/lit/ - Literature

>>9898142
Glad my thread is getting such interesting commentary. bumping with some of my favorite baudrillard selections.

This text is from the Transparency of Evil, it's about the eradication of sex and race and the human becoming plastic.

I actually think this kind of nihilistic appraisal of pop culture should appeal to much of the anti-post-modernist crowd that posts on /lit/. It's kind of misogynistic and strangely demeaning of race and gender. At university, I generally had to defend his writings and act as an apologist for his homophobia and sexism. Totally bizarre that here on /lit/ he'd be considered a marxist cuck.

>>9897612
>"Simulacra and Simulation".
not actually the easiest place to enter continental philosophy, or even Baudrillard. Check out some of his lighter books like The Transparency of Evil or Cool Memories.

This is from Transparency of Evil.

and hey, admitting you didn't understand something is fair and nothing to be ashamed of. But, just because you didn't understand what you read, doesn't mean you need to 'reject it'. Keep reading and investigating whatever you're interested in. Maybe someday check out Baudrillard or Lyotard or someone else again if your interested.

>>9885414
weeeeeeeeee, Child Prosthesis

Also, here is another one of my favorites from the Transparency of Evil.>>9819253

>>9650176

Micheal Jackson as a Child Prosthesis to reconcile all differences of race, sex and gender.

From the Transparency of Evil, Baudrillard talking about Michael Jackson as a 'Child-Prosthesis' to reconcile all differences of gender, sex and race.

Micheal Jackson the Child Prosthesis, from Transparency of Evil, chapter: Transexuality

>>9567034
>I'm trying to understand Debord and Baudrillard in synthesizing what can be best described as a far-right ideology informed by critical theorists and the way post/modernity destroys real human experience.

I think trying to understand Baudrillard in terms of a "far right ideology" is kind of missing the point. I've always seen Baudrillard as an elaborate trap to catch up both the left and the right. As Baudrillard brings up one after another of disturbing phenomenon (pic related) that characterize society, he left is forced into defending the orgy of values, even though they didn't really want to defend any of the things he brings up. Meanwhile, the right can look to baudrillard's evidence and say "society is degenerate! return to tradition" but such a process probably isn't possible, just windmill jousting.

Baudrillard is quite clearly a nihilist, he says so and makes no qualms about it. I'm guessing his experiences in May 68 were enough to make him cynical towards all political projects.