What You Reading?

"Don't post anything racist/misogynistic/pornographic, loli images, or any animated GIFs and you should be fine, haha!" The Raytownian

Moderator: xome

Post Reply
User avatar
suspiria 23
Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:40 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH

Post by suspiria 23 » Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:07 am

Various horror anthologies/collections, mostly Thomas Ligotti and Ramsey Campbell.

Clemon09
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:43 pm

Post by Clemon09 » Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:39 am

erector wrote:
Clemon09 wrote:hmm, yeah. i don't think this intro is great - at least for someone with very little knowledge of aesthetics, hegel, kant and that sort of thing. a lot of it reads as part nonsense and it's difficult to reconstruct much of an argument. _but_ i think that it might make that book easier to read - i looked at a couple of pages that had really stumped me and i think they clicked. maybe just determination...

it's sad how much i worship adorno considering how little i understand :D
Have you read Minima Moralia? I think that's the best place to start with Adorno.

(I'm something of a fanboy myself...)
is it really just a list of aphorisms?
weird idea for a serious book... dunno.

erector
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:33 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by erector » Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:50 am

Wierd? How so? I personally think it works brilliantly; the supra-disciplinary essence of Critical Theory is, I think, captured very well in Adorno's aphorisms. The aphoristic structure allows him to touch upon everything from running in public to gift-giving to having visitors to the film industry, etc.

It also makes things very bite-sized, which helps a lot since it's not exactly light reading.

http://members.efn.org/~dredmond/MinimaMoralia.html

(Although I have to admit I prefer the older Jephcott translation.)

Clemon09
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:43 pm

Post by Clemon09 » Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:00 am

well i don't know - aphorisms are fine but for me - having come across some of these ones before - they seem a bit disposable out of the context of some over arching goal that you associate with most philosophical works. not saying they can't get you anywhere but do they build on each other and is each one just stated or is there some logic behind them?


you don't see what i mean at all?
anyways i think i feel brave enough to read aesthetic theory now. sort of - i have the time anyway, but it's still going to probably take like over a month :( :mad:

erector
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:33 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by erector » Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:22 am

I get what you mean, I think, but I don't really see what the problem is.

Anything and everything taken out of context becomes disposable to an extent, I suppose.

There is a logic behind Minima Moralia, if that's what you're asking. It's not a disorganised set of aphorisms. Critical Theory is well and alive in the book, alongside more personal-but not totally divorced from Critical Theory-observations and etc. They're also roughly grouped, in a sense (not that I think it really matters anyway).

But no, it's not structured like, say, Hegel's Phenomenology of Mind, if that's what you're also asking. It's not a grand statement of intent or a system-defining work-for that you'd have to read Dialectic of Enlightenment, probably-but it does capture Adorno perfectly, I believe... occasionally oddly Messianic tone and all.

Guess the thing with Minima Moralia is that you have to piece things together. He doesn't seek to define Critical Theory, only to show examples of its working. The logic is there and the aphorisms do work as a whole (and on their own); it's just that there's no direct A -> B -> C development of ideas.

Perhaps one could say that Adorno, like Marx, tended towards packing a dissertation's (or at least a final paper's) worth of ideas in a few paragraphs, etc.

Clemon09
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:43 pm

Post by Clemon09 » Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:32 am

what is critical theory?


i read a book called the idea of a critical theory - and came away with a paraphrase - but i don't think you mean that. but not whatever adorno says, either ;)

erector
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:33 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by erector » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:51 am

Of course pretty much any sort of theory can be a critical theory, but what I-and most people-mean by Critical Theory, capitalised, is a critical social theory that builds upon Marx's idea of commodity fetishism-and, by extension, Lukács' idea of reification-and a supra-disciplinary approach that attempts to unite the fields of philosophy and (empirical) social science/research. Plus, of course, the trademark pessimism about the revolutionary potential of the proletariat etc.

Cultural studies before cultural studies, I suppose.

Clemon09
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:43 pm

Post by Clemon09 » Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:03 am

good answer :D !


when you read aesthetic theory - start a thread on it?? might be useful - i mean you don't have to post a summary but maybe we can both learn from each other's fanboyism!!

Clemon09
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:43 pm

Post by Clemon09 » Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:26 pm

non fiction:
empty persons
aryadeva's 400 stanzas

fiction:
endgame

User avatar
zombra
Posts: 866
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:30 am
Location: screwston, tejas

Post by zombra » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:16 pm

currently on The Heartmath Solution

suggested by jliat, (thanks) last week I finished This Is Modern Art by Matthew Collings.
Really good for someone like myself that's unaware lots about the visual arts.

All right amount of info I suppose but I still didn't acquire an answer to "what is art?" exactly so, do I dare ask on this forum... to the search function!
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."

ephemeralnaut

channel?

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3231
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Post by jliat » Tue Jan 01, 2013 12:59 am

The short answer is that anything and everything can be art. Who decides.
Well who decides who decides….. who decides who decides who decides….


Alternatively the curators of "certain" galleries decide. And more importantly
The curators of national galleries. Though that doesn't mean what they pick will remain art. And they will pick their friends in the main… that will be the criteria…

The long answer has to do with the death of the author stuff….and Duchamp et al.
Derrida's nothing outside the context…. The meaning of anything is no longer (or was no longer - in po-mo) fixed.

Don Judd - "if someone calls it art - its art"

Modernism wanted to find out the answer to what is art - and this ended in empty galleries - and nothing….

The only person qualified to give absolute definitive answers is God.

Do you want to go there…?

User avatar
Zugzwang Productions
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:35 pm
Location: Angers, France
Contact:

Post by Zugzwang Productions » Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:00 am

Into my second read of Bram Stoker's "Dracula". Next in line are Farenheit 451, The Hitchiker Guide..., Simak's "City" and Interview with a vampire.

RJMyato
Posts: 4652
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:14 am
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Post by RJMyato » Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:39 am

celine's "death on the installment plan" which i won't finish before classes start and all my casual time gets taken away which sucks. but it owns and is extremely "noise" and his use of ellipses is amazing

RJMyato
Posts: 4652
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:14 am
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Post by RJMyato » Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:43 am

also reading back this is actually a dece thread and is way cooler than comparable threads on e.g. special-interests where it's nothing but lugheads posting true crime shit and entry level "fucked up!!!" books all day

not that theres anything wrong with either of those it's just refreshing to see people that are at least moderately well-read / in possession of taste

User avatar
zombra
Posts: 866
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:30 am
Location: screwston, tejas

Post by zombra » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:22 am

jliat wrote: The only person qualified to give absolute definitive answers is God.

Do you want to go there…?
Oh yes, gurl, we can go there! (mostly because what i call god is creation/everything :P)

I would rely on Scott McCloud's definition of art for the longest but I'm not sure of it anymore.

"Art, as I see it, is any human activity which doesn't grow out of either of our species' two basic instincts: survival and reproduction."
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."

ephemeralnaut

channel?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests