[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 15 KB, 305x475, 22613-1203221021.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22352035 No.22352035 [Reply] [Original]

Am I stupid? Or is Baudrillard's comprehensiveness shit? The only things I'm getting out of this are references to my own preexisting views.

Could I get a run down of the ideas present, please?

>> No.22352039

>>22352035
It's the French intellectual way. Lots of bullshit but low content

>> No.22352591

>>22352035
No, you can't you retarded zoomer. There is no instant gratification here, you read, you study, you think.

>> No.22352678

>>22352035
S&S is fine but it's not some mindblowing systematic treatise on hyperreality like people assume it is. It's just a bunch of essays strung together that reflect on why random architecture or popular culture counts as hyperreality. Which is fine like I said, but it's overblown by people who never read the book. You can tell they haven't read it from the fact they assume it's something else.

>> No.22353116

>>22352035
S&S is a meme
Symbolic Exchange and Death is the actual book you need to read from this fag

>> No.22353580

>>22353116
Second that
Also the whole book is kinda Rudy poo BS. Kind of entertaining to read the 'this is the engineered new age world we're doomed its over.jpg' , it could be a good primer if you want to vibe with zeitgeist, but for me after reading it was all pee pee poo poo and sharts.

>> No.22353587

>>22352591
I asked nicely, mf. It's an author's job to make their work as comprehensible as possible, especially when presenting such unhinged topics. If you read any political science book, you'll see that the author almost always eases you into the topic by introducing related ideas and fleshing out what they mean to them so that you are on the same page. Baudrillard does none of this. Instant gratification my ass, it's about how this guy's writing is shit; both in prose and content.

>>22353116
I don't think I'm ever reading this guy again for reasons mentioned above.

>> No.22353723

>>22353587
Welcome to French philosophy. Don't get me wrong, there is some genuine quality content there. But they make you work for it as if they're trying to keep their basic ideas a secret. Which is probably true to some extent.

>> No.22353746

>>22353587
>It's an author's job to make their work as comprehensible as possible
No, it isn‘t. Iirc Luhmann for example made his prose hard to encourage slower and more reflected reading. Mr. Baudrillard doesn‘t owe you anything, stupid American.

>> No.22353812

Continental philosophers write like this because they are failed novelists.

>> No.22354284

>>22353587
Typical zoomer. It's not me it's everyone else.