Dark, Violent Theory/Lit

[Anonymous No.18653124]

Does it get any better than this, /lit/? I feel like I've reached the pinnacle.

[Anonymous No.18653132]

[Anonymous No.18653133]

>>18653124
There is a meme book named Omnicide that catalogues types of mania and apparently advocates destroying the universe or something. I didn't get very far into it lol

[Anonymous No.18653135]

Do you just read books because they're br00tal?

[Anonymous No.18653289]

>>18653124
I'm 100% certain you didnt actually read that book. Tell me which chapter you liked best and why

[Anonymous No.18653310]

>>18653289
i liked that chapter where he talked about the violent stuff

[Anonymous No.18653372]

what's the prerequisite to read this

[Anonymous No.18653378]

>>18653372
drugs

[Anonymous No.18654085]

>>18653372
In depth understanding of Marx and Freud and contemporary response texts to them.
Then Kant and Deleuze.

[Anonymous No.18654355]

>>18654085
what's the prerequisite to read Marx, Freud, Kant and Deleuze?

[Anonymous No.18654461]

>>18654355

If you go this route, you won't be able to read anything in this life. Just find a good introductory book on the work you are interested in. It should at least fill enough gaps to make the central arguments understandable. After that, you are free to read the original work and/or to go deeper in the works mentioned by the introductory book. Slowly, your knowledge will increase and you will find yourself more and more able to just pick a book and understand it.

[Anonymous No.18654479]

>edgy facistic pseudointellectualism
>the pinnacle
This board is a fucking circus

[Anonymous No.18655635]

>>18654461
I wish someone told me this earlier. At the same time, I've read pretty much everything between Kant and Bataille and still have to take Deleuze 101 just to tackle Fanged Noumena. It's still been a rewarding journey even if it's taken over a year and a half.

[Anonymous No.18655862]

>>18655635

I spent years trying to get enough background to completely reconstruct and understand in depth all the arguments of the critique of pure reason using primary literature only (because it made me feel more intellectual and genuine).

I read Kant letters and his lessons on logic to get into his mind and understand his usage of terms. Studied the rationalists and the empiricists to see who he was responding to and which concepts he would take for granted. Learned how people thought about mathematics and physics in his age in order to make sense of his examples. And so on. Even learned German, thinking that the key to some passage might be found in the original phrasing.

But in the end, what really unlocked the full range of the Critique for me was finally reading secondary literature. It was crazy to think that I could do this work better than someone who has devoted his professional life to it.

How are you going about studying Deleuze?

[Anonymous No.18655984]

>>18655862
I don't read Deleuze at all. I only read secondary literature. I'm doing a PhD on Deleuze's difference and repetition right now. I will never read that fucker.

[Laura Numeroff !BmHtx5LcGM No.18655993]

Spinal Catastrophism was way better

[Anonymous No.18655995]

Stop spamming accfag.

[Anonymous No.18655998]

>>18655993
>Spinal Catastrophism
You sound like a fucking loser

[Anonymous No.18656006]

>>18655995
>spamming
>it's the only Nick Land thread on the board

[Anonymous No.18656021]

>>18656006
>urbanomic ad bumping
>you talking to yourself
No one gives a shit but you're spending money to samefag

[Laura Numeroff !BmHtx5LcGM No.18656025]

>>18655998
Yea, losing my dick up your sisters arse

[Anonymous No.18656037]

>>18656025
>arse
oh, well that explains that.
Fucking loser. Go and read Land instead of that weak ass shit.

[Laura Numeroff !BmHtx5LcGM No.18656055]

>>18656037
>I haven’t read Land already
what are you even so fucking buttmad about? did this book also fuck you’re sister or something?

[Anonymous No.18656064]

>>18656055
>Thinks Land is just FN
Faggots that read Spinal Catastrophism should catastrophically die

[Anonymous No.18656196]

>>18655984
Based

[Anonymous No.18656412]

>>18654085
>Freud and contemporary response texts
i dont seriously have to read contemporary psychology? you jsut mean Lacan and Guattari right?

[Anonymous No.18656465]

>>18655984

Have you found any particularly good stuff so far?

I'm planning to start Deleuze soon. I see that Claire Colebrook's book is considered good as a general introduction, and there are a few good guides both to Difference and Repetition and to Logic of Sense.

[Anonymous No.18656477]

>>18656064
please don't reply to tripfags.

[Anonymous No.18656480]

>>18656477
good advice.

[Laura Numeroff !BmHtx5LcGM No.18656503]

>>18656477
>>18656480
Das rite, boy. Don’t reply.
Go on, don’t even greentext my post number and post a spinach. Think you got the balls?

[Anonymous No.18656513]

@18656503
bafflingly cringe desu.

[Laura Numeroff !BmHtx5LcGM No.18656521]

>>18656513
Knew you couldn’t manage it ;)

[Anonymous No.18656527]

[Anonymous No.18656552]

>>18654479
Literally nothing fascistic about that book, making it rather ironic you use the word pseud when you're talking about something you haven't read because of the author's reputation, based on his later writing, which you also haven't read and is not fascist either lmao it's just right wing

[Anonymous No.18656593]

>>18656465

[Anonymous No.18656604]

>>18653372
The Turner Diaries