TRADITION AND ARCHETYPE: CREATIVE FOUNDATION OF THE POSTMODERN INTERPRETATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2020-1(21)-122-132Keywords:
tradition, archetype, postmodernism, neotribalism, glocalization, narrative, the pastAbstract
The article will attempt to outline the conceptual field of postmodern interpretation of the correlation between the traditional and the innovative in the archetypal approach to analyzing social interactions. The author accentuates the accord of the theoretical foundations of postmodernism, poststructuralism and deconstructivism, gives an account of the postmodern practices that demonstrate the ability of individuals and communities to live under conditions of instability, chaos and plurality due to various factors, among which interpenetration of new and archaic forms of sociality can be found. The archetypal nature of traditions in the postmodern narrative practice appears clearly evident in interpretive game stories and numerous outlooks on the “perusals” of the archetypal images, as well as in deconstructing the traditional methods of introducing archetypes in an ironic dialogue with the near and the distant past.
Basing on the theory and methodology of postmodernism, this paper discusses the theories of the alternative self-organization forms that tend to replace modern forms of socialization and rely on the distinctions between social and cultural realities. While paying attention to the increasing global contexts of globalization, the research critically reviews the phenomenon of neotribalism, as introduced by M. Maffesoli, based on such prominent postmodern values as contextual sympathy, community empathy, inclusive diversity, plural tolerance, eclecticism and conventionality. The author argues that neotribalism is a mere reflection of the true spiritual revolution of the modern information society in terms of building a new network sociality based on the free choice of cultural values and promoting a culturally “close-knit” lifestyle. Therefore, postmodernism in the aspect of its neoconservative essence is understood as the returning archaism, which is a source of vital energy and organic mobilizing of the collective energy. Neo-tribes, representing existential networks of “live sociality”, illustrate a creative reincarnation of the tradition, when vital interests, real desires and personal needs are being conveyed by the collective interactivity ousting at the same time the obligatoriness and impersonality of the ritual and the canon.
References
Baudrillard J. Simulacres et simulation. Paris: Galilée, 1981. 235 р.
Лиотар Ж.-Ф. Состояние постмо- дерна : пер. с фр. Москва: ИЭС, Санкт-Петербург: Алетейя, 1998. 160 с.
Deleuze G., Guattari F. A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: University of Minnesota Press, 2005. 629 р.
Маффесолі М. Час племен. Занепад індивідуалізму у постмодерному суспільстві. Київ: Вид. дім “Києво-Могилянська академія”, 2018. 264 с.
Jameson F. Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. Durham: Duke University press, 1991. 438 p.
Ермоленко А. Н. Этика ответствен- ности и социальное бытие человека (современная немецкая практиче- ская философия). Киев: Наук. дум- ка, 1994. 200 с.
Юнг К. Г. Архетип и символ. Мо- сква: Канон, 2016. 336 с.
Юнг К.Г. Ответ Иову. Москва: АСТ, 1998. 384 с.
Лиотар Ж.-Ф. Заметка о смыслах пост. После времени: французские философы постсовременности / Иностранная литература. 1994. № 1. С. 54–66.
Эко У. Заметки на полях “Имени розы” / Эко У. Имя розы : пер. с итал. Москва: Книжная палата, 1989. С. 468–481.
Robertson R. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage publications, 1992. 211 p.
Maffesoli M. Iconologias. Nuestras idolatrias posmoderas. Barselona, Ediciones Peninsula, 2009. 204 р.
Foucault M. Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison. P: Gallimard, 2004. 318 p.