/lit/ - Literature

Im blind I cant read

GTFO with these shitty pill memes

>>14037065
Alternative naming suggestion for the theme?

>new
it's stale as fuck

>>14037069
This is simply burgerpunk with a focus on the reproduction of images and creation of behavior patterns.

>>14036033
>real-cum
Nice lol

>>14037088
/thread

This seems like commie shit

>>14037088
hmm, not as catchy

>>14036033
I'm genuinly worried why there wasn't some kind of "aesthetic defense force" formed yet that would destroy advertisements. Liberals may whine about muh non-agression and muh property, but that shit is not there for itself, it's there solely for a reason to influence me in a way I did not consent to.

>>14037112
This seems more like a thing both gommies and conservatives (the authentic kind, not liberal ones) would agree upon.

>>14037134
wE ARE

BURGOMEISTERz

>>14036033
Anti-consumerism based in the growing anti-tech scene.. Pretty standard progression of ideas desu.
Anti-tech is the next big rebellious movement anyway.

>>14037207
Wrong, anti-consumerism of the OP's kind is bastard daughter of Marx. Wrong, the progression has opposite direction. Wrong, unless climate change goes mad.

>>14037231
I meant "trendy" rebellion not real rebellion you dolt.
You can already see it kinda taking hold. People have been wiggin' out about AI since the 60's. It had a spike in 80s and now with the 80's nostalgia fest comes the same old fears. People are expressing an interest in the old idealized "life in a cabin" wetdream. I know people who have been like "fuck smartphones, I'm downgrading to a flip phone" and all that.
People cutting cable, cutting social media, going back to "the simple life". It's becoming more trendy day by day.

This is missing. Ammend the list and I'll glady take the pill.

>>14037274
There are different types of rejecting technology. For example, if your reason to toss your phone is to be more productive at work, then you're an asshole. But there are legitimate ways of being skeptical of the technological wager.

>>14037315
What ways are those

>>14037139
>"aesthetic defense force" formed yet that would destroy advertisements
there's no money in it

Can there be such thing as Neo Luddite cinema or is it impossible?

>>14036033
Adding this, and Radical Technologies by Adam Greenfield

>>14037781
Cinema is inherently a product of technique. I think a neo luddite movement centered around cinema would be absolutely ridiculous.

>>14037909
I thought as much just wanted to get others' views :(

>>14037909
What isn't a product of technique?

>>14037942
Spoken poetry, folk festivals, folk manifestations of culture, anything pre-industrialization and reproduction, basically. When we can start to really multiply images and sounds, we enter the realm of economies of scale.

>No Lasch whatsoever.
Absolutely unbased and hopelessly bluepilled.

>>14037970
this

>>14037965
So books are technique and verboten?

>>14038010
Books have one thing going for them that cinema and commercial music don't have: they require attention. But they definitely represent one of the first ways in which culture was commercialized. It's no wonder whole novels were being published in cheap newspapers and such.

>>14037970
Just recommend something by him, you ignorant dastard.

>>14038152
Everything

I thought this blindpill chart would be people like Homer and John Milton and Joyce. I am sad now

>>14038072
So is i just the 20th century technology that is off limits? Where was the absolute cut off point where technology became too much?

How could you omit Don DeLillo op?

>>14036033
>Blind Pill
>no Borges

>>14038152
The Culture of Narcissism is a good place to start, and then Revolt of the Elites. If you like those go about the rest as you like.

>>14038289
Late XVIII century is the cut off.

>>14037805
I entered this thread to post that pic

>>14039033
Seems arbitrary

>>14039228
It's not arbitrary, you doofus. It's when the industrial revolution started in English.

>>14037781
>>14037909
>>14037942
>>14037965
>>14038010
>all these people spelling technic wrong

>>14039234
Are you literally retarded?

>>14039243
technique is a method, technic is technology. Are you retarded.... yourself?

>>14039248
You've literally filtered and outed yourself as never having read any major book dealing with this subject. I mean, I know you're American and all, but can't you try to be less stupid from time to time or to at least keep it to yourself?

>>14039243
Definitely retarded

>>14039232
Did it start later in French?

>>14039278
>he can't even argue back just ad hominems
logical fallacy much.

And I'm not American, but I am an anglo country - never gonna be able to guess ya stupid cunt) and hurry up and reply my hotspots about to run out(actually charge but you get the point faggot).

What a pseud.

>>14039288
Not him but you are coming across as quite retarded now I'm sure you're not really deep down but it doesn't look good for you.

>>14039288
Just read Ellul at once you irredeemable faggot. https://ellul.org/themes/ellul-and-technique/

>>14039298
>>14039299
>still no answer
as I expected, they can't provide any possible means of a debate because they don't understand it themselves - but I do.

Remember charge nibba.

>3%

>>14039308
Answer to what you dumb poor faggot you

>>14039319
It's technic, not technique.

Are you so retarded you haven't read Spengler. Out of your depth bucko.

>1%

>>14039326
No, it's technique which you would know if you had read Ellul

>>14039357
that's just one opinion bro - which is wrong.

Technique is a method, technic is technology and infers modernity.

>>14039248
>sargonposting

Immediate brainlet giveaway.

>0%

>implying I'm a Sarganon smoothbrain. H

>>14039361
Nope Technique is technology sorry you're too stupid to grasp this.
>infers
brainletry confirmed

>>14039375
That guy's probably an 18yo newfag, stop answering him.

>>14036037
FPBP

>>14036033
going on an imageboard is not blindpill

>>14040091
What is blindpill? How do I be blindpill

>>14038440
kek

>>14037781
>Can there be such thing as Neo Luddite cinema or is it impossible?

>>14036033

add Medium is the Massage by McLuhan
Fahrenheit 451 by Bradbury
Destruction of Memory by Robert Bevan
Jihad vs McWorld by Benjamin Barber
The Death of Expertise by Tom Nichols

>>14037306
>>14038433
This, and of course Camatte. Postman really isn't necessary. Also, why this specific book of Baudrillard, while many other are much more on topic ? I'll add that the order in which you put these is not ideal at all. For example, why separate Debord and Vanengeim ? Why Debord first, the more tedious on a related line of thought? Similarly, you put advanced marxist thinkers and then Capital at the end? On this subject (technology, the autonomisation of the image/capital), it starts to be interesting in maybe vol. 2 or 3, that's a lot to read for a single item in a reading chart. Just put the Grundrisse. Nice try though

>>14040091
This.

>>14036033
Roll

you could read every book on this list a billion times over and still be nowhere closer to fixing the problem. technology and machines are merely a manifestation of the problem, movies and video games and various propaganda are just means of transmission. again, the fucking problem is technique, and the techniques are making man into the best machine possible. nothing short of not playing the game at all or completely overhauling your entire week ethical and spiritual worldview will change anything

>>14042340
>completely overhauling your entire week ethical and spiritual worldview will change anything
Expand

Fix the list with the reccs on the thread and I'll take it

>>14042344

this is why i hate mobile shitposting

for example, when christianity (I'm analyzing christianity as technique here and basically repeating ellul) was the dominant force that ruled over westerners lives, all possible techniques and technology were subject to intense scrutiny. how is this new machine going to help me get to heaven? how is this new technique of data collection going to help me worship? this is where the technological stagnation came from in regards to Christianity. but since the brakes have been completely fucking removed, you have very little ethical concerns in regards to creating new techniques and technology. if you have problems here, you just go to china and they'll roll out the red carpet for you. if it is more efficient to the desired end, out with the old, in with the new

and since the cat is completely out of the bag in regards to building new technology and technique, the only way to put brakes on technique is to force everyone to adopt a new set of values, with what is essentially a religious or transcendent goal, and all forms of technique must be rigorously examined against it. so if the goal is "colonizing space" for example, all technique must be simultaneously devoted to getting to space, as well as not blowing up the entire fucking planet before we accomplish the goal. how this happens, i have no clue

>>14042401
That's really interesting, thank you for your response. I suppose the ethical framework that looms over us today is the vaguely formed idea of Progress that Lasch criticizes.

>>14042443

i'm not familiar with his work, but crisis will undoubtedly come eventually that will force backwards, or change direction, which is why am i not completely hopeless. and the only reason why I'm even posting criticism is because these little "pills" are nothing more than dialectical traps that only further entrench you in the system, even the OP post slightly acknowledges it. what is the point of a doctor that tells you that you have every disease in the book and does nothing to cure them?

>>14042340
>again, the fucking problem is technique, and the techniques are making man into the best machine possible

This is precisely what this list deals with, you fucking midwit. Society of Spectacle, the concept of Culture Industry from DoE, Heidegger's discussion of technology, Infinity Jest's addicted characters, the colonization of sleep described in 24/7 or the effects of technique in art noted by Benjamin focus on precisely this problem. OP list is incomplete but not too bad.

>>14042508
What crisis are you envisioning? Climate change?

Is there anything that you've read that does offer some form of "cure" to our current host of affections?

>>14042537
There are no general solutions anymore, only individual acts of resistance. This is an extremely depressing outlook.

>>14037069
fuck off

>>14042520

not in the mood to trade insults with you, but if my eyes are tired from reading about how fucked we are, i know for a fact that everyone else is even more tired. keep visiting different doctors if you want
to
>>14042537

outside of the realm of science fiction, resource conflict, collapse of the banking system, and the forever wars engulfing the entire planet, with terrorism against the system as the primary response to the system. it isn't so much as a specific threat, but instead the multitude of problems. ironically, the stronger the system gets, the larger the problems become

transcendent philosophies like advaita vedanta and neoplatonism help me as an individual, but those are outside of the realm of what is practical

>>14037909
>would be absolutely ridiculous.
sounds like a good enough reason, no?

>>14042630
What would it even look like though? You need a wealth of tech to shoot, edit and distribute a film

>>14042630
Guy Debord made some movies, but they're mostly him talking in this very monotonous voice against images and a few videos. You can check it out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIuEFYSs_68&t=2881s

>>14036033
special mention to saramago pls