/lit/ - Literature

>>14536787

>For the subject, postmodernism presents a mighty, seemingly inescapable trap. Any attempt it makes to find itself through a search for meaning is bound to go awry, for every sign promising some sort of originary knowledge is embedded in further contexts whose explication requires the setting of even more signs. Attempting to find itself through meaning, the subject drowns in a flood of ever expanding cross-references. Yet even if the subject clings to form it fares no better. For postmodernism sees in form not an antidote to meaning, but rather a trace leading back to already existing, semantically loaded contexts. Every fixation of meaning is dispersed through cross-connected forms; every use of form links up with already existing meanings; every approach to an origin leads back to an alien sign. Searching for itself, the subject quickly ends where it began: in the endlessly expanding field of the postmodern.

>The way out of postmodernism does therefore not lead through the intensified search for meaning, through the introduction of new, surprising forms or through the return to an authentic origin. Instead, it must take place through a mechanism completely impervious to postmodernism’s modes of dispersal, deconstruction and proliferation. This mechanism, which has been making itself felt with increasing strength in the cultural events of the last few years, can be best understood using the notion of performance. Performance in itself is, of course, not a phenomenon new or unknown. In Austin’s speech-act theory it refers to a language act that does what it promises (“I now pronounce you man and wife”). In the sense of an artistic event in the modernist avant-garde, a performance foregrounds or “makes strange” the border between life and art; in the happenings and performance art of postmodernism it integrates the human body or subject into an artistic context. The concept of performance I am suggesting here is, however, a different one. The new notion of performativity serves neither to foreground nor contextualize the subject, but rather to preserve it: the subject is presented (or presents itself) as a holistic, irreducible unit that makes a binding impression on a reader or observer. This holistic incarnation of the subject can, however, only succeed when the subject does not offer a semantically differentiated surface that can be absorbed and dispersed in the surrounding context. For this reason the new subject always appears to the observer as reduced and “solid,” [...]. This closed, simple whole acquires a potency that can almost only be defined in theological terms. For with it is created a refuge in which all those things are brought together that postmodernism and poststructuralism thought definitively dissolved: the telos, the author, belief, love, dogma and much, much more.

Can someone please explain to me what is to be done?
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0602/perform/

I'm only 2 sentences in but you seem to rip off Kierkegaards Either/Or with a Kafka story or something?

>>13003738
Well yes I agree and I sage (can't recognize a single book on the pic anyway).
All that said, I don't think it's more hurtful than hard drugs. If you mean heroin/meth by that. It's probably less damagng than weed, desu. There's a bunch of mind dead stoners in the world and the porn addicts are largely lost guys anyhow. In both cases, the addiction might not be the cause.

>>12971789
Take up the problems Marx raised but go back to Hegel to solve them

Also, for the time being, tongue in cheek Stalism

Also, there's no getting out of ideology

https://youtu.be/CMRM_bfCBig

Just see this the first time. What's the consensus so far?

I'm a physics PhD but had a gf who wrote her thesis on Deleuze and I could summon her to help me out with this. She uses rhizomes and whatnot as WhatsApp avatars and such.
I'm also interested in Land because I'm interested in distributed consensus algorithms (blockchain, direct democracy) for the technology sake and Accelerationism is a means to justify working on this to myself, despite my anti-capitalist reservations.

>>10720395
I don't get the history part at all. Why would that help or be interesting?

And I also don't see what is depolitized.

>>10608890
When I heard this many months ago (the fact that he makes up to $50k per months in donations), I was sort of envious and disturbed.
But then I bought the right cryptos and made a million in a few months myself and realized that money is a joke and a few somehow manage to keep the many working wages while not really doing it themselves. And it's not like you get a good feel out of $50k at this point. Don't cry, money is a meme and those things happen almost naturally. Network effect.