/lit/ - Literature

>>11361077
very interesting anon, thank you kindly. i'll have a look at this.

>>11361091
the marx-freud (or hegel-lacan) bromances are old and venerable ones. the deleuze-land one is a newer one but it has legs. my own alluding to the Dark Side partly relates to taking the side of chaos in this regard - maybe similarly to what Bret Weinstein calls 'Plan B.'

land is imho way more than 'just' anything. deleuze - and bergson, and spinoza - was way more of a vitalist. so the question is, is what land is doing to deleuze, cyberneticizing him in this way, analogous to a death drive? it's hard to say. it might be more accurate to say that he's doing to deleuze what marx did to hegel: taking something metaphysical and materializing it. i don't know if that necessarily means sublation into a death drive, however.

the thing about land's description of capital, as teleoplexy, is that it is this runaway thing: a computer that processes desire. so i guess in a way you could say that it is our death drive, but it is the death drive folded into itself in this way. we're not alienated from it, it's alienated from us. but what 'it' is is the product of all our fantasies, like the spectacle come alive. i don't remember where he wrote this (or if i'm making it up?): anyways, imagine if you took a huge computer and fed into it the complete corpus of 20C Spectacle/advertising culture. every trick in the book every human ever invented to sell the other guy a chicken mcnugget. what *wouldn't* that thing know about the human unconscious mind? would it go insane, like the TayAI? would it come out like those horrible alien drawings that bot made? would it be insta-Wintermute? something else? who knows?

it's also said that, for land, capitalism *is* critique itself. capital may really be our objectified death drive. this is old-school freudo-marxism, in a way, sure. what land introduces are these autopoeitic, hyperstitional, machine learning-related questions. all kinds of doors open from there.