/lit/ - Literature

>>15323869
No thanks. Fuck off shill.

>>15323869
it makes for good tp.

>>15323869
You'd get better responses if you shilled on Reddit.

>>15323871
>>15323876
>>15323895
Rightcels triggered. Go work yourselves to death and pretend it's fair for your boss to steal your wages.

I'll just leave this here

>>15323912
cuck reddit post. you probably suck jew dick and have trotski poster on your wall

>>15323912
The fuck are you talking about? He's obviously just shilling, regardless of political ideology.

>>15323979
Okay, this one actually interests me.

>>15323979
Might get this and Minima Moralia.

>>15323869
Verso has 50% sales every couple of months. You’d think it was a front for a laundering scheme with how little they must make

Haymarket Books is having the exact same sale right now and I honestly prefer their selection

>all of the classic critical theory is still out of print
damn.

>>15324818
Most of their money comes from universities and occasional hits like New Dark Age. They've filled a niche that, at this point, few others can: keeping important left-wing texts in circulation for cheap prices. They tend to do these huge sales whenever they're planning to roll out new editions/series. Their popularity also masks their actual operation size, which is a single store in Brooklyn and like, two lofts. I don't think Verso employs even 200 people.

There's a 100% sale on libgen right now

>>15325018
What would you recommend?

>>15325406
Holy kek

>>15323869
Ethics of the Real by Zupancic is fantastic, the print quality is always nice and the books are very cheap as far as theory goes. But the majority of their releases are just more of the same regurgitated marxist analyses that I really don't care for. At least there are some decent Baudrillard books in there to balance it out

New Dark Age was really good.

>>15326146
>Lacan

>>15323979
>not the based translation
Shame, anon.

>>15328141
Plebs need not apply.

>>15323869
Do they have any books about the cinema?

>>15323869
You *buy* books? Wow.

>>15328911
yes

>>15323869
literally who

>>15328901

>Lacan is garbage.

>By that I don't mean I disagree with his ideas, I mean he was a terrible, authoritarian person who didn't believe in his own rhetoric. He was a manipulative charlatan, and his work appeals only to other manipulative charlatans. Lacan's ideas and writing are not conceptually coherent. That means anyone drawing on Lacan is not astute or critical enough to recognize and avoid incoherent, inferentially defunct ideas. Is that who you want to be influenced by?

>Lacan was a master of the straw man approach. He says shit like "Freud assures us that X; our experience of the unconscious proves that Y." Except if you look carefully, quite often Freud doesn't say anything of the sort anywhere, Lacan just needs a foil for his own nonsense.

>There are two problems with this. The first is, it's a dishonest gesture, an argument in bad faith. But worse, straw men get picked up. Someone who only reads Lacan and doesn't know Freud walks away from Lacan's text convinced Freud says X when he doesn't. They'll repeat it as a fact at cocktail mixers and teach it to their students without ever tracking down the actual Freud passages.

>Only fundamentally awful people find Lacan charming or appealing. I honesty can't think of a more reliable indicator of intellectual bad faith than Lacanianism. I mean, Heidegger was a Nazi but at least he was actually trained as a philosopher.

>He loved to pepper his conferences and books with misused references to mathematical concepts or various scientific theories. He was the typical "big talk guy", always using complicated words to cloud his own misunderstanding or give some shade of scientific authority to his fantasies. By the way "big wordism" is a generalized fault among social scientists and philosophers (Deleuze and Guattari are particularly incomprehensible at times) however Lacan is in a class of his own by his propension to bullshit.

>Lacan is not Freud. Lacan is a chimeric mixture of Kojeve, Heidegger, Hegel, Saussure, Bataille, Jaspers, and even Salvador Dali. Lacan was a Hegelian demagogue who did not actually read or care about Freud. If you want to learn/read/teach Freud, forget Lacan, forget Lacanians. Lacan's charlatanry would never have been possible if there had been a French standard edition of Freud in the '50s and '60s, because anyone would have been able to see that the texts don't actually say what he claimed they said.

>Psychoanalysis is an empirics of intensities, it is not a hermeneutics. The analyst is not a detective, and neurosis has very little to do with truth. If you're reading a book and the author tells you psychoanalysis is an allegory of reading, put down the book.

>>15328901
>>15328941
>At the distance of 35 some-odd years I give Lacan an armchair diagnosis as a pathological narcissist, who in another time and place might have been a Jim Jones or Da Free John, but instead found his narcissistic outlet first as a psychotherapist and then as a public intellectual. His speech style is so affected and self-consciously performative. I strongly he suspect he picked up his public speaking skill from Alexandre Kojève, who held seminars that Lacan attended as a young man and were by all accounts electrifying.


>It's mostly just my opinion, but it's an opinion I have based on reading his entire lecture series, a lot of his other writings, and his biography, as well as watching Lacan Parle and Psychanalyse 1 and 2 (both are available for free on the internet if you search hard enough; there's also a documentary called Quartier Lacan containing interviews with his contemporaries about his work and his life.)


>I'm not being combative or demeaning when I say that I think he was a charlatan, but he was what he was, and it becomes pretty apparent when you dive into his work, watch the few taped appearances that exist, and read about how he treated his patients as well as his relationship with the psychoanalytic society.

>In one of Zizek's documentaries (can't remember if it was Perv's Guide to Cinema or Perv's Guide to Ideology) there's a segment where Zizek is sitting on a couch in his home watching Lacan Parle and he makes a pretty interesting analysis about Lacan, double interesting because the same analysis could apply to Zizek himself. I honestly think the reason he gives is why Zizek is so enamored with him, and it makes sense when you've read enough of him and seen him speak in public.

>For what it's worth, nothing i'm saying isn't common knowledge, even Zizek said something along the lines of: Lacan is a largely charlatan (a lot of lacanian psychoanalysts think he's largely bullshit as well), and he does not care for Lacan's presentation and theatrics but he believes that Lacan was on to something nevertheless.

>http://www.psychiatrie-und-ethik.de/infc/en/Shrink_from_Hell.htm

>>15325406
Lol!

>>15328901
>>15328941
>>15328960
>Lacan was born in 1901 into a wealthy middle-class family and trained as a doctor. He was attracted first to neurology but soon abandoned this because the patients' troubles were too "routine", as his biographer (who clearly sympathises with his inhumanity) explains. If Elizabeth Roudinesco's account is accurate, he must have made a hash of his first case presentation to the Societe Neurologique: his patient, she says, supposedly had "pseudobulbar disorders of the spinal cord" - a neurological impossibility. (The innocence with which Roudinesco reports all kinds of clinical cock-ups makes this book a particularly disturbing read for a medic.) Abandoning neurology was obviously a wise career move. Unfortunately, though he lacked all the qualities necessary to make a half-way decent doctor (eg kindness, common sense, humility, clinical acumen and solid knowledge), Lacan did not abandon medicine altogether, only its scientific basis. He chose to be a psychoanalyst where, instead of elucidating diagnoses, he could impose them.

>He fastened on Marguerite Pantaine, a tragically deluded woman who had attempted to kill a well-known actress. For a year, he and Marguerite were, according to Roudinesco, "inseparable". (She had no choice, being in detention.) The elaborate story he concocted about her became the basis of an entire theory of the sick soul and formed his doctoral thesis. In the great tradition of psychoanalysis, "he listened", Roudinesco says, "to no truths other than those which confirmed his own hypotheses". More precisely, the truth was that which confirmed his hypothesis: into her case, "he projected not only his own theories on madness in women but also his own fantasies and family obsessions". For this soul-rape Lacan was awarded his doctorate and his reputation was made. To the end of her days, Marguerite remained bitterly resentful of the use he had made of her. With good reason: Lacan's crackpot theories, partly expropriated from Salvador Dali, probably prolonged her incarceration. To add insult to injury, he "borrowed" all her writings and photographs and refused to give any of them back.

>Lacanians may argue that the great edifice of the Ecrits is not undermined by revelations about his life: the Master's thoughts should be judged on their own merits. However, in the absence of any logical basis or empirical evidence, the authority of the thought has derived almost completely from the authority of the man. The discovery that Lacan was the shrink from hell is not, therefore, irrelevant. Roudinesco's biography is consequently an act of liberation on behalf of those students, forced by uncritical teachers who do not know Stork from butter, to try to understand and make sense of his nonsense. This act of liberation is all the more compelling for being the work of a disciple and thus in part involuntary.

>>15328941
>>15328972
>>15328960
Neat I'll be sure to check out Lacan

>>15328941
>>15328960
>>15328972
>appealing to the authority of a fucking 4chan post
Congrats, you know how to copy paste things. Bet you feel proud of those 10 minutes you spent searching the catalog for that, aye?

Can anyone recommend me leftist books and authors that don't despise history, tradition, culture, beauty and family?

>>15329269
how about you read something that actually challenges your presuppositions, instead of simply reaffirming them? Reading things just because they conform to your narrow window of appreciation is just bad intellectual practise, dude

>>15329303
No you fucking moron. I do read a lot of leftist literature and every thing I've read so far has been against those things I listed.
I'm asking for some specific recommendations because I can't find m any.

Good on you for confirming to the stereotype that leftoids despise everything most people care about with your pathetic attempt to call me out for no reason.
You know the best way to try and convert people to your beliefs isn't by telling them all their convictions are false?
So please, if you want to do you and me a favour, could you PLEASE recommend me any left-wing affirmations of history, tradition, culture, beauty and family?

And to demonstrate that I'm not acting in bad faith (like I suspect you did, you soulless ideologue bugman), here's an example of compelling left arguments to me:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/10/why-you-hate-contemporary-architecture

Gonna get this New Dark Age people here think is good. Might get Ego and His Own and Minima Moralia as well.

>>15329394
Might not fit exactly, but Theodor Adorno hated most thing contemporary for his time and constantly talked about the great German cultures of the past.

>>15323869
Good tip, thanks.

>>15329269
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/index.htm

>>15323979
ok. this is epic.

>>15329975
NDA is great

>>15328414
>those quotes up top
ruined

The deals aren't too bad, found some interesting books I might pick up, but then when I saw that every e-book is basically 2 bucks, i might have to expand my backlog a bit.

Just picked up £170 worth of prime leftist material. Can't wait.

>>15323869
>coming to a board full of pirates to try and advertise
whoever is paying you, they're paying you too much. virgin buyfag versus CHAD pirate.

>>15323869

>Be anti-capitalist lefty
>Forced to sell your books for half price because no one is willing to buy them

Pottery