5 ms·

Mark Fisher describes the same thing, as not "the end of history" but the cancellation of the future based on observations that the Neoliberal political system

Mark Fisher describes the same thing, as not "the end of history" but the cancellation of the future based on observations that the Neoliberal political system has continued well past its serviceable life and that there seems to be nothing coming to replace it.

keiferski 6y ago
I've noticed this a lot with culture, particularly with television. At the moment, there seem to be an infinite number of shows that rehash the 1920s and the 1980s, as if we just jumped back a century, with 1920 being the present and 1980 being the future.
- Traster 6y ago
  I'm not sure that there's a deep cultural issue with this, I think there's a pragmatic issue. 99% of television drama can be replaced with a text message. It's incredibly difficult to tell a suspenseful story when everyone can communicate with everyone else instantly at any time. Can you imagine The Shining in 2020? The guy would be driven insane by browsing reddit. This is why it's very difficult to make modern TV programmes that have realistic phone use.
kfichter 6y ago
And the observation clearly placed a great weight on Fisher, Rest In Peace. Capitalist Realism is short, but very heavy. I highly recommend it to the HN community.
- 50 6y ago
  I just came across Mark Fisher this past year - his ideas are interesting. He reminds me of David Foster Wallace for some odd reason. Here's a few of my favorite excerpts from Fisher's Ghosts of My Life: Writings on Depression, Hauntology and Lost Futures: > Producing the new depends upon certain kinds of withdrawal — from, for instance, sociality as much as from pre-existing cultural forms — but the currently dominant form of socially networked cyberspace, with its endless opportunities for micro-contact and its deluge of YouTube links, has made withdrawal more difficult than ever before. Or, as Simon Reynolds so pithily put it, in recent years, everyday life has sped up, but culture has slowed down. > The most productive way of reading the ‘personal is political’ is to interpret it as saying: the personal is impersonal. It’s miserable for anyone at all to be themselves (still more, to be forced to sell themselves). Culture, and the analysis of culture, is valuable insofar as it allows an escape from ourselves. > Joy Division always sounded as if they had experienced one too many of those desolating voidings, so that they could no longer be lured back onto the merry-go-round. They knew that satiation wasn’t succeeded by tristesse, it was itself, immediately, tristesse. Satiation is the point at which you must face the existential revelation that you didn’t want really want what you seemed so desperate to have, that your most urgent desires are only a filthy vitalist trick to keep the show on the road. > To leaf through other people’s family photos, to see moments that were of intense emotional significance for them but which mean nothing to you, is, necessarily, to reflect on the times of high drama in your life, and to achieve a kind of distance that is at once dispassionate and powerfully affecting. That is why the - beautifully, painfully - dilated moment in Tarkovsky’s Stalker where the camera lingers over talismanic objects that were once saturated with meaning, but are now saturated only with water is for me the most moving scene in cinema. It is as if we are seeing the urgencies of our lives through the eyes of an Alien-God. Otto claims that the sense of the numinous is associated with feelings of our own fundamental worthlessness, experience with a ‘piercing acuteness [and] accompanied by the most uncompromissing judgement of self-depreciation’. But, contrary to today’s ego psychology, which hectors us into reinforcing our sense of self (all the better to ‘sell ourselves’), the awareness of our own Nothingness is of course a pre-requisite for a feeling of grace. There is a melancholy dimension to this grace precisely because it involves a radical distanciation from what is ordinarily most important to us. > [A]s Rudolf Otto establishes in The Idea of the Holy, encounters with angels are as disturbing, traumatic and overwhelming as encounters with demons. After all, what could be more shattering, unassimilable and incomprehensible in our hyper-stressed, constantly disappointing and overstimulated lives, than the sensation of calm joy? Otto, a conservative Christian, argued that all religious experience has its roots in what is initially misrecognized as ‘daemonic dread’; he saw encounters with ghosts, similarly, as a perverted version of what the Christian person would experience religiously. > Capital can never openly admit that it is a system based on inhuman rapacity; the Terminator can never remove its human mask.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> the Neoliberal political system has continued well past its serviceable life Neoliberalism isn't a political system, but an economic ideology. Neoliberalism, insofar as it is a distint viewpoint within the derivatives of classical liberalism, is a fairly recent reaction to post-classical-liberal economic ideologies, primarily (but not exclusively) those of the Left. The neoliberal consensus beginning to break down is even more recent, and, while its obviously unclear what will replace it (or if neoliberalism will be resurgent), I don't see how that would be the "cancellation of the future", only (potentially, assuming neoliberalism is not resurgent and finally triumphant) the end of the idea that neoliberalism itself was, economically, the end of history.
- thatcat 6y ago
  Why is the idea of futurism as an aesthetic reflected by ideas from 1985 instead of 2025?

keiferski 6y ago

I've noticed this a lot with culture, particularly with television. At the moment, there seem to be an infinite number of shows that rehash the 1920s and the 1980s, as if we just jumped back a century, with 1920 being the present and 1980 being the future.

Traster 6y ago
I'm not sure that there's a deep cultural issue with this, I think there's a pragmatic issue. 99% of television drama can be replaced with a text message. It's incredibly difficult to tell a suspenseful story when everyone can communicate with everyone else instantly at any time. Can you imagine The Shining in 2020? The guy would be driven insane by browsing reddit. This is why it's very difficult to make modern TV programmes that have realistic phone use.

kfichter 6y ago

And the observation clearly placed a great weight on Fisher, Rest In Peace. Capitalist Realism is short, but very heavy. I highly recommend it to the HN community.

50 6y ago
I just came across Mark Fisher this past year - his ideas are interesting. He reminds me of David Foster Wallace for some odd reason. Here's a few of my favorite excerpts from Fisher's Ghosts of My Life: Writings on Depression, Hauntology and Lost Futures: > Producing the new depends upon certain kinds of withdrawal — from, for instance, sociality as much as from pre-existing cultural forms — but the currently dominant form of socially networked cyberspace, with its endless opportunities for micro-contact and its deluge of YouTube links, has made withdrawal more difficult than ever before. Or, as Simon Reynolds so pithily put it, in recent years, everyday life has sped up, but culture has slowed down. > The most productive way of reading the ‘personal is political’ is to interpret it as saying: the personal is impersonal. It’s miserable for anyone at all to be themselves (still more, to be forced to sell themselves). Culture, and the analysis of culture, is valuable insofar as it allows an escape from ourselves. > Joy Division always sounded as if they had experienced one too many of those desolating voidings, so that they could no longer be lured back onto the merry-go-round. They knew that satiation wasn’t succeeded by tristesse, it was itself, immediately, tristesse. Satiation is the point at which you must face the existential revelation that you didn’t want really want what you seemed so desperate to have, that your most urgent desires are only a filthy vitalist trick to keep the show on the road. > To leaf through other people’s family photos, to see moments that were of intense emotional significance for them but which mean nothing to you, is, necessarily, to reflect on the times of high drama in your life, and to achieve a kind of distance that is at once dispassionate and powerfully affecting. That is why the - beautifully, painfully - dilated moment in Tarkovsky’s Stalker where the camera lingers over talismanic objects that were once saturated with meaning, but are now saturated only with water is for me the most moving scene in cinema. It is as if we are seeing the urgencies of our lives through the eyes of an Alien-God. Otto claims that the sense of the numinous is associated with feelings of our own fundamental worthlessness, experience with a ‘piercing acuteness [and] accompanied by the most uncompromissing judgement of self-depreciation’. But, contrary to today’s ego psychology, which hectors us into reinforcing our sense of self (all the better to ‘sell ourselves’), the awareness of our own Nothingness is of course a pre-requisite for a feeling of grace. There is a melancholy dimension to this grace precisely because it involves a radical distanciation from what is ordinarily most important to us. > [A]s Rudolf Otto establishes in The Idea of the Holy, encounters with angels are as disturbing, traumatic and overwhelming as encounters with demons. After all, what could be more shattering, unassimilable and incomprehensible in our hyper-stressed, constantly disappointing and overstimulated lives, than the sensation of calm joy? Otto, a conservative Christian, argued that all religious experience has its roots in what is initially misrecognized as ‘daemonic dread’; he saw encounters with ghosts, similarly, as a perverted version of what the Christian person would experience religiously. > Capital can never openly admit that it is a system based on inhuman rapacity; the Terminator can never remove its human mask.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> the Neoliberal political system has continued well past its serviceable life Neoliberalism isn't a political system, but an economic ideology. Neoliberalism, insofar as it is a distint viewpoint within the derivatives of classical liberalism, is a fairly recent reaction to post-classical-liberal economic ideologies, primarily (but not exclusively) those of the Left. The neoliberal consensus beginning to break down is even more recent, and, while its obviously unclear what will replace it (or if neoliberalism will be resurgent), I don't see how that would be the "cancellation of the future", only (potentially, assuming neoliberalism is not resurgent and finally triumphant) the end of the idea that neoliberalism itself was, economically, the end of history.

thatcat 6y ago
Why is the idea of futurism as an aesthetic reflected by ideas from 1985 instead of 2025?