What is your opinion on Romanticism as a cultural and artistic movement?

Romanticism doesn't have a place in the modern world anymore.

Too hard to find peace and beauty in 1st world countries at times among the mass of congested buildings and modernist architecture.

Internet, photography, etc has really done away with the idea of romanticism as well i imagine, who needs long winded descriptions and depictions of beautiful things that move people when you can just look at pictures of say hagia sophia or an english country side.

Are there any artistic romanticist films?

romanticism is ONLY possible in the modern world. the 19th century romantics were reacting to dingy, industrial london.

That's the point senpai. Escape from the shitty metal towers for a few hours

Mainly because it breaks with positivism and offers a more dynamic view of organism and their enviroment. Read Herder's essay on language and some of his philosophy of mind.
Von Humboldt is obviously important in this respect too.
Poe doesn't ring a bell. Do you mean EE Poe?

Btw Chateaubriand is imoortant too to the formation of those ideas, but very much indirectly. His essay on chtistianity is very interesting, primarily for its methodology.

Produced some of the greatest paintings and poems I have ever read/seen, though I feel the Romanticist take on Neoplatonism to be pseudo-philosophic at best.

>Poe doesn't ring a bell. Do you mean EE Poe?
Yes, have you read Eureka?

And how can you say that Romanticism is underrated? Half of the great writing since that movement was heavily influenced by it.

>tfw you live in the Pacific Northwest
>tfw old tall trees all around, just beyond the city (and some within it)

Feels good man.

I think Symbolism is where neoplatonism really went too far. Think of Yeats' most bawdy poems, or this sort of painting

Only Central and Eastern Europe did it right. I never understood how the british romanticists are the most popular ones globally.

This is bullshit since Wordsworth, Shelly, and Keats are among the best poets. In fact, the West did it best: Heine, Hugo etc

>Yes, have you read Eureka?
Not sure. But he comes much later anyway. Also is he genuinely romantic?

And I'm saying that when romanticism is reduced to a purely aesthetic movement it misses the influence it had on philosophy and the scientific method, hence it's 'underrated'.

>I never understood how the british romanticists are the most popular ones globally.

What sort of reputation do they have outside the Anglo world? I know Byron was a European celebrity in his day.

By central european I meant German. They affected other countries way more than the french and british ones.

Feels so good. I

East European romanticism is a misnomer. It's an entirely different school with hugely different roots.

I MET a Traveler from an antique land,
Who said, "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desart. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is OZYMANDIAS, King of Kings."
Look on my works ye Mighty, and despair!
No thing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that Colossal Wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

find a flaw

In Search of Wealth and Power: Yan Fu and the West, by Benjamin Schwartz.

Yan Fu was the first guy to translate Darwin (and even more importantly, Huxley. Also, Adam Smith) into Chinese. He thought it wasn't just important to understand Darwin's thoughts, but how Darwin's thoughts came about, that is, Darwin was a product of the same great system that produced western supremacy. Most of which he saw in releasing the power of the individual (Huxley and Smith, remember) but also in what he sees as the central failure of the Chinese to embrace modernity.

They understand scientific prowess to be a specific technical skill. They send someone off to Germany to study chemistry, he learns chemistry, he comes back, and he is allowed a say only in affairs of chemistry. And then they wonder why they cannot advance in chemistry.

Darwinism is and expresses the interlinked nature of things. Matter, animal life, the human body, and human society are all interlinked, and it's only possible to understand any of these things by understanding the other. At the same time, while most western readers of Darwin (implicitly) see a rough Judeo-Christian emergence of man possessing a divine spark as the 'narrative' of Darwinism, to Yan Fu, it sounds like Taoism. The gradual unfolding, from a murky, shadowy, 'simple' origin.

The interlinking of all things, the emergence of complexity from the unseen and simple, and mastery achieved through non-interference. This starts sounding to Yan Fu a lot like Lao Tze. And so, in his old age he becomes a 'conservative' but one of a very odd sort. He sees Confucius as the central tragedy of Chinese History. The problem of the 19th century is simply the problem of the 6th century, BC: Confucius versus Lao Tze, who's principles have been understood, without trying (which is fitting) in England.

Meme poem tbf

Interesting.

It has qualities I don't like socially and culturally, but it's produced some of the best art ever to grace this world. The romantics have created poetry, paintings and literature that stand in a league of their own.

>It has qualities I don't like socially and culturall
Such as?

Nationalism and revisionism

not necessarily

No, not necessarily, you're right. They aren't universal qualities by any means. I just don't endorse the movement wholesale.

Many of the progenitors of liberalism were romantics too.

Faffy aristocratic nonsense, perpetuated by bored and lonely elites who would rather write about, and create an idealised image, of nature than actually enjoy it or do anything worthwhile.

Now Futurism. That's a movement you can get behind.

Partially agree with you, but there was some good art and poetry produced by the movement. The philosophical side of it was just pretentious trust fund kids whining as you said. That said it is understandable that one would romanticize (no pun intended) nature when confronted with the squalor and misery of early industrial age cities.

Berlioz, Schumann, Lizst, Chopin, Mendelssohn
Romanticism is breddy good

Except you posted proto-suprematism not futurism.

My opinion on Romanticism as a culture and autism is that it's garbage.

Not enough suffering.

enlightenment > romanticist

romanticist are whiners that believe their dung ages where better than the time when they were conquering all of the known world.

Studied it at University and it wasn't my thing. Too much emphasis on emotion and beauty. Plus it stole a lot of ideas from Greek mythology.

Is Rousseau enlightenment or romanticism? Herder? Baumgarten? Hume?

Aesthetically it is pleasing.

Problem is that it doesn't serve a function in a hypertechnological world.

An idealistic fervor that could create any Romantic art in the 21st century is really only reserved for people who think the technological singularity will come in 15 years time, or religious fanatics.

Hume was obviously enlightenment