Sunday 18 November 2012

Postmodernism: Developing Ideas

Postmodernism: Developing Ideas

In preparation for Wednesday's seminar, I've compiled some basic mind maps in an attempt to decide which topic I'm going to tackle for the essay. I've had various ideas over the last few weeks, but many lacked substance or simply weren't very interesting ideas. Below are three of my more developed ideas.

Idea One: Gunther von Hagens/Bodyworlds


Photobucket Pictures, Images and Photos

Idea Two: The Scott Pilgrim Series






Idea Three: Art Spiegelman's Maus



1 comment:

  1. Evening Stevie P,

    Okay - had a good old think about your proposals above, and while I think Scott Pilgrim is going to give you lots of helpful discussion and has no doubt attracted lots of postmodern-centric analysis from other critics, I also think that the Gunther von Hagens is interesting, but only perhaps as an example in a bigger discussion in regard to the appeal of hyperrealism as an aesthetic. The thing is hyperrealism and the uncanny are entirely associated in terms of aesthetics and the spectacle of the more real than real. On the same continuum as von Hagens is the work of Ron Mueck:

    http://www.boredpanda.com/13-hyper-realistic-sculptures-by-ron-mueck/

    and Duane Hanson:

    http://www.perrotin.com/artiste-Duane_Hanson-57.html

    'Hyperrealism' is also an art movement as well as a theoretical concept - but obviously in something like the Stepford Wives, there is a link between the 'politics' of hyperrealism (i.e. the copy world created for us by late capitalism) and the aesthetic of hyperrealism (the Stepford wives themselves who are 'too' perfect).

    I found this which looks like it could be pretty interesting in terms of bringing together ideas about the uncanny as a peculiarly postmodern effect:

    http://www.uncanny-aesthetics.blogspot.co.uk/

    The point is I think there's gold to be mined in terms of investigating hyperrealism, hyperrealistic art, postmodernism and the uncanny - with Von Hagens in the mix (but not exclusively).

    ReplyDelete