/lit/ - Literature

>>11362187
the bataille book has some good moments - there's one absolutely incredible passage about kant and thanatology. i've read it twice but that's the only real part that sticks with me. but it's worth checking out for land and bataille as well.

as for abandoning ontological marxism...yeah, i agree with that. i check his twitter all the time, but i'll admit that i've found some of his recent tweets to be sub-par. there's a lot of stuff in there about genes and things, or ultra-cryptic stuff about protestantism and so on that just kind of seems beneath him. i really miss the chaos patches he used to post on xenosystems and things like that. maybe all the flirting with the far right made him just kind of lazy. i'm not sure. but there's been a kind of drop-off in quality there. he seems to enjoy shitposting, and he's earned the right to do so, but it's still kind of disappointing sometimes.

>He gave up on trying to understand the problem in exchange for offering a monolithic solution, or at best crutch-for-Capital. It's simply not schizoanalytic.

so, this. maybe the affinity with enlightened despotism turned out to be bad for the analysis. and maybe neocameralism offered the kind of direct political solution he was looking for. patchwork is kind of brilliant, in a way, if even somewhat obvious if you follow land's mode of thought to that point: just corporatize everything! but the trade-off is that you lose a lot of the stuff that actually makes the analysis interesting: the humans and the machines, the encounter with the alien, the eerie, the weird and the rest. that's Young Nick's bag (and mark fisher's too). Old Nick doesn't give a fuck.

but, you're right. reading a lot of it doesn't make you feel necessarily more enlightened, just kind of salty and disaffected. hopefully somebody else will pick up the tracks then. i'm honestly tired af of being angry and triggered at this point.