Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
DOPE FIEND KILLA G

bad guy posted:

pretty sure it's communism

:hai: this. idk if we can truly envision how an unadulterated society would look, because even such an imagination is itself involved in the spectacular mode. we cannot operate outside of the sphere of spectacle because it is impossible to disengage from the capitalist mode of production. That said, a society free of spectacle would necessarily be one which has escaped such a mode of production

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

DOPE FIEND KILLA G

(anything i post here imagine has a big red stamp on it that says UMM I THINK”

DOPE FIEND KILLA G

https://aphelis.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/BURROUGHS_1978_The_Limits_of_Control.pdf


https://cidadeinseguranca.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/deleuze_control.pdf

i posted these two short essays by William S Burroughs & Giles Deleuze yesterday in the discord, and I’m posting them again here because i think what they view as aspects of a ‘control society’ fit nicely with the notion of the society of spectacles.

Manifisto


DOPE FIEND KILLA G posted:

:hai: this. idk if we can truly envision how an unadulterated society would look, because even such an imagination is itself involved in the spectacular mode. we cannot operate outside of the sphere of spectacle because it is impossible to disengage from the capitalist mode of production. That said, a society free of spectacle would necessarily be one which has escaped such a mode of production

yeah debord makes this point repeatedly. it may be an unavoidable hurdle but it does render a lot of what he says extremely vague and hand wavey (nut and I have gone back and forth on this). saying it's difficult to describe things is fine and fair, and it's even fine to say that you cannot fully or precisely describe something in a given conceptual framework. buddhism engages with this head on; certain buddhist insights literally cannot be conveyed in language because language is part of the problem, and yet buddhism finds ways to use language to approximate these insights through skillful teachings, in a way that can be later refined. so I do not accept that it is necessarily true that it is impossible to make useful, concrete positive claims about life absent the spectacle, but I accept that it might be, and I understand that debord believes it is not possible.

there is however a saying going around (variously attributed) that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism, and I'm mindful of that, I think it's an interesting quote


ty nesamdoom!

bad guy

well, gravity kinda sucks because it makes planes crash and stuff but when you read a physics textbook you don't go "i wish the author would spend more time exploring the alternative"

Manifisto


bad guy posted:

well, gravity kinda sucks because it makes planes crash and stuff but when you read a physics textbook you don't go "i wish the author would spend more time exploring the alternative"

physics textbooks (in my experience, maybe I'm missing out) do not generally take stances on "gravity, good or bad?" but if the author's principal argument was that we should live (or try to live) without gravity I would hope he would spend some time talking about what the implications of that would be. that's sort of . . . the point, he is clearly advocating that we head towards something but is spending more time talking about what it isn't than what it is. again, maybe this is unavoidable.

I am not even finished reading the dang thing so any observations I make are off the cuff and not considered. He says a lot of intriguing things that I am willing to accept arguendo but that is a far from agreeing that he's met any sort of burden of persuasion.


ty nesamdoom!

FutonForensic

i liked the part at the end where the author encourages us, the "spectators," to rush the monkey and beat it to death

DOPE FIEND KILLA G

i keep starting responses to your posts mani but this is hard stuff to talk about and i have to keep starting over -_- I'll get back to you eventually.

but in the meantime let me just say

FutonForensic posted:

i liked the part at the end where the author encourages us, the "spectators," to rush the monkey and beat it to death
lmao

Luvcow

One day nearer spring

FutonForensic posted:

i liked the part at the end where the author encourages us, the "spectators," to rush the monkey and beat it to death

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

nut

Morpheus but he is holding out a blue pill in one hand and in the other hand he’s holding a post it note that says “the blue pill gives u diarrhea and it’s nasty lol”

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply