/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12802523]

What's his favourite lovecraft story?

[Anonymous No.12802550]

Land, Nick. Dislike him. A self-conscious stylist, tried and conservative. A sham horrorist, a claptrap metaphysicist and a shoddy Deleuzian. Nobody takes his rambling blog posts seriously.
The Thirst for Annihilation. Dislike it intensely.
Fanged Noumena. Dislike it intensely. Ghastly haunting

[Anonymous No.12802566]

Take for instance François Laruelle and Nick Land, fundamentally different thinkers and writers. Without questioning or doubting the merits of Laruelle’s work, I think there is a cognitive lesson to be learned here. Once you almost flatten the distinction between content and form, once you unwittingly develop an increasingly esoteric style, then you inevitably open yourself to reappropriation by the most dubious sects. Save for some glaring exceptions, Laruelle’s thought has been hijacked by new age mysticism, politically-motivated negative theology, and colonial pessimism masqueraded as the voice of decolonial emancipation. Land on the other hand is a self-conscious stylist. His industriously crafted libidinal prose is less a product of a harbinger of semantic apocalypse who wages an all-out war against meaning (or inadvertent stylistic overexcitement) than it is a mundane yet effective mobilization of style to recruit the impressionable and those who are tired, rightly so, by stale and intellectually frustrating philosophy. But beneath the facade of this titillating, libidinally charged, and insinuating prose lies a philosophically and politically conservative writer, whose ideas of cybernetics and complexity hasn’t advanced since the 1970s, whose brand of social Darwinism as cosmological laws can be effectively debunked by an undergraduate in physics, and whose idea of the will-to-think is no more than mere a lacquer over petty psychological fixations.

In a nutshell, Land is one of the greatest English-language writers alive, but being a great writer is not, by itself, a register of insight or profundity. It can very well be the symptom of someone who wants to think but is plagued with incessant poetic tics which are purely automatic and non-cognitive. In contrast to these examples, let’s mention Carnap (the writer of the Logical Syntax of Language), Wilfrid Sellars and—a more recent example—Lorenz Puntel, author of Structure and Being. These authors might strike the reader as boring, or even intolerably pedantic. But once you suspend your learned biases, you can see that they are much more exciting, subversive and rebellious than those who boast philosophical egalitarianism and the great outdoors of thought all the while under the shroud of fighting orthodoxy, indulging in conformism, conservatism and intellectual idleness.

[Anonymous No.12802577]

>>12802523
>gabbidull iz dervore id dink

[Anonymous No.12802600]

>>12802566

I like Sellars as much as the next guy but I feel like this dude is comparing apples and oranges. Yes he is a stylist, but it is through that speciffic libidinal style that so much is going under the hood. For example, the whole theory around hyperstition, there is so much meat there that its analogous in scale to the best of the best of Lovecraftian mythos writers. Also he/she makes the mistakes of confusing Land the writer and Land the person. They are two very separate entities that very "consciously" exist apart.

[Anonymous No.12802646]

>>12802566
absolutely scathing

[Anonymous No.12802689]

>>12802600
Reza Niggastani wrote that

[Anonymous No.12802691]

>>12802600
>gabbidull mean mummee
>n mean mummee gud

[Anonymous No.12802714]

>>12802566
Negarestani is posturing here; if there has been a move towards some third-order cybernetics he should explicitly lay it out, not vaguely gesture towards it like this new order is somehow in vogue. Also, I bought Spirit and Intelligence, and, if we are talking about style over substance, oh Lord above, he is actually WORSE than Land. If ANYONE doubts this, watch this video unboxing the fucking LEGO SET he released for the book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzFFWh1B3J0

[Anonymous No.12802727]

>>12802689

Reza did the Abjad and Trison stuff, Eshun blended the Nigerian mythology into it, while Nick and the CCRU team created the numogram. You underestimate his autism.

[Anonymous No.12802739]

>>12802714

Wow, Negarestani wrote that? What an ingrate, if it wasn't for Nick he would have been in some shitty Iranian university teaching sandnigger philosophy.

[Anonymous No.12802740]

>>12802714
Land's crypto book better come with warhammer 40k miniatures

[Anonymous No.12802750]

>>12802566
he's pissed because land said we should invade iran

[Anonymous No.12802755]

>>12802714
Nick is releasing a video game to promote Crypto-Current

[Anonymous No.12802764]

>>12802755
source?

[Anonymous No.12802843]

>>12802740
Not being satisfied with FakeCoins.
>>12802714
Accelerationists are unironically the LootBox of ideology.

[Anonymous No.12802899]

>>12802843
what philosophers are you keen towards, petrockanon?

[Anonymous No.12802943]

>>12802714
>Look mom, I'm subverting the analytic establishment!

[Anonymous No.12802967]

>>12802714
I always found it odd that continentals go after a system reliant on continually modified formal logic like the scientific method as though it was an orthodox dogma imposed as a strictly top-down institution, while simultaneously being the philosophical tradition most reliant upon exegesis of dogma.

[Anonymous No.12803796]

jina gud
gugl gud
gabdul god

[Anonymous No.12804086]

[Anonymous No.12804097]

>>12802550
Based
I aint trying to accelerate i just wanna slow down wit the codeine

[Anonymous No.12804220]

That's ted bundy