the best post in that thread is by JortyDaysShartyNights in response to SirFrancisBaconalia
i know nothing of political/social theory save for my own experiences and their surrounding contexts. can the rhi77one suggest a Book, but preferably one that addresses the issues of creative repression... loss of identity when faced with a heavy sense of 'self-adequacy' and lack thereof. but in an international context (im not gay). like what kind of book would u give a lazy fellah if you wanted to inspire him to Work Hard. T I A
not theory but the collected works of william gaddis, the recognitions specifically. thanks.
- Vulgarity, cupidity, and power. Is that what frightens you? Is that all you see around you, and you think it was different then? Flanders in the fifteenth century, do you think it was all like the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb? What about the paintings we've never seen? the trash that's disappeared? Just because we have a few masterpieces left, do you think they were all masterpieces left, do you think they were all masterpieces? What about the pictures we've never seen, and never will see? that were as bad as anything that's ever been done. And your precious van Eyck, do you think he didn't live up to his neck in a loud vulgar court? In a world where everything was done for the same reasons everything's done now? for vanity and avarice and lust? and the boundless egoism of these Chancellor Rolins? Do you think they knew the difference between what was bizarre and what was beautiful? that their vulgar ostentation didn't stifle beauty everywhere, everywhere? the way it's doing today? Yes, damn it, listen to me now, and swear by all that's ugly! Do you think any painter did anything but hire himself out? These fine altarpieces, do you think they glorified anyone but the vulgar having men who commissioned them? Do you think a van Eyck didn't curse having to whore away his genius, to waste his genius, to waste his talents on all sorts of vulgar celebrations, at the mercy of people he hated?

Blood flowed over his broken tooth. He'd turned away, but swung about again unable to stop. - Yes, I remember your little talk, your insane upside-down apology for these pictures, every figure and every object with its own presence, its own consciousness because it was being looked at by God! Do you know what it was? What it really was? that everything was so afraid, so uncertain God saw it, that it insisted its vanity on His eyes? Fear, fear, pessimism and fear and depression everywhere, the way it is today, that why your pictures are so cluttered with detail, this terror of emptiness, this absolute terror of space. Because maybe God isn't watching. Maybe He doesn't see. Oh, this pious cult of Middle Ages! Being looked at by God! Is there a moment of faith in any of their work, in one centimeter of canvas? or is it vanity and fear, the same decadence that surrounds us now. A profound mistrust in God, and they need every idea out where they can see it, where they can get their hands on it. Your ... detail, he commenced to falter a little, - your Bouts, was there ever a worse bourgeois than your Dierick Bouts? and his damned details? Talk to me of separate consciousness, being looked at by God, and then swear by all that's ugly! Talk to me about your precious van Eycks, and be proud to be as wrong as they were, as wrong as everyone around them was, as wrong as he was. And Basil Valentine flung out a hand to the broken hulk on the floor, toward which he backed the retreating figure before him. -Separation, he said in a voice near a whisper, - all of it cluttered with separation, everything in its own vain shell, everything separate withdrawn from everything else. Being looked at by God! Is there separation in God!
jk um walter benjamin, art in the age of mechanical reproduction i guess
ive just realized that anti-oedipus is THE anti-accelerationist text....

The social machine's limit is not attrition, but rather its misfirings; it can operate only by fits and starts, by grinding and breaking down, in spasms of minor explosions. The dysfunctions are an essential element of its very ability to function, which is not the least important aspect of the system of cruelty. The death of a social machine has never been heralded by a disharmony or a dysfunction; on the contrary, social machines make a habit of feeding on the contradictions they give rise to, on the crises they provoke, on the anxieties they engender, and on the infernal operations they regenerate. Capitalism has learned this, and has ceased doubting itself, while even socialists have abandoned belief in the possibility of capitalism's natural death by attrition. No one has ever died from contradictions. And the more it breaks down, the more schizophrenizes, the better it works, the American way.

slotting this into the context of the current financial crises, and hmmm....


parabolart posted:
i know nothing of political/social theory save for my own experiences and their surrounding contexts. can the rhi77one suggest a Book, but preferably one that addresses the issues of creative repression... loss of identity when faced with a heavy sense of 'self-adequacy' and lack thereof. but in an international context (im not gay). like what kind of book would u give a lazy fellah if you wanted to inspire him to Work Hard. T I A

Art in Theory 1900 - 2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas is a great selection of 20th century cultural thought, includes a whole load of stuff from orthodox marxism, western crit theory & poststructuralism (including lots of texts i haven't seen published, in english at least ,elsewhere) ... not so strong on colonial or post colonial thought, tho, so you might want to find something giving a good overview of those schools to read aswell. but ya its a great primer i recommend to everyone !

Edited by blinkandwheeze ()


getfiscal posted:
i'm sort of a beginner on such things so i probably won't describe it well and will step into various errors.

basically marxist humanism focuses on humanity as being realized (the liberation of their species-being) in the process of history and sees alienation as the key to marxism. althusser suggests that this relies on an early marx who has not rejected hegel's dialectic yet. althusser argues that marx's dialectic is qualitatively different from hegel's, that it isn't just an adopted hegelianism. marx had to "break" with hegel in order to understand history in a scientific way. and so mostly after this "break" he doesn't really talk much about alienation (except again in private journals).

hegelian marxists like lukacs had said, for example, that the proletariat was the subject-object of history. that means that human history was essentially groping towards its own liberation in the form of a proletariat that could see itself as liberator of all and therefore see society as it actually is rather than mediated through class relations. but this objectivity was questioned by althusser, who ended up saying something radically different: marxism was the first theory that didn't see itself as objective and representing all of humanity. so it is theoretically anti-humanist.

for example, bourgeois philosophy almost always implies universalism about itself, it always say that it has come to conclusions about what is natural and timeless about itself. so it might come up with things like "humans are rational self-seekers that self-organize in markets naturally" as axioms that can't really be argued against effectively. marxist humanists played a similar game by implying that classless society was the natural state of humanity and that history was essentially restoring a natural balance but with advanced technology. althusser says, on the other hand, that marxism doesn't make claims about timeless features of humanity, and it doesn't appeal to see society as it really is in absence of distorting features, it rather is a partisan theory of theoretical practice that draws on the class position of the proletariat as the first theory in history that admits it is biased and contingent. in other words, marxism is a theory in service to the proletariat, rather than pretending to be a theory of humanity (as in bourgeois philosophy).

hmmm i see.

tell me by which subjective means did you choose to develop that objective perspective
[account deactivated]
HE HE HE HE HE HE im reading, the unnameable, by, samuel beckett, and, when i'm done, i am going to make an awesome post about it
i'm going to direct a movie called the beckett list starring jack nicholson and morgan freeman and it will be about two old men who decide they'll put on a showing of waiting for godot before they die and then one of then men spins out because of alzheimers and the other one is in denial and tries to force him to perform the play with him and starts to beat him and the alzheimers one just cries on the floor of a retirement home because he's confused and battered.
thats actually more or less the plot of the last season of the canadian tv series "slings and arrows"

deadken posted:
HE HE HE HE HE HE im reading, the unnameable, by, samuel beckett, and, when i'm done, i am going to make an awesome post about it

im reading molloy

[account deactivated]

babyfinland posted:

deadken posted:
HE HE HE HE HE HE im reading, the unnameable, by, samuel beckett, and, when i'm done, i am going to make an awesome post about it

im reading molloy

its awesome, freakin Awesome bro


discipline posted:
I'm reading a bunch of papers on financialization as discipline of foreign developing markets because grad school ownz bonez


[account deactivated]

discipline posted:
well I'm running though bacevich, d. harvey's "a brief history of neoliberalism", and r. martin's "the financialization of every day life" while reading articles by craig murphy, veltmeyer, will robinson, carvalho, etc. I can get you links to some of the stuff if you have access to j stor I guess.

ok, i know several of those, i was just wondering if it was something different because of the way you phrased it. i'll look up the names i don't know and that should be good

[account deactivated]
[account deactivated]
i might take a course with mcnally in january :-)
BAHAHAHA my copy of the deleuze dictionary ed. by adrian parr arrived the other day. im going to get fucking incomprehensible
there can be only one anistorian, deadken.
one anistorian? how.... molar of u. a pack of anistorians, a multiplicity of anistorians, a field of anistorians, a texture of anistorians. molecular posting yall
the search for subatomic particles is based on deeply misguided molar/arborescent conceptions of reality. the wave/particle paradox only exists because we retain a false idea of particularity. the physical universe is composed of flows. the science of flows and turbulence is inimical to royal science with its oedipal obsession with object and position, that's why it has been suppressed at every turn
i like computational fluid dynamics
im readin thucydides

discipline posted:
thought I'd drop off this link in case you have access to jstor and wanna read some good papersumm also I'm reading "the global slump" by mcnally and it's really good so far, very harrowing

thanks, i'll check both out. as far as what i have, maybe this:

A ball of hot money rolls around the world. It seeks anonymity and political refuge. It dodges taxes and sidesteps currency controls. It rolls through offshore shell companies and secret bank accounts, phoney charities and fraudulent religious foundations. It is kept rolling by white-collar criminals, gun-runners, drug dealers, insurgent groups, scam artists, tax evaders, gold and gem smugglers, and, not least, secret service agents plotting coups and financing revolutions. R.T. Naylor explains the origins of this pool of hot and homeless money, its origins, its uses and abuses, how the world of high finance, corporate and governmental, became hostage to it, and the price the world is paying and will continue to pay until the hostages are released.

his style is a little odd, but he wrote the first edition in the midst of the financial blitzkrieg (1986) and has updated it twice since then. he deals with quite a few specific episodes from the Bahamas to Mexico to Poland.

Soviet intelligence was apparently partially responsible because they wanted to hold dollars but didn't want the US to find out, so they got got British banks to agree to hold accounts for them. this helped establish the eurodollar market and ultimately pull the dollar outside US political/legal jurisdiction. at the same time, the US was trying to actively encourage capital flight, so you had pressure from multiple directions.

i remember Giovanni Arrighi relating an anecdote about deals on the eurodollar market being conducted with a telex machine. the computers coming in made it purely algorithmic, which i guess sort of established the critical mass where David Harvey picks up.

the best reasons to read it would probably be a lot of detail on how the political jurisdictions work and details on the complicity of local oligarchies

[account deactivated]
i'll have to see what mcnally says, but it seems to me like that angle is somewhat overemphasized. a good indicator might be whether or not you think it's possible to make any sense of this shit: https://www.google.com/search?q=pinging+dark+pool
[account deactivated]
Give me a ping Vasily. One ping only, please.
hey jools do you have a steam profile you can link me to??
sure http://steamcommunity.com/id/totalbiscuit
thats not actually you is it
TotalBiscuit, The Cynical Brit
im about 60 pages into butler's story by liminov. it's kinda meh to me, liminov approaches his stories with a bitterness, he scores high on the "lf 'fuck yeah'" checklist, but i find him a bit boring. like, houellebecq can pull off this sort of thing because his novels are very well crafted, and you get the impression of he being on the horizon of something at all times, while liminov just makes me feel small.

could be that im just really tired tho