Ideas of a man,time and space in modernism

CHAPTER 2. MODERNIST TRENDS IN ART
Thus, the ambiguity and limitation of the description of the world by means of mathematics was shown, that it is possible for mathematical systems to represent only certain aspects and slices of the world, mathematically the world can only be reflected using various, including conflicting, means.

The current state of science, culture and society as a whole in the 1970s was characterized by J. F. Lyotard as a “postmodern state”. To fix the mental specifics of the new era, which was radically different from the previous one, the term “postmodernism” began to be used.

The term itself appears during the First World War (at the height of the decadent trends) in the work of R. Panwitz "The Crisis of European Culture" (1917). In 1934, in his book An Anthology of Spanish and Latin American Poetry, the literary critic F. de Onis uses it to denote a reaction to modernism. In 1947, Arnold Toynbee in his book "Comprehension of History" gives postmodernism a cultural meaning: postmodernism symbolizes the end of Western domination in religion and culture[ 8].
Fiedler's 1969 article , "Cross the Border, Fill in the Ditches", defiantly published in Playboy magazine. The American theologian Harvey Cox, in his works of the early 1970s on the problems of religion in Latin America, widely uses the concept of "postmodern theology". However, the term "postmodernism" gained popularity thanks to Charles Jenks . In the book The Language of Postmodern Architecture, he noted that although the word itself was used in American literary criticism in the 1960s and 1970s to refer to ultramodernist literary experiments, the author gave it a fundamentally different meaning[ 9].
Postmodernism meant a departure from the extremism and nihilism of the neo-avant-garde, a partial return to traditions, and an emphasis on the communicative role of architecture. Justifying his anti-rationalism , anti-functionalism and anti-constructivism in his approach to architecture, Jencks insisted on the primacy in it of creating an aestheticized artifact[ 8]. Subsequently, the content of this concept is expanded from an initially narrow definition of new trends in American architecture and a new trend in French philosophy ( Lacan , Jacques, J. Derrida, J.-F. Lyotard , Foucault, Michel) to a definition covering those that began in 1960-1970 years, processes in all areas of culture, including the feminist and anti-racist movements[10]. In the 1990s, post-modern feminism emerged from post-structuralism, post-modernism, and French feminism.
Basic interpretations of the concept
The section lacks references to sources (see search recommendations).
The information must be verifiable, otherwise it may be deleted. You can edit the article by adding references to authoritative sources in the form of footnotes. (December 29, 2018)
Currently, there are a number of concepts of postmodernism as a phenomenon of culture, which are sometimes mutually exclusive [ 11]:

Jurgen Habermas, Daniel Bell and Zygmunt Bauman interpret postmodernism as the result of the policy and ideology of neoconservatism, which is characterized by aesthetic eclecticism, the fetishization of consumer goods and other distinctive features of a postindustrial society.

In the interpretation of Umberto Eco, postmodernism in a broad sense is a mechanism for changing one cultural era by another, which every time replaces avant-garde (modernism) (“Postmodernism is the answer to modernism: since the past cannot be destroyed, because its destruction leads to dumbness, it must be rethink, ironically, without naivete")[12]
Postmodernism is a common cultural denominator of the second half of the 20th century, a unique period based on a specific paradigm setting for the perception of the world as chaos - “postmodern sensitivity” ( Hassan , 1980; Welsch , 1988, J.-F. Lyotard ).
Postmodernism is an independent trend in art (artistic style), which means a radical break with the paradigm of modernism (G. Hoffman, R. Kunov).
According to X. Leten and S. Suleimen , postmodernism as an integral artistic phenomenon does not exist. One can speak of it as a reassessment of the postulates of modernism, but the postmodernist reaction itself is regarded by them as a myth.
Postmodernism is an era that replaced the European New Age, one of the characteristic features of which was the belief in progress and the omnipotence of reason. The breakdown of the value system of modern times (modernity) occurred during the First World War. As a result, the Eurocentric world view has given way to global polycentrism (H. Küng ), the modernist belief in reason has given way to interpretive thinking (R. Tarnas [ en ]).
The difference between postmodernism and modernism
The section lacks references to sources (see search recommendations).
The information must be verifiable, otherwise it may be deleted. You can edit the article by adding references to authoritative sources in the form of footnotes. (December 29, 2018)
Arising as an antithesis to modernism, open to understanding only by a few[ 13], postmodernism, dressing everything in a game form, levels the distance between the mass and elite consumer, reducing the elite to the masses (glamour).
Modernism is an extremist denial of the Modern world (with its positivism and scientism), and postmodernism is a non-extremist denial of the same Modern [source?].
The difference between postmodernism and modernism is as follows[ 14]: in the philosophy of postmodernism, its rapprochement is noted not with science, but with art. Thus, philosophical thought finds itself not only in the zone of marginality in relation to science, but also in a state of individualistic chaos of concepts, approaches, types of reflection, which is also observed in the artistic culture of the late 20th century. In philosophy, as well as in culture as a whole, there are mechanisms of deconstruction that lead to the disintegration of philosophical systemicity, philosophical concepts are moving closer to “literary discussions” and “linguistic games”, “non-rigorous thinking” prevails. A “new philosophy” is declared, which “in principle denies the possibility of reliability and objectivity…, such concepts as ‘fairness’ or ‘rightness’ lose their meaning …”[ 10]. Therefore, postmodernism is defined as a marginal kitsch philosophical discourse with a characteristic anti-rationality .
Epistemological crisis and the doctrine of constructivism as the basis of postmodernism
As Tsendrovsky O. Yu. notes, “the content of the postmodern worldview that has taken shape is predominantly critical and negative, it “does not so much create“ new knowledge ”as it sows doubts about the validity of“ old knowledge ”". And this is inevitable, since postmodernism originates in post-structuralist thinkers , whose philosophy has become both the basis and expression of the postmodern worldview, postulate the impossibility of objective knowledge and the absence of criteria for reliability; they establish the "principle of" methodological doubt "in relation to all positive truths, attitudes and beliefs" The legitimacy of the ideals of modernity, its authorities and shrines are denounced in their internal irrationality, groundlessness and destructiveness Progress, truth, meaning, order, a just society, in general, the entire Western “logocentric tradition”, as defined by Jacques Derrida, is declared to be a set of ideologies and myths "[15].
World as text
In the postmodern picture of the world, which is constructivist from the point of view of the theory of knowledge, the sign (including the verbal one, that is, the concept and the text as a system of signs) “loses its referential functions” [ 15], the functions of reflecting reality. This is said to be fundamentally impossible. What is left in this case? Only other signs and other texts. Thus, the true content of any discourse is only other discourses, a concept consists of concepts, a sign consists of signs, a text consists of texts, they have no connection with reality. The whole world, including ourselves, our self-image, is just a text, complex semiotic systems. The classical definition of this situation is given by J. Derrida: “Nothing exists outside the text”, culture, history, personality - everything has a textual nature[ 16].
The collapse of metanarratives and big projects
As Lyotard and Z. Bauman emphasize, the most important feature of traditional and industrial societies was the dominance of ideologies in them that united people and set them great distant goals, in a word, it was the era of “big projects” and universal languages ( metanarratives ) describing them, for example, metanarrative Platonism, Christianity, New European rationalism and the Enlightenment. “Today,” writes Lyotard , “we are witnessing the fragmentation, splitting of “great stories” and the emergence of many simpler, smaller, local “stories-stories ” [ 17]” meta-narratives as suppressing thinking and legitimizing power entered the flesh of a new picture of the world.In a word, we are talking about the collapse of "big projects", including social ones, such as Kant's global liberalism, and then fascism and communism "[15].
The "death" of God, the "death" of the subject, the "death" of the author
The “death” of God, which has been slowly trying to be realized for more than one century, is supplemented in postmodernism by the realization that as soon as the world is a text, a person is a text, then there can be no question of human freedom. Our actions are determined by the textual, cultural composition of our "I", we are the sum of inherited patterns of behavior and ways of perceiving reality. To no lesser extent, this also applies to the author, who creates not from himself, not from his own subjectivity only, but on behalf of the entire vast collection of texts that goes back to the depths of centuries. Thus, postmodernism not only reduced religions and stories about God to specific control-oriented texts, but also “put forward the concept of the impossibility of the existence of an autonomous, sovereign individual and rethought creativity as a hidden citation and recombination of what has already been written”[15 ] .
An alternative characterization of postmodern philosophy
In the philosophy of postmodernism, its rapprochement is noted not with science, but with art. Thus, philosophical thought finds itself not only in the zone of marginality in relation to classical science, but also in a state of individualistic chaos of concepts, approaches, types of reflection, which is also observed in the artistic culture of the late 20th century. In philosophy, as well as in culture as a whole, there are deconstruction mechanisms that lead to the disintegration of philosophical systemicity, philosophical concepts are moving closer to “literary discussions” and “linguistic games”, “non-rigorous thinking” prevails[ 18 ] .
Postmodern philosophy with its disjunctiveness , the denial of any total discourse and the recognition of the relativity of any values becomes the basis of a fundamentally new, non-classical stage in the development of science, which researchers associate with the realization of the illusory nature of ideas about the unlimited possibilities of science, the recognition of the incompleteness of any discourse, including scientific, essential the role of implicit knowledge in the functioning of science, relativity and the fundamental irreducibility of the subject from the results of scientific knowledge, the responsibility of scientists for decisions made[19].

The positive aspect of postmodernism is that the fundamental openness to the dialogue of postmodern philosophy and science contributes to the formation of new sciences and scientific areas that synthesize and combine previously completely unrelated areas of knowledge, such as: quantum mechanics, K. Godel's theorems, cosmology, synergetics , ecology, global studies , artificial intelligence, etc. [ 20]

2.1. Criticism
Recognition of the conventional, contractual nature of norms, principles and values, the denial of a priori attitudes makes possible the utmost openness of postmodern philosophy, readiness for an equal dialogue with any cultures, structures, forms and norms that exist in any spatio-temporal period of history . The phenomenon of recognition in postmodernism of the significance and equality of other, non-Western cultures was called " recognition "[ 21]
The negative aspect of postmodern philosophy finds its expression in the fact that a “new philosophy” is declared, which “in principle denies the possibility of reliability and objectivity…, such concepts as ‘justice’ or ‘rightness’ lose their a priori meaning…”[22 ] . Therefore, postmodernism is defined as a marginal kitsch philosophical discourse with a characteristic anti-rationality [ 23].
Thus, as if illustrating the Hegelian understanding of dialectics as the law of development, the great achievements of culture turn into their opposite. Declaring the state of alienation and loss of value orientations in modern society, postmodernist theorists differ in assessing the significance of this phenomenon[ 24].
On the one hand, it is argued that "eternal values" are totalitarian and paranoid idefixes that hinder creative realization. The true ideal of postmodernists is chaos, called Deleuze chaosmosom , the initial state of disorder, the state of unfettered possibilities. Two principles reign in the world: the schizoid principle of creative development and the paranoid principle of a suffocating order[ 25].
On the other hand, representatives of the apocalyptic approach (Jean Baudrillard) sharply negatively assess the process of devaluation of "eternal values" and argue that the loss of value values occurs as a result of a gap between the sign and its object, when the sign turns into an independent object, which, through a long series of self-copying, completely breaks away from the reality that it is intended to designate and forms a virtual reality that has nothing to do with true reality. The personality is gradually losing its uniqueness, "its own face", becoming a unified element of a meaningless kaleidoscope of masks, becoming an object among objects. According to Baudrillard, only external forces, world catastrophes, which are able to “reason” a person, can instruct the true path of humanity[ 24].

Baudrillard identifies the following signs of processes of alienation in the semantic sphere of society:

the formation (including through the media) of virtual reality, almost independent of the true reality and arbitrarily constructing the meaning of certain events;
separation of the signified from the signifier;
devaluation of values and norms;
uncontrollability and catastrophic consequences of scientific and technological progress for a person[ 20].
At the same time, critics of the apocalyptic approach find Baudrillard's concept unscientific.
The irreconcilable antagonist of Baudrillard's concept is the position of Michel Foucault. Devoting his work to the criticism of total discourses in all spheres of life, M. Foucault puts forward the concept of “self-care” or “self-salvation” as a concept of human self-realization in conditions of total dictate and alienation[ 26].
Foucault believes that the totality of “eternal values” and their rootedness in not always conscious discourses of knowledge that set the “parameters”, “field of possibilities” for perceiving the world and alienating a person from the true world, should not serve as an excuse for a person’s obedience to forces alien to him, “transition to side of the object”, in terms of J. Baudrillard, as well as justifying the “total deconstruction” of these values ( Deleuze’s concept )[21].
In an effort to avoid the extremes of the concepts of Deleuze and Baudrillard, Foucault does not call for a complete denial of "eternal values" and discursive practices in which they are rooted as hostile to human essence, but suggests that they be considered certain "reference points", "points of departure" that allow a person, having built own personal program, go beyond the thesaurus of the dominant discourse and overcome alienation from the world, revealing the true meaning of "eternal values" by revealing the true meaning of one's own existence, self-realization based on internal principles and axioms crystallized from personal life experience and based on the true laws of physical and spiritual development[21].
Criticizing his early works, including radical interpretations of the concept of episteme , Foucault puts forward a seditious assertion for postmodernists about the non-randomness and historical continuity of discursive practices as a general movement, the cumulative result of personal efforts for self-transformation , self-salvation, allowing the individual to expand his consciousness and go beyond a certain spatial -temporal discourse, discovering opportunities for self-realization and self-salvation that are impossible in the original discourse. In this context, historical continuity acts as a baton of personal efforts to overcome social and cultural conditioning, transform discourse in the direction of greater freedom and pluralism of opportunities for self-realization of the individual[ 20].
“Caring for oneself” for Foucault appears as taking care of oneself in a projective aspect: about oneself, “what I want to be”. The dignity of life, according to Foucault, is to think correctly, to overcome social and historical conditioning, to make a feasible contribution to the common life of people, to make oneself a kind of work of art. Work on oneself is carried out through practices that constitute a person, his moral behavior. Foucault calls these practices "techniques of the self" - they "allow individuals to carry out a certain number of operations on their body, soul, thoughts and behavior, and at the same time in such a way as to produce in themselves some transformation, change and achieve a certain state of perfection, happiness, purity, supernatural power[ 24].

2.2. See also

Foucault, on the contrary, calls for "remembering Baudrillard", considering Baudrillard's apocalyptic approach as a real alternative to "taking care of oneself", a scenario in the case of a person's inability to decide on personal transformation and the creation of their own unique personality as a work of art[24].
Postmodernists assert the idea of "death of the author", following Foucault and Barthes. Any semblance of order needs immediate deconstruction - the liberation of meaning, by inverting the basic ideological concepts that permeate the entire culture[ 27].
The philosophy of postmodern art does not imply any agreement between concepts, where each philosophical discourse has the right to exist and where war is declared against the totalitarianism of any discourse. Thus, the transgression of postmodernism is carried out as a transition to new ideologies at the present stage[ 28].
Researchers of postmodern philosophy and art believe that the ideologization of contemporary art, the loss of its boundaries, the devaluation of principles and values, the control of art by the global administrative network, and, on the other hand, involvement in the system of virtual reality, divorced from true reality, puts under the question is the very existence of art as an independent sphere of life with its own principles, norms and values[26].
Comparing classical and postmodern aesthetics, Baudrillard comes to the conclusion about their fundamental differences. The foundation of classical aesthetics as a philosophy of beauty is education, a reflection of reality, deep authenticity, transcendence, a hierarchy of values, a maximum of differences, the subject as a source of creative imagination. Postmodernism, or the aesthetics of the simulacrum, is distinguished by artificiality, anti-hierarchy , superficiality and the absence of deep meaning. At its center is the object, not the subject, the excess of copying, and not the uniqueness of the original[ 24].

The source of the process of turning a symbol into an independent object, from the point of view of Baudrillard, is the tradition of subject-object dichotomy, which is embedded in the origins of Western culture, which reaches its maximum in modern culture, when the subject loses control over the object in the form of computer technologies that create virtual reality, which itself begins dictate to the subject the parameters of his existence.

However, it can be assumed that the state of chaos will sooner or later settle into a new level system and there is every reason to believe that the future of philosophy will be determined by its ability to generalize and comprehend the accumulated scientific and cultural experience[ 29].
Postmodernism in art
Main article: Postmodern art
The section lacks references to sources (see search recommendations).
The information must be verifiable, otherwise it may be deleted. You can edit the article by adding references to authoritative sources in the form of footnotes. (December 29, 2018)
Postmodernism in art
"Puppy" by Jeff Koons
Umberto Eco is a bright representative of postmodernism in literature
Robert Rauschenberg, Bicycles, Berlin, Germany, 1998
Vasily Ryabchenko, Naked Dream, 1995
Researchers note the duality of postmodern art: the loss of the heritage of European artistic traditions and excessive dependence on the culture of cinema, fashion and commercial graphics, and on the other hand, postmodern art provokes sharp questions, demanding no less sharp answers and touching on the most pressing moral problems, which fully coincides with the primordial mission of art as such.[ 30][ source?]

Postmodern art has abandoned attempts to create a universal canon with a strict hierarchy of aesthetic values and norms. The only indisputable value is the unlimited freedom of expression of the artist, based on the principle of "everything is allowed." All other aesthetic values are relative and conditional, not necessary for creating a work of art, which makes possible the potential universality of postmodern art, its ability to include the entire palette of life phenomena, but also often leads to nihilism, self-will and absurdity, adjusting the criteria of art to the creative imagination of the artist , blurring the boundaries between art and other areas of life. [source?]

Baudrillard sees the existence of contemporary art within the framework of the opposition of the mind and the elements of the unconscious, order and chaos. He argues that the mind has finally lost control of the irrational forces that have come to dominate contemporary culture and society.[ 31][ source?] According to Baudrillard, modern computer technology has transformed art from a sphere of symbols and an independent sphere, virtual reality, alienated from true reality, but no less spectacular in the eyes of consumers than true reality and built on endless self-copying. [ source?]
At present, it is already possible to speak of postmodernism as an established style of art with its own typological features. [ source?]
The use of ready-made forms is a fundamental feature of such art. Their origin is not of fundamental importance: from utilitarian household items thrown into the trash or bought in a store, to masterpieces of world art (it doesn’t matter whether it is Paleolithic or late avant-garde ). The situation of artistic borrowing up to the simulation of borrowing, remake, reinterpretation , patchwork and replication, addition of classical works from oneself.

Postmodernism refers to the finished, the past, which has already taken place in order to make up for the lack of its own content. Postmodern demonstrates its extreme traditionalism and opposes itself to the non-traditional art of the avant-garde. “The artist of our day is not a producer, but an appropriator ( appropriator ) ... since the time of Duchamp, we know that the modern artist does not produce, but selects, combines, transfers and places in a new place ... Cultural innovation is carried out today as an adaptation of cultural tradition to new life circumstances, new technologies of presentation and distribution, or new stereotypes of perception ”(B. Groys ). [ source?]

The postmodern era refutes the postulates that until recently seemed unshakable that "... tradition has exhausted itself and that art should look for another form" (Ortega y Gasset) - a demonstration in the current art of the eclecticism of any form of tradition, orthodoxy and avant-garde. “Citation, simulation, re-appropriation - all these are not just the terms of modern art, but its essence” - (J. Baudrillard ). [ source?]

Baudrillard's concept is based on the assertion of the irreversible depravity of all Western culture ( Baudrillard , 1990). Baudrillard puts forward an apocalyptic view of contemporary art, according to which, having become a derivative of modern technology, it has irretrievably lost touch with reality, has become a structure independent of reality, has ceased to be authentic, copying its own works and creating copies of copies, copies without originals, becoming a perverted form genuine art.[ source?]

The death of modern art for Baudrillard occurs not as the end of art in general, but as the death of the creative essence of art, its inability to create something new and original, while art as an endless self-repetition of forms continues to exist.[ 31][ source?]

The argument for the apocalyptic point of view of Baudrillard is the statement about the irreversibility of technological progress, which has penetrated into all spheres of public life and got out of control and freed the elements of the unconscious and irrational in a person. [ source?]

In the postmodern, the borrowed material is slightly modified, and more often it is extracted from the natural environment or context, and placed in a new or unusual area. This is its deep marginality. Any everyday or artistic form, first of all, is “... for him only a source of building material” (V. Brainin- Passek )[ 32].

Spectacular works by Mersad Berber with inclusions of copied fragments of Renaissance and Baroque paintings, electronic music, which is a continuous stream of ready-made musical fragments connected by “DJ summaries”, compositions of Louise Bourgeois from chairs and door panels, Lenin and Mickey Mouse in a work of social art - all this typical manifestations of the everyday reality of postmodern art. [ source?]

The paradoxical mixture of styles, trends and traditions in postmodern art allows researchers to see in it not “evidence of the agony of art, but a creative ground for the formation of new cultural phenomena vital for the development of art and culture.”[33][source ? ]

Postmodernism, in general, does not recognize pathos, it ironizes the surrounding world or itself, thereby saving itself from vulgarity and justifying its original secondary nature. [ source?]

Irony is another typological feature of postmodern culture. The avant-garde attitude towards novelty is opposed by the desire to include in contemporary art the entire world artistic experience in the way of ironic quotation. The ability to freely manipulate any ready-made forms, as well as the artistic styles of the past in an ironic manner, appeal to timeless plots and eternal themes, which until recently was unthinkable in avant-garde art, allows us to focus on their anomalous state in the modern world. The similarity of postmodernism is noted not only with mass culture and kitsch. Much more justified is the repetition of the experiment of socialist realism, noticeable in postmodernism, which proved the fruitfulness of using, synthesising the experience of the best world artistic tradition. [ source?]

Thus, postmodernism inherits syntheticity or syncretism from socialist realism as a typological feature. Moreover, if in the socialist realist synthesis of various styles their identity, purity of features, separation is preserved, then in postmodernism one can see an alloy, a literal fusion of various features, techniques, features of various styles, representing a new author's form. This is very characteristic of postmodernism: its novelty is a fusion of the old, the former, already in use, used in a new marginal context. Any postmodern practice (cinema, literature, architecture or other forms of art) is characterized by historical allusions. [ source?]

The game is a fundamental feature of postmodernism as its response to any hierarchical and total structures in society, language and culture. Whether it is Wittgenstein's "language games"[ 34][ source?] or the game of the author with the reader, when the author appears in his own work as, for example, the hero of Borges' story "Borges and I" or the author in the novel "Breakfast for Champions" by K. Vonnegut. The game assumes a multivariance of events, excluding determinism and totality, or, more precisely, including them as one of the options, as participants in the game, where the outcome of the game is not predetermined. An example of a postmodern game is the works of W. Eco or D. Fowles. [ source?]

An integral element of the postmodern game is its dialogism and carnivalism , when the world is presented not as the self-development of the Absolute Spirit, a single principle as in Hegel's concept, but as a polyphony of "voices", a dialogue of "original principles" that are fundamentally irreducible to each other, but complement each other and revealing themselves through the other, not as a unity and struggle of opposites, but as a symphony of "voices", impossible without each other. Without excluding anything, postmodern philosophy and art include the Hegelian model as one of the voices, equal among equals. An example of a postmodern vision of the world is Levinas' concept of dialogue [ 35][ source?], Y. Kristeva's theory of polylogue [36][source?], analysis of carnival culture, criticism of monologue structures, and M. Bakhtin's concept of unfolding a dialogue .[37][source ?]

Criticism of postmodernism is total in nature (despite the fact that postmodernism denies any totality) and belongs to both supporters of modern art and its enemies. The death of postmodernism has already been announced (such shocking statements after R. Barthes, who proclaimed the “death of the author”, gradually take the form of a common cliché), postmodernism has received the characteristics of culture second hand .[ source?]

It is generally accepted that there is nothing new in postmodernity ( Groys ) [source?], it is a culture without its own content ( Krivtsun ) [4] and therefore uses all previous developments as a building material (Brainin- Passek ) [32], which means synthetic and most similar in structure to social realism (Epstein) [source?] and, therefore, deeply traditional, based on the position that “art is always the same, only certain methods and means of expression change” (Turchin) [source?]. Contemporary art has lost touch with reality, has lost its representative function and has ceased to reflect the reality around us to the slightest degree [ 38] [ source?]. Having lost touch with reality, contemporary art is doomed to endless self-repetition and eclecticism.[ 39][ source?]

Because of this, some researchers talk about the "death of art", the "end of art" as an integral phenomenon with a common structure, history and laws[ 40][ source?]. The separation of contemporary art from reality, classical aesthetic values, closing it within itself, erasing its boundaries - leads to the end of art as an independent sphere of life ( Kuspit , 2004). Some researchers see a way out of the semantic impasse in the works of the “new old masters”, combining in their work the artistic tradition with innovative methods for realizing the artistic concept.[ 41][ source?]

Accepting largely justified criticism of such a cultural phenomenon as postmodernism, it is worth noting its encouraging qualities. Postmodernism rehabilitates the previous artistic tradition, and at the same time realism, academism, classics, actively denied throughout the 20th century, serves as a universal experimental creative platform, opening up the possibility of creating new, often paradoxical styles and trends, makes possible an original rethinking of classical aesthetic values and formation of a new artistic paradigm in art. [source?]

Postmodernism proves its vitality by helping to reunite a culture's past with its present. Rejecting the chauvinism and nihilism of the avant-garde, the variety of forms used by postmodernism confirms its readiness for communication, dialogue, to reach consensus with any culture, and denies any totality in art, which should undoubtedly improve the psychological and creative climate in society and will contribute to the development of adequate era forms of art, thanks to which "... distant constellations of future cultures will also become visible" (F. Nietzsche). [source?]

Postmodernism in historiography

Originating as a general philosophical trend in the 1960s, postmodernism found its place in historiography already in the 1970s and 1980s[ 42]. According to V. P. Vizgin , the emergence of this direction is directly related to the general scientific revolution of the 20th century, especially in the field of exact sciences and, first of all, in physics. Revolutionary discoveries in natural science, which in the first third of the 20th century caused a radical revision of established ideas, required a philosophical and methodological comprehension of new realities. And this entailed the beginning of "methodological shifts in thinking, significant for historical knowledge." Moreover, as the scientist notes, they arose much earlier than the 50-60s [ 43]. In the most general terms, this trend in historiography can be characterized as a revision of established views on the profession of a historian. The new trend was a kind of response of some intellectuals to Marxism and structuralism. In an effort to "liberate creative individuality from the fetters and restrictions imposed on it by all kinds of global determinisms," they expressed skepticism about the traditional interpretation of historical truth. From their point of view, the historian, when creating a historical text, does it in the same way as a poet or a writer. And therefore, they believe, the text of the historian is a narrative discourse, a narrative that follows the same norms of rhetoric as in fiction [ 44].

A. Ya. Gurevich draws attention to the fact that representatives of postmodernism in historical science, when defining a new trend, also use other terms in relation to it, such as post-structuralism or a linguistic turn. All these definitions, one way or another, reflect the rejection of the old historical tradition, a number of provisions of which the representatives of the new direction simply do not recognize. According to A. Ya. Gurevich, such decisive steps and revolutions in science are most often not justified. At the same time, according to the scientist, one cannot “deny the fact that postmodern criticism of historiography has revealed real weaknesses in the methodology of historians”[ 44]:

The historical source does not at all possess the "transparency" that would enable the researcher to approach the comprehension of the past without much difficulty. The historian's work really obeys the requirements of poetics and rhetoric, representing a literary text with its own plot and "intrigue", and the danger here lies in the fact that historians, as a rule, do not notice this closeness between historical and artistic discourses and therefore do not draw proper conclusions . . The metaphorical nature of the language of historians (who do not have their own professional language) often leads to the reification of concepts that are given an independent existence.

As L.P. Repina notes, the postmodern approach to historiography not only questioned the very idea of historical reality, but also shook the “historian’s own identity”, his unique qualification, destroying the differences between history and literature. This approach practically did not distinguish between fact and fiction, because the very criteria for the reliability of the source were called into question. Ultimately, the postmodern paradigm undermined "faith in the possibility of historical knowledge and the desire for objective truth." It is not surprising that a significant part of historians did not accept the views of postmodernists[ 45].

CONCLUSION
As a result, a kind of restructuring took place in the professional environment of historians, as a result of which the enemies and supporters of the "new" and "old" history were forced to define their positions. In this regard, the opinion of J. Elton is indicative. As a defender of the professional exceptionalism of the historian, he did not accept postmodernist ideas:
Any acceptance of these theories - even the slightest and most restrained bow in their direction - can be fatal[ 45].
In essence, this opinion reflects the psychological state of most historians of the older generation, which "won a leading position in the" invisible college "at the turn of the 60-70s (and earlier)" and hardly endures the collapse of their habitual habitat. Of course, in different countries, the community of historians (due to the peculiarities of national historiography) perceived the onset of postmodernism differently. However, the presence of two polar points of view turned out to be common to all. Some defended the thesis that "allegedly 'nothing exists outside the text', 'no extralinguistic reality' that historians are able to understand and describe." Others rejected this approach outright. This opposition was most clearly manifested in the American scientific community. The concepts of French post-structuralists and German neo-hermeneutics aroused great interest in American literary criticism due to its traditionally high receptivity to new Western European theoretical ideas. Soon, new views and methods of criticism went beyond the boundaries of fiction and, thanks to the work of American intellectuals, spread to the analysis of historical writings. The work of Hayden White played a big role in this [ 45].
Gradually looking extravagant at first, the ideas of the postmodernists found understanding among some "traditionalist" historians. This was largely facilitated by philosophers conducting their research in the field of epistemology[ 45]. The works of G. Bachelard , who is considered the creator of a new epistemology in France , made their contribution . His views on the methodology of history had an impact on the methodology of world history, whose ideas were expressed by J. Cangil and M. Foucault[ 43]. Their work and the work of other researchers marked the beginning of the search for a compromise between extreme points of view. The works of the famous Dutch philosopher F. Ankersmit played an important role here . In historical journals, publications appeared that carefully analyzed the main ideas of postmodernists. (More details on this issue can be found in the articles published in the collection “Disputes about the main thing: discussions about the present and future of historical science around the French Annales school”[46].) At the same time, precisely those positions that caused “internal protest historians against the extremes of the "linguistic turn". This helped to find the arguments that became fundamental for the development of the so-called "middle position"[ 45].
This position was mainly based on the key concept of "experience that is not entirely reducible to discourse". The number of historians who adopted this view has grown steadily. At present, the concept of "historical experience", which has become central, has united around itself the so-called "moderate" historians. For them, the existence of "a reality outside of discourse, independent of our ideas about it and influencing these ideas" is indisputable. And, of course, they consider the “linguistic turn” to be a significant event in history. However, with all this, they are ready to recognize its positive influence, provided that “it does not reach that extreme limit beyond which fact and fiction become indistinguishable and the very concept of history, which is different from the concept of literature, is denied”[45][47 ] .
In the 21st century, researchers no longer argue with the fact that on some positions the adherents of the “ narrativist philosophy” turned out to be right, focusing on specific methodological miscalculations in the work of the historian. Thus, the idea is accepted that the historian's work is essentially based on the principles of poetics and rhetoric and, strictly speaking, is a literary text with a "plot" and "intrigue". It is also recognized that "language has the property of a structural impact on its specific" carriers "".