/lit/ - Literature

Agree or disagree with him he's funnier than 95% of comedians

I hate this fake Lacanian sensationalist bastard

he's a fucking idiot

What's he talking about?

Rank the Postmodern Neomarxists

Lacan>Adorno>Benjamin>>Jameson>>Foucault>Gramsci>Marcuse>>Derrida>>>>>>>>>Deleuze>Lyotard>>>Baudrillard

What would I need to read, other than Marx and Engels, to understand Zizek?

I tried to get /lit/ at a party and failed. What did I do wrong?

I was invited to a party last Friday. I usually shun human society, preferring the comfort of two-dimensional waifus and David Foster Wallace essays to the lowest common denominator rubbish that typifies most human interactions, but I had a great idea up my sleeve to agitate and offend an acquaintance of mine who I hardly knew. I had copped a picture of him in a bow-tie at an Oxford University Finance Society gathering, looking sufficiently Tory to elicit rage and condemnation from the right-on crowd that I expected to be in attendance. I’d printed this picture onto a plain white t-shirt, inserting the caption ‘TORY SCUM’ underneath the champagne glass he was holding in the picture, intending to reveal it beneath my Christmas sweater at an opportune moment.

I arrived about two hours late, hoping everyone would be suitably intoxicated so that my lacklustre social skills and emotional tactlessness wouldn’t exhibit themselves too noticeably. As expected, the party-goers were all wonderfully righteous and indignant in a way only university students can ever truly be. At least half the crowd were pseudo-vegans, and the other half looked like Labour voters of some kind. I had always found it difficult to understand why people cared about anything outside of their immediate vicinity, and half-thought about suggesting some Ayn Rand to these yahoos before I saw a semi-attractive girl wielding a dog-eared copy of a Zizek book on meta-aesthetics. I strode on another, rehearsing my utterly made-up political views so as to appease her false morality. On my way I overheard someone make a heated remark about the Agricultural Revolution, and sniggered at the futility of this moron’s historical dispute, just about loud enough for the room to fall silent and their faces to turn upon me.

“Hi, I’m Joel. I’m Jethro’s friend.”

I went up to the girl and spouted some half-baked titbits about Zizek’s philosophy that I’d picked up from 4chan memes. She seemed eminently impressed, chuckling delightedly at the nonsensical aphorisms I fashioned on the spot. All I needed to seal the deal was to somehow suggest that I had an active social conscience, something I’ve always found very hard to feign.

“And if you read the Daily Mail, you’re a racist.”

Smiling triumphantly to myself, I hoped this well-timed assault on tabloid journalism would win her over into my arms.

“Ummm, sorry?”

[cont]

what would he have to say about clifford?

Who is the Analytical version of Zizek?

*SNIFF*, yes

>>14408901
>Can anyone do that in this day and age?
Yes.

>>14346983
You cant be an Atheist without being a Christian by the way

who is our guy ?
and why is it slavoj žižek ?

literally nothing but a stupid, retarded hypocrite. his work has no value. someone should shoot this cocksucker

ITT place your pets for who's gonna win the 2020 Nobel Prize in Literature

I'm guessing pic related. It's been a while since they gave it to a philosopher.

book noob here. can i read zizek without reading the guys he talks about (or more specifically can i get by with summaries, cursory research and skimming)

also post zizek chart(s) i lost mine lmao

I like Slavoj Žižek

>>12130376
I cringe every time Peterson mentions "cultural Marxism" and have doubts to his understanding of the school of Frankfurt, let alone Marx. Peterson is correct in pointing out that a lot of people of the left adapt Marxism, but I think they have a superficial understanding hereof which Zizek points out. The people who are fanatical with political correctness have zero understanding of Marxism and are just confused capitalists.
I think Zizek is wrong in regards to Peterson's lobster fascination and its implications implying concepts of freedom, liberties and so on wouldn't be attainable given our naturalistic limitations. Though we have naturalistic limitations we are not "only" animals as I think Peterson is quite clear about. We can create something "beyond" this - civilization (meaning an area ruled by reason) (see natality coined by Hannah Arendt).

in 2018 im forgotten.....