/lit/ - Literature

Toward the African Revolution - Frantz Fanon
Proust and Signs - Gilles Deleuze
A Thousand Plateaus - Deleuze and Félix Guattari
Tales of the Jazz Age - F. Scott Fitzgerald

>mfw I realize who was wisest and my most level-headed member of our species

this man just released me from all my anxieties may have saved my life

>“Drug addicts continually fall back into what they wanted to escape: a segmentarity all the more rigid for being marginal, a territorialization all the more artificial for being based on chemical substances, hallucinatory forms, and phantasy subjectifications. Drug addicts may be considered as precursors or experimenters who tirelessly blaze new paths of life, but their cautiousness lacks the foundation for caution. So they either join the legions of false heroes . . . . Or, what is worse, all they will have done is make an attempt only nonusers or former users can resume and benefit from . . . discovering through drugs what drugs lack. . . . "

during senior year of highschool, me and a couple of friends used to do lines of coke during homeroom, in the bathroom so that we'd be skeeted for marine biology...
teacher had a video about sharks and seals and there was a scene with tuna in it and this cute blonde girl asked
>oooh so is like tuna fish cans made with tuna?
at this point i had been at the back of class sniffing loudly,my sinuses were blocked badly and i knew i had a bunch of trapped coke in my nose and was trying get that shit in my system and as soon as she said that, it caught me by surprise and i hiccuped/inverse coughed and a huge chunk of congealed coke-snot shot into my lungs and i almost choked to death laughing.
same girl asked during the same class "but why did the shark eat the seal?"

>>3662329

>Do you smoke?
Hell ya, I fucking smoke.
>What do you smoke?
Man, smoke weed all day every day, other than that I'm certainly a nicotine addict, smoke DMT whenever my tryptamine tolerance is good for it, always try to keep at least a ball of opium around, smoke some freebase coke,
smoked meth a few times, chase the dragon occasionally. Mostly just smoke drugs, you know, that shit's good for your mind.
>Do you smoke when you read/write?
Hell ya I smoke when I read and when I write, words are meaningless without drugs. You try reading 'The Critique of Pure Reason without a joint in hand, you're not likely to get very far. Want to finally "get" Nietzsche do as the man himself did, to quote an 1882 correspondence with Lou Salomé, “Tonight I will take so much opium that I will lose all reason.” The line between genius and madness not only no longer exists, but it never did, now go out and loose all of your reason, dear reader-friends.

Gilles Deleuze
"Difference and Repetition"
Seriously, what the fuck is he talking about?

>>3327228

>mfw these associations are an inextricable part of the assemblage of the figure and should not be resisted but embraced

>>2701435
wow u sure are buttmad huh, objectivist scum?

bitches don't know about my rhizomes

Where to begin with Deleuze?

>2011
>still thinks there's something called western culture

>>2247203
>mfw that's only because of rhizomatic cultural-societal language-game biopolitical anti-realist signifier-signification.

>>1583002

I think that the

>>1582680,

Dude was just making a shitty joke about the showcase. I don't think he's actually studied Derrida in depth. He posted his shitty visual gag and fucked off to troll another thread.

Just my theory of course - I'd be interested if someone who'd actually studied Derrida would talk about it without posting screeds of shite, but it's not going to happen. All those people have jobs, they don't have time for 4skinChan. Most of the people here are a bunch of autodidactic blowhards. Not me, of course. I happen to have several degrees, and two phds, one in Awesomeness, and the other one in Everything.

For what it's worth, I think that Derrida falls into the trap of a lot of French theorist and kind of falls in love with his own theory, and then spends another two long books fucking it on the carpet in front of you and licking its ear and saying sexytime French things. Too much French theory has a tendency to lose itself in it's own cleverness and poetry. Foucault's the same: you read the work, and you enjoy it and you think "wow, this is cool, I'm totally getting this and this dude is blowing my fucking teeny tiny mind with his huge French, schlong-swinging brain". Then you realise you've been reading all these outrageous claims about French prisons, or the french navy of the 17th century, or Hegel or whatever the fuck Derrida decided to bang on about that day, but (and here, at long last, is the point), you realise you haven't seen a single footnote or reference for 100 pages, and that these guys could indeed be making all this shit up.

I think a lot of the French post-structuralists, deconstructionists and whateverthefuckists of the 1960s-1980s have this problem - they're essentially the unreliable narrators of philosophy/social theory.

I'm desperately trying to think of what Gilles Deleuze would say.

Everytime I see his name, I say to myself "damn, I NEED to read one of his books"

He wrote on a lot of things that interest me (cinematography, fine arts, politics, against psychoanalysis) and on some famous philosophers.

Question: where do I start?