What makes avant-garde avant-garde?

[David Morris]

I think the problem is that innovation/invention do not necessarily denote a
"movement" or "revolution" which was a very conscious aspect of the French and
Russian Avant Gardes.  It has something to do with the defiance of an accepted
mode, and as such takes on the camaraderie of an army with its own acceptable
non-conformity (which really is funny because it creates its own new
conformity).  This is very different than a "zeitgeist" which is usually only
recognizable after it has become a common mode, but begins with a "new"
aesthetic.  Some would argue that the present zeitgeist is "Postmodernism"
which is by no means a "movement."

David Morris

--- "Vincent A. Maeder" <vmaeder at cyhc-law.com> wrote:
> Malignd wrote >I think the term is meaningless, a perhaps once-useful term
that no longer has currency except in historic terms; e.g., in speaking of what
was once considered avant-garde.<
> 
> The concept of invention, evolution and revolution in art and literature
still has purpose.  Perhaps it is difficult to parse such changes until after
the events have occurred.  For the sake of argument, assume we can recognize
significant and important innovation in literature; what would it look like? 
Unless it's one of those, "I know it when I see it" thingies...
> 
> I would hazard to say that if such a concept "seems now precious, even
ludicrous" that we are saying literature is dead; or at least in code awaiting
the defibrillation of genius.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com