I added this to my "to-read list" a while back mostly because I thought the cover looked rad. Edit: After scrolling through his linked Twitter account: nevermind.
I added this to my "to-read list" a while back mostly because I thought the cover looked rad.
Edit: After scrolling through his linked Twitter account: nevermind.
Yep. Land is quite decisive, and going back to my old reply on this thread, frequently wrong. That being said, the book is pretty rad. Even without the cool cover!
Yep. Land is quite decisive, and going back to my old reply on this thread, frequently wrong. That being said, the book is pretty rad. Even without the cool cover!
Ya, I don't doubt that the writing is, uh, erudite... but spending >600 pages on something written by someone who engages in what amounts to asinine trolling is a big ask. Well, hell, maybe I'll...
Ya, I don't doubt that the writing is, uh, erudite... but spending >600 pages on something written by someone who engages in what amounts to asinine trolling is a big ask.
Well, hell, maybe I'll still get around to it one day...
The book itself is honestly much more, formal, than his twitter. He restricts the layers of sarcasm from 34 down to, um, 4. Honestly if it seems like a task in it of itself, I wouldn't read it. I...
The book itself is honestly much more, formal, than his twitter. He restricts the layers of sarcasm from 34 down to, um, 4. Honestly if it seems like a task in it of itself, I wouldn't read it. I read it with the thought of engaged leisure (whatever that means) and it went by faster than I thought.
I don't believe in layers of sarcasm above two! Above that threshold the alternating layers of "yes I do mean" with "nah I don't mean" cease to represent an affect on the utterance and become...
I don't believe in layers of sarcasm above two! Above that threshold the alternating layers of "yes I do mean" with "nah I don't mean" cease to represent an affect on the utterance and become illformed digressions... Sarcasms are the hiccup effect of wobbling in place, leave them aside when you look for arts
I don't know who Shaun is and I don't know much about this guy. It's depressing to see that someone who has written something with academic rigor (if your book is being published by MIT...it's...
I don't know who Shaun is and I don't know much about this guy.
It's depressing to see that someone who has written something with academic rigor (if your book is being published by MIT...it's academic) stoop to the level of discourse adopted by the masses. Yes, I do expect my academics to present themselves prim and proper in the public sphere. Bad form to this man, I say!
The stodgy scholar is a stalwart soldier, standing stout in the stronghold of scrupulousness, shielding sense from stupid, sophomoric silliness. F'reals, though, it feels like the boring academic...
The stodgy scholar is a stalwart soldier, standing stout in the stronghold of scrupulousness, shielding sense from stupid, sophomoric silliness.
F'reals, though, it feels like the boring academic is a rare thing these days and maybe the last bastion of reason.. Though, probably, it's more that the few vocal academics/intellectuals/people-in-general debasing themselves with Twitter inanity get too much focus while boring people go on about their lives. Or, at least, I hope that's the case...
It's discouraging. My distaste for this particular person's Twitter feed was edited in to a post about my potential reading of his work and should be read in that context. That is, if I were to read his work (which, as I said, I imagine is serious talk) it'd be hard for me not to think of the crap populating his Twitter feed. A distraction, really.
Everyone is human and is subject to their human whimsy, certainly!
My impression of Land's writing across this time period (especially the earlier stuff) is a bunch of amphetamine stoked poetics. It can be fun to read, if you're not bent on extracting some kind...
My impression of Land's writing across this time period (especially the earlier stuff) is a bunch of amphetamine stoked poetics. It can be fun to read, if you're not bent on extracting some kind of philosophical panacea. On the other hand, it's infuriating if you're the kind of person who needs something tangible and concrete to take away.
There are components like "hyperstition" (basically manifesting fiction into reality) and "accelerationism" (in as simple terms as possible, doubling down on capitalism in the hope that it will destroy itself) that constitute some of the more tangible concepts. Land helped shape these terms alongside his Warrick philosophy squad CCRU in the 90s, and later people like Alex Williams and Nick Srnicek helped renew interest in 21st century. I believe Land's accelerationism differs somewhat to, for example, what you might find in the Accelerate manifesto.
Your impression would be accurate. Fanged Noumena is pretty fun to read and easy to find a bit of resonance in, but like you said, a solid takeaway is scarce.
Your impression would be accurate. Fanged Noumena is pretty fun to read and easy to find a bit of resonance in, but like you said, a solid takeaway is scarce.
Fanged Noumena is collection of writings by accelerationist author Nick Land, dated from 1987-2007. Prerequisites to this reading might be, Anti-Oedipus by Deleuze and Guattari, Necropolitics by...
Fanged Noumena is collection of writings by accelerationist author Nick Land, dated from 1987-2007.
Prerequisites to this reading might be, Anti-Oedipus by Deleuze and Guattari, Necropolitics by Achille Mbembe, and Liquid Modernity by Zygmunt Bauman.
This is... a link... to purchase... at full price? I would have thought that those who tote this text can think of better ways to evangelize. Isn't this some reactionist twittery? Feh!
This is... a link... to purchase... at full price? I would have thought that those who tote this text can think of better ways to evangelize. Isn't this some reactionist twittery? Feh!
Do you have any ideas to present out of this text? No context links to modernist compendia are the rabblerouser's excuse du jour. Surely you have an opinion to share, out with it
Do you have any ideas to present out of this text? No context links to modernist compendia are the rabblerouser's excuse du jour. Surely you have an opinion to share, out with it
I tried sparking discussion on critical text before, and nothing really happened. I thought I might as well get straight to the stuff this time. Land falls into the misinterpretation that every...
I tried sparking discussion on critical text before, and nothing really happened. I thought I might as well get straight to the stuff this time.
Land falls into the misinterpretation that every theory of power can be linked back to Marxist theory and his critique of capitalism, but fails to include that social death pervades economic systems. In line with his lack of engagment with queer literature, which is surprising considering his disconnection from academia, it can be suggested that this collection isn't intended on rallying an accelerationist following. It's like someone took a coffee table lookbook and turned it into a lengthy novel. So that's fun.
Is Land worth looking into? I remember accelerationism was all the rage a year or so ago but I never got into it. I heard his ideas were very complex and required a bit of Deleuze to understand.
Is Land worth looking into? I remember accelerationism was all the rage a year or so ago but I never got into it. I heard his ideas were very complex and required a bit of Deleuze to understand.
A bit of Deleuze is exactly the amount you'd need. I think his writing is very easy to understand, but at the same time it's quite dense. You need to be engaged with the text to follow what he...
A bit of Deleuze is exactly the amount you'd need. I think his writing is very easy to understand, but at the same time it's quite dense. You need to be engaged with the text to follow what he says, but beyond that I would recommend it. I think this book is less of Land presenting academic work, and more of him sharing thoughts and abstractions. If you want to read his more "serious" work, I would recommend The Thirst for Annihilation: Georges Bataille and Virulent Nihilism (1992). If you want to view Land's mind through a window, his twitter (https://twitter.com/Outsideness) is also great.
I added this to my "to-read list" a while back mostly because I thought the cover looked rad.
Edit: After scrolling through his linked Twitter account: nevermind.
Yep. Land is quite decisive, and going back to my old reply on this thread, frequently wrong. That being said, the book is pretty rad. Even without the cool cover!
Ya, I don't doubt that the writing is, uh, erudite... but spending >600 pages on something written by someone who engages in what amounts to asinine trolling is a big ask.
Well, hell, maybe I'll still get around to it one day...
The book itself is honestly much more, formal, than his twitter. He restricts the layers of sarcasm from 34 down to, um, 4. Honestly if it seems like a task in it of itself, I wouldn't read it. I read it with the thought of engaged leisure (whatever that means) and it went by faster than I thought.
I don't believe in layers of sarcasm above two! Above that threshold the alternating layers of "yes I do mean" with "nah I don't mean" cease to represent an affect on the utterance and become illformed digressions... Sarcasms are the hiccup effect of wobbling in place, leave them aside when you look for arts
I don't know who Shaun is and I don't know much about this guy.
It's depressing to see that someone who has written something with academic rigor (if your book is being published by MIT...it's academic) stoop to the level of discourse adopted by the masses. Yes, I do expect my academics to present themselves prim and proper in the public sphere. Bad form to this man, I say!
The stodgy scholar is a stalwart soldier, standing stout in the stronghold of scrupulousness, shielding sense from stupid, sophomoric silliness.
F'reals, though, it feels like the boring academic is a rare thing these days and maybe the last bastion of reason.. Though, probably, it's more that the few vocal academics/intellectuals/people-in-general debasing themselves with Twitter inanity get too much focus while boring people go on about their lives. Or, at least, I hope that's the case...
It's discouraging. My distaste for this particular person's Twitter feed was edited in to a post about my potential reading of his work and should be read in that context. That is, if I were to read his work (which, as I said, I imagine is serious talk) it'd be hard for me not to think of the crap populating his Twitter feed. A distraction, really.
Everyone is human and is subject to their human whimsy, certainly!
I lean more on this interpretation. Land is a heavy shitposter. And by heavy, I mean HEAVY.
My impression of Land's writing across this time period (especially the earlier stuff) is a bunch of amphetamine stoked poetics. It can be fun to read, if you're not bent on extracting some kind of philosophical panacea. On the other hand, it's infuriating if you're the kind of person who needs something tangible and concrete to take away.
There are components like "hyperstition" (basically manifesting fiction into reality) and "accelerationism" (in as simple terms as possible, doubling down on capitalism in the hope that it will destroy itself) that constitute some of the more tangible concepts. Land helped shape these terms alongside his Warrick philosophy squad CCRU in the 90s, and later people like Alex Williams and Nick Srnicek helped renew interest in 21st century. I believe Land's accelerationism differs somewhat to, for example, what you might find in the Accelerate manifesto.
If you're into this kind of poetic philosophical writing you'll probably appreciate the CCRU stuff like this similar collection of their writing from 1997-2003
Land currently writes at https://www.xenosystems.net/
And of course seems to be addicted to Twitter
Your impression would be accurate. Fanged Noumena is pretty fun to read and easy to find a bit of resonance in, but like you said, a solid takeaway is scarce.
Fanged Noumena is collection of writings by accelerationist author Nick Land, dated from 1987-2007.
Prerequisites to this reading might be, Anti-Oedipus by Deleuze and Guattari, Necropolitics by Achille Mbembe, and Liquid Modernity by Zygmunt Bauman.
This is... a link... to purchase... at full price? I would have thought that those who tote this text can think of better ways to evangelize. Isn't this some reactionist twittery? Feh!
Here's the pdf link.
https://syntheticzero.net/2019/11/14/fanged-noumena-pdf-by-nick-land/
It's not an advertisement. Feh!
Do you have any ideas to present out of this text? No context links to modernist compendia are the rabblerouser's excuse du jour. Surely you have an opinion to share, out with it
I tried sparking discussion on critical text before, and nothing really happened. I thought I might as well get straight to the stuff this time.
Land falls into the misinterpretation that every theory of power can be linked back to Marxist theory and his critique of capitalism, but fails to include that social death pervades economic systems. In line with his lack of engagment with queer literature, which is surprising considering his disconnection from academia, it can be suggested that this collection isn't intended on rallying an accelerationist following. It's like someone took a coffee table lookbook and turned it into a lengthy novel. So that's fun.
Is Land worth looking into? I remember accelerationism was all the rage a year or so ago but I never got into it. I heard his ideas were very complex and required a bit of Deleuze to understand.
A bit of Deleuze is exactly the amount you'd need. I think his writing is very easy to understand, but at the same time it's quite dense. You need to be engaged with the text to follow what he says, but beyond that I would recommend it. I think this book is less of Land presenting academic work, and more of him sharing thoughts and abstractions. If you want to read his more "serious" work, I would recommend The Thirst for Annihilation: Georges Bataille and Virulent Nihilism (1992). If you want to view Land's mind through a window, his twitter (https://twitter.com/Outsideness) is also great.
Give it a try.