/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18826872]

I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.18827983]

>>18826872
Bump

[Anonymous No.18828663]

>>18826872
what's not to get

[Anonymous No.18828978]

>>18828663
Whats the point of all the transgressive shit? What's the meaning behind all the juvenile erotic shit?

[Anonymous No.18829110]

>>18826872
unironically read (at least) Eroticism, all will makes sense
Bataille is a far better non-fiction writer anyway

[Anonymous No.18829131]

they make fucki fucki

[Anonymous No.18830046]

>>18828978
big pp

[Anonymous No.18830079]

>>18828978
It's for "intellectuals" to jerk off to so they can spare their dignity instead of picking up something trashy.

[Anonymous No.18830900]

>>18826872
You might have gotten it though.

>>18828978
>Whats the point of all the transgressive shit? What's the meaning behind all the juvenile erotic shit?
So it is more dreamlike and unbound from cultural expectations.

[Anonymous No.18831955]

>>18826872
have sex

[Anonymous No.18832102]

>>18830900
>So it is more dreamlike and unbound from cultural expectations.
My dreams are nothing like that though

[Anonymous No.18832618]

>>18826872
I started reading the introduction to Visions of excess, and I got filtered.... Besides Freud and Marx (as the other anon recommended) do I need to read anyone else?

[Anonymous No.18832648]

The essay ‘‘The ‘Lugubrious Game’ ’’ must be seen in the context of two fragments, unpublished in Bataille’s lifetime, that are, for their scope and theo- retical audacity, among his most important writings.
These are ‘‘The Jesuve’’ and ‘‘The Pineal Eye.”’ Both circle around an ‘‘excremental fantasy,”’ a legacy of an anal fixation worked out in Bataille’s psychoanalytic cure. This fantasy involves, through the process of evolution, the movement of a tremendous erotic force up from the ape’s provocative anus to the erect human’s head and brain.

Ok, this guy's a joke.

[Anonymous No.18832921]

>>18832618
If you're going to read Marx then you would benefit from reading Hegel. But before reading Hegel you should read Kant. Aristotle's Organon is a prerequisite to understand Kant. Kant assumes you know it well and doesn't spend time explaining why or how for example the 10 categories are relevant. Also Hume is useful to understand what Kant is replying to and what motivates Kant to think like he does.

[Anonymous No.18833566]

>>18832921
Thank you for the answer; I was already intending on reading then all.

[Anonymous No.18833633]

>>18826872
>>18828978
It's about using the limits of perversion and transgression to approach mystical experiences.
Take the scene in the church. A midwit might think it was because the characters or the author didn't like Christianity and wanted to insult it.
What's really happening is the characters are almost forcing God's hand, doing something so evil and sinful in a church to make him show up and smite them.
Weather or not he shows up is immaterial, the characters will feel something like his presence in their heightened experience of pleasure and sadism.
You'd be better reading some romantics to get an understanding of this, they approach the sublime through terror and eroticism instead of looking at a big mountain.
t. coomer

[Anonymous No.18833856]

>>18828978
it gallops over the limits of human experience and ecstatic states by pertaining to the obscene and depraved; the inversion of sanctity, the corruption of purity. there is a slight tinge of class-analysis as demonstrated by the interactions between sir edmund and his encouragement of boundary-breaking, in that, after hoarding wealth, the bourgeois character seeks to exploit the ultimatums of nature (carnality and vulgar eros) which the proletariat will not partake in willingly, but be victim of as the proletariat are alienated from 'luxury'.

granted, i haven't read this in awhile, but that was partly my take-away from memory.

[Anonymous No.18833896]

>>18833856
That class interpretation is a MASSIVE leap.
All three characters are wealthy and have servants, but it would be insanely reductive to say the characters acted that way because they were bourgeois. He's not even saying this behaviour is bad, he's just examining the experience of the behaviour.
(I doubt the author would condone that stuff in reality, I think he just assumes that the reader would know that raping and killing someone was bad and so didn't need to point that out.)

[Anonymous No.18833897]

>>18833856
same anon, just adding that:

the character of sir edmund has enough power to be able to escape from the consequences of his actions- that the world is his plaything to use and abuse to his hearts content. perhaps there's an underlying theme (knowing batailles marxist background) of the effects of the imperial core on foreign nations.

[Anonymous No.18833920]

>>18833896
i can understand why someone may think it's a massive leap. my interpretation really just comes the understanding i have on leisure-classes and the excitations of anglican bohemia; this is why i specifically referred to sir edmund. i don't think i implied that bataille thought this behaviour was necessarily bad, as he didn't delve into moralism to such an extent in the novella, just highlighted the experiences that, and i may seem schizo lol, the exploitations of the bourgeois unto the proletariat (i.e. in contemporary society, the links of sex-trafficking and child abuse for example). appreciate the criticism though.

[Anonymous No.18834076]

>>18833920
1. stop typing like that, it has the opposite effect you think it does.
2. I know why you would think that way, but you're just wrong. It just isn't about that.

[Anonymous No.18834199]

>>18834076
subjectivity

[Anonymous No.18834250]

>>18834199
Great point anon, in fact, why not stop reading books altogether? There's no point when you can just come up any old trash as an interpretation and have that be as valid as anyone else's.
Your interpretation simply isn't supported by the text. Sorry.

[Anonymous No.18834278]

>>18834250
you're also missing the point that it's just a side-interpretation, by no means did i suggest that it's what the entirety of the text is about, but rather just a possible underlying theme ("slight tinge") lol.

[Anonymous No.18834295]

>>18834278
That's an association you have, not a theme in the book.
but all the same, sorry I was so mean

[Anonymous No.18834303]

>>18834295
thank you for challenging my perspective on the novel. :)

[Anonymous No.18834309]

>>18834303