The Mirage of Modernity

This in-depth article was published before restructuring.

Starting May 1st, our free newsletter will feature more accessible insights, while similar deep analysis will be published monthly.

We're making this change to better serve our diverse audience of students, practitioners, and leaders.

EXPERT INSIGHT

I believe our obsession with the new sometimes blinds us to the wisdom of the past.

I often think about the tension between progress and nowness. As we rush toward an AI-dominated future, early 20th century anxieties about technology seem eerily present. Does heritage represent resistance to modernity or its most profound expression?

I find myself excavating philosophical frameworks from the past to navigate our fractured digital present.

We've mistaken acceleration for advancement.

The parallel between the industrial anxieties captured in expressionist cinema, for example, and our current technological upheaval is striking. Both moments represent critical inflection points where society grapples with what we gain and what we sacrifice in the name of progress.

Heritage discourse typically focuses on tangible preservation, but perhaps its most radical application is as a philosophical lens for evaluating technological progress. The wisdom of the past isn't obsolete—it's prophetic.

RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT

The concept of heritage transcends physical structures and extends into philosophical territories. Henri Bergson's notion of durée—fluid, experiential time that resists mechanical segmentation, offers a profound framework for understanding heritage not as static preservation but as dynamic continuity.

Key insights:

• Time isn't linear but flows continuously, with past experiences informing present consciousness
  

• Rationality alone cannot capture the full human experience of reality

• Intuition provides access to deeper understanding beyond analytical thinking

Bernard Bosanquet proposed that art functions as a bridge between individual expression and universal truth—a concept remarkably applicable to heritage conservation. For him, the aesthetic experience transcends mere personal appreciation to reveal collective values.

These philosophical frameworks suggest that heritage isn't just about preserving artifacts but about maintaining continuity of human experience across time—I’d call it experiential conservation.

DEEP DIVE

Radical Philosophies of Bergson and Bosanquet
and of Golem and Metropolis

What is modernity, really?

It's a word we throw around to signify progress, innovation, or even the march of time itself. But what does it actually mean? A mirage that blinds us to its fractures, its contradictions, its costs?

In this piece, I dive into the philosophical ideas of Henri Bergson (1859-1941) and Bernard Bosanquet (1848-1923), juxtaposed against the cinematic worlds of Wegener’s Golem (1920) and Lang’s Metropolis (1927). These films, set against the backdrop of early 20th-century social and technological upheaval, are not just relics of their time — they are radical critiques of modernity and its discontents.

So, what does modernity mean to us today, in a world of endless digital streams, rising inequalities, and the creeping dominance of artificial intelligence?

The Fractured Promises of Progress

Modernity, in its gleaming promise, often hides the darker truths: the dehumanization of industrial progress, the ethical dilemmas of technological power, the thin line between creativity and control.

Golem and Metropolis are not celebrations of modernity—they are eviscerations of it.

In Golem, the rabbi creates a clay monster to protect his community, but his ambition spirals into destruction. It’s a warning about the limits of human control and the unintended consequences of technological power.

In Metropolis, the city is a dystopian nightmare. The elite live in luxurious skyscrapers while workers toil underground in misery, reduced to cogs in a vast industrial machine.

These films expose modernity’s dual nature: its promises of innovation and progress coexist with its darker side—alienation, dehumanization, and inequality. They’re mirrors of the tensions that still define our world.

A Flowing Reality

Bergson rejected the rigid, linear time of clocks and calendars. For him, time was fluid, a continuous flow where past, present, and future intermingle—a concept he called durée.

These ideas resonate in the way we experience time through digital platforms.

The endless scroll of Instagram or TikTok.

Social media feeds don’t just mirror Bergson’s fluid time—they embody it.

In Golem, the rabbi’s reliance on logic and reason mirrors Bergson’s critique of over-reliance on rationality. The result? A loss of control, as the monster embodies the chaos that rational thought alone cannot contain.

In Metropolis, the time is mechanized, segmented into shifts and routines that strip workers of humanity. Yet Bergson’s philosophy insists on the opposite: that true time is felt, not measured—a reminder that modernity often silences the human experience.

Art as a Bridge of the Individual and the Universal

For Bosanquet, art is not just an escape from reality. It’s a bridge—a way to connect personal experiences with universal truths. Art, he argued, allows us to explore the intersection of the individual and the collective.

The personal story of a persecuted Jewish community in Golem becomes a universal meditation on morality, power, and responsibility.

The stark divide between the ruling elite and the working class in Metropolis transforms into a universal narrative of inequality, resonating across cultures and eras.

The philosophy feels uncannily modern.

Today, we see its ideas everywhere:

Street art, where personal rebellion merges with collective critique. Think of Banksy’s graffiti—individual expression amplified into universal social commentary.

Digital activism, like #MeToo or #BlackLivesMatter, where personal stories merge into global movements, echoing Bosanquet’s belief that art bridges the personal and the universal.

The Ethics of Creation—Golem, Metropolis, AI

The rabbi in Golem and the industrialists in Metropolis share a common flaw: a failure to reckon with the ethical implications of their creations. Both films critique the unchecked pursuit of progress, warning us of the dangers of wielding power without accountability.

These warnings are now more relevant than ever.

Debates around artificial intelligence, surveillance, and automation echo the ethical dilemmas posed by these films nearly a century ago.

Who controls the technology?

Who benefits from it?

Who is left behind?

The Radical Resonance of Modernity Today

The ideas of Bergson, Bosanquet, and films Golem and Metropolis don’t belong to the past. They belong to the present.

In a world of 24/7 connectivity, streaming culture, and real-time updates, the concept of flowing time feels prophetic.

As platforms like Instagram and TikTok amplify personal expression into collective narratives, we witness the art’s power to bridge the individual and the universal.

Critiques of technology, inequality, and the ethics resonate with our debates about AI, automation, and the societal impacts of the digital age.

Modernity is an ongoing dialogue that challenges us to rethink what progress means, to confront its contradictions, and to imagine alternatives.

Modernity as a Radical Challenge

Modernity is messy. It’s a collage of politics, philosophy, art, and technology—a dynamic interplay of ideas and challenges.

Through Bergson’s fluid time, Bosanquet’s universal art, and the cautionary tales of Golem and Metropolis, we can see the essence of modernity not as a single truth but as a vibrant, evolving tapestry.

These works don’t just belong to the past, they demand engagement. They challenge us to rethink our digital age, to question the ethical boundaries of technology, and to find meaning in the chaos of modern life.

Their ideas present profound challenges for heritage preservation:

• How do we preserve heritage when its essence is fluid?

• Can traditional conservation approaches accommodate temporal dynamics?

• What new frameworks might emerge from understanding heritage as flow rather than fixity?

Modernity isn’t a linear journey. It’s a battlefield—a dynamic, fractured space where innovation collides with ethics, and creativity struggles against control.

It's a constant negotiation—a dialogue between what was, what is, and what might be.

The future isn't something we stumble into, it’s something we imagine, create, and fight for.

CURATOR’S PICK

🔹Parc de la Villette / Paris, France
Author: Bernard Tschumi
Year: 1998

🔹Blur Building, Swiss Expo 2002 / Lake Neuchâtel, Switzerland
Author: Diller Scofidio + Renfro
Year: 2002

🔹Walt Disney Concert Hall / Los Angeles, USA
Author: Frank Gehry
Year: 2003

READING RECOMMENDATION

Bergson, Henri. 1912. An Introduction to Metaphysics. Translated by T. E. Hulme. New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

Bosanquet, Bernard. 1915. Three Lectures on Aesthetic. London: Macmillan and Co.

RADICAL THOUGHT

What if heritage isn't just what we preserve, but how we navigate change itself?

PUT THESE PRINCIPLES INTO PRACTICE

Theory becomes powerful when applied. I help students, firms, and institutions translate these heritage philosophy concepts into actionable design strategies.

Join the leaders who have transformed their approach to design & heritage:

• Students & Early Practitioners [Review & Coaching] 
  Receive tailored guidance on your portfolio.
  (40+ reviews delivered)

  
  

• Architects & Firms [Design Impact Assessment]:
  Identify future heritage potential in your project.
  (200+ design audits completed)

  
  

• Leaders & Institutions [Heritage Strategy Consultation]:
  Develop a strategy for your vision.
  (10+ premium strategies implemented)

→ Book a Discovery Call via e-mail: [email protected]