/lit/ - Literature

>>12988434
>Double Neetchan

"The apocalypse isfinished, today it is the precession of the neutral, of forms of the neutral and ofindifference. I will leave it to be considered whether there can be a romanticism, anaesthetic of the neutral therein. I don't think so - all that remains, is the fascination fordesertlike and indifferent forms, for the very operation of the system that annihilates us.Now, fascination (in contrast to seduction, which was attached to appearances, and to dialectical reason, which was attached to meaning) is a nihilistic passion par excellence,it is the passion proper to the mode of disappearance. We are fascinated by all forms ofdisappearance, of our disappearance. Melancholic and fascinated, such is our generalsituation in an era of involuntary transparency.

I am a nihilist.

I observe, I accept, I assume the immense process of the destruction of appearances (andof the seduction of appearances) in the service of meaning (representation, history,
criticism, etc.) that is the fundamental fact of the nineteenth century. The true revolution
of the nineteenth century, of modernity, is the radical destruction of appearances, the. disenchantment of the world and its abandonment to the violence of interpretation and ofhistory.

I observe, I accept, I assume, I analyze the second revolution, that of the twentieth
century, that of postmodernity, which is the immense process of the destruction of
meaning, equal to the earlier destruction of appearances. He who strikes with meaning is
killed by meaning.

The dialectic stage, the critical stage is empty. There is no more stage. There is notherapy of meaning or therapy through meaning: therapy itself is part of the generalizedprocess of indifferentiation.
The stage of analysis itself has become uncertain, aleatory: theories float (in fact,
nihilism is impossible, because it is still a desperate but determined theory, an imaginaryof the end, a weltanschauung of catastrophe).

Analysis is itself perhaps the decisive element of the immense process of the freezingover of meaning. The surplus of meaning that theories bring, their competition at thelevel of meaning is completely secondary in relation to their coalition in the glacial andfour-tiered operation of dissection and transparency. One must be conscious that, nomatter how the analysis proceeds, it proceeds toward the freezing over of meaning, itassists in the precession of simulacra and of indifferent forms. The desert grows."

>If you, like all visible things, must die,
>To live thirty years or a hundred
>Is the same. Drink and forget. Spit hope,
>Vomit charity, and urinate faith.

The entire day, in all the desolation of its scattered and dull clouds, was filled with the news of revolution. Such reports, true or false, always fill me with a peculiar discomfort, a mixture of disdain and physical nausea. It galls my intelligence when someone imagines that things will change by shaking them up. Violence of whatever sort has always been, for me, a flagrant form of human stupidity. All revolutionaries, for that matter, are stupid, as are all reformers to a lesser extent – lesser because they’re less troublesome. Revolutionary or reformer – the error is the same. Unable to dominate and reform his own attitude towards life, which is everything, or his own being, which is almost everything, he flees, devoting himself to modifying others and the outside world. Every revolutionary and reformer is a fugitive. To fight for change is to be incapable of changing oneself. To reform is to be beyond repair.* A sensitive and honest-minded man, if he’s concerned about evil and injustice in the world, will naturally begin his campaign against them by eliminating them at their nearest source: his own person. This task will take his entire life. Everything, for us, is in our concept of the world. To modify our concept of the world is to modify the world for us, or simply to modify the world, since it will never be, for us, anything but what it is for us. That inner justice we summon to write a fluent and beautiful page, that true reformation of enlivening our dead sensibility – these things are the truth, our truth, the only truth. Everything else in the world is scenery, picture frames for our feelings, book bindings for our thoughts. And this is true whether it be the colourful scenery of beings and things – fields, houses, posters, clothes – or the colourless scenery of monotonous souls that periodically rise to the surface with hackneyed words and gestures, then sink back down into the fundamental stupidity of human expression. Revolution? Change? What I really want, with all my heart, is for the atonic clouds to stop greyly lathering the sky. What I want is to see the blue emerge, a truth that is clear and sure because it is nothing and wants nothing.

>not being on some level an environmentalist
You know you can’t actually be an aesthete unless you are right?

>>11740572
I did, kind of. I got my rejection letter yesterday.

Is there any philosopher that takes radical individualist stances without being an Ancap memester shill?

Has there ever been a worse misreading that Memerson with Nietzsche?

Since Deleuze is the new meme can someone summarize his philosophy for me so I can meme properly

>modern day retelling of the entire bible
Has it been done? Could it be done?