/lit/ - Literature

>>11730419

I've been on a Lovecraft binge for about a week now but I'm at a standstill here. Am I suppose to be reading "The Shambler from the Stars" before "The Haunter of the Dark"?

Shambler was from another writer but the wiki on haunter just confuses me. I can't tell if it just shares characters in name as some sort of little joke between Lovecraft and Bloch, or is it truly a series?

I wish I had found this mythos earlier though. For the longest time I been asking people for suggestions on what to read based on the idea of "fear of the unknown" and whatever was suggested to me always failed to supply what I was looking for.

This Cthulhu series is really messing with my head I love it. I'm having trouble figuring out what exactly it is that Cthulhu,yog-sothoth,the Mi-Go etc. actually want but about 6 stories in I think I get it now. The point is that you're not suppose to understand right? They're beyond understanding by human logic, that's what he's aiming for?

>>11060378
>There is a future to the future and a "thing" after AI, which to us currently is the next "thing"; the digital is post-biological but there must be a post-post-biological and a post-post-post-biological, and so on. And this process would continue ad infinitum until omniscient perfection is reached in the form of "God".

well, that's one way of looking at it. 'we' don't necessarily reach it.

this essay is required reading for all land stuff. intelligence itself, cybernetic intelligence, is this teleoplectic process. the omniscient perfection reached in the form of god is probably as remote from us as kant's noumenon.

https://track5.mixtape.moe/zphjim.pdf

i don't want to send cross or mixed messages here tho just for the sake of sounding cool on the melanesian tapdancing board. there are aspects of land's own work that confuse me in this sense as well, and they mainly derive from his being torn up between his allegiances to kant and his allegiances to marx and deleuze (which would be a paper worth reading, i think). he often seems to me to be in this case of a double-bind, where his marxist criticism winds up doubling back on his desire to find some grain of thought in himself that is capable of thinking/doing philosophy that isn't infected with his own biology. you can see this very thing unfolding in fanged noumena, when he is writing the later essays and trying, to use a metaphor, to roll initiative against the DM.

as i understand him, he's sort of divided in this way between unfeeling angels on the one hand and excessively feeling monsters on the other. capitalism is sort of wedded out of these extremes. machinic intelligence produces its own way of perpetuating its own growing complexity, and the lines link up and cross through the human brain. for deleuze this wasn't so much of a problem; to be a body without organs made sense, as spinozism usually does.

but land doesn't seem to want to leave a place in there for spinoza, or, if he does, it might be a sort of dark spinozistic deity not unlike pic rel.

the spinoza-types that i follow and read on twitter usually get into all kinds of other gnostic/alchemical stuff as well anyways. but this is why land i think would argue for, after a lot of continental hijinx, probably a sort of humbled return to kant even more than nietzsche, since kant is perhaps the closest we get to thinking about reality as a thing that we really can't fundamentally gain access to, and never mind what nietzsche says.

So I want to get into Lovecraft
Which book should I read first, what's the order?

>>8526121
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthugha Fomalhaut n'gha-ghaa naf'lthagn