|
Crossposting from Bonfire Mk. IIEugene V. Dubstep posted:The literary theory I find most sensible is often just a more eloquent or idiomatic restatement of a few already famous Romantic works: Biographia Literaria, Knocking at the Gate, the Preface to the Lyrical Ballads, the bit of The Genius of Christianity on the vague des passions. For a biased but mostly correct critical foundation, I've always felt you could do worse than read those, Locke's theory of consciousness, the Philosophical Investigations, and The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction before chasing whatever thread you like.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
Lanny is good friends
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:21
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:Crossposting from Bonfire Mk. II i feel as though a wittgenstein primary text is perhaps slightly peripheral to a discussion on literary and more trouble than it's worth if that's what you're going for it's absolutely worth reading and digesting, but honestly if you can't read good before getting into that you're not likely to get much use out of it imo
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 03:25
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i feel as though a wittgenstein primary text is perhaps slightly peripheral to a discussion on literary and more trouble than it's worth if that's what you're going for I was going to recommend Remarks on Culture – or whatever the title is – but I think it is more interesting to readers of Wittgenstein than it is to readers of fiction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:08
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i feel as though a wittgenstein primary text is perhaps slightly peripheral to a discussion on literary and more trouble than it's worth if that's what you're going for (1) The Philosophical Investigations is exceptional among primary texts in philosophy for being accessible and understandable provided you actually read it and not a summary of its "conclusions." (2) A major current in late-20th C. and contemporary lit consists of novels and poetry that respond, in a direct and self-aware way, to Wittgenstein's philosophy of language. Most obvious would be Beckett, but also W.G. Sebald, Wallace Stevens, David Markson, Mary Robison, W.G. Sebald, Clarice Lispector, William H. Gass, Helen DeWitt, Thomas Bernhard, and many more. (C) PI has a lot to say on poetics and could absolutely be read as literary theory, even you wouldn't call Wittgenstein a "literary theorist" foremost. (4) A number of subsequent authors and literary critics, e.g. Marjorie Perloff, have made the case for the PI itself being a work of literature, a self-contained example of the poetics that he describes. (5) I didn't tack him onto the end of that list of Romantics for nothing. I see them as closely linked, and a critical survey of the authors named above would show that many of them also intuited a clear development of Romantic conceptions of consciousness and associativity in Wittgenstein's late philosophy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:28
|
|
|
pleasecallmechrist posted:nortop fry: fearful symmetry: a study of william blake this one is extremely ftw if you are a fan of blake and especially if you are a fan of his weird mythological psychosis
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:37
|
|
|
i absolutely agree that the wittgenstein-as-poet is a fruitful reading, but most people just getting into lit-crit aren't going to have the philosophical toolset to handle e.g. the private language argument very well if they don't know what he's replying to PI-wittgenstein is fun because the structure of the work leads you through certain argumentative patterns, but without having a basic grasp of e.g. frege i question whether the points that are intended as critique can be accurately distinguished from the points where he's making some positive case or other basically my issue is that you're recommending a pretty heavy philosophical work to people probably lacking any philosophical context or, if they have that, often without much understanding of the analytical tradition that ole ludwig was subverting/contributing to. i don't doubt that it's useful as a lit-crit work, but i'm skeptical of its value in the context of 'good intro to lit-crit'
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
Yeah the idea that the layman can just pick up the PI and easily understand the argumentative threads running through the book (and what implications, if any, these arguments have for literary theory) is pretty ludicrous when there's still substantial, fundamental disagreements between trained philosophers regarding what eg the private language argument is even about
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:36
|
|
|
Lex Neville posted:Lanny is good friends I’ve been waiting for a good biography about Macho Man’s brother.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:59
|
|
|
multistability posted:Yeah the idea that the layman can just pick up the PI and easily understand the argumentative threads running through the book (and what implications, if any, these arguments have for literary theory) is pretty ludicrous when there's still substantial, fundamental disagreements between trained philosophers regarding what eg the private language argument is even about This is an argument against reading just about anything, esp. any of the novels that crop up in this thread. The idea that you must be assured in advance that you will understand something before you read it is dumb on its face, and it's even dumber when it's applied to the PI, which isn't even as difficult or obscure as most of the Romantic texts I listed. I could see criticizing the list I offered for being narrow and blatantly biased, but difficult? Nah. Anecdotally, the PI was the first work of philosophy I ever read, and I read it at the same time as I started to think seriously about literature, and the experience was invaluable. Of COURSE I didn't understand everything. No one does, just like no one quite understands a novel or a poem the first time they read it, barring an extraordinary flash of insight. (For one thing, Wittgenstein is fond of strange riddles approaching koans.) But I understood enough—and anyone would understand enough, because his flow of argument is intuitive and jargon-free—to open up lots of strange new avenues for interpreting texts, including the PI itself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Anyone have recommendations for Soviet playwrights?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
Budgie Jumping posted:Anyone have recommendations for Soviet playwrights? Save your money and watch out for that Putin guy
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
Budgie Jumping posted:Anyone have recommendations for Soviet playwrights? i read an old rear end book about stalin era soviet theatre once that was sort of cool but it focused more on the theatre directors like meyerhold and stanislavski than it did on the playwrights.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 05:33
|
|
|
the closest i’ve come is Black Snow or whatever it was called, but that’s a novel
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 10:06
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Save your money and watch out for that Putin guy 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 11:45
|
|
|
Svetlana Alexievich is good, but I don’t know how much more human misery I can take after a few hundred pages. It’s mostly stuff like this: quote:We die how we lived… I even go to church and wear a little cross, but there has never been any joy in my life, and there isn’t any now. I never got any happiness. And now even praying won’t help. I just hope that I get to die soon… I hope the heavenly kingdom hurries up and comes, I’m sick of waiting. Just like Sashka… He’s in the graveyard now, resting. [She crosses herself.] e: for context, Sashka doused himself in acetone, set it on fire and burned to death Take the plunge! Okay! fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
Take the plunge! Okay! posted:Svetlana Alexievich is good, but I don’t know how much more human misery I can take after a few hundred pages. It’s mostly stuff like this: A man who reads about Eastern Europe and is not prepared for incomparable human misery
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:18
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:A man who reads about Eastern Europe and is not prepared for incomparable human misery Dude, I live in Eastern Europe
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
lmao
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
Pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:33
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Save your money and watch out for that Putin guy I always do. Love that guy's work. A human heart posted:i read an old rear end book about stalin era soviet theatre once that was sort of cool but it focused more on the theatre directors like meyerhold and stanislavski than it did on the playwrights. Yeah I recently read a book about the Moscow Art Theater and the techniques of Stanislavsky, Chekhov, Vakhtangov, Meyerhold, etc, but anytime the plays they worked on are mentioned, it's all classic or foreign material. Which can't actually be the case? Take the plunge! Okay! posted:Svetlana Alexievich is good, but I don’t know how much more human misery I can take after a few hundred pages. It’s mostly stuff like this: That's what I'm talking about! What's that from?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:04
|
|
|
Budgie Jumping posted:That's what I'm talking about! What's that from? non-fiction lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
Budgie Jumping posted:
Secondhand time
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
Take the plunge! Okay! posted:Secondhand time Huh, sounded like a Zinky Boys quote
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Budgie Jumping posted:I always do. Love that guy's work. I think they mentioned Gorky writing a few plays here and there, and there was a stage adaptation of Serafimovich's The Iron Flood mentioned as well. it was an interesting book because it was from the 30s and written by this British actor who had actually gone to the USSR and worked there for a few years. quite a few snipes at British theatre culture being really stupid and commercialised which was fun to read.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Budgie Jumping posted:Anyone have recommendations for Soviet playwrights? I went to an exhibition on Ukrainian avant-garde playwright Oleksandr "Les" Kurbas in Kyiv last fall that was incredibly interesting. He was targeted as a subversive and executed in the 30s (and thus fell into obscurity and largely forgotten until recently), but some of the stuff he put out was pretty groundbreaking compared to the average output of the time. I'd recommend checking him out. God Hole fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Mar 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2019 11:49
|
|
|
God Hole posted:I went to an exhibition on Ukrainian avant-garde playwright Oleksandr "Les" Kurbas in Kyiv last fall that was incredibly interesting. He was targeted as a subversive and executed in the 30s (and thus fell into obscurity and largely forgotten until recently), but some of the stuff he put out was pretty groundbreaking compared to the average output of the time. Thank you! Sounds like exactly the sorta thing I'm looking for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
Slightly old news by about two or three weeks, but an author I like and have chatted to a few times and who's said she liked a story of mine has won a $165,000 literary prize.quote:Danielle McLaughlin has become the third Irish writer in four years to win one of the world’s most lucrative literary awards, the Windham-Campbell Prize, worth $165,000 (€146,000). Her collection of short stories, "Dinosaurs On Other Planets" is well worth picking up, human stories with just a twist of darkness. I know another goon who's picked it up in the US and loved it as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:This is an argument against reading just about anything, esp. any of the novels that crop up in this thread. The idea that you must be assured in advance that you will understand something before you read it is dumb on its face, and it's even dumber when it's applied to the PI, which isn't even as difficult or obscure as most of the Romantic texts I listed. I could see criticizing the list I offered for being narrow and blatantly biased, but difficult? Nah. I've never read any Wittgenstein, so I'm curious: Is The Blue and Brown Books actually necessary to read with PI, since it's called "Preliminary Studies for Philosophical Investigations", or is it just supplemental?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I've never read any Wittgenstein, so I'm curious: Is The Blue and Brown Books actually necessary to read with PI, since it's called "Preliminary Studies for Philosophical Investigations", or is it just supplemental? Not at all necessary, imo. It's interesting to see a lot of the ideas that would be organized and elaborated in PI in a crude state, but the notebooks are nowhere near as complete, transparent, or enjoyable. e: The "Preliminary Studies" title was given to them after Wittgenstein's death. He chose not to publish them and certainly never intended them as a supplement or aid to the PI. Hell, the title "Philosophical Investigations" itself is arguably tongue-in-cheek. e2: all of this is just the opinion of some guy who read the books. I am by no means a Wittgenstein scholar and have no background in philosophy worth mentioning. Eugene V. Dubstep fucked around with this message at 22:31 on Apr 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 21:26
|
|
|
just read philosophical investigations you coward
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
CestMoi posted:just read philosophical investigations you coward Don't, actually. Just read Difference and Repetition until you become an absolute UNIT of schizoid analysis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
CestMoi posted:just read philosophical investigations you coward this applies to all cowards, not just the specific coward being mentioned Boatswain posted:Don't, actually. also, i'm permabanned philosopher plateaustomper58. i first started reading deleuze when i was about 12. by 14 i got really obsessed with the concept of "rhizomes" etc etc etc
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
Of the two, Deleuze was less bourgeois than Wittgenstein, thus better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
Boatswain posted:Of the two, Deleuze was less bourgeois than Wittgenstein, thus better. Wittgenstein was born wealthy, true, but he gave away all his money more than once, the first time in his 20s. He was an engineer, a mechanic, a math teacher, a soldier, and a hospital porter before and during his career as a "philosopher." Deleuze was born middle class, attended the Sorbonne, studied philosophy, and never let the teat of academe slip from his pedant's soft lips the rest of his life. You tell me who's more bougie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
Giving away your cash is such a slap in the face to the poor and mediocre though
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
wittgenstein always gives me the same impression that stalin does in life and fate, as this sort of otherworldly almost daemonic entity trying very hard to pass as human for some ineffable reason
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:Wittgenstein was born wealthy, true, but he gave away all his money more than once, the first time in his 20s. He was an engineer, a mechanic, a math teacher, a soldier, and a hospital porter before and during his career as a "philosopher." Deleuze was born middle class, attended the Sorbonne, studied philosophy, and never let the teat of academe slip from his pedant's soft lips the rest of his life. You tell me who's more bougie. wittgenstein's family was literally rich enough to buy their ways out of being jews in nazi germany that's a special category of wealth
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:wittgenstein always gives me the same impression that stalin does in life and fate, as this sort of otherworldly almost daemonic entity trying very hard to pass as human for some ineffable reason this but tommy wiseau
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2019 05:26
|
|
