/lit/ - Literature

There are the following early texts, not included in Fanged Noumena, probably because they're review essays:
"Machines and Technocultural Complexity: The Challenge of the Deleuze–Guattari Conjunction," Theory, Culture & Society 12:2 (May 1995).
"Review of Terminal Identity, Out of Control, Feminism and the Technological Fix, and Heuretics," Textual Practice 9:3 (Winter 1995).
"Shoot-out at the Cyber Corral," New Scientist 2043 (17 August 1996).
"Organisation Is Suppression" [interview], Wired UK 3.02 (February 1997).

I also know of a more recent article called Introductions to the Afterlife.

>totally not op
A thread died for this.

>>18165533
where to find these?
>>18165558
oh no. that poor Jünger thread with 2 replies

>>18165652
why don't faggots like you distinguish between meme shitpost Land threads and serious inquisitive Land threads such as this one?

>>18165628
Searching academic databases + there used to be a list of articles on Land's wiki page

>>18165666
thanks satan. also based and checked

>>18165628
Ywnbaw

>forgets to reset router
Nice work op.

>>18165673
thank the Lord

>>18165109
don't forget his blogs and twitter posts

>>18165533
From the interview
>Nick Land: Your question suggests that there’s some pre-existing social pool of liberatory, revolutionary, emancipatory creative potential that could be expected to spontaneously express itself as soon as it had an opportunity to do so. But there is no such intrinsic power of innovation latent in the human organism that’s just waiting to bounce out onto the web. So the question really is what are the assemblages that are emerging? And correspondingly to what extent are distributed systems becoming operative as such?
Fashy vibes. He was on his way to becoming a NRx already then

>>18166145
kek what a pseud.

>>18166127
the blogs are in Reignition it seems. Twitter is umimportant except for black necrosis and one tweet from early 2020

>>18166145
>Fashy vibes. He was on his way to becoming a NRx already then
guess I'm too brainlet to understand what's fasist about the quote. can you explain?

>>18166175
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25pX6JacK20

Where can I find most of his nonfiction essays? Would that be in Reignition?

>>18166232
probably. there's also something called the nick land reader that has stuff that's not in reognition or FN

>>18166165
>one tweet from early 2020
which tweet would that be?

>>18165109

A handful of his articles are "rare".
I'm thinking about the one he wrote on the American constitution for example.

https://antinomiaimediata.wordpress.com/2016/08/12/a-republic-if-you-can-keep-it/

>>18165109
I can't take him seriously anymore after he became an unironic gop trump boomer. I wish somebody else could still write as well about cool shit like hyperstition and the capitalocene

>>18165109
>Collected Nick Land

Someone should transcribe all his interviews and those online classes he did.

There was a great interview with him about 2 years ago about the In the Mouth of Madness movie.

>Maggie Siebert has a discussion with Land on the carpenter movie "in the mouth of madness". Discusses it's impact on his work, how well it embodies lovecraftian mythos, and how it can be viewed as a metaphor for transcendental metaphsyics.

It's since been deleted from the Internet. I hope someone saved it...

https://soundcloud.com/personalcanon/in-the-mouth-of-madness-with-nick-land

>>18166390
>unironic gop trump boomer.
he was an ironic trumper

>>18166401
>Someone should transcribe all his interviews and those online classes he did
It's a formidable task but I'm planning on it regardless

Wow a Nick Land thread!? Haven't seen one of these in forever.

Very based frens. Make /lit/ fast again.

>>18165665
Because land himself is a meme shitpost.

>>18166423
He still routinely reposts shit from ron unz and other cuckservatives and bitches about democrats non stop, no it isn't "ironic"

>>18165665
>serious inquisitive Land threads

>>18166357
"The future is seizing the opportunity to bust its way in" then a link to augmented chinese policemen.
The quote itself is a profound and extremely salient statement on the nature of time as a whole, perfectly encapsulating a philosophical concept of mine I've termed "Reverb"

>>18166443
t. midwit

>>18166455

>>18166449S
>very profound
HAHAHAHAHAHA

>>18166463
don't cry. you can't understand everything unless you're me

his fiction, his work for That's Mag, the Dark Enlightenment, the Xenosystems posts, the pre-Xenosystems blogposts, his fiction, his book about bitcoin that he posted on his blog, etc.

>>18166470
i didn't say very. you can't even quote me verbatim and have the gall to talk to me about profundity. away with you. you pollute the thread

anyone got a pdf of the shanghai expo guide?

>>18166521
seconded. It's even harder to find than his PhD thesis

There was also an interview and a bitcoin extract in Šum.

lmao at your life.

>>18166445
yeah because the democrats have degenerated into the epitome of woke insanity but that doesn't mean that he is anywhere near todays republicans which are only a shade less pozzed.

Nick is still a marxist. He takes marxism to some wild (and ultimately correct) conclusions with capital at its centre but his views are built on a marxist foundation to this day aren't they? It's not even wholly unprecedented, as he's a neoliberal and so was Foucault. Seems to me like, and twitter would be very upset by this if true (which it is), the arc of marxism is long but it bends toward neoliberalism

>>18166632
True, I understand why he feels how he does (I feel the same often) but it still feels like a big step back from when he said all politics are meaningless and obsolete some time back in the 90s. Hyperpoliticization of society is probably to blame

>>18167098
>all politics are meaningless and obsolete
where did he say this? not disputing, just want the source(s)

>>18167178

His old Xenosystems blog is full of posts speaking to his alignment with anti-political forces.

>There’s one dimension of reactionary diversity that strikes Outside in as particularly consequential (insofar as anything out here in the frozen wastes has consequences): the articulation of reaction and politics. Specifically: is the reaction an alternative politics, or a lucid (= cynically realistic) anti-politics? Is democracy bad politics, or simply politics, elaborated towards the limit of its inherently poisonous potential?

>Outside insides emphatically with the anti-political ‘camp’. Our cause is depoliticization (or catallaxy, negatively apprehended).The tradition of spontaneous order is our heritage. The New Reaction warns that the tide is against us. Intelligence will be required, in abundance, if we are to swim the other way, and we agree with the theonomists at least in this: if it is drawn from non-human sources, so much the better. Markets, machines, and monsters might inspire us. Rulers of any kind? Not so much.

I'd call politics pernicious rather than meaningless. As for politics being obsolete? Let's just say that politics is trying to prevent a runaway future from coming to be.