannot be solved; at most we can resolve to take theory in a new direction.

Postmodernism and Education responds to the interest in postmodernism as a way of understanding social, cultural and economic trends. Robin Usher and Richard Edwards explore the impact which postmodernism has had upon the theory and practice of education, using a broad analysis of postmodernism and an in-depth introduction to key writers in the field, including Lacan, Derrida, Foucault and Lyotard. In examining the impact which this thinking has had upon contemporary theory and practice of education, Usher (...) and Edwards concentrate particularly upon how postmodernist ideas challenge existing concepts, structures and hierarchies. (shrink)