The Future of History...."...'Modern' has become vague and abstract, to the extent that its various meanings were now confusing*....*"Had the Modern Age not begun five hundred years ago, succeeding the Middle Ages? What was, and is, 'modern' art or design? - something created after 1890?....What was (and is) 'postmodern' (a word beginning to appear after 1970)? And the much touted sexual and 'cultural' revolutions in the 1960s were hardly anything but repetitions of the modernity of the 1920."

Originally Posted by TimWalker

The Future of History...."...'Modern' has become vague and abstract, to the extent that its various meanings were now confusing*....*"Had the Modern Age not begun five hundred years ago, succeeding the Middle Ages? What was, and is, 'modern' art or design? - something created after 1890?....What was (and is) 'postmodern' (a word beginning to appear after 1970)? And the much touted sexual and 'cultural' revolutions in the 1960s were hardly anything but repetitions of the modernity of the 1920."

Tim, I wish I could answer this but I have the same exact questions and look forward to a good discussion with insight from some one. I mean what happens after post modernism (society and art) Post post modernism??? I wish we created a better term.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

The Future of History...."...'Modern' has become vague and abstract, to the extent that its various meanings were now confusing*....*"Had the Modern Age not begun five hundred years ago, succeeding the Middle Ages? What was, and is, 'modern' art or design? - something created after 1890?....What was (and is) 'postmodern' (a word beginning to appear after 1970)? And the much touted sexual and 'cultural' revolutions in the 1960s were hardly anything but repetitions of the modernity of the 1920."

Well, the linguists refer to Early Modern English, 1500-1800, and Late Modern English, 1800-present. I tend to disagree and cut "present" off at 1970, after which it's "Postmodern English." Professor Damico found that amusing, I think, if clever and original.

But I agree: "modern" in the sense of art, music, and literature began around 1890 and "postmodern" in that sense around 1970. But I've said repeatedly that the Twentieth Century --- here defined as 1890-1970 -- was a transition period between the Modern (i.e. post-Medieval) culture and world, and the one we're living in now.

And I also agree about the 60-on being a repeat of the 20s. I was watching the DVD of "Murder Must Advertise" last week, and the bad girl Dian de Mormerie would fit into the Madonna/Paris Hilton world so easily! In fact, she was like a blast from the recent past, not the past of 80 years ago.

Book - copyright 2006. The Last Days of the Renaissance ~*~ & the March to Modernity by Theodore K. Rabb.From the blurb:"The Renaissance may have emerged out of the upheavals of the fourteenth century - but when did it end?...In the second half of the seventeenth century, a sea change swept over Europe. The dominant commitments of the preceding centuries were eroding, and a new outlook was emerging from an age of conflict and uncertainty. The ancient world no longer held the European imagination in thrall. Rulers across the continent consolidated political power, asserting control over territories that long had relished their independence. Religion began to lose ground to reason as a model for human inquiry. And both the attitude to war and the belief in the supernatural passed crucial divides. As these vast transformations unfolded, the Renaissance gave way to the Age of Revolution."

The Last Days of the Renaissance...."...the periodization I propose addresses four distinct and coherent patterns that have ruled the West in succession: during the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Age of Revolution, and (still in formation) Modernity. by seeing how these patterns crystallized and then dissolved...we will move, in four large steps, from the time of Charlemagne to the present.

The Last Days of the Renaissance...."...the periodization I propose addresses four distinct and coherent patterns that have ruled the West in succession: during the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Age of Revolution, and (still in formation) Modernity. by seeing how these patterns crystallized and then dissolved...we will move, in four large steps, from the time of Charlemagne to the present.

Last Days...."The new ambitions that Europeans began to pursue in the years around 1700 have often been summed up as the 'Enlightenment project,' which encompassed two quests: one for control over nature and the other for a larger degree of social equality. Both of these goals were indeed preoccupations of the period. But they were merely part of a larger enterprise that, though sometimes associated with a notion of modernity, deserves a more descriptive label. When looked at as a totality, the years from around 1700 to around 1900 are best thought of as an era of Revolution."...an era quite distinct from the Renaissance. This was a society that was heading in new directions: it had shaken off the reverence for antiquity; it had raised doubts about the glory of war; it had limited the authority of the supernatural; and it had resolved difficult struggles over centralized political authority and the role of the Church."The wave of Revolution that had now engulfed Europe had six major components; between them they shaped the age:* Political revolution* Industrial revolution* Communications revolution* Social revolution* Revolution in global relations* Cultural revolution"If the past is any guide...it will eventually become clear how the world wishes to move forward, and the coherences of the age will take shape anew...."

westernciv forum

Any ideas as to how society may be reconstituted?

Western Civilization has been drumming along just fine since the time of Plato, many argue since Babylon itself. Which by my calculations is either 3 or 7 thousand years. Why do you think it is going to end? If anything it has spread and dominated Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. We are now seeing a up and coming Chines and Indian version of Western Civilization. If anything it is on course to dominate the worlds Civilizations.

Originally Posted by Attila

Western Civilization has been drumming along just fine since the time of Plato, many argue since Babylon itself. Which by my calculations is either 3 or 7 thousand years. Why do you think it is going to end? If anything it has spread and dominated Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. We are now seeing a up and coming Chines and Indian version of Western Civilization. If anything it is on course to dominate the worlds Civilizations.

Dominate or infiltrate? I suspect the latter.

Digital media/technologies have been discussed in other threads. According to Dent, we may expect these to mature during the next 1T, maximizing their social impact.

We are heading for our Catalaunian Fields. I hope we win again.

Babylon Mesopotamia and the Birth of Civilization by Paul Kriwaczek. "Most cultures either look forward to the future or look back towards the past. Rarely both. When the future is bright, when what is yet to come seems most exciting, history is usually left to fend for itself...By contrast, times that are obsessed with maintaining the past, with conservation and preservation, with genealogy, with investigating and unearthing prehistory, are usually those, like ours now, whose future looks uncertain, even threatening."

Babylon continued.... "...we also live towards the end of an era. Many features of our own times are strongly reminiscent of the last centuries of Assyrian and neo-Babylonic rule. Our society too shows distinct signs of a loss of confidence in the future: an obsession with the past, an all-consuming zeal for preservation and conservation, a passion for museum culture, for genealogy and history...."

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Babylon continued.... "...we also live towards the end of an era. Many features of our own times are strongly reminiscent of the last centuries of Assyrian and neo-Babylonic rule. Our society too shows distinct signs of a loss of confidence in the future: an obsession with the past, an all-consuming zeal for preservation and conservation, a passion for museum culture, for genealogy and history...."

You have a point. What always bothers me is this PBS announcement: "this program is supported by the National Endowment for the Arts. Because a great nation deserves great art." The program usually turns out to be some performance of a work created decades ago, not an original; or some performance from merely popular culture. We don't see and hear original music or art that moves the soul and spirit.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

You have a point. What always bothers me is this PBS announcement: "this program is supported by the National Endowment for the Arts. Because a great nation deserves great art." The program usually turns out to be some performance of a work created decades ago, not an original; or some performance from merely popular culture. We don't see and hear original music or art that moves the soul and spirit.

Presume you also watch KQED/KTEH. The best stuff on there in terms of new material, I find, are the Euro and handful of American short films they sometimes run.

With regards to the west, this pertains mostly to america, the anglosphere and our closer aligned nations (much less so the eu countries). The 20th and early 21st century of american and anglophone history in my opinon bears a very strong resemblence to 13th century france. Barbara Tuchman was partially wrong to compare the 14th century to the twentienth, when the twentienth century far more resembled the late 12th and later the 13th century much more. The 21st century will likely resemble the 14th century with the 22nd resembling the 15th. America's history of the next centuries will have many similarities with the history of france from roughly 1300 to 1550. Even the reactionaries who want to dismantle the government as we know have their parrellel with the french barons of the 13th through early 16th centuries who wanted to undo the reign of philip augustus.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

With regards to the west, this pertains mostly to america, the anglosphere and our closer aligned nations (much less so the eu countries). The 20th and early 21st century of american and anglophone history in my opinon bears a very strong resemblence to 13th century france. Barbara Tuchman was partially wrong to compare the 14th century to the twentienth, when the twentienth century far more resembled the late 12th and later the 13th century much more. The 21st century will likely resemble the 14th century with the 22nd resembling the 15th. America's history of the next centuries will have many similarities with the history of france from roughly 1300 to 1550. Even the reactionaries who want to dismantle the government as we know have their parrellel with the french barons of the 13th through early 16th centuries who wanted to undo the reign of philip augustus.

Cynic Hero is wrong; Tuchman is right. The 14th/15th is parallel to the 19th/20th. The cycle is 500 years long, not 700.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

Presume you also watch KQED/KTEH. The best stuff on there in terms of new material, I find, are the Euro and handful of American short films they sometimes run.

I watch those stations, yes, but the "great art" I am interested in is art and music, not film; the films may be good, but they bore me. You may not agree, but movies in general don't seem to me worthy of the title of art; at least not if that's all that is presented as art. Occasionally the Spark program has some good artists featured. Most, though, are not in touch with the real creative spirit of our times. The older styles of modern art have mostly run their course; we need to feature the inspired artists and new styles that are out there now. I think that should include the new age and psychedelic. Beyond that, besides news and current affairs, I myself tend to favor the history and travel programs, being stuck in the past myself. Since the stations don't present the great art of today, at least I can see what people in Europe and Asia did centuries ago.

What would make people look towards the future? I have considered the space program. Some people seem to imply that new media are the future. I have to wonder if we might end up with a society that looks both forward and backwards...as rare as that might be.

I think this mired in the past orientation we're is specifically indicative of a growing desire to establish a somewhat permanent archive of our cultural and scientific accomplishments. I think when we're convinced that we're as safe as we can be from significant data loss (significant data being scientific and technological information, artistic works, and a truthful account of our history as we know it), we'll move forward.

I think there's a general sense that this time we occupy is the end of a chapter in our history, wether or not that is true, it does need to be addressed directly.

Originally Posted by Kepi

I think this mired in the past orientation we're is specifically indicative of a growing desire to establish a somewhat permanent archive of our cultural and scientific accomplishments. I think when we're convinced that we're as safe as we can be from significant data loss (significant data being scientific and technological information, artistic works, and a truthful account of our history as we know it), we'll move forward.

I think there's a general sense that this time we occupy is the end of a chapter in our history, wether or not that is true, it does need to be addressed directly.

There are cycles and there are cycles. I suspect that 20 Saecula make up a 1600 year cycle of cycles. I think we are nearing the end of such a 1600 year cycle.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

There are cycles and there are cycles. I suspect that 20 Saecula make up a 1600 year cycle of cycles. I think we are nearing the end of such a 1600 year cycle.

Could be, but we have no real way to verify such long term cycles. Even 250 and 500 year cycles are murky and muddy affairs. I have no doubt there are other cycles, but their identity is obscure at best because of how we document or history. We could be passing a point where all major cycles are converging at one major tipping point, how would we know? There could be a 50,000 year cycle that wrapped up yesterday and there's just no way to tell.

Originally Posted by Kepi

I think this mired in the past orientation we're is specifically indicative of a growing desire to establish a somewhat permanent archive of our cultural and scientific accomplishments. I think when we're convinced that we're as safe as we can be from significant data loss (significant data being scientific and technological information, artistic works, and a truthful account of our history as we know it), we'll move forward.

What? At a time when we have by far the most recording of data, culture and science of any time in history?

We are overflowing with databases and archives, and have a significant deficit in creativity and in exposure of what creativity exists.

Although the data does not give a complete picture, the evidence for the 500-year cycle is quite clear. What it means for our time though, people seem confused about. With every cycle now merging into a new world culture, in which significant trends get lost in the crowd and buried by corporate media, it's no wonder people are confused. The one thing that seems clear, is that the 20th century, the start of a new 500-year cycle, marks a significant departure-- the world culture and civilization itself as predominant, and the consequent end of all national empires.