Being present-date does not mean being new in a citational culture
Evidence
But this is entirely to miss the point of Jameson’s critique of the nostalgia mode. For Jameson, the nostalgia mode is exemplified by cultural artefacts which deny, or more radically, are unaware of their own total debt to the past. In other words, being contemporary does not guarantee being modern, especially not in a postmodern culture whose temporality is obsessively citational and commemorational. One of the most idiotic tics in cultural gatekeeping today is its need to justify the past in terms of the present: as if Gang of Four were only significant because they “influenced” no-mark, here-today boot-sale-tomorrow clones like Bloc Party and Franz Ferdinand. As if simply being here, now, meant that something New and Important is happening… — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 1021
Categorization
- XREF: Ties ch34’s claim that ‘futures are increasingly represented in the forms of the past’ to a specific critical error committed by gatekeepers who validate old art via present influence. — connects to: Archaic language in devotional texts can mislead historical dating — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 406; Tradition is about how elements are articulated, not about persistence of old forms — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 1017; Discursive formations like Orientalism preserve identifiable influence of individual authors through citation (+1 more)
Broader Connections
- Direct quotation of past genres can feel contemporary rather than retro
#corroborates(0.90) — W. David Marx, Blank Space, 379 - Archaic language in devotional texts can mislead historical dating
#qualifies(0.85) — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 406 - Tradition is about how elements are articulated, not about persistence of old forms
#expands(0.80) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 1017 - Discursive formations like Orientalism preserve identifiable influence of individual authors through citation
#expands(0.75)