Modernity, Sloterdijk and Private Semiologies

According to Sloterdijk, the contemporary age is an age of foam, i.e., a multiplicity of people, who rub up against each other with their own private semiologies. The metaphysical age was a bubble, i.e., God as the transcendent signified, who encased the Earth, like a dome. This divine macro-sphere provided a psychological immunization to the Lacanian ’ real '. But now, since all the grand meta-narratives and transcendent signifieds have been deconstructed, in the contemporary age, we are in a state of existential nakedness, exposed to the Lacanian ’ real '. The grand bubble has popped and now what remains is foam, the multiplicity of semio-spheres, which contain their own idiosyncratic logic and meaning. Understanding this macro/micro symbolism is conducive to the understanding of contemporary art. Much of modern art is extremely perplexing and ambiguous, even absurd - it isn’t confluent with the metaphysical grand narratives and transcendent signifieds. The deconstruction of the transcendent signified has allowed room for play, as Derrida would say - the signifiers can now play around and create their own semiologies. Once you understand the personal bubble of the contemporary artist, his logic and meaning, you can begin to become part of his semio-sphere.

amazon.com/Bubbles-Spheres-M … 1584351047

This is really not much more than mental masturbation, this psychobabble using
all these big words and meaning nothing.
Einstein said it best, only those who truly understand a matter
can make it simple enough for everyone to understand.

Kropotkin

Check the book out; it’s replete with interesting new ways to look at things. Don’t let my prose discourage you.

-Erik

Kropotkin: This is what i was trying to say in the Marx forum also. Before artists used to paint realistically, beliefing in ideal forms such as God, determinism, there was no abstaction, disassocation , there was no modern art to speak of , nowadays there are only private spheres, and where the private globus only represents within the many. (Where there is no comparison, there is no meaning) The deconstruction this dis-associative objective narrative, created the private narratives.

Orb, are you familiar with this work of Sloterdijk?

Not really, but most of the moderns follow a similar line using pretty much similar analysis. But i will try to familiarize myself with it, will be interesting how it corresponds with the others’.

Bubbles/Spheres is a trilogy - consists of three parts, each of which is very dense, but jam-packed with innovative perceptions. There are copious amounts of reviews on the book ( the first one ), which give distillations and explanations of the technical jargon. Def. recommend this.

Thanks, Erik will look into it

You’re welcome, buddy. Happy hunting.

In this last phase man is closest to non existence. The next phases artist has to re introduce the primordial pathos of self valuing, which is negated by postmodernism, was miniaturized during the metaphysical age but unrestrained in the premetaphysical age. The agonizingly clearly understood relativity of Achilles’ perspective was the cause of its absolute consequences.

The modern thinks that his standard is already in compliance with the absolute and his consequence is nil. Belief in the one god has been internalized.

The coming age will wash all postmodernism and “monadologue art” away. It is the age of trauma, rupture, in which art must be majestic and universal to survice.

Postmodernism is a degenerate impulse towards chaos, or fragmentation - a will to deconstruct, to tear down the strata, not for the sake of reconstruction, but for chaos in itself - chaos as the telos par excellence.

I think the coming age will be a revival of the golden; the masses will be thirsty for order and true nobility. The vicissitudes of ethoses are like seasons.

In Spheres, Sloterdijk brings forth the concept of the “placental-double” or " the With ", which is the essential dyadic relationship of the primordial sphere within the mother, i.e., when you were in the mother’s womb, your double, or alter ego, was the placenta - which provided you with comfort and nourishment. This primordial dyadic relationship continues to haunt the human throughout the course of his life - he seeks to re-construct the conditions of the mother’s womb, albeit unconsciously.

Interfacial Spheres:

Negative Gynecology:

What he said ^
Bunch of incoherent words, mixed with too fanciness.

This isn’t philosophy, please move it to somewhere else.