/lit/ - Literature

Schizoanalysis is the duologue between the academic Deleuze and the ADHD guatteri. that is why they resonate with /lit/ and other extremely online people.

>>15853766
deleuze was a crypto-gnostic

>>15853912
Why do you say this

>>15854344
because he sees representationalism as expressing a "demiurgic" function. it is a limit imposed on the fullness of energy

Where should I start with him?

>>15853766
>Schizoanalysis is the duologue between the academic Deleuze and the ADHD guatteri
Fuck you for writing this poopie sentence.

>>15854750
https://baudrillardstudies.ubishops.ca/baudrillards-duality-manichaeism-and-the-principle-of-evil/

>>15854750
the sep article on him

>>15854376
>>15853766
>>15852950
what in the name of God are you freaks talking about? your sentences make no damn sense!

>>15855047
gotta read Baudrillard and Deleuze, friend

>>15855047
READ FRENCH POSTMODERNISTS

a couple questions to liven up the thread:
have you fellas done your homework on barthes (myth), lefebvre (critique of everyday life), veblen (conspicuous consumption) and obviously debord (spectacle)? how did it enrinch your understanding of his work?
what about his more obscure references to authors and artists like david nebreda (photographer) and macedonio fernandez (author, influence on borges)? have you checked their work?
there recently was an exhition in china of baudrillard's photos*, do you guys know much about them and baudrillard's relationship with photography? other than his own photographs he contributed with an afterword (please follow me) to a photobook by sophie calle (suite venitienne) right before he took up photography himself. i'd recommend you look them up if you want to learn where baudrillard came from as a photographer
* http://www.powerstationofart.com/en/exhibition/Jean-Baudrillard.html

>>15855306
g-girardfag?

>>15855306
>do you guys know much about them and baudrillard's relationship with photography? other than his own photographs he contributed with an afterword (please follow me) to a photobook by sophie calle (suite venitienne) right before he took up photography himself. i'd recommend you look them up if you want to learn where baudrillard came from as a photographer
it has no relation with his writing by admission.

Deleuze and Baudrillard will always remain entry level thinkers. This thread should show why

>>15855306
They're all garbage. Use your shift key faggot

>>15855047

Filtered

>>15852950
He also BTFO'd the faggot Foucault. He was indeed based

>>15853912
Wishful thinking.

>>15856075
Why?

>>15852950
Based

>>15852950
Baudrillard's focus in his later work on how the individual is removed from existence by mass media and technoculture is still one of the most on the head analytics of identity in the 21st century. Deleuze's societies of control is just as prescient.

>>15855047
I'm just glad my strong intuition explains difficult things to me, my immediate memory's comprehension of difficult texts is very low.

But I think that's just called being based.

>>15854750
And after that ?

>>15855047
Good. Get filtered you /v/ermin.

>>15857533
>Deleuze's societies of control is just as prescient.
Baudrillard retroactively refuted that in Forget Foucault

>>15857533
>Baudrillard's focus in his later work on how the individual is removed from existence by mass media and technoculture
This seem very interesting, in which book does he develop that more? I know next to nothing about Baudrillard but the term of "technoculture" makes me think of thinkers like Heidegger of Jonas, has Baudrillard any relation with them?

>>15858128
How so? Societies of Control sees a lot of parallels with Baudrillard's work that occurs in the mid-80s onwards, in texts like The Perfect crime or Transparency of Evil. If anything I saw FF as a critique of the genealogical aspects of Foucault as well as a critique on Foucault's use of desire. SoC is predictive. Feel free to give me a page number, if got FF in my bookshelf.
>>15858147
Check out The Vital Illusion, it's a collection of 3 lectures he gave. It's on libgen, and fairly readable. Impossible Exchange is another good one, but a bit of a harder read.

>>15855306
>barthes (myth), lefebvre (critique of everyday life), veblen (conspicuous consumption) and obviously debord (spectacle)?
other major touchstones per the Fragments interview also include Bataille, Rimbaud, Jarry, and Artaud. McLuhan is also important. Lefebvre: perhaps very little intellectual influence on Baudrillard and after about 1968 very little personal influence either. but Baudrillard was rightly suspicious of influence and deliberately tried to obscure and misdirect with his references. all of those names are not terribly useful for understanding his work.
>do you guys know much about them and baudrillard's relationship with photography?
he addresses it in numerous interviews from the 90s onwards and ideas on photography also makes its way into some of his later books (Intelligence of Evil, Why Hasn't Everything Already Disappeared?). someone needs to arrange to have his photographs shown more, especially in the U.S. I don't know who can make that happen, his wife who is still alive seems very pleased to help and attend those events. this is a very good recent paper on Baudrillard and photography:
https://baudrillardstudies.ubishops.ca/baudrillards-photographic-theory/

>>15858193
Alright thanks! Any idea what's the name of The Vital Illusion in French? I can't seem to find it...

>>15854750
His books are indecipherable from front to back. Read his essays and watch lectures.

>>15858364
No idea, it was a series of lectures given in english at the university of California Irvine in May 1999

>>15858193
>If anything I saw FF as a critique of the genealogical aspects of Foucault as well as a critique on Foucault's use of desire.
Forget Foucault is as much an attack on Deleuze and Guattari's theory of desire as it is Foucault's theory of power. The postscript essay is not only a continuation of what, for Baudrillard, is an incoherent and floating theory of desire once desire has disappeared, but it is also explicitly an addition to Foucault's genealogy. The Postscript essay is a simulation of a genealogy and even more indicative of what Baudrillard meant in Forget Foucault than Anti-Oedipus and The History of Sexuality Vol. 1 was imo. There are some parallels between the essay and Baudrillard's work, but even more subtle differences.

>>15858201
There is also Roger Callois, game theory sociologist, who becomes very important to Baudrillard after seduction where he denies the law for the rule, and calls production a game, since it is on that basis that baudrillard rejects it (he thinks the game is shit, and uses Callois to justify that). He talks about this in an interview, but I cannot find it. For a less explicit and direct proof of this, see the last page of the intelligence of evil:
The more daily life is eroded, routinized and interactivized,
the more we must counter this trend with complex, initiatory
sets of rules.
The more reality becomes reconciled with it.'! concept in an
o�jectless generality, the more we must seek out the initiatory
rupture and the power of illusion.
If we cannot make the world the object of our desires, we
can at least make it the object of a higher convention - which,
precisely, eludes our desire.
Any illusion, any initiatory fonn, involves a severe rule.
Any created object, visual or analytic, conceptual or photcr
graphic, has to condense all the dimensions of the game into
a single one: the allegorical, the representative (mimicry) , the
agonal ( agon) , the random (alea) and the vertiginous (ilinx) .47
Recomposing the spectrum.
A work, an obj ect, a piece of architecture, a photograph,
but equally a crime or an event, must: be the allegory of some�thing, be a challenge to someone, bring chance into play and
produce vertigo.

What do I need to read/know before reading The Gulf War Never Happened?

>>15859892
Honestly if you read his entry on IEP you'll be set, that's one of newspaper writings, those are his more readable writings.

>>15859668
Hey anon any advice for what Callois to read if I'm into Baudrillard? I'm a massive nerd for Baudrillard so I want anything even tangentially related to the man

>>15859982
Read his work "Man, Play, and Games". It is very interesting and you will instantly see connections with Baudrillard. It is also very useful for getting into Baudrillards mindset, where everything functions through play, seduction, and reversibility.

>>15860214
Thanks anon.
>It is also very useful for getting into Baudrillards mindset, where everything functions through play, seduction, and reversibility
I'm actually a classically trained musician. I've found these parts of Baudrillard to offer some of the best insights to how music, especially improvisational music, works from the perspective of the performer. There's an infinite number of people that can talk offer insight to experiencing music, there's not many ways to look at performance. The game, the rule, the play of forms, metamorphosis and seduction are inherent in performance.

>>15860348
Certainly!

this thread WILL get to 300

>>15860908
yes

>>15855031
How is Symbolic Exchange and Death?

>>15861654
If you’re not familiar with Marxism and a bit of Freud you’ll find it’s a hard place to start with Baudrillard

>>15854750
If you're looking for an advaitic/gnostic interpretation of Baudrillard, read this.

>>15862169
Based thanks

You might not like it but this is what peak male shit posting looks like

>>15862962
calling him a shitposter is doing a disservice to his work, even if it is inflammatory

>>15863356
Dude the perfect crime is shitposting perfected

in the end, how is one to live after baudrillard?

>>15863533
Fatally

>>15863576
fractally*

The fact that 4chan is the only place where I can have a decent discussion about Baudrillard is the most Baudrillardian thing I’ve encountered

>>15852950
Isn't it kind of cucked to maintain a belief in a truth behind the simulacra? Why do we want truth? Why not rather fiction? Are you thinking of yourself as the man fooled by the simulation? Or as the man who creates it?

>>15863871
Brah you’ve basically just rewritten Baudrillard’s ideas but with less zazz

>>15858201
>other major touchstones per the Fragments interview also include Bataille, Rimbaud, Jarry, and Artaud.
it's in fragments too that he references fernandez
>When you speak about the exchange of the nothing, one thinks, of course, of Georges Bataille and the famous 'accursed share', prodigality and sumptuous expenditure: the living organism receives more energy than is strictly required by it. It is this excess that men expend in luxury, love or war. Something that goes beyond the anthropological underpinnings of classical political economy!
>Bataille's 'accursed share', of course, to which must be added Marcel Mauss's 'potlatch'. But I found the idea of the 'nothing' in Macedonio Fernandez, an Argentine author who is very little known in France, even though two of his books have been translated! He wrote a very remarkable book on the continuation of the nothing.
referencing papiers de nouveauvenu et continuation du rien
and nebreda in living coin: singularity of the phantasm from impossible exchange
i'm interested in his minor references too, like these ones. what's some other noteworthy ones you know?
>all of those names are not terribly useful for understanding his work.
i think they are useful for understanding his early work on sign value
>>15863871
>Isn't it kind of cucked to maintain a belief in a truth behind the simulacra? Why do we want truth? Why not rather fiction?
isn't it kind of cucked to have a complacent opinion in line with the system's?
>Are you thinking of yourself as the man fooled by the simulation? Or as the man who creates it?
debord. what one creates is situations, not spectacle, unless you're compromised that is

>>15854750
just dig the fuck in and read simulation and simulacra

he's reiterative enough to hammer in his points

>>15861936
I’m both. But how much of Marx should I be acquainted with? Like, have read the whole Capital?

Which is peakest tranny? Deleuze or Baudrillard?

Postmoderniss is pseudophilosophy. ITT tryhards who cannot for the life of them build sentences wihtout trashing them with ridiculously overinflated language. You will never be real thinkers.

>>15866134
go huff and puff some brainlet anglo "analytical" philosopher's farts

>>15866088
Deleuze and Guattari would be in a transbian relationship if they were in their 20s now, just look at them

>>15866088
Baudrillard is far from a tranny, you fucking pseud. He was even accused of being a reactionary.

>>15866354
accused of being a reactionary by post-post-post-Marxists, very meaningful indeed

>>15866354
>He doesn't know
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/24/movies/philosophers-draw-on-a-film-drawing-on-philosophers.html

>>15866381
nice attempt

>>15866381
what does this article say? I need an account to read it and I won't do it

>>15866384
Baudrillard is g/acc
https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/3/30/18286436/the-matrix-wachowskis-trans-experience-redpill

>>15866408
baudrillard hated matrix for a good reason. two american came in, took all the 'coolness' from his idea and turned it into trans-gnostic-schlock.

>>15866421
You don't have to openly advocate cuting your dick off to be tranny-compatible like Baudrillard, Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Land, etc.
Look at the philosophers the twitter tranny crowd always make references to, always the usual suspects

>>15866408
For any anon that might want to read this: don't waste your time. It's a really uninspired piece of "journalism". Here's a summary: the matrix is about trans people, yet alt-right trolls use the term red-pill, trans people are aware that they're white and rich.

>>15866445
>tranny-compatible
i don't buy into that narrative. being "something-compatible" is in the beholder eyes which itself weak way of thinking about the world ("i'm what others say i'm").
i can bang the drum and keep repeating PLATO IS TRANNY-COMPATIBLE, give you some vague reason and act like a smug pseud. i won't do that.

>>15853766
>duologue
it's called a dialogue, brainlet

>>15866511
dilate.

>>15866579
no

>>15854750
Order of publication from first to the last.

>>15863458
beautiful

>>15866579
This is true. As a kid you're pre-sexual. It all flows continuous. But sexes create a fissure. A rift between people. Multiplication of sexes creates a multitude of rifts aka atomization. And you feel more alone. It is almost an underground tendency toward that pre-sexual landscape. But it won't retrieve it or emulate it successfully. It is a plastic version of it. So I guess Deleuze is right but clueless at the same time.

>>15866353
Deleuze wouldn't be so shockingly ugly without the hair

>>15867173
no you make big gamete or small gamete

*reads Baudrillard once*