/lit/ - Literature

>>23334457
fuck, bro. i could have saved her.

Maria..

I'm so tired and exhausted and depressed. There are no happy sights before my eyes or happy thoughts in my head or happy sounds in my ears.

For the love of god, please give me a read that will make me happy, even if only for while I read it.

>>19937349

>reading antigone in library
>start crying
>people saw

>Reading Swann’s Way
>You can give up your life’s passion to give your daughter a comfortable life and in the end when you’re dead your reward is her hawking a loogie on your picture with her friend who just called you an ugly monkey
Bros....why?

>41 replies
>8 posters
Horia's lost it.

I think K is an author that really understands a certain kind of inwardness that is completely unique to the subject it reverberates through. He seems to write from this kind of experience, and its something I immediately picked up on and in a sense found, what he would call, psychological investigations to the nth degree regarding these kind of experiences. It's like a clarity that evades the whole of life in so far as its composed of sociability or personal relationships.
I think you can get so much out of his books without a formal training in philosophy because of the way he writes and these experiences he wants to share. Either/Or is pretty much explicitly written as a poetic/literary way of making you confront things about yourself you either avoid of do not understand, once you accept these with a kind of frightful clarity you have basically assented to his thought and then read his more philosophically dense books in order to find faith/god/ground yourself transparently in the powers that compose you.
Dont be scared by the theological stuff, it will make sense. There has been no more therapeutic and psychologically penetrating and helpful author I have ever encountered.
Kierkegaard really was an angel.
oh and you can skip most of book one and just go to crop rotation then read all of book 2. There's a bunch of fucking filler in that book you can kind of skim around or skip a few pages here and there. Listening to him talk about marriage for 50 pages is a slog sometimes but theres always little gems.

>>11774920
in awe of this gnosis lads

There's a lot you can say about Hegel and Crowley. Big difference is that for Crowley reconciliation is ecstatic, not notional.

For both soul exists as an opacity that just is Chaos' self-interpretation. For Crowley the sun (logos) is blinding. Reason is an anomaly of truth. Crossing the Abyss is living the realization that reason is grounded by its antinomies.

The Night of the World in Hegel is also Choronzon, the absolute dispersion of contradiction that is A = B: or otherness is the condition and basis of your existence. The nauseous preconscious slurry of images. This is also the idea behind CHIM. The Gnostics were right to feel that life is captive to the movement that it is.

All processes are excremental, Crowley says every heaven is the excrement of the one below it. Because the subject is a porosity to nothing, it exists only as the creative membrane that appropriates non-sense to its Sense. So in a way it's a stomach, and God is the All-Stomach and All-Sense - the Eye, Ouroboros, Ain 70. Life-deniers are those who are invited to the banquet and do not eat. I don't remember accepting the invitation. One never does.

>This is one of the readings of Schelling's claim that the "the same principle carries and holds us in its ineffectiveness which would consume and destroy us in its effectiveness": a power which, when it is kept in its proper place, can be benign and pacifying, turns into its radical opposite, into the most destructive fury, the moment it intervenes at a higher level... At a different level, Hegel same the same point: the abstract universality of a Ground, when it is directly actualized, turns into the destructive fury of absolute Terror which threatens to destroy all particular content. We should generalize this principle: Evil is as such the very principle of the actualization of a Ground.

Just in awe of this gnosis lads

>... The universal is self-particularizing, whilst it still remains self-identical. ... The spirit is not some mode or meaning which finds utterance or externality only in a form distinct from itself: it does not manifest or reveal something, but its very mode and meaning is this revelation.

Just in awe of this gnosis lads

>>10983232
Cut it and float off into the void, it's what I did