/lit/ - Literature

>>11903390
oh boy you'll get a kick out of this part then. if you haven't seen the episode 'Crocodile' make sure to put it on the list. Zizeks book is good, but it does get repetitive.

I see the book (so far) as more of a sifting of his disparate views on tech, automation, biogenetics, ect. into somewhat of a continuous series. there is some repetition (with Zizek it can never be totally avoided) but I'm hoping it's not simply an intellectual one-off but the beginning of a new project. I don't see an 'accelerationist turn' either, nothing more explicit than he's stated before at least. he's already reached such an oddly accelerationist position from without it's hard for him to really turn short of straight up quoting Land (and no luck on that by the halfway mark).

The reason Zizek and accelerationism always jived with me was his notion of ontological incompleteness. substance is a broken, progressing thing rolling through time in an incredibly contingent and indeterminate process, something which explicitly has no "big Other", and yet which still manages to capture us absolutely by the very process itself. a subjective position is only possible if at the basis of the real there lies a gap, a literal incompleteness which drives the absolute. Zizeks noumena is fanged too, but his process is much more deterritorialized than Lands; as a good Marxist, Zizek never arborializes substance around Capital as a big Other. the fusion dance of Zizekian Hegelianism and Landian accelerationism is too tempting for me to pass over in silence.