/lit/ - Literature

>>11827560
as much as i have bitched about pic rel, the idea that there is nothing outside the text does relate to what we're talking about, with a caveat. i'm more interested in a thought experiment that says, perhaps we have to take all of this text as a kind of code and inauguration into cyber-wonderland in this way. because perhaps that is a more interesting way of moving through or beyond deconstruction into whatever is next. i'm not into deconstructing the patriarchal canon, i'm looking for a way through to a different way of understanding. because maybe politically all we can do is keep the party going without going off towards the dystopian black holes/game over screens.

i started my own misadventure mainly by trying to escape from derrida's shadow, in a way, so it is a little weird to find myself back here and talking about him in a more conciliatory way. but i think there are connections between land and baudrillard everywhere: Capital is the big text, but there is no Outside of capital, because, as land says, Capital is the Outside itself. and so we find ourselves inside: as heidegger says, it's not about getting outside of the circle but coming into it in the right way.

>I think that's what Badiou was trying to do, shill pure math competency to prosefags, even if it was painfully suffused with his off brand French """maoism""".
yeah. badiou's maoism is seductive at times, but it feels like the appeal of amputation when what you need is a skilled doctor. badiou is one of the great maoists but even xi jinping is trying to put some distance between the CCP and mao, i think.
>and it's not like xi jinping is a saint either, fwiw

>Even D*rrida wrote his thesis on Husserl's work on the origins of geometry, and Whitehead was clearly no slouch either.
that's the thing. philosophers have to some connection with the sciences.

here's another dyad to explore: language and *code.* with lacan and the frankfurt school, zizek also, we get the infinite protocol of critique: everything can be critiqued, you can always find Oedipus if you are looking for him. it is the phallologos derrida talks about, but again, what i'm wondering is how much of a dead end this is. of course, to move beyond this is to board Nick Land's Wild Ride, which is no picnic either and arguably even worse. but to his credit, Uncle Nick at least *did* offer one possible way through the universe of deconstruction, which was more defensible while derrida was alive and has now morphed into full-on Woke Justice and the rest.

there has to be another way. so along with the rehabilitation of heidegger and the care and feeding of a few ghosts there i probably have to pay my respects for JD as well. this does not come naturally to me, but still. the question is about *text* and *code* - the same, but different. baudrillard also alluded to this mysterious code as well, esp in the consumer society, and bordieu also to some degree. some of those things are still mysterious.