At first when reading both of these pieces, I was really confused because I thought “Horizons” was very wordy and lengthy. It took me a second read-through to grasp the point being made. I am not very familiar, or even opinionated, on Avant-Garde. One of the things that surprised me was Marinetti proposing that the future shouldn’t rely on the past. I believe that some of the greatest things (or inventions, for a more tangible thought) come from ideas from the past. I think the reason things are made better is because we use ideas from the past and improve on them. I know, for me personally, when I am trying to think of ways to solve something I think of how problems were resolved in past situations. I think that it is impossible to eliminate what we know from the past.
As far as “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism”, I found that a lot easier to comprehend, while it was completely different from the thinking of “Horizons.” It was less wordy and definitely more straightforward. I thought it was a lot easier to wrap my head around the idea of Avant-Garde. I appreciated that Higgins thinks we can use the past in creating our future. If I were to propose a question, it would be: What prospective of Avant-Garde are we trying to look from?
No comments:
Post a Comment