| Title | : | Post-History (Univocal) |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 1937561097 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9781937561093 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 170 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 1993 |
In his main argument, Flusser suggests that our times may be characterized by the term “program,” much in the same way that the seventeenth century is loosely characterized by the term “nature,” the eighteenth by “reason,” and the nineteenth by “progress.” In suggesting this shift in worldview, he then poses a provocative If I function within a predictable programmed reality, can I rebel and how can I do it? The answer comes Only malfunctioning programs and apparatus allow for freedom.
Throughout the twenty essays of Post-History , Flusser reminds us that any future theory of political resistance must consider this shift in worldview, together with the horrors that Western society has brought into realization because of it. Only then may we start to talk again about freedom.
Post-History (Univocal) Reviews
-
Summary: "Learn to play" or else become a piece in an "absurd game" of programs that run away from their programmers.
Variably: "Program or be programmed to program"
Flusser talks a lot about how what we think of as human life and freedom has become "absurd" in a world run by programs/apparatus/institutions that function and continue to function with complete disregard for their intended purpose or intended objects.
To think in terms of purposes and objects is either finalistic ("for what?"/"why?") or causalistic ("how happened?"). Flusser suggests that a new worldview is necessary to understand a world that functions without purpose: the programmatic ("how *possible*?"). In other words, don't ask "for what is x meant?" or "how does x determine y?" but " what are the implicit virtualities in x, y, x+y, x-y, ...?" -- what are the potential situations which WILL manifest themselves given an absurd enough amount of time or an absurd enough amount of *permutations* (read: this becomes more and more our situation with increases in processing speed)? What does x make *possible*?
Flusser at times talks about the absurd as a horizon to be hopefully escaped. Elsewhere he calls for us to "accept the absurd," as a player accepts the rules of the game. Personally I am left with a nagging question: what draws the boundaries of the absurd other than the safety of human or Western conventions (conventions which Flusser himself notes contain such horrific virtualities as Auschwitz)? Is the absurd not an indication of a boundary to be stepped across?
In the end it seems that Flusser is less afraid of an absurd life than an inhuman life. We can "accept the absurd" as long as we recapture "responsibility" from our past and present abdications, whether they be destiny or objectification or functionalism. We must be responsible to ourselves in order to save us from the fate of becoming "slots" and "functionaries" of blind programs, and we must be responsible to others in order to emancipate our thinking from the lonely monstrosity of objectification.
There is much to think with here. -
Post-History reads as an addendum to Baudillard's System of Objects: a methodic attempt to theorize trends in current (c. 1983) Western culture, with only so-so results. (Even Flusser, at the end of this book, rates his attempt as a failure.) While such totalizing attemps seem appealing--an aftereffect, no doubt of Modernism at all things Wagner)--attempts that weigh in at only 167 pages, such as Post-History, necessary tend to the overarching generalization and abstraction, and suffer for a lack of concrete examples. So, while I find myself nodding in agreement with some of his arguments, I remain unconvinced by an equal number. The upshot of Post-History is that the degree of alienation we all feel is increasing, and so the need to buck the system (here, "apparatus")--and how--is increasing, too. This is the message of '60s protest updated for the cyberage.
-
This is an amazing work of theory. Flusser's ideas feel incredible and revolutionary, and he presents them at a rapid fire pace that leaves the head spinning in the best way possible. Unlike many theorists, he is incredibly readable, with an almost journalistic style that manages to deal with difficult material in a non-pretentious way. I really love how the book was broken up into short, subtly connected essays. This structure kept the ideas well-organized. Anyone interested in media theory, theories of history, or just critical theory in general, should give Flusser a read. It's dark stuff he's dealing with (the self-annihilation of man inherent in the program of Western culture... doesn't that sound like fun?) but he offers an answer that people should be able to get behind.
-
A brilliant book: A collection of articles and short analytical short stories - extremely dense in its meaning it needs to be read, re-read, dissected and digested. Each article is a discovery trip of the mind. Marvelous !
