Manic Ferocity
Active Member
- Nov 5, 2006
- 5,280
- 549
- 113
It's informative if you're interested in fiction. Isn't that how interests work and why you would bother reading anything to begin with?
The Books/Reading Thread
- Thread starter Matt
- Start date
It's informative if you're interested in fiction. Isn't that how interests work and why you would bother reading anything to begin with?
Yeah, I'm constantly re-assessing what I think about his work due to his massive impact on Western thought. One thing that continually bugs me is the fact that he is forthright about the treatise not being philosophical anthropology, but I really don't see how it's anything but that.
I don't have a particular issue with the fact that he invents such a novel lexicon for his massive project, but I feel like he's very imprecise with certain terms and tends to conflate important concepts. A lot of the existentiales are given by a number of names and (if I recall correctly, I don't have the book with me) used without discretion or adherence to a structured logic. I really wish I knew German, because I know a lot of the nuances of even the smallest things (and especially crucial technical terms) are lost in translation.
Ein: Thanks. I'll definitely be checking that out. I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking he isn't unassailable.
monoxide_child
New Metal Member
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
when reading
Fiction >>> non-fiction
if i want something "informative" i'll watch History Channel/Discovery Channel/The Learning Channell/documentaries on A&E, documentaries on other channels/Court TV/local news/CNN
Fiction >>> non-fiction
if i want something "informative" i'll watch History Channel/Discovery Channel/The Learning Channell/documentaries on A&E, documentaries on other channels/Court TV/local news/CNN
Balls McHoolihan
You mean coitus?
- Jan 22, 2012
- 759
- 8
- 18
Dak
mentat
Balls McHoolihan
You mean coitus?
- Jan 22, 2012
- 759
- 8
- 18
Why would you believe it is? I guess there really is no way of knowing what's true and what isn't... The only people who really know what happened were the people actually involved in the raid. But with all of the fuss the government is making about the book, it seems like there must be some truth to it.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Reading load for the PhD is ridiculous. This week I'm working on:
Also, just got this in the mail a few days ago. Can't wait to get started on it; the guy translates and writes about both Alain Badiou and Quentin Meillassoux:
Also, just got this in the mail a few days ago. Can't wait to get started on it; the guy translates and writes about both Alain Badiou and Quentin Meillassoux:
monoxide_child
New Metal Member
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
Dak
mentat
Pure propaganda. Brer Rabbit style.
@Ein: Pilgrims Progress is a really under appreciated fiction work.
Einherjar86
Active Member
I love it thus far (have another hundred pages or so to go); but it's difficult to read it with anything other than a Marxian lens, although I do honestly think that's a helpful interpretation. After all, it was published in England in 1848...
Our discussion in class centered on the sentimentalization of the working class, but most of us (myself included) agreed that she doesn't really aim to sentimentalize them all that much. The most inflammatory member of the working class, John Barton, is really not a likable character at all (and certainly not a good father). However, I think the novel is interested more in the inevitability of revolutionary action, and both the positive and negative consequences of such action. I actually gleaned something useful from the introduction to the Book of Esther from my Norton Bible (Mary Barton is definitely in dialogue with that Biblical work, and one of the characters is named Esther...):
Essentially, the editors wrote that the Book of Esther demonstrates the ugliness of the consequences of violence - but also the necessity of the oppressed classes to act rashly. In such cases, violent action is inevitable. Gaskell's definitely exploring this issue in Mary Barton.
The level of realism in the novel is also incredible, especially for the time when it was written. It really achieves a new precedent for psychologically complex characters.
Our discussion in class centered on the sentimentalization of the working class, but most of us (myself included) agreed that she doesn't really aim to sentimentalize them all that much. The most inflammatory member of the working class, John Barton, is really not a likable character at all (and certainly not a good father). However, I think the novel is interested more in the inevitability of revolutionary action, and both the positive and negative consequences of such action. I actually gleaned something useful from the introduction to the Book of Esther from my Norton Bible (Mary Barton is definitely in dialogue with that Biblical work, and one of the characters is named Esther...):
Essentially, the editors wrote that the Book of Esther demonstrates the ugliness of the consequences of violence - but also the necessity of the oppressed classes to act rashly. In such cases, violent action is inevitable. Gaskell's definitely exploring this issue in Mary Barton.
The level of realism in the novel is also incredible, especially for the time when it was written. It really achieves a new precedent for psychologically complex characters.
divine_torture
leVel
Einherjar86
Active Member
Nice, I didn't know anyone else who had heard of him.
I read the first 18 pages yesterday. It's dense, especially since it begins by discussing philosophers I'm not familiar with (primarily in the field of cognitive science); but the argument is discernible if you take your time with it.
I read the first 18 pages yesterday. It's dense, especially since it begins by discussing philosophers I'm not familiar with (primarily in the field of cognitive science); but the argument is discernible if you take your time with it.
divine_torture
leVel
I've heard his stuff is a little...overly complicated (to read, not necessarily to understand). But I believe he is all about speculative realism like one of my favorites Quentin Meillassoux, correct?
I'm not too familiar with cognitive science, either.
I'm not too familiar with cognitive science, either.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Indeed, he is; although apparently he doesn't like the term "speculative realism". I've read that this phrase became popular after Meillassoux emphasized a speculative approach in his work and began using the phrase "speculative materialism". I think the actual phrase "speculative realism" is more of an internet fad term than anything else; that said, it does somewhat capture what they do.
Not sure if you've heard about this, but there's an open access book on "speculative realism" that's available online. You can download the whole pdf. It does a good job navigating the work being done in the field, although it does presuppose a bit of familiarity with the theorists:
http://www.re-press.org/book-files/OA_Version_Speculative_Turn_9780980668346.pdf
Not sure if you've heard about this, but there's an open access book on "speculative realism" that's available online. You can download the whole pdf. It does a good job navigating the work being done in the field, although it does presuppose a bit of familiarity with the theorists:
http://www.re-press.org/book-files/OA_Version_Speculative_Turn_9780980668346.pdf
divine_torture
leVel
I recall Meillassoux using the term "speculative materialism", but never thought to connect the two terms until you said that. I'll definitely bread the pdf soon.
Now that I think about it I vaguely recall someone (Brassier?) saying something similar about speculative realism being an internet wank fest haha.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Just noticed this. I'm surprised you enjoy Bunyan, but not Chaucer...
I really did like Pilgrim's Progress, if more for the narrative innovation than anything else. It works as both a text of religious pedagogy and interpretive pedagogy (since, after all, Calvinists only have signs to work with about their salvation).
Mary Barton was spectacular. I'm especially interested in the character of Esther as this figure of irreconcilable conflict - someone who doesn't fit into the social spectrum and who betrays a fundamental flaw (economic, gender, etc.) in the social system. I think it's very telling that she's terrified of being "seen" in her nightmares...
Dak
mentat
Just noticed this. I'm surprised you enjoy Bunyan, but not Chaucer...
I really did like Pilgrim's Progress, if more for the narrative innovation than anything else. It works as both a text of religious pedagogy and interpretive pedagogy (since, after all, Calvinists only have signs to work with about their salvation).
It's been years since I read it, and for all I know what I read was updated English (probably was). But the story itself is timeless and the characters archetypal, as opposed to TCT.
Einherjar86
Active Member
It wouldn't have been updated, Bunyan was writing in modern English. In class we actually discussed the heavily historical nature of its form and structure, since it's a Puritan narrative. Wolfgang Iser argues that it wouldn't have emerged in that form if Protestant Calvinism hadn't been the religious motivation behind it. Pretty drastic claim, but interesting argument; it's with Calvinism that Protestants begin putting lots of emphasis on signs and their meaning, since they believed their fate was predetermined. Thus, a narrative that actually functions partially as a pedagogical tool for interpreting symbols and events makes sense in a Calvinist context.
