/lit/ - Literature

>>16547633
>signified

>>16512147
only because he took Bataille in more interesting directions

>>15324609
>It seems like the dominance of consumer capitalism, where people fabricate their identities based on what they buy, read, and profess, now even extends into the realms of philosophy, morality, and ethics.

he was right all along

How do I get into postmodernism? Are there any charts?

>The revolution has already taken place. Neither the bourgeois revolution nor the communist revolution: just the revolution. This means that an entire cycle is ending, and they have not noticed it. And they will play the game of linear revolution, whereas it has already curved upon itself to produce its simulacrum, like stucco angels whose extremities join in a curved mirror.

>All things come to an end in their redoubled simulation-a sign that a cycle is completed. When the reality effect, like the use less day-after Messiah, starts uselessly duplicating the course of things, it is the sign that a cycle is ending in an interplay of simulacra where everything is replayed before death, at which point everything falls over far behind the horizon of truth.

>It is useless therefore to run after power or to discourse about it ad infinitum since from now on it also partakes of the sacred horizon of appearances and is also there only to hide the fact that it no longer exists, or rather to indicate that since the apogee of the political has been crossed, the other side of the cycle is now starting in which power reverts into its own simulacrum.

>Power is no more held than a secret is extracted, for the secrecy of power is the same as that of the secret: it does not exist. On the other side of the cycle-the side of the decline of the real-only the mise-en-scene of the secret, or of power, is operational. But this is the sign that the substance of power, after a ceaseless expansion of several centuries, is brutally exploding and that the sphere of power is in the process of contracting from a star of first magnitude to a red dwarf, and then to a black hole absorbing all the substance of the real and all the surrounding energies, now transmuted at once into a single pure sign-the sign of the social whose density crushes us.

>Today the extremes finally come face to face, once the conservative obstacle of critical thought has been removed. Not only do social forces clash (however dominated by one single great model of socialization) , but forms come into opposition as well-the forms of capital and of sacrifice, of value and of challenge-with the death of the social at stake. The social itself must be considered a model of simulation and a form to be overthrown since it is a strategic form of value brutally positioned by capital and then idealized by critical thought. And we still do not know what it is that forever has fought against it and that irresistibly destroys it today.

it's a short walk to Nick Land's Wild Ride from here. baudrillardian skepticism about postmodernity or unironic anti-marxism lead to the same places. what land is doing is supplying an intelligenic process within capital itself - the Outside - to continue this line of thought. the meaning is technological, but it's not necessarily anthropological. abstraction never was.

>>11250622
nigger stop

WHY DIDNT ANYONE LISTEN TO ME

>>10953815
>>10955037
was this in the context of talking about the French immigration debate in that thread that blew up with 300+ replies? If so that was me :)

>>10707867
yes a few other anons and I have been memeing Baudrillard with success. Read Baudrillard you faggots.

>>10693687
>/lit/
>leftist
all this ideology I can't even

>>10681121
I enjoyed it but I'm high af right now

>>10675272
tankies, communists and pseudo-marxists gtfo of my /lit/ please

>>10657475
To be fair for the past centurary or so people have developed a multitude of art and cultural instances that haven't stood the test of time and only the exceptional has seeped through, or at least the more underground stuff has seem a bit of a renaissance (see Gaddis).

But we live in a culture of constant information and media, so its hard to really find things that distinguish one from another.

>>9903857
All of America's "culture" is simulation

meme thread

We should all appreciate this literary form native to 4chan. Post anything /lit/-related. But please: do it in greentext

>>9543596
And at what point in refering to Debord as similar to Baudrillard did I appeal to my limited knowledge of the scientific field of linguistics?

I may have put it rather bluntly, this is a chan-forum after all, buy I don't think it's controversial to say that Baudrillard's idea of simulacra owes a debt to the situationist theory of spectacle. But in any case I don't see how it relates to the field of linguistics and I don't understand your critique. Please elaborate.

>>9224331
>>9224359
The ultimate consequence of liberation and boundlessness is its opposite.

>cultural deterrence

wdhmbthis?

>Retrospectively, this triumph of the transsexual and the travestied casts a strange light on the sexual liberation of earlier generations. That liberation, far from being, as in its own self-image, the irruption of a maximum erotic value of the body – with an elevation of the feminine and jouissance (the masculine having rather reserved for itself up to that point the field of power) – will perhaps merely have been an intermediate phase on the path to gender confusion. The sexual revolution will perhaps merely have been a decisive stage in the journey towards transsexuality. This is, ultimately, the problematic fate of every revolution. By releasing all the potentialities of desire, the sexual revolution leads to the basic question: am I man or woman? (psychoanalysis has at least played a part in generating this sexual uncertainty principle). As for the political and social revolution – the prototype for all the others – by giving human beings the use of their freedom and their own free will, it will have led them, in an implacably logical process, to wonder where their free will lies, what they ultimately want and what they are entitled to expect of themselves – a problem previously quite unknown. This is the paradoxical outcome of every revolution. With revolution begins indeterminacy, anxiety and confusion, but many other pleasures too: choice, pluralism, democracy.

>But there simply is no democratic principle of sexuality. Sex is not part of human rights and there is no principle of the emancipation of sexuality. Once the orgy was over, sexual liberation could be seen to have had the effect of leaving everyone searching for their gender, their sexual and gender identity, with fewer and fewer possible answers, given the circulation of signs and the multiplicity of pleasures. This is how we subtly became transsexuals, just as we secretly became transpolitical – that is to say, politically indifferent and undifferentiated beings, politically androgynous and hermaphroditic. Having subscribed to, digested and rejected the most contradictory ideologies, we now merely wear the masks and have become in our minds, perhaps unwittingly, political cross-dressers.

written in 1987

when did french philosophy become this based?

>>8908535
I never understood the obsession with Disney. Some decent films but the level of devotion by many is astounding

What does /lit/ think of Baudrillard?

So how would you guys call the current stage of the philosophical development? What could be the main factors setting trends in the current era (say, starting from the 21st century)? Is it all about the rise of digital technologies?

>>8664038
Baudrillard is not a crazy person to read either, if only because you get this first-person view of someone watching 'reality' fragment into a thousand shards of glass, that then reconstruct each other in kaleidoscopic forms. People tend to think Baudrillard was this poster boy for obscurantist postmodern rhetoric when in fact I would claim that he is one of its most prescient and tortured observers. The conclusions that he draws from this are hyperbolic and incredibly sad, but worth reading. Where Baudrillard falters (or, depending on your point of view, becomes really interesting) is where he abandons the social project altogether and begins doubling down on Nietzche. The hyperreal is mimetic theory flipped inside-out and become social criticism instead of literary criticism. The book to read here is Seduction.

I don't have much good to say about Derrida, because imho 'deconstruction' vastly overcomplicates that which mimetic theory makes simple, elegant, and useful. Girard is like Einstein and Derrida is more like a 10C alchemist. Anyways.

Since icycalm was brought up, I would actually like to do something contrarian and say, to his credit, that he was probably thinking about this stuff too. "Why have the Japanese — alone among subhuman races — managed to become human? Because they are great at copying things. — A hint to all the rest." Philosophers don't need to be wonderful human beings. All they have to do is make us question our assumptions. True story: I actually exchanged emails with this guy. As fucked up as he was I have to admit that I have never met a more interesting human being.