[HN Gopher] 1922: The year that made modernism
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       1922: The year that made modernism
        
       Author : benbreen
       Score  : 39 points
       Date   : 2022-02-03 16:25 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.newstatesman.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.newstatesman.com)
        
       | DoreenMichele wrote:
       | I imagine it was deemed "obscene" for discussing things like the
       | inner thoughts of a man speculating that his wife was having an
       | affair. _Mrs. Dalloway_ was not only written by a woman and about
       | a woman, it in part describes her potentially romantic interest
       | in another woman in her youth.
        
       | TheSocialAndrew wrote:
       | > [Ulysses] was banned for "obscenity" in both Britain and the
       | US. In Britain, the director of public prosecutions Archibald
       | Bodkin read only the last section, Molly's monologue, and
       | confirmed that "there is a great deal of unmitigated filth and
       | obscenity". In 1922, 500 copies were seized by customs at
       | Folkestone and burned. Eventually, a 1932 court judgment in the
       | US allowed it to be published in the country.
       | 
       | 100 years later we're still fighting over what gets to be
       | published or broadcast.
        
         | imwillofficial wrote:
         | If you believe what you consume effects you, and those around
         | you, it is your duty to make sure those effects are positive.
         | Much like fighting pollution.
         | 
         | Look at how social media has driven inattentive behavior,
         | atomization of social ties, teen suicide, and cratering senses
         | of self esteem.
         | 
         | Maybe they were on to something.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | oh_sigh wrote:
           | The "unmitigated filth and obscenity" is a wife lying in bed
           | next to her husband, thinking back to when she first met and
           | fell in love with him.
        
           | mihaic wrote:
           | Huh, it's rare that I started reading this message in
           | disagreement, and while finishing it I ended up saying to
           | myself "Yeah, maybe they were on to something, could be."
           | Thanks, I guess.
        
           | throwaway42096 wrote:
           | (Throwaway because unpopular opinion, which is ironic given
           | the subject... and I make an honest plea to assume good faith
           | in what follows)
           | 
           | The story so far: In the beginning of the 20th century,
           | Modernism was created. This has made a lot of people very
           | happy and been widely regarded as a good move.
           | 
           | I'd argue that it has also caused a great deal of harm.
           | 
           | Lately I've been analyzing life (as in {people, their
           | actions, reality, fiction, ...}) through a simple filter: is
           | this creating or destroying something?
           | 
           | The thing is, creating is much harder than destroying. The
           | universe generally tends towards entropy, in the more
           | philosophical sense of a gradual increase in disorder.
           | 
           | Creation is the act of building order out of that disorder.
           | It's much easier to turn a glass into shards than the other
           | way around.
           | 
           | Modernism and a great deal of 20th century zeitgeist
           | (bleeding into the 21st century) was about breaking down
           | establish cultural and moral norms. I'd argue that is only a
           | net positive if that which you destroyed is replaced with a
           | new creation that is better than the previous status quo.
           | 
           | Yes, we should absolutely destroy e.g. laws that made same-
           | sex relationships illegal or disallowed same-sex marriages.
           | But the __reason__ for doing that is because we want to
           | replace them with something better: equal rights to people of
           | every gender _because_ liberty and life are the two absolute
           | most inalienable rights.
           | 
           | But maybe, I don't know, abolishing the value of marriage, at
           | least culturally if not legally, isn't a societal net
           | positive. Maybe people drunkenly fucking strangers until they
           | are 38 years old doesn't really lead to great outcomes. Maybe
           | not all aspects of "free love" create a net-better society.
           | 
           | Maybe post-modern art _is_ a  "lesser creation" (or "worse")
           | than "pre-modern" art. Just breaking existing standards,
           | paradigms, aesthetics isn't enough to elevate works to the
           | same level as old masters (or even above them, as some would
           | argue). Maybe Jeff Koons baloon animals really are shit.
           | 
           | Anyway, what are we _creating_ today? I live most days
           | thinking we 're so focused on destroying that we neglect the
           | value of beautiful, purposeful creation.
        
             | webmaven wrote:
             | _> The story so far: In the beginning of the 20th century,
             | Modernism was created. This has made a lot of people very
             | happy and been widely regarded as a good move._
             | 
             | Ah, a Douglas Adams fan. Well met!
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | http://web.archive.org/web/20220203164201/https://www.newsta...
       | 
       | https://archive.is/SzR44
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-02-05 23:01 UTC)