zizek - sublime object of ideologyzizek - living in the end timesvarious artists - aesthetics and politicshal foster - the art-architecture complexanabel hernández - narcoland
― Mordy , Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:42 (ten years ago) link
Contingency, Hegemony, Universality remains a favorite. and anything by Ernesto Laclau in general. wish i knew more, but Verso tends to cover things outside my competence. which is why i should read more of their stuff.
i can't find any info on "signs mistaken for wonders"--what is it? good title.
― ryan, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:43 (ten years ago) link
nevermind! it's moretti.
― ryan, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:45 (ten years ago) link
shit it's not in stock.
― ryan, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:47 (ten years ago) link
Jameson's Late Marxism is really good, though i read it probably a decade ago.
― ryan, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:52 (ten years ago) link
minima moralia out of stock :(
― mattresslessness, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:58 (ten years ago) link
you should order it used anyway, to get the bad-motherfucker black cover instead of the newer grosser one
o wait i see the new sexxxier series has a kewl black hardcover now
― j., Tuesday, 8 April 2014 22:26 (ten years ago) link
i'll wait for a library copy.
― mattresslessness, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 22:38 (ten years ago) link
went hardcore suck-up and bought a bunch of stuff by ppl in my department.
― Merdeyeux, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 23:20 (ten years ago) link
know Brouwer's math pretty well, had no idea about that element of his philosophy! saw some very out-there heyting quotes the other day that inspired me to want to learn more. sort of painfully naive claims about mathematics being that which is 'immediately evident' and thus not needing a philosophy. maybe brouwer's intuitionism really went that deep too.
― wat is teh waht (s.clover), Tuesday, 8 April 2014 23:56 (ten years ago) link
for me it's just striking how deep into some kinda pro-christian (anti-world) schopenhauerian dutch nationalist melange it is, apparently w/o much buildup. that level of philosophical uh embeddedness is not exactly surprising in mathematicians/scientists of that age or earlier, i just wonder at its specific sources (since it is evidently more or less a repetition of dogmas common to the schopenhauerian tradition).
schopenhauer has a weird philosophy of mathematics that stems somehow from his ways of claiming to correct/simplify kant (esp. in the direction of affirming unusual doctrines about perception which i think from an orthodox kantian perspective just sound uncritical?).
― j., Wednesday, 9 April 2014 00:13 (ten years ago) link
Brouwer's sources include Fichte and Schelling and Goethe ; he's drawing on German idealism
― Euler, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 01:55 (ten years ago) link
well yuh, i meant something a bit more recent
― j., Wednesday, 9 April 2014 02:01 (ten years ago) link
can't post it now but there are p close textual similarities b/w Fichte et al & Brouwer's text, kinda striking
― Euler, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 02:40 (ten years ago) link
talk was excellent - thought there were some pretty clear connections between his mathematical work and his solipsism, or at least his idealism
― twistent consistent (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 9 April 2014 05:44 (ten years ago) link
this discussion sent me on a bit of reading. lots of texts seem to suggest schopenhauer was directly key, and more directly his teacher Gerrit Mannoury. want to read more about him and the signific circle now, but not sure how much if anything is available in english.
also didn't read that it was originally brouwer that coined the term (apparently) 'metamathematics'! i had always thought that it originated more as a _concession_ to those who claimed certain stuff wasn't 'real math' than as a point of pride and distinction...
― wat is teh waht (s.clover), Wednesday, 9 April 2014 18:59 (ten years ago) link
re. Brouwer's influences, this is a secondary lit article I'd recommend, in this volume
― Euler, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 20:32 (ten years ago) link
started reading more on mannoury and wow that guy is interesting. anyone know more about him and the significs group? dude was talking about speech acts 30 years before austin. the connection with Adriaan de Groot and cognitive psych is also really interesting.
― wat is teh waht (s.clover), Friday, 11 April 2014 03:33 (ten years ago) link
cool search feature
http://www.versobooks.com/search?q=zizek&scope=Authors
― markers, Saturday, 12 April 2014 14:51 (ten years ago) link
was browsing amazon and came across a new zizek, "absolute recoil: towards a new foundation of dialectical materialism." On verso in October.
― ryan, Saturday, 12 April 2014 14:59 (ten years ago) link
www.buenosairesherald.com/article/156933/ernesto-laclau-passes-away-at-78
― Fiddler on a hot tin roof (ed.b), Sunday, 13 April 2014 22:44 (ten years ago) link
i bought hegemony & socialist strategy when i was in college, but i don't know how much of it i read, if any
zizek's also putting out:
http://www.versobooks.com/books/1688-comradely-greetingshttp://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745663746http://www.amazon.com/Event-Slavoj-Zizek/dp/1612194117/
― markers, Sunday, 13 April 2014 23:36 (ten years ago) link
the last of those is already available here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Event-Philosophy-Transit-Slavoj-Zizek/dp/1846146267/
― markers, Sunday, 13 April 2014 23:37 (ten years ago) link
I've heard the 'Event' book is quite good, a rare recent example of Zizek not on autopilot.
― Merdeyeux, Sunday, 13 April 2014 23:55 (ten years ago) link
that's actually a little surprising. i did a reading group on violence in 2009 and i don't remember how much of it was original stuff but i doubt it was all of it
― markers, Monday, 14 April 2014 00:03 (ten years ago) link
ended up buying nothing from the verso sale
― markers, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 14:56 (ten years ago) link
i've been meaning to reread that
― j., Wednesday, 16 April 2014 14:57 (ten years ago) link
which? violence?
― markers, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 14:59 (ten years ago) link
i didn't buy it from the sale, but the website alerted me to the existence of s. critchley's (and co-author's) "The Hamlet Doctrine," so i impulsively got it on my kindle. it was pretty fucking stupid though. a nice tour through some famous takes on an intrinsically fascinating topic (benjamin, freud, lacan, nietzsche, joyce) but it's really indulgent and doesn't come to anything new. a book that focused on Hamlet as a topic for philosophy would be pretty cool though, and this book approaches that but doesn't really come close to what I wanted.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:07 (ten years ago) link
which is a shame, because i thought "faith of the faithless" was pretty good and worth engaging with. getting tired of so many stupid cash-ins from these guys (uh, philosophers). i swear half of the new books i read come across as a collection of semi-edited notes.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:10 (ten years ago) link
it probably depends on who you're reading. ray brassier has only put out one book and is working on a new one but it's been seven years.
― markers, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:11 (ten years ago) link
well brassier, from the little ive read of him and some interviews, certainly strikes me as more serious than many. glad he's taking his time.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:13 (ten years ago) link
if i ever get to write another one (unlikely) i'd like to take 10 years or so on it. people who publish a lot of frivolous garbage should be frowned upon.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:14 (ten years ago) link
I've been wanting to check out that Critchley book. I've been dipping into Cavell's Disowning Knowledge lately, his essays on skepticism in Shakespeare. His essay on Hamlet is so short and sketchy that it doesn't really establish itself as not-crazy. Was wondering if Critchley took it up at all.
There are a few other books out there on skepticism in Shakespeare that might do better. Millicent Bell's Shakespeare's Tragic Skepticism looks good.
― jmm, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:14 (ten years ago) link
they don't bring up cavell except once. cavell on shakespeare >>>> the critchley book.
will check out those others though!
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:15 (ten years ago) link
honestly i rarely find anything by a uk 'continental' type, esp. the pop variety, to be very substantial. their weird mix of matter-of-factness and across-the-board, nonspecific endorsement of french/german ideas, terminology, etc. makes them come across as unserious. posturing.
― j., Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:22 (ten years ago) link
there's definitely a thing with philosophers getting some kind of non-academic popularity and then having the pressure / feeling the desire to just churn out new book after new book at the expense of actually doing serious work and having any new thoughts, the zizeks and rancières of the world just repeating themselves into eternity. tbh i don't think there are too many people who have a good level of popularity and aren't doing that. critchley's a slightly different model in that every couple of years he decides to write about something completely different and never really gets beyond his shallow beginnings before finding a new fancy.
― Merdeyeux, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:23 (ten years ago) link
good post
― markers, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:24 (ten years ago) link
imagine of zizek had a handful of books instead? each of which was focused, etc.
j. otm. i think that's exactly it. anything substantial in the book came from those other sources i mentioned. maybe i've missed that aspect of SC or been taken in by it previously.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:24 (ten years ago) link
i don't know that he's different from a lot of more academic uk academics in that regard, he's just more popular/less proximate to their (style of) debates
― j., Wednesday, 16 April 2014 15:33 (ten years ago) link
critchley is the worst for that. his book of dead philosophers is a similarly good/interesting idea that he doesnt really pull off
― max, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 16:31 (ten years ago) link
oh yeah I also forgot about that weird ny times piece he wrote about his pink shirt.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 16:43 (ten years ago) link
I did learn from the book that apparently Joyce gave something like a 12 part lecture series on Hamlet but it's been lost. that was something, I bet.
― ryan, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 16:47 (ten years ago) link
that's a lot of algebra
― waterflow ductile laser beam (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 16 April 2014 16:56 (ten years ago) link
oh yeah I also forgot about that weird ny times piece he wrote about his pink shirt.― ryan, Wednesday, April 16, 2014 12:43 PM
― ryan, Wednesday, April 16, 2014 12:43 PM
he's in charge of their "the stone" blog or blog section, i think
― markers, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 17:07 (ten years ago) link
i've only read infinitely demanding
i am re-reading after finitude and it's p good so far
― markers, Thursday, 17 April 2014 01:11 (ten years ago) link
now thar's a guy who certainly hasn't gotten onto the overproduction bandwagon.
― Merdeyeux, Thursday, 17 April 2014 01:39 (ten years ago) link
there's the divine inexistence, most of which is unpublished, then after finitude, and a book on mallarme in addition to some articles.
― markers, Thursday, 17 April 2014 01:42 (ten years ago) link