No.60032[Last 50 Posts]
Previous thread: >>54504
So it's been about a year since I read Arabian Nights (>>54901
) and last night I was staring at the ceiling before going to bed and out of nowhere felt like going through it again and started reading. Not sure why, I think it's because it turns out it's my favorite literary work out there. This was not obvious to me until very recently but it's becoming clearer now. Let's see how a second reading feels like. I feel like this book is everything I look for in literature. Weird fantasy, horror, mystery. It feels exotic and outlandish and you never follow the same people for long. You catch them at the turn of the tide, just before the angel of death comes for them. It races through this odd, tragic world at a steady pace, highlighting the shitshow that is humanity. Beasts, monsters, men and succubi who in their fear and ignorance become even more cruel and unpredictable than a Djinn. Ghouls feeding their young with the flesh of a young prince. Warm colors of a beautiful palace, where the powerful fill their stomachs with delicate pastries in a hurry, before their inevitable demise. The peaceful, lulling sounds of a gentle breeze in the desert. Dromedaries feeding on the flowers of an Acacia tree under a clear bright sky. Fishermen dreaming about rings of sorcery inside the belly of a blue tilapia. Forgotten ruins, forgotten, sleeping demons. I want to go back to those places again and when you read it, for a moment, you're there.
Also I got a warning for posting 'test' on the previous thread. Apologies, I wanted to check if it was still bumping and forgot to delete it.
How do you lads decide what to read next? I have a list of thousands of books I want to read but can never pick one…
I thankfully don't have this problem, I always just pick one book, read it, start looking for a second one.
Maybe you should start reading what you added first, and if it's boring, skip it and start reading what you added second.
I just finished reading Snow Crash, it was weird but definitely an enjoyable read. Before that I read the Neuromancer trilogy which was also pretty good. Probably going to read Dune next.
I'm bored so I will start posting a brief summary of the things I've read so far this year. Here I go:
>El Criticón by Baltasar Gracián
This was pain to read honestly, I can't recall anything besides the major themes he Gracián touches on the book. This is a work about general skepticism and pessimism about life and this world. Trickery, lies, corruption, traps are around the corner and are the norm in this world. You can't trust anything offered by this world and redemption can only be found in God and truth. Schopenhauer had Gracián in high regard and I see the reasons. There are some memorable fables in the book but overall I will dare to say that it's poorly constructed and the metaphors he uses are rather abstruse and hard to digest. This is a Spanish classic and Gracian helped to build the basis that various European thinkers used in the next centuries but I prefer Don Quixote of Cervantes more. He's is clearer, funnier and feels like a fresh breeze when compared to El Criticón of Gracián.
Does Wizards like goth literature? What would goth folks recommend besides Edgar Allan Poe?
Idk what "goth" literature is but I totally adore gothic horror.
Is that what you mean?
If so I highly recommend reading the classics of the genre. While some of the modern stuff is quite good it just doesn't compare to the stuff that has stood the test of time.
Recently I finished a book called Suttree, that I really liked. It's a hilarious book, something I didn't expect from the same guy who wrote Blood Meridian. A few days later I read The Screwtape Letters, since it's so brief and the prose isn't very dense, it's a really light and easy read.
I want to break next into The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul, before I do my annual re-read of The Satanic Verses. This year I've read almost all of Houllebecque's work, at least all of his novels that were translated into English.
I don't know what I'll read next, but by the time I do it'll be 2022. I guess I can decide then.
I'm OP and I have to confess I dropped the Arabian Nights a couple of days after I started, getting just a little beyond Shahrazad'a frame story.
Instead I've been reading something quite different and I dare say quite rare indeed. In fact I don't think there's a translation of this in English at all, certainly not in its entirety and even in its native language this text is known by very few and read by even fewer.
I'm talking about Chronicle of king Peter I by Fernão Lopes, written around the 1430s. It's a very interesting text about two kings Peter, the Portuguese one and the Castilian one. Funny how the people chronicled here reminded me of the characters on the Arabian Nights. These kings are cruel and prone to violence. The Castilian Peter is perticularly perverse. The whole book is a long collection of people being terribly punished, hung, beheaded, shot, drowned, stabbed, clubbed, burnt and worse.
Yet there's a charm here, not only in the content but how Lopes tells us about those things. He uses a very personal, casual style and informs us about it in a very unceremoniously manner. I just was not expecting that from an official document from the 1400s.
Some of the events he tells us are quite memorable. There's this particular episode when the Castilian Peter uses caravels to transport his army in order to besiege a particular city. The siege doesn't go as planned and he orders every single man, including the sailors, to go ashore and help. Then at the evening a particularly strong wind pushes most of his caravels against the rocks and since no one was manning the fleet he loses most of it. Some he has to actually burn it down because he's afraid his enemy is going to be able to use them once he retreats. Lopes then casually informs us that some of those boats were from Genova and the Genovese sailors had to go back to their home on foot 'and they were very upset about it'. I imagine they were.
Also interesting is his sense of justice being nothing but the will to punish. He tells us several episodes where the Portuguese Peter goes out punishing adulterers, thieves and murderers. This guy liked to go around his kingdom, asking if there were any criminals to be punished that particular day and if there were he was quick carry out the punishment himself. Peter would have a cudgel on him at all times just in case the place he was visiting at the time had a criminal in need of a good beating. He also liked to watch those punishments being carried out while he was having his dinner. Would you imagine that.
Lopes is also quick to point out the rich, powerful and even those close to the king himself were not free from his swift justice. He tells us about two of the king squires who robbed and killed a jew and how Peter had them both beheaded, even if they were his squires and the victim was 'just a dirty jew'. And he also castrated several men for sleeping with married succubi. Somtimes he would hang the succubi too for good measure.
The people depicted are so picturesque in their behavior you almost forget they are actually real people and most of those events actually happened. Fernão Lopes was not only the official chronicler of the kingdom of Portugal, he was also the guardian of the Royal Archives and all the stuff he tells us in his books he found registered with great care on official legal documents there.
I'm fascinated. It's not the easiest read because his Portuguese is 600 years old but it's very worth it. I quite like his language, his choice of words and the stories. Two other chronicles by his hand survived. Chronicle of king Fernando I, which picks up after the death of Peter I and the coronation of his son Fernando, and Chronicle of king John I, a king from another dynasty whose Lopes was a contemporary of. I'm planning to read both.
Unfortunately there are no English translations for this, I don't think, but there are A LOT of such medieval Chronicles in English and they must contain a lot of human folly as well I'm sure. I have the impression they'll probably sound a lot more official than the way Fernão Lopes did though. Who knows. I might check on that later. I know of Froissart but never read his stuff. We'll see.
Anyway if you're curious you can find several printings of Lopes's work from the 17th and 19th centuries for free at https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Lopes%2C+Fern%C3%A3o%2C+b.+ca.+1380%22
I'm using the ones from 1895 because they're obviously the easier ones to read.
>The Divine Comedy,Dante Alighieri
I don't know how to put it, Dante is eternal for a reason. As you all probably already know, Dante's hell is divided in circles. At there Dante goes to the full lengths of perversion, suffering and sadness that humanity can reach converting them in eternal ideas. The couple doomed to being blown away by a strong wind by all eternity due to their forbidden love, the rains and lakes of blood and fire, those being perpetually tortured and dissected and then, at the ninth circle, Judas and all the traitors to God, lying in a frozen lake, experiencing the strongest glacial cold imaginable, being chewed by Satan while no light, no company, no goodness will ever reach these deeps, therefore experiencing an acute eternal loneliness too.
At purgatory the intensity of the work decreases a little though is still very beautiful. At the shores of the Mount of Purgatory lies the wandering souls longing for bliss of God. While Dante climbs up the mountain he encounters many examples of extreme penitence of those who desire to reunite with God. Intense images of how they wish with all their might and soul to be granted with God's love.
At heaven Dante starts to introducing some dense discourses of how the order of world works and how everything is directed by the eternal and infinite love of God. Nonetheless, the intense imagery still remains here even more powerful. To represent this infinite love Dante has to go to the limits of his talent, probably his best poems are here. Lights, angels, music, harmony are among the resources Dante used to convey the idea of the eternal love of God sustaining the whole structure of the universe and how despite the suffering and the fluctuating nature of the world, everything is hold together in unity and for all the eternity by the never ending love of God and we are all embraced by it. That was beautiful.
Of course, Dante uses the particular motifs and characters of his time and place and he evens actively condemns or praises some of them (all that Guelphs and Ghibellines stuff in Florence, the city of Dante) and all of that is important in the work but to me the greatness of The Divine Comedy lies in the intensity and eternity of the motifs represented in the work. Truly magnificent.
Did you read it in English? I should give TDC another shot, I tried to read it years ago and gave up even before getting to purgatory. One might say I've been stuck in hell since.
did any of you read lotr
You either read it or did not, no need for ?
>>60389>Did you read it in English?
No, I read it in spanish
Random pick out of the hundreds of books I have.
Usually I buy more books because of reading about something that I want to know more about, so the 'random' book is infact interesting one too. And so the reading continues eternally.
This really only works on non-fiction. I'm currently trying to read all the Finnish literature classics, of course of which there wasn't much left to read except scraps from Snellman's, Alkio's, Linnankoski's, and Ivalo's works.
Two Finnish writers of which collected works I haven't yet touched (but have read single volume chosen works) are Juhani Aho and V.A. Koskenniemi (the latter I have steered away from, because large part of his works are poems and some such).
Not really interested in any other modern classical literature, except for few chosen ones.
I have of course read all Dostojevskis's big works and The Idiot and The Devils (for its realistic prophecy of what revolution will bring about) are really great, thanks least of which is for their Finnish translator.
In fact for Russian writers there is one really simple rule: those who have been jailed and sent to the camps for political 'offences' or are not in reality Russian (Gogol, Ukrainian), are good ones; those withn leisure life are mostly garbage (yes, I'm loooking at you Tolstoi: never again War and peace).
One exception to the rule is Chekhov, who really had the nag for writing interesting short novels and for his Sakhalin camp report (Solzenitsyn use it very often as a comparison between the camps of old older and Soviet ones).
Jaroslavs Hasek's 'Svejk' I have to mention too, because it's one of my favourite work and rereading the book after reading more about Prussian or German in general and obviously about Austro-Hungarian history, many little details and situations became understandable (why the hailing German student was beaten up for example).
Few weeks ago finished rereading Kershaws' second volume of his biography of Hitler. Best biography from the point of view of details and facts, but not as well written as Toland's.
From this subject I have read too much about (just like about Russian revolution, Soviet Union and Communism in general) really and currently somewhat tired about the subject, but will probably read Longerich's Goebbels biography in the near-future and Siemens history of the SA (read his book about Horst Wessel, which really filled all factual holes I was still missing from this specific person and incident, altough I didn't really like some of the conclusions the writer did, but that happens).
Oh yeah, also rereading Finnish Bible translation of 1776 (boy, Deuteronomy is really, really slow read…). Have also read 1642 (this was the first full Finnish Bible translation, and had extremely large meaning for written Finnish word) and also 1933 (OT) and 1938 (NT) translations, which are really good ones and much comparable to the King James version - which I have read (except for apocryphics) too.
pretty cool site i found today, has books organized by topic.
I've tried listening to the audiobook of Timur Vermes' newest book along with the second entry in Liu Cixin's trilogy but I get bored halfway through. The same thing happened with ebooks and physical books which made me switch to audio but now it seems like I can't get through anything. Maybe fiction just doesn't do it for me anymore and I need to stick with non fiction
>The world as will and representation, Arthur Schopenhauer
This book is a milestone of pessimism. I tend to gravitate towards this kind of philosophy/literature but I had never read any Schopenhauer's book before. This is an immense work that can't be fully explained here in a mere imageboard post nor I got a complete understanding of the work but still I will give a brief recapitulation of what I believe are the central points of the book.
Schopenhauer starts by addressing one of the principal problems of metaphysics and epistemology: if one tries to think in what our perception of reality lies, generally two elements are found: each one of us as an unit perceiving the world around and that external world itself. We have sensors to capture stimulus existing in the external world and somehow this process creates the notion of reality inside our heads. The problems here are: how can we be sure that the external world truly exists at all when the whole notion of it we have is a movie generated by the conjunction of our senses and our mental structures? are the external stimulus truly coming from "outside" ? how can we even grasp some of the "truth" of the world when we are trapped inside our heads and senses?
Schopenhauer takes Kant's philosophy as the starting point to address this question. He earnestly recommends to read Kant before attempting to immerse in The World as Will and Representation. Honestly I didn't do that. Shortly, based on Schopenhauer's points in the book, Kant states that besides our sensory limitations, we are subjected too to our mental structures, i.e., the notions of space, time and causality are prebuilt inside us, everything that we can think of is immediately referred to these notions and we can't proof that these notions form the basis or the truth of this reality, the "thing-in-itself" as Kant named it. The whole perception arising from these basic notions is what he calls the world as representation.
So, If there is anything beyond space, time and causality, it would be virtually impossible to us to know anything about it. We are trapped in this realm of causes and consequences. Are we doomed to this universal prison or can we take another path to even remotely grasp some of the true nature of reality? well, that's what Schopenhauer tries by taking a different approach. He invites to look inwards, to look inside our beings.
If we look inside us we are still subjected to the limits of human knowledge but some elemental and basic facts start to appear. Each one of us can be categorized as an undeniable will expressing itself. An individual is mass of actions, plans, desires and when we wholeheartedly examine our beings we can't deny that we are that: actions and desires taking place, being sexual desire the most powerful manifestation of this inner will.
Schopenhauer takes a leap of faith here and he admits it. We've looked at ourselves and at the deepest of our beings we found pure will, why wouldn't all the things that exist behave in the same way, i.e, will is at the core of their actions and existance? Schopenhauer accepts this and stablish will as the most fundamental principle of reality.
The movement of the planets, the existance and reproduction of life, physical and chemical forces, etc are all manifestations of a universal and single will. This will appears to us as chaotic and irrational force with no purpose. This will cares only for the preservation and propagation of eternal ideas and motifs. A clear example of this is life itself: living beings are borning and dying all the time but the species, the DNA are preserved through time. Schopenhauer even argues that time, space and causality are mere tools, mere apendixes of the will that living beings use to navigate through life. The most fundamental nature of reality is then WILL. No space, no time, no causality affects the essence of will, will is a never setting sun. This is the world as will.
However, we humans and living beings in general are disposable and hopelessly trapped in the world of representation, in the world of causes and consequences. So, individual life is no more than a fugue in time waiting for inevitably wreckage of death.
What can we do? No much really, Schopenhauer offers art as mean to reduce the pain of living and connect to the eternal ideas of existance.
That was a really nice overview. I recently got the first volume, but I never read much philosophy books aside from Kierkegaard’s Either/Or, so I’m pretty sure it’s going to be a difficult read for me. Great post however.
Hey! i used to read that blog, the guy wasn't a great writer but i really liked the stuff that he was into, it was like listening to a good friend talk about his favorite things (which is kind of the writing i'd like to make).
Obviously because you’re reading normie tier classics. Not all books are like that.
Do you tend to go for books that validate your worldview? I’m genuinely asking, not being sarcastic or anything.
I don't know how to distinguish between normal and non normal. I am trying to find something that amuses me as much as visual novels do now that I have already read most of the good ones. I suspect that the main reason that I enjoyed visual novels so much is that they allowed me to self insert so I didn't feel that I was observing the story of someone who was more boring than myself. So it would be true to say that I am looking for validation of my own ideals.
At first I was just reading VNs for simple amusement but then I read too much philosophy. Now I don't feel comfortable reading VNs anymore because they are rooted in the particular instance of recent Japan whereas I now want to attempt to experience universality. The problem is, of course, that most of the literature I attempt to read does not meet the lofty standards that some philosopher hold it to have according to my tastes.
The source of this distaste is probably my own undisciplined mind and poor understanding but the gods have decided that I must continue to push the boulder up the hill as punishment for my ineptitude.
I’m curious to know what kind of philosophy books and visual novels you’ve been reading. I’m somewhat similar, but not quite. I don’t enjoy reading anymore but still do it out of obligation, or because I don’t have anything else to do. The only book that got close to describing how I feel was a short novella by Georges Perec called A Man Asleep. I suppose any depressed wizard can self-insert into that.
>>60698>Thus Spake Zarathustra is your book.
Indeed, it is the kind of book that I desire. The problem is that Nietzsche has introduced the puzzle of literature that still torments my mind. I also now feel compelled to listen to classical music even though, again, I don't really like it that much. >>60699
I've done a fair amount of research into the history of philosophy, the individual philosophers that I'm most familiar with are Plato and Nietzsche. My favourite VNs are Air, Tsukihime, Subahibi, Umineko and Kikokugai. While I like VNs I don't have much fondness for anime which I conclude must be because it does not have the memorable soundtracks that VNs have and because the VN format is easier to project one's own attitude into so that while characters and plotlines that are uninteresting in anime become far more intruiging in VNs because it feels that I am the one who is experiencing them and not someone else.
I'm currently listening to Don Quixote and it is tolerable so far. I suppose I'll start posting in the audiobook thread shortly because listening to books is easier than reading them, although it can be easy to zone out and lose track of what is happening.
>The Guermantes Way, Marcel Proust
This is the third volume of In the Search Of The Lost Time series. This time we follow the narrator fascination with the Guermantes family, the Duchesse de Guermantes and all the wonders encompassed by that surname.
ISOLT (In Search Of the Lost Time) might be a tedious reading if you aren't in the correct mindset because there isn't a thrilling or complex plot going on, nor Proust is as raw and direct when examining the human condition when compared to Dostoevsky for example. Besides, Proust can go for hundreds of pages describing rather mundane scenes. So, ISOLT can be a torture to read to a newcomer reader. However, when you "get it", ISOLT is great. With "get it", I'm referring to being in a state of meditation and contemplation, where you look behind and examine your life and you remember all the little details that compose it: the particular weather of a season, the landscapes, your feelings, the smells, the flavors, what you thought of a person back then and how you looked at the world in general. With that in mind you can appreciate the beauty of the scenes described by Proust.
Some notable fragments I can recall of this volume are for example: when the narrator associates the word "Guermantes" with colors and seasons of the past, the excitement and joy he felt when the Duchesse and the Princesse of Germantes smiled at him in the theater, the long essay the narrator does when he's alone at bed about the nature of the sound and silence and how sound vivifies the world, the sadness the narrator felt when he called his grandmother by telephone and after listening her dim and lonely voice, sadness invaded him; the sickness and death of his grandmother, the first time he kissed with Albertine and he was rather disappointed and I could go on.
Some quotes to better convey the nature of the book:
>“We may, indeed, say that the hour of death is uncertain, but when we say so we represent that hour to ourselves as situated in a vague and remote expanse of time, it never occurs to us that it can have any connexion with the day that has already dawned, or may signify that death — or its first assault and partial possession of us, after which it will never leave hold of us again — may occur this very afternoon, so far from uncertain, this afternoon every hour of which has already been allotted to some occupation. You make a point of taking your drive every day so that in a month’s time you will have had the full benefit of the fresh air; you have hesitated over which cloak you will take, which cabman to call, you are in the cab, the whole day lies before you, short because you have to be at home early, as a friend is coming to see you; you hope that it will be as fine again to-morrow; and you have no suspicion that death, which has been making its way towards you along another plane, shrouded in an impenetrable darkness, has chosen precisely this day of all days to make its appearance, in a few minutes’ time, more or less, at the moment when the carriage has reached the Champs-Elysées.”
>“It is illness that makes us recognize that we do not live in isolation but are chained to a being from a different realm, worlds apart from us and by whom it is impossible to make ourselves understood: our body. Were we to meet a brigand on the road, we might manage to make him conscious of his own personal interest if not our plight. But to ask pity of our body is like talking to an octopus, for which our words can have no more meaning than the sound of the sea, and with which we should be terrified to find ourselves condemned to live.”
> “But should a sensation from the distant past-like those musical instruments that record and preserve the sound and style of the various artists who played them-enable our memory to make us hear that name with the particular tone it then had for our ears, even if the name seems not to have changed, we can still feel the distance between the various dreams which its unchanging syllables evoked for us in turn. For a second, rehearing the warbling from some distant springtime, we can extract from it, as from the little tubes of color used in painting, the precise tint-forgotten, mysterious, and fresh-of the days we thought we remembered when, like bad painters, we were in fact spreading our whole past on a single canvas and painting it with the conventional monochrome of voluntary memory.”
> “Poets claim that we recapture for a moment the self that we were long ago when we enter some house or garden in which we used to live in our youth. But these are most hazardous pilgrimages, which end as often in disappointment as in success. It is in ourselves that we should rather seek to find those fixed places, contemporaneous with different years. And great fatigue followed by a good night's rest can to a certain extent help us to do so. For in order to make us descend into the most subterranean galleries of sleep, where no reflexion from overnight, no gleam of memory comes to light up the interior monologue—if the latter does not itself cease—fatigue followed by rest will so thoroughly turn over the soil and penetrate the bedrock of our bodies that we discover down there, where our muscles plunge and twist in their ramifications and breathe in new life, the garden where we played in our childhood. There is no need to travel in order to see it again; we must dig down inwardly to discover it. What once covered the earth is no longer above but beneath it; a mere excursion does not suffice for a visit to the dead city: excavation is necessary also. But we shall see how certain fugitive and fortuitous impressions carry us back even more effectively to the past, with a more delicate precision, with a more light-winged, more immaterial, more headlong, more unerring, more immortal flight, than these organic dislocations.”
that rock quote is a real feeler
if you find anything else please share
hot damn the mirror one is brutal in the best possible way
I'm convinced, will read it now.
I can read most things in French but Proust is a whole other level of difficulty. I really wanted to read it in the original language first but every time someone brings it up I feel like starting right away with a translation.
I'm reading the book of disquiet now and I have to say everything I'm reading in it resonates on a level I've never had before. I am loving the way it was written too, in fragments and pieces. The way it starts out you would think it was written in 2015 but he must've written that in the early 20th century. It cements in my mind that we've been living in a prolonged dark age of sorts since before we were born if things were that bad back then.
"With merely a kind of smile in my soul, I passively consider the definitive confinement of my life to the Rua dos Douradores, to this office, to the people who surround me. An income sufficient for food and drink, a roof over my head, and a little free time in which to dream and write, to sleep – what more can I ask of the Gods or expect from Destiny?
I've had great ambitions and boundless dreams, but so has the delivery boy or the seamstress, because everyone has dreams. What distinguishes certain of us is our capacity for fulfilling them, or our destiny that they be fulfilled.
In dreams I am equal to the delivery boy and the seamstress. I differ from them only in knowing how to write. Yes, writing is an act, a personal circumstance that distinguishes me from them. But in my soul I'm their equal.
I realize that their are islands to the South and great cosmopolitan attractions and…
If I had the world in my hand, I'm quite sure that I would trade it for a ticket to the Rua dos Douradores.
Perhaps my destiny is to remain forever a bookkeeper, with poetry or literature as a butterfly that alights on my head, making me look ridiculous to the extent it looks beautiful.
I'll miss Moreira, but what's that next to a glorious promotion?
I know that the day I become head bookkeeper of Vasques & Co. will be one of the great days of my life. I know it with forestated bitterness and irony, but also with the intellectual advantage of certainty."
>A Short History of Decay, Emil Cioran
Cioran probably wrote the same book several times but he's always a quality reading. Amongst the countless prophets and messiah that pullulate over the world, he on the other hand offers nothing. No salvation, no redemption is possible. Language, words, politics, tradition, ideologies, etc, all are absurdities when compared with the vast void and emptiness of the world. Yet he knows that a strong and criminal conviction is needed to sustain civilization and keep living. Once the lie has worn out, societies are doomed to collapse and death. Still, one can say that Cioran, rather than being a life denier, experienced life intensely. To doubt of everything, to doubt of even meaning and language, to deeply apprehend the void intrinsic to life is equal to be marveled at the wonder of existence. He's full of life. For that reason he had in very high regard the saints, those capable of almost abandoning consciousness and melting with God and eternity.
>The Reactionary Angels
>It is difficult to sit in judgment on the revolt of the least philosophical of the angels without a tinge of sympathy, amazement, and . . . blame. Injustice governs the universe. Everything which is done and undone there bears the stamp of a filthy fragility, as if matter were the fruit of a scandal at the core of nothingness. Each being feeds on the agony of some other; the moments rush like vampires upon time’s anemia; the world is a receptacle of sobs. . . . In this slaughterhouse, to fold one’s arms or to draw one’s sword are equally vain gestures. No proud frenzy can shake space to its foundations or ennoble men’s souls. Triumphs and failures follow one another according to an unknown law named destiny, a name to which we resort when, philosophically unprovided for, our sojourn here on earth or anywhere seems insoluble to us, a kind of curse to endure, senseless and undeserved. Destiny—favorite word in the vocabulary of the vanquished. . . . Greedy for a nomenclature of the Irremediable, we seek relief in verbal invention, in lights suspended over our disasters. Words are charitable: their frail reality deceives and consoles us. . . .
>Thus “destiny,” which can will nothing, is what has willed what happens to us. . . . Infatuated with the Irrational as the sole mode of explanation, we watch it tip the scale of our fate, which weighs only negative elements. Where find the pride to provoke the forces which have so decreed, and what is more, are not to be held responsible for this decree? Against whom wage the struggle, and where lead the assault when injustice haunts the air of our lungs, the space of our thoughts, the silence and the stupor of the stars? Our revolt is as ill conceived as the world which provokes it. How take it on ourselves to right wrongs when, like Don Quixote on his deathbed, we have lost—madness at its end, exhausted—vigor and illusion to confront the highroads, combats, and defeats? And how regain the energy of that seditious angel who, still at time’s start, knew nothing of that pestilential wisdom in which our impulses asphyxiate? Where find enough verve and presumption to stigmatize the herd of the other angels, while here on earth to follow their colleague is to cast oneself still lower, while men’s injustice imitates God’s, and all rebellion sets the soul against infinity and breaks it there? The anonymous angels—huddled under their ageless wings, eternally victors and vanquished in God, numb to the deadly curiosities, dreamers parallel to the earthly griefs—who would dare to cast the first stone at them and, in defiance, divide their sleep? Revolt, the pride of downfall, takes its nobility only from its uselessness: sufferings awaken it and then abandon it; frenzy exalts it and disappointment denies it. . . . Revolt cannot have a meaning in a non-valid universe. . . .
>(In this world nothing is in its place, beginning with this world itself. We must therefore not be surprised by the spectacle of human injustice. It is equally futile to refuse or to accept the social order: we must endure its changes for the better or the worse with a despairing conformism, as we endure birth, love, the weather, and death. Decomposition presides over the laws of life: closer to our dust than inanimate objects to theirs, we succumb before them and rash upon our destiny under the gaze of the apparently indestructible stars. But they themselves will crumble in a universe which only our heart takes seriously, later expiating its lack of irony by terrible lacerations. . . .
>No one can correct God’s injustice or that of men: every action is merely a special, apparently organized case of the original Chaos. We are swept on by a whirlwind which dates back to the dawn of time; and if this whirlwind has assumed the aspect of an order, it is only the better to do away with us. . . .)
I recommend Oswald Spengler "Decline of the West" good book. Link: https://archive.org/details/DeclineOfTheWestSpengler/mode/2up
Boring, keeps going in circles for no reason. It's just one simple idea and it could have been expressed in one paragraph. Fucking writers always have to masturbate over their little pet theories like they're something special. Over 100 years later the same crowd is still screeching about 'decline.'
Anyone knows where i can find "Schloss Nornepygge" by Max Brod in english? or in text form so i can easily copy and translate it
Is there another anonymous board for discussing literature? 4chan mods are trying to enforce tiktok attention span, and wizchan is nice and well moderated, but too slow.
>>61080>4chan mods are trying to enforce tiktok attention span
What do you mean?
How did you feel about the end? I've read it two or three times and always wished it had another twenty pages to resolve the stuff with Hiro and such, but I don't hate the ending.
I can't imagine being a 4chan mod, the place goes so fast it would be like a full time job, eventually getting burned out by the never ending assault of retards on proxies and dynamic IPs, the once fun board you used to like would become an annoying shitshow of unwanted work while people get mad at you for not being some unsleeping robot that instantly catches shitty posts that are made every second
that's just /b/ though right? i hope. i have fond memories of the other boards, that would be unthinkable seeing that shit on any other board
it's /v/ but those have been one in the same for since 2009.
>The Temple of Dawn, Yukio Mishima
This is the third volume of the Sea of Fertility tetralogy. We follow Shigekuni Honda, an old adult man by this point, his meditations of different currents of Buddhism and his increasing voyeurism.
On the first part of the book Honda travels to Thailand where he meets a princess called Ying Chan who claims to be the reincarnation of a young Japanese man (Isao and Kiyoaki, the two boys that died in the two previous volumes following their passions and were close to Honda). After that Honda embarks in a travel to India where he visits sacred places of Hinduism and then the book introduces heavy analysis on different schools of Buddhism. I don't recall the details of these long meditations but I find interesting how Mishima thinks that despite the fleeting nature of life and beauty yet there is something eternal and transcendental in existence in a fashion akin to Buddhism. I can recall touching moments across the tetralogy (the photo of the soldiers going to the war with Russia; Honda, Kiyoaki and the two princes from Siam at the beach contemplating the sea; the harakiri of Isao while the sun was rising, etc) that transmit this feeling of ephemeral yet eternal beauty. The events in the world are in continual cycle of creation and destruction but the idea of beauty is eternal.
However in this same volume we probably see how Mishima was increasingly worried with growing old and leading of life of mediocrity and conformity. Honda is the character that Mishima uses to represent this aspect. His inadequacy, his old age and his feeling of a wasted life are conveyed through his voyeurism: Life with all his passion and beauty is going but now he is just a man that can only spy persons having sex, that can only watch from far away. That's ugly. He, the man that led a life of order and rationality can only loose some of his passions through this petty act.
Following Mishima style, this volume ends with a climax where Honda spies Ying Chan having lesbian sex and the subsequent destruction of the house where this event took place by fire. An act of consummation.
>It was outrageous that his pleasure might disgust others and thereby subject him to their everlasting repugnance and further that such disgust might one day grow to be an indispensable element of pleasure. Chilling self-disgust fused with the sweetest allurement… the very denial of existence joining with the concept of immortality that can never be healed. This unhealable existence was the unique essence of immortality.
>Flames reflecting in the water… burning corpses… Benares! How could he have dreamed of recapturing the ultimate he had seen in that holy land?The house had turned into kindling and life had become fire. All triviality had turned to ash and nothing but the most essential was important, and the hidden, gigantic face had turned up its head abruptly from the flame. Laughter, screams, sobs were all absorbed in the clamor of the flames, the crackling of wood, the distorted panes of glass, the creaking of the joints – sound itself was enveloped in an absolute quiet.
Fellow reading wizzies, forgive my blogpost, but I'd like to ask for some advice.
I find it really difficult to fit reading into my daily life for two main reasons. Reason 1 is that my attention span is bad due to constant internet/tech usage when I'm awake, meaning it's hard for me to read more than a page or two at a time before my eyes and mind wander. Now, I have solved this before, having spent multiple periods of time offline and/or tech free, spending most of my free time reading (usually 3-6 week long periods). These periods can be really nice, and I have lots of nice memories of relaxing and reading for hours at a time - and I feel genuinely happier and more fulfilled than any day using the net and tech. This, however, leads me to Reason 2:
When I read a lot, my days get painfully lonely. Usually I have 0 problems with loneliness, because I can chat online all day with online friends or anonymously in forums, and I can discuss hobbies and relatable things with others who understand. But when I read for a few weeks and keep away from the net, I get struck with a feeling of isolation, not just because I can't talk to people (all my friends are online), but also because I'm no longer participating in or doing anything that my peers can relate to. I have nobody to talk to about reading or the tech detoxing.
To reiterate, I really want to read more. Sometimes I'll read 3 or 4 novels in a week when away from tech and I enjoy it more than anything I do online. But I don't know how to do it without the downsides of not being in touch with internet culture, friends and forums, which feel like my last tether to decent mental health and sanity. I feel bored and sad and unfulfilled when I spend days online, scrolling content I don't care about. So how can I strike a balance? Until now I've only ever done cold turkey tech/internet detoxes, but I don't want to do another one (I've done more than 10 before, lost count) just to go back to "normal".
Lots of wizzies and some normal folks manage to balance tech and reading, but to me they seem incompatible. The internet is something you skimread and you dart your eyes around looking for the best content, whilst reading is the opposite, you fall into the pages and absorb every sentence.
Any advice or similar experiences are appreciated.
>>61184>Lots of wizzies and some normal folks manage to balance tech and reading, but to me they seem incompatible. The internet is something you skimread and you dart your eyes around looking for the best content, whilst reading is the opposite, you fall into the pages and absorb every sentence.
There are different types of reading. Falling into a page is one type, entering a dialectic with the text is another. There are traditions of lectio divina and biblomancy, along with structural and deconstructive literary techniques. There's no reason why reading has to be a passive act. Not all texts are worthy of active participation, but the ones that are may help you restrike the balance.>>61186
Sehr gut, I hope wiz appreciates the irony.
>>61187>There are different types of reading
I understand what you mean, but I specifically like the feeling of being carried away by a novel for a a few hours, losing myself in the story. That's the part of reading that makes me happy and feels fulfilled, and it's the only hobby I've had in years that makes me forget about/lost track of time. The way I read forums and the news etc is totally different.>>61189
I don't think you understood what I meant, but that's probably my fault.>You need better reason to read than just "I like to read"
this isn't my only reason. As I mentioned to the another anon just now, reading is the only hobby I have that I enjoy enough to really lose track of time, and it's the only form of media that really emotionally affects me. I enjoy it significantly more than anything else that I do in life, besides maybe cycling, which I can't do for half the year.>You will have a good reason to actually read a book
Again, I'm not missing a "reason" to read, I'm missing the attention span. When I spend a few weeks of tech I can read for hours at a time with almost complete concentration, taking 2 minute breaks when I need it, every hour or so. But when using the internet as normal I can barely read 2 pages.
Don't be too hard on yourself,just take a break, if you can take a break for six months from cycling, you can also take a break from reading for a few days (even if you don't want to).
Has anyone read that 48 laws of power book? I skimmed a PDF and it seems like sociopathic bullshit, but who knows. I like the idea of a secular book of principles like that anyway.
It's not really sociopathic. Some of it seems so, and Greene is a Jew, if that matters. He reminds the reader to engage as ethically as possible, and to not just be callous with people who don't have much to offer.
Was Either/Or worth the read? I have it on my desk right now.
I read that and "Purity of Heart" and enjoyed both. Read it wiz!
I remember this guy! He wrote about efilism, pessimistic, escapism and NEET related stuff in Spanish until he deleted all his entire content one day. Apparently he has APD or something like that.
Anyway. I just found another blog pretty similar to Mainländer's one:https://boringhermit.wordpress.com/2022/02/04/dna/
>As far as I’m concerned, nihilism reminds us that we’re nothing more than rudderless puppets, spastically flailing in the dark for anything to grab on to that can alleviate us the burden of our existence. We distract ourselves, we put our faith into cultural ideas or other human made institutions, or we try to paint a more aesthetically pleasing face over what is otherwise a bottomless hole of nothing.
The Bible - Proverbs
The Dao De Ching (Up to interpretation)
There was a book I find at library as child, big some 200 pages of proverbs and general advice for teens, mostly for males. It had a Yoda quote "Do or do not, there is no try". Not sure of name.
Some soldiers, many from Vietnam conflict, have written series' of practical lessons they learned through trials and camaraderie.
> Duino Elegies, Rainer Maria Rilke
This was a rather hard reading for me. These poems are difficult to interpret but when you "get them" the beauty of them flourish. Rilke, through the figure of the angel puts the reader through some difficult questions and dilemmas proper of the human condition. I don't know what he's exactly talking about when he uses the concept of angel. For sure, he is not talking about a particular being nor the classical definition of angel. Probably I'm totally wrong here but the angel is something like transcending the fears and constraints of mundane life, totality, experiencing life to its fullest. Among the major themes Rilke touches in this book are fear of death, loneliness, the nature of sexual desire. I will have to reread this some time in the future, I'm sure I will appreciate it better. For the time being I can say I liked it and got some vague impressions.
>It’s true enough, of course, no longer to live on earth is strange, to abandon customs barely mastered yet, not to interpret roses and other auspicious things, not give them meaning in a human future. No longer to be as we have always been, in those endlessly anxious hands – to leave even our name behind us as a child leaves off playing with a broken toy. Strange, no longer to know desires desired – strange to witness the involvement of all things lost suddenly, each drifting away singly into space. And truly, to be dead is hard, so full of making up lost ground, till little by little we find a trace of eternity. Yet, the living are wrong to draw such distinctions so clearly: angels (it is said) are often never quite sure whether they pass among the living or the dead
>"Nobody sees Death,
Nobody sees the face of Death,
Nobody hears the voice of Death.
Savage Death just cuts mankind down".
Gilgamesh, Tablet X, VI.
Pretty good summary. I have some things to add though. Schopenhauer's "leap of faith" in relation to the identification of the Will as the sole substance of reality is indeed a crucial step in his argumentation, it's the "narrow door" in Kant's epistemology. It would be paradoxical to identify the substance through the logic of the representation, since it wouldn't lead us to the thing-in-itself but, obviously, to the representation. Thus the "leap of faith". It is important to notice that Schopenhauer gives an in depth analysis of nature (in this is and other books) that point towards a confirmation of his theory. And indeed, as an evolutionary psychologists I will tell you Schopenhauer's metaphysics feels proven to me the more I study this field.
>What can we do? No much really, Schopenhauer offers art as mean to reduce the pain of living and connect to the eternal ideas of existance.
That's not all. Since the Will produces suffering through eternal dissatisfaction (the Will moves you from point A to point B, since all its nature is is self-continuation, through desire; this move requires that you feel dissatisfied with being at point A, you get satisfied momentarily when you reach point B, get bored, and then start desiring point C) the solution to suffering is denial-of-the-Will, to stop desiring to reach another "point".
I have studied arabic for sometime
These guys are super nihlists
Many of their poems are about hating the current life most of them believe there is another life
One of the poets who is famous for that is Aba al atahya
If you can read arabic please read for him
His words truely describes our lives
sometimes i even doubt that he was secretly a wizard being a wizard in arab society is like bekng a homo or even worse
How to smoke weed and read books? Is there someone here who does both successfully? I'm not very disciplined but I have read a few books before starting to smoke, but I feel like a retard when I'm in a period where I smoke (even when I'm sober in the following days) and I can't focus. Is this a choice I have to make? I feel like both books and weed improve my creativity. Weed is definitely less healthy, but it's easier. I feel guilty not being able to focus on what I'm reading.
I thought Al-Ma'arri was the OG Arabian wizard. I can't read Arabic though, wish I could jahili/pre-Islamic poetry in translation is still beautiful.
I am currently reading The Constitution of Liberty by the economist Friedrich Hayek.
This book discusses the ideals of freedom and liberty that have shaped the Western civilization and the dangers of an expanding government that may halten the West growth and lead to its decline.
I guess you would consider it anti-NEET as it leans more towards libertarian ideology.
However, it's a very good read. I was oblivious to the dynamics that freedom creates in a society.
Careful with those ideas. Just stop an think for a second: were do you have more freedom and liberty? in the private sector? are corporations and workplaces "democratic"? No, they are authoritarian and completely vertical. You do what your boss tells you or you get fired, and even if you do what your boss tells you, you still can get fire anyway because of cost reduction or because he just doesn't like you.
Once you realize that, it's follows automatically that if you have more of that and less of the state that is the only true "free and democratic" institution that you have in society were you have any say at all (beyond a few minor exceptions) you are not going to have more freedom at all but completely the opposite. Once the state is lessen or out of the picture, you know what the corpos in the private sector are going to do, because they are already doing it, they are going to enslave you even worst and you are going to have to work 12-16hs a day 6-7 days a week like it was 100 years ago.
The problem is not a "big government" the problem is an "efficient government" that works for you instead of the bureaucrats and the corpos.
Or that libertarian shit only works if you already have money and power. If you are a broke peasant you are going to eat shit even worst in a libertarian society.
Democracy is not a synonym for freedom.
Voluntary hierarchy isn't inherently anti-freedom.
Arguments aside the book sounds interesting and I think I will at least check to see if there is a easy to find audio book version of it so I can listen to it while at work.
>>61411>Once the state is lessen or out of the picture, you know what the corpos in the private sector are going to do
You can even think about it backward.
If the corpos are removed from the picture, the state would oppress its people like what happened in the communist era.
I think we need a fine balance between state interventionism and laissez-faire. The issue is that such balance is extremely difficult to preserve and to define because :
-First, this balance is not set in stones. Different times, different needs.
-Secondly, the leaders are biased by the community they're trying to appease or their own interest.
So, maybe it's a process of experimentation. We throw laws around, see their effect and judge if they should continue to be applied or abolished.
The issue with the experimentation process is that you are toying with people's life (this isn't like a science lab where you play with chemicals) and quite possibly hurting the social tissue. It will take a long time for the wound to heal, granted you are not experimenting with other laws that can mess this situation even more.
Plus, when your book of law contains thousand laws, how is it possible to differentiate the defective harmful ones from the neutral or good ones. Frankly it's no easy task and it's probably why governments quickly abandon the idea of reforming and just adds in new laws to the ever expanding set.
In this context, I can see the appeal of laissez-faire. Get rid of this pile nobody can make sense of anymore, implement few basic laws and let the market do its thing.
At the same time, it could be scary if it leads to the elites sucking us dry. Although you can argue it's kinda already the case since 1% people owns 90% wealth, this mostly due to the usury that our financial system is based on.
>Les Chants de Maldoror, Lautréamont
In this collection of prose poems, Lautréamont takes the reader through the "adventures" and musings of Maldoror, the incarnation he uses to represent pure evil. Lautréamont is almost a natural heir of Baudelaire, Rimbaud, etc. Following that style, Lautréamont poems are like an invitation to "explode", to transcend the Baudelaire's spleen by letting all of our inner desires to take free expression in this world. Doing that implies inflicting suffering and pain unto others, basically being evil, but to Lautréamont that also is like a form of merging with the universe, connecting with God, experiencing "total reality". Both Baudelaire and Rimbaud share this need of expanding outwards, of letting everything inside you to takes free way and of experiencing sensations to its fullest but Lautréamont is another level of brutality and violence. This was a very fierce and intriguing book.
>We must let our nails grow for a fortnight. Oh! how sweet it is to snatch a child from his bed, who has nothing on his upper lip, and, with his eyes open, pretend to pass his hand sweetly on his forehead, tilting his hands hair! Then, suddenly, at the moment when he least expected it, to push the long nails into his soft breast, so that he did not die; for if he died, one would not later have the appearance of his miseries. Then the blood is drunk by licking the wounds; and during this time, which should last as long as eternity lasts, the child weeps. Nothing is so good as his blood, extracted as I have just said, and still warm, if not his tears, bitter as salt. Male, Have you ever tasted your blood, when by chance you cut your finger? How good it is, is not it; for he has no taste. Besides, do not you remember one day, in your gloomy reflections, carried your hand, hollowed in the depths, on your diseased ligure wet by what was falling from your eyes; which then went fatally towards the mouth, which drew long lines in this cup, trembling like the teeth of the pupil who looks obliquely at the one who was born to oppress him, tears? How good they are, are they not? for they have the taste of vinegar. One would say the tears of the one who loves most; but the tears of the child are better on the palate. He does not betray, not yet knowing the evil: the one who loves most betrays sooner or later … I guess by analogy, though I do not know what friendship is, or love (it is probable that I will never accept them, at least on the part of the human race). So, since your blood and tears do not disgust you, feed, feed with confidence the tears and blood of the adolescent. Bend his eyes, while you tear his palpitating flesh; and after hearing long hours his sublime cries, like the piercing groaning in a battle the throats of the dying wounded, then, having thrown you as an avalanche, throw yourself into the next room, and you will pretend to to come to his rescue. You will untie his hands, with the nerves and the swollen veins, you will render the sight to his eyes lost, restoring you to lick his tears and his blood. As then repentance is true! The the divine spark which is in us, and appears so rarely, shows itself; too late! As the heart overflows with being able to console the innocent one who has been harmed: "Adolescent, who has just suffered cruel pains, who has been able to commit a crime on you which I know not what name to call! Unhappy that you are! How you must suffer! And if your mother knew this, she would not be nearer to death, so abhorred by the guilty than I am now. Alas! what is good and evil? Is it the same thing by which we rage our impotence, and the passion of reaching to infinity by even the most insane means? Or are they two different things? Yes … that it is rather the same thing … for, if not, what will become of me on the day of judgment? Teenager, forgive me; it is he who is before your noble and sacred face, who has broken your bones and torn the flesh that hangs in different parts of your body. Is it a delirium of my sick reason, is it a secret instinct that does not depend on my reasoning, like that of the eagle rending its prey, which prompted me to commit this crime; and yet, as much as my victim, I was suffering! Adolescent, forgive me. Once I have emerged from this passing life, I want to be interwoven for eternity; to form but one being, my mouth stuck to your mouth. Even so, my punishment will not be complete. Then you will tear me, without ever stopping, with teeth and nails at the same time. I shall wrap my body with balmy garlands for this atoning sacrifice; and we shall both suffer, to be torn, you, to tear me … my mouth glued to your mouth. O teenager, with fair hair and so sweet eyes, will you do what I advise you? In spite of you, I want you to do it, and you will make my conscience happy. "After speaking thus, at the same time you will have harmed a human being, and you will be loved by the same being: it is happiness greater than can be conceived. Later, you can put him in the hospital; for the perclus will not be able to make a living. You will be called good, and laurel wreaths and gold medals will hide your bare feet, scattered over the great tomb, with the old face, O you, whose name I do not want to write on this page which consecrates the sanctity of crime, I know that your forgiveness was immense as the universe. But I still exist! be torn, you, tear me … my mouth stuck to your mouth. O teenager, with fair hair and so sweet eyes, will you do what I advise you? In spite of you, I want you to do it, and you will make my conscience happy.
I am reading the "Love letter to America", written by a KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, in which he details the communists (thus the KGB) tactics to culturally destroy then physically conquer a nation that cannot be taken out frontally.
It's at the same time eye-opening but also quite frankly frightening, specially when you notice that these tactics are still being used (not by USSR since it's long gone) but by the elites who own mass media, hollywood, governments etc.
Here is the pdf link : https://ia802308.us.archive.org/34/items/1984-yb-love-letter-to-america/1984%20YB%20Love%20Letter%20To%20America.pdf
He quoted a writer named Gregory Clark, and it's quite accurate to our current time :
"If I were a communist agent in America with millions of dollars to spend annually I would not waste it in bribing public servants to give away states secrets. But I would lavish and encourage the sleazy tune-smiths of that region to turn out more and more of garbage culture"
gonna read a world history textbook from cover to cover
Wizards know deep Arab lore remains an underrated catalogue of books. Lovecraft based his Necronomicon on Arab esoterica for good reason.
Well that book is more about minarchism vs the welfare state than communism vs capitalism, there are different points along the economic spectrum not just 2 binary extremes
>Sodom and Gomorrah, Marcel Proust
This volume of In the Search of the Lost time puts great emphasis on homosexuality. As through the whole series, we perceive in a very intimate way how the world changes for the narrator when he discovers new facets of the persons he frequents. This time, homosexuality is a hidden force, a secret society beneath the general public and the formal relations. To fully satisfy their desires without bluntly disrupting the normal order, the homosexuals, the members of this secret club, have to resort to tricks, gestures and keywords only known by the members of the club. The application of these tactics is the perfect ferment to someone like Marcel, our narrator, to discover new sides of the characters. The Baron de Charlus is basically the main character in this novel used to represent the secret fraternity of homosexuals. He's all uppity, aristocratic, disparaging and fondly proud of his bloodline but when his desires takes the ride, he begins to act cowardly, timid, incoherent or even he's more conceited and disrespectful.
Another aspect I enjoyed in this volume was the mourning of Marcel due to the death of his grandmother. She died in the previous volume, probably several months/years have passed since then but he didn't totally realized that she was absent for ever until he returned to Balbec and everything there was reminding him of her. A classical Proustian moment when the things, the spaces, the weather take us to the past but also a cruel reminder that all these things we love in life are permeated by death and we will depart from this spectacle someday.
Sadly for Marcel, his beloved Albertine also takes part in the fraternity of homosexuals. Marcel suspects it and we are witnesses of his pains and sufferings while he tries to divert Albertine from that path.
The volume ends with an "in crescendo" where Marcel realizes that all his efforts where futile since the beginning, Albertine has been homosexual for several years already, she's an integral member of the secret club. This realization breaks the hearth of Marcel and life now looks depleted and painful to him. The sunshine at the shore of Balbec is not an invitation to life like it usually looked to him but a heavy and melancholic painting.
You do realize that was his shitty communists country the one that collapsed and they had complete control over the culture?
In other words, he doesn't know what he is talking about. The Communist leaders ideas - and by extension the KGB - on the matter were proven to be garbage when they failed to prevent their own culture collapse.
In practice it works the other way around, if you try to control the culture so it's "good" like they did, you infantilize it killing creativity and making it less resilient. If you expose it to "garbage" it develops anti-bodies for it and it grows stronger. That is why shitty countries that control their culture like China have to steal all their technology from the West and live like lowly dogs and not the other way around.
What translation are you reading? Would you say Proust is overrated
I wouldn’t say overrated since most people don’t read beyond the first two, or maybe even three books. It gets dull in some parts, but overall it’s a good book. Not War and Peace good, but still good. A lot of people like to name-drop Proust as a way of social posturing, mentioning the Madeline cake, the theme of involuntary memory and all that. But really deep down it’s very disquieting and pessimistic once you get to the later parts.
I’d recommend Samuel Beckett’s essay on him if you’re interested in a different perspective.
>>61715>Habit is a compromise effected between the individual and his environment, or between the individual and his own organic eccentricities, the guarantee of a dull inviolability, the lightning-conductor of his existence. Habit is the ballast that chains the dog to his vomit. The periods of transition that separate consecutive adaptations represent the perilous zones in the life of the individual, dangerous, precarious, painful, mysterious and fertile, when for the moment the boredom of living is replaced by the suffering of being.
You seem to read a lot. Do you have reading tips or advice? And may I ask what you do for living or how you make time for reading? Just curious about jobs that would enable one to read so much. Also, did you ever feel compelled to go to college to study any of this?
"The ancients, to awake from life, turned to death. The moderns flee from death in order not to awake, and take pains not even to think of it. Which are the more ‘practical’? Those who compare earthly life to sleep and wait for the miracle of the awakening, or those who see in death a sleep without dream-faces, the perfect sleep, and while away their time with ‘reasonable’ and ‘natural’ explanations? That is the basic question of philosophy, and he who evades it evades philosophy itself."
Lev Shestov. It's a very interesting philosopher who was pretty much a sort of irl Dostoevsky's Underground Man. He was both the Anti-Spinoza and the Anti-Aquinas as he thought God is beyond all reason and logic, the realm of absolute freedom against the Necessity and the laws. For him death was one of the most important philosophical topics, death is the tragic and pure reality and everyone is asleep until they confront Her face to face, like Dostoevsky himself.
It's funny how every philosopher has to believe to have found the basic question of philosophy in order to philosophise.
I find useful to think about modern philosophy as a branch of literature. NEETzsche said philosophy is mostly biographical and I agree, so it's common that we see so many different philosophies and systems from different "axioms" or premises. The philosopher is a man of flesh and bone like Miguel de Unamuno said, the philosopher is after all only a man who is gonna die and suffer, not an AI or a robot so of course a big part of philosophy is subjective and more similar to literature than to science. But it's enjoyable and stuff imo. It's a big part of the soul and charming of philosophy itself.
Heraclitus Fragments, One Robe, One Bowl: The Zen Poetry of Ryokan, Enchiridion>>60871
Yep, I felt the exact same way when I first read it. Some authors you can just tell were spiritual (or actual) wizards. If you want something lighter read Welcome to the N.H.K., the novel the anime was based on. The author was an actual hiki when he wrote it and I won't spoil anything but the epilogue he writes a few years after the book's original publication is a sobering lesson for us all.
I'm reading Pedro Salinas spanish translation
>On the Heights of Despair, Emil Cioran
As I have already stated, Cioran wrote the same book several times. He always touches the topic of the sense of amazement, anguish and despair towards the condition of existing and the mystery of being. Rather than trying to be a philosopher and starting lines of reasoning, Cioran dwells in the sensations and organic reaction produced in ourselves when confronted with this vast unknown condition of being. We are hopelessly unarmed and unable to comprehend or establish a complete theory of metaphysics. Cioran just explores painstakingly the reaction and the compartments in our souls. In this book, Cioran is particularly good at that. He writes little essays that are meticulous descriptions about his probably own inner experience. The despair produced by this cosmic bewilderment and solitude is traduced in pulsations in the nerves, muscles and hearth. He's loyal to the title, this book is a study about despair.
>There are no arguments. Can anyone who has reached the limit bother with arguments, causes, effects, moral considerations, and so forth? Of course not. For such a person there are only unmotivated motives for living. On the heights of despair, the passion for the absurd is the only thing that can still throw a demonic light on chaos. When all the current reasons—moral, esthetic, religious, social, and so on—no longer guide one's life, how can one sustain life without succumbing to nothingness? Only by a connection with the absurd, by love of absolute uselessness, loving something which does not have substance but which simulates an illusion of life. I live because the mountains do not laugh and the worms do not sing.
>The deepest and most organic death is death in solitude, when even light becomes a principle of death. In such moments you will be severed from life, from love, smiles, friends and even from death. And you will ask yourself if there is anything besides the nothingness of the world and your own nothingness.
>I would like to explode, flow, crumble into dust, and my disintegration would be my masterpiece. I would like to melt in the world and for the world to melt orgasmically in me and thus in our delirium to engender an apocalyptic dream, strange and grandiose like all crepuscular visions. Let our dream bring forth mysterious splendors and triumphant shadows, let a general conflagration swallow the world, and let its flames generate crepuscular pleasures as intricate as death and as fascinating as nothingness.
> seriously ask myself, What is the meaning of all this? Why raise questions, throw lights, or see shadows? Wouldn't it be better if I buried my tears in the sand on a seashore in utter solitude? But I never cried, because my tears have always turned into thoughts. And my thoughts are as bitter as tears.
>Despair is the state in which anxiety and restlessness are immanent to existence. Nobody in despair suffers from “problems”, but from his own inner torment and fire. It’s a pity that nothing can be solved in this world. Yet there never was and there never will be anyone who would commit suicide for this reason. So much for the power that intellectual anxiety has over the total anxiety of our being! That is why I prefer the dramatic life, consumed by inner fires and tortured by destiny, to the intellectual, caught up in abstractions which do not engage the essence of our subjectivity. I despise the absence of risks, madness and passion in abstract thinking. How fertile live, passionate thinking is! Lyricism feeds it like blood pumped into the heart!
Longerich doesn't explain enough (or maybe G. didn't elaborate in his diaries) why Dostojevski made such a strong impression on Goebbels. I'd really like to read his diaries, but I don't know Germany well enough.
I can see why he would liked Crime and Punishment, but why Idiot (this is also especially mentioned)? Because the prince is purest and most honest slavophile (which was and is pretty different from European nationalism) and thru this the ideal man of vision?
From Longerich biography of G. it becomes very clear that even aside from Dostojevski and other Russian writers, he was a russophile. But not enough I quess to steer away from Hitler once he became The Man of Destiny for him.
Rosenberg as a Baltic German was on many occassion also disgusted by Goebbels positive views of Muscovism and Russians and even the Bolshevik takeover of the country.
I started reading a lot of classical literature and I think this is the ultimate NEET hobby in many ways. I know everyone relates NEET hobbies to mostly watching anime and vidya but think about it. You need tons of free time to read and properly enjoy classic literature books, especially big fat books from the 1800s. Plus you can have additional fun reading about the lore and there are usually millions of pages written about every single detail of the characters / the plot / the book / the context. Reading War & Peace by Tolstoi as a NEET with no worries is a really comfy experience.
I agree with you that reading old books is really comfy there is something magical about them.When you read them you feel like ,time traveling to books era
> The Decay of the Angel, Yukio Mishima
This is the final volume of the Sea of Fertility tetralogy. Honda is now a retired old judge. He finds a boy named Toru that works in a port watching and taking notice of the ships arriving. Upon watching on him the same moles that Kiyoaki, Isao and Ying Chan had, he decides to adopt this boy thinking he is another reincarnation of them.
But Toru doesn't share the same romantic and passionate nature of the previous reincarnations, he's rather sadistic, manipulative and selfish. Toru isn't guided by any noble ideal, he's framing how to get rid of Honda to inherit all his wealth.
Keiko, that was previously informed by Honda about the line of reincarnation he witnessed, tells Toru that Honda believes he's a reincarnation of the aforementioned persons and if he doesn't die before he turns 20 years old he will prove himself to be a fake. This deeply hurts the pride of Toru and subsequently he tries to commit suicide but he fails, proving then that he's not part of that line.
Honda also falls in disgrace when his voyeurism is made public. When he presages that death is near, he visits the temple where Satoko retired many years ago after the incident with Kiyoaki, and then the conclusion of this journey is dismal: nothing happened at all, universe remains the same, unity is unchanged.
Through the course of the tetralogy we saw romantic portraits of passion, heroism, immolation but after that we also saw ugliness, pettiness,ageing and a feeling of uselessness that permeates all. Mishima was a very interesting and troubled man and one wonders if his death was an act of romanticism, passion, despair, nihilism or all this combined.
That sounds a bit similar to Against Nature by Huysmans. The main character is a rich NEET who spends the entirety of the story (save for one chapter) at home. Every chapter is either about him gushing over some sort of hobby of his or reminiscing about a past experience.
Hey wiz, it's been about 20 days since you made that post. I'm sorry I just saw you replied to me. How's your reading going? Still enjoying it? Did you drop it?
It's a ridiculously long book, quite a challenge even though the stories are very easy to follow. I can honestly say it's still my favorite literary book of all times.
I've been meaning to read that for a couple years, but like everything else I keep procrastinating. Thematically it might be a bit similar but from what I know Huysmans was more cynical while Xavier was somewhat of a romantic, also Against Nature is presumably way better in a literary sense since Xavier wasn't a novelist but a military man
A biography of Pessoa has just been published this year by his translator Richard Zenith. It's pretty good from what I've read, and very detailed.
Thanks I'll check that out, although I'm always scared to learn about my favorite authors' lives in case they turn out to be lame.
You sound like some libright from r/politicalcompass
Quite funny place for a whale.
>Notes from Underground, Fyodor Dostoevsky
This is one of the most powerful things I've ever read. A middle age man living alone in the city, working as civil servant. This is ferocious, this is a scream from the deeps of a human soul .I don't know what the central message of the book is but these are the principal points I guess:
- The first part of the book is a monologue of the anonymous narrator/protagonist. Science and technological development appear to be headed towards a complete explanation of human motives in a way that every act could be predicted and thoroughly explained. This implies that the social order of the future would be perfect and humans would have to merely follow a set of instructions to achieve happiness and the whole well being of society. However our narrator refuses to accept this and despises such destiny. Humans aren't machines and even if we manage to study the impulses and motives of human acts completely, somebody would still be able to say "fuck you" , go against the tide, destroy everything just for the pleasure of not following orders, the pleasure of being himself. To me, this a majestic representation of human condition and the problem it represents. Self awareness is very painful yet it gives us immense freedom to do anything (jerking off in the street, killing your neighbor and steal his money, etc). Dostoevsky doesn't give an answer but as a great artist he can perfectly describe the problem. What are we in the end and what should we do? For the time being human condition when thoroughly examined is overwhelming and frightening. Human soul is a black well.
- The narrator is of course alienated. This is not clearly shown in the book but there are hints that explain the narrator resentment and attitude towards life. Apparently his problems can be traced back to childhood. How was he raised? How was his family? We don't know but certainly he's a new kind of man that the modern world and its conditions has produced. Let's remember the epoch of the novel: new forms of social order, new forms of family, the birth of industrial cities, etc. In the ancient social order, the place of a human in the social hierachy was established from birth, the new social order gave humans freedom without precedents.
- The second part of the book can be categorized as pathetic, dark and funny at the same time. Our narrator goes to a little party with some old "friends" from school that he despised. The narrator has a very big opinion of himself, he considers himself smarter than everybody, a great thinker but when he realizes that his friends are in better material position than him he can't hide his resentment and things go awkward. After that he meets a prostitute and he discharges his accumulated anger towards her. He decides to morally destroy and break her. He shows her that she is just a pathetic whore and future for her is dismal. The prostitute develops some feelings for the narrator but he just laugh at her face and show his true condition, he is the underground man, he is just pathetic. He could have built something with that succubi but out of self hate he sabotage himself. There's not redemption left for him
As I said, I can't describe the message of the book in one sentence. It is a majestic portrait of human condition. A scream of somebody trapped.
>>62275>a majestic portait of human condition
I'm starting to doubt how much healthy the praise of our own misery is…
>picking on hoe bcos being pathetic compared to normies
Don't expect me to celebrate this misery. I do know lots of normos with better economy than me yet I still have a big opinion of meself… obviously not related to whatever comparison between us could be done in monetary sense.
I have read almost all his novels when I was 18-20 and remember almost nothing. The only one I can say I truly enjoyed was the autobiographical one about his days in the siberian prison camp.
Not him but he's obviously talking about The House of the Dead.
Thank you, wiz. Have you read it?
>>62276>I'm starting to doubt how much healthy the praise of our own misery is…
Probably not much but don't forget that Notes from Underground starts with these lines:
>The author of the diary and the diary itself are, of course, imaginary. Nevertheless it is clear that such persons as the writer of these notes not only may, but positively must, exist in our society, when we consider the circumstances in the midst of which our society is formed. I have tried to expose to the view of the public more distinctly than is commonly done, one of the characters of the recent past. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living. In this fragment, entitled “Underground,” this person introduces himself and his views, and, as it were, tries to explain the causes owing to which he has made his appearance and was bound to make his appearance in our midst. In the second fragment there are added the actual notes of this person concerning certain events in his life.
Dosto is not praising the underground man. He's showing a dark side of the human condition and that representation is what is majestic not the condition itself. The power to self sabotage, self destruct and say "fuck it all" at any moment is very intriguing even if this time if comes from somebody so resented like this man. Why does his alienation and resentment led him to write such manifest? I don't know but Dosto made something sharp here
>Don't expect me to celebrate this misery
Well,you don't have to compare yourself with that guy, that's not the point. His pathetic attempts to rebel and the anger he feels towards his companions in better material condition can be funny yet illuminating about his mindset. But again, it is nothing to celebrate, follow or measure yourself against.
I did. It's good but not his best imo, of course each person will have his own favorite. Mine would be Brothers Karamazov, Dream of a Ridiculous Man and Notes from Underground. I never read The Idiot or Crime and Punishment, people say those are pretty good too.
I found an old poetry book in my library by an Arabic poet named Amal Donqol which I can’t remember buying. I’m not really that much into poetry, nor do I enjoy reading in my native language, but some of his poems are really good, and had he written them in French or Italian I’m guessing they would’ve been more popular. He’s a bit too revolutionary, but not to the point of being political.
Here’s a translation that doesn’t do justice to one of his poems about the death of Spartacus: https://www.jadaliyya.com/Details/26934
Yeah I liked it because it was more… entertaining? and down to earth. I could no longer stomach the philosophical and moral musings that are so common in the russian literature of that period, with copious amount of miserabilism to boot.
i need more unga bunga john carter/conan space warrior and bikini amazon princess reading material
I've been reading the Knickerbocker Classics' Lovecraft book on and off for a while, just a story or 2 every now and then. I really like it so far. "The Doom That Came to Sarnath" and "The Statement of Randolph Carter" were the last 2 I read, they weren't that good.
I used to read quite a bit as a kid, but stopped for some reason. Last year I picked up House of Leaves and it was great, it made me start reading again.
Probably haram around here but I read normie memoirs. They all suffer the human condition however their lens through the experience is different.
One thing that upsets me is how they live life on a different time scale. I mean a whole bunch of things will happen and they come out of an experience with a shit ton of new experience and perspective. Then it turns out the whole saga happened over a span of a few months.
My life is so much slower than that. A few months equates to a nap on my watch. I can't comprehend how people experience life through such an accelerated pace.
Understanding Media by Marshall McLuhan
Interesting, if a bit hand wavy, analogy on cold and warm medias, and fast and slow medias, as well as a selection of exposes on mediums. So far 6/10, I might be daft, or this could be more straight forward.
Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka
One of the classic alienation stories, I only find it very funny that even in the face of monsterness he just wants to work, good wagie.
4/10 good, but I don't compelled to read and turn pages.
Class: A Guide through the American Status System by Paul Fussel
A look into the late 80s early 90s class system, so far it's been describing the particular habits, styles and ideological views of different classes from destitute, prole, middle class, upper class, and ultra-wealthy. 6/10
Empire by Toni Negri and Mike Hart
A tomb of a text about imperialism and globalist hegemonic power from a Marxian view. Hard to read, not as good so far in my limited reading as Anti-Oedipus. 2/10
I know exactly what you mean. I feel like normies have a totally different perception of time than me that goes way more slowly. It took me so long to realize that responding to an email/text weeks/months later is basically worse than not responding at all to them.
Exactly the same happens to me. I simply cant help that sometimes it takes me weeks/months to reply to a message but they get really offended.
Can you explain why you can't help it? It's more defensible to say you don't care, which is what I tell people.
I'm not sure really. I dont know if i care, i guess i dont really. Days just pass so fast, and I have some powerful combination of dissociation and anxiety. I dont even know who i am or what im doing
> The Prisoner, Marcel Proust
Well, as I have already stated in this thread, I'm gradually reading In Search of Lost Time. Nothing new to say about the nature of this series: we are reading the mind of Marcel and how he perceives the world and the persons around him. A tour through Marcel's mind, a reflection of how the world somehow lives inside us and it changes its form and meaning as we also change through life or find new facets of things and people. The time is relentless but these memories we have, these impressions we felt, still live inside us, the worlds we knew are still inside us. I guess this is a very "schopenhauerian" approach to art: despite the fleeting and chaotic nature of the world we can manage to capture "platonic ideas", eternal motifs, transcendental impressions that give order to the world.
This time we have two principal themes I guess: Marcel keeps exploring Charlus homosexuality. We see his fall into disgrace in the Verdurin's room and his abrupt rupture with Morel. As usual, the social life is a setting Marcel uses to study human types and persons. We see new facets of Charlus, the arrogant and aristocratic man shows pathos and weakness when Morel breaks with him.
The other theme, even more important and that gives the title to the volume, is the new life of Marcel with Albertine. This succubus once awoke curiosity and marvel in Marcel but now they are living the "ordinary life". Marcel explores that ordinary life in this volume. The security that some person is waiting for you at home, the routine, the intriguing and apparently indomitable succubus he once saw at the beach now sleeps in his same home. This security brings new impressions about Albertine to Marcel's life but also at some point becomes boring to him and privates him of the endless succubi wandering on the streets.
Nevertheless, Marcel can't avoid violent jealousy when he realizes and remembers that Albertine is lesbian and lies to him repeatedly.
Eventually Albertine leaves on his own, this is both sad and relieving for our protagonist.
didnt he write that on his long slow death bed
I don't know the details but as far as I know, Proust secluded himself for various years while he was writing In Search of Lost Time. He even covered the walls of his room with cork to reduce the sounds from outside. The whole series is thus an intense exercise of meditation and introspection by Proust.During that time he only left his house to go to social rooms and "gather data" for his work.
I posted in the wrong thread last time, oops. I finished Heralds of the siege and I was not disappointed. On to Titandeath and I am shocked at how boring it manages to be, that's a feat considering I've read books about the lives of monks. All the characters of the book are unlikable(to me), the setting and descriptions particular to the story are mediocre at best. Vengeful Spirit did what this entire book did in ~50 pages, with interesting characters. I will power through anyway, should the book bring anything good I'll be sure to post it here. But be assured, 3 chapters in and it's the worst novel of the entire Heresy, beating even battle for the abyss.
I tried my best but the novel defeated me. I tried and tried for the last week but titandeath is truly the worst the heresy has to offer. And I am even discounting the all-succubi cult of lesbians:
‘I hear you lie with each other,’ he scoffed.
‘We do,’ she said, and glanced at him. ‘A human body has its needs. Like I said, we share everything.’
I always go into a book with an open mind, but even that was not enough. Still I will read all the combat and politics sections, then move on to the buried dagger.
>The Death of Ivan Ilyich, Leo Tolstoy
Painful but pretty on point read. To put it simple without many details, this little novel is about the life of a wage slave that has followed the supposedly righteous life according to society standards, but when sickness arrives and with it, impending death too, this man questions if his life was worth living and the painful answer is no.
The dude studied, made a career, got a wife, started a family and yet he can't feel any sense of fulfillment. These things were more a facade and the mere endorsement to society expectations. The protagonist can only feel disappointment about his life and his relations and absolute despair when faced with the unknown void.
All of this might sounds cliche but Tolstoy genius is unmatched when representing that visceral fear of death. In fact, even if a cliche theme, death in general is something rarely considered by the average human. As the protagonist of this novel, we are submerged in our daily lifes, in our routine, in our projects. Death is not something to think about of and even the death of somebody relatively close is a mere hindrance in our routine. But a careful meditation of the fact that death is imminent and unavoidable can make you sleepless and pass through some of those tortuous nights…
A problem without solution and the realization that your time is irrevocable over. This little book hit me hard. My father, your average and honest factory worker sustaining a family, died of brain cancer after decaying and agonizing for several months and I couldn't stop remembering him while reading this and I believe he knew he was dying months before the diagnosis.
>They had supper and went away, and Ivan Ilyich was left alone with the consciousness that his life was poisoned and was poisoning the lives of others, and that this poison did not weaken but penetrated more and more deeply into his whole being. With this consciousness, and with physical pain besides the terror, he must go to bed, often to lie awake the greater part of the night. Next morning he had to get up again, dress, go to the law courts, speak, and write; or if he did not go out, spend at home those twenty-four hours a day each of which was a torture. And he had to live thus all alone on the brink of an abyss, with no one who understood or pitied him.
The final part of titandeath at least had some cool battles, my favorite part is sanguinius taking down a imperator titan like it is child's play. So titandeath it's not as bad as Battle for the Abyss, but some sections of the book really don't sit well with me. I truly believe that editing out the parts would make it a much better work. The Buried Dagger was quite cool, Mortarion getting backstabbed by Typhus was very funny, Garro (the guy with the sword Libertas) gets freedom to do whatever he wants which I thought was very fitting. My only nitpick is Garviel Loken acting like a douche the whole book, for no reason whatsoever, even the way he refuses to follow the other Knights is disrespectful, specially considering he was in the presence of the emperor just a few moments before. The Solar War, unfortunately, Perturabo is written like a retard, shame he is one my favorite characters. Anyway, the book is very good, full of symbolism and daemonic shenanigans, exactly the way I like it. Also it's funny that the author himself calls the emperor Space Hitler in the afterword.
Here is my favorite moment of the buried dagger:
‘Grulgor…’ sneered Typhon. ‘Well met, brother.’
‘Not quite,’ gurgled the creature, eyeing him up and down.
‘Daemon!’ Mortarion called. ‘You begged to kill for me, so I give you freedom to do so. You are oath-sworn to my command, and it is this – destroy Typhon!’
‘Is that what you wish?’ The Eater’s giant podgy arm shot out with uncanny speed and clasped the First Captain before he could draw back, shaking him violently. Mutated talon-fingers clasped around Typhon’s throat and began to contract.
Mortarion watched, grim-faced, as the daemon spawn strangled his comrade, ignoring every blow that Typhon rained down upon it. Finally, Typhon began to choke and splutter, as oily matter spurted from his gagging mouth and the monstrous tear in his body.
‘I fulfil my oath,’ snarled the creature, leering into the face of his victim.
Then the timbre and cadence of Typhon’s dying exhalations changed. The death-rattle shifted, becoming a hate-filled, spiteful sound. The First Captain was laughing – and the Grulgor-thing joined in with him.
The claws released and Typhon staggered back, spitting out broken stumps of teeth and gobs of black mucus.
Mortarion started forward. Another betrayal? His thoughts roared against the prospect. Impossible!
Another betrayal? Impossible!
The lost and the damned. Perturabo just can't be left alone it seems, he had inverse character development for the whole series, but it just reached comical levels. This time around Guy Haley did a good job, he is specially good with the night lords, Gendor skraivok is everything I wanted him to be in the book, cruel, vain, a prideful coward and a desperate bastard. Not that I did not like perpective of the normal troops have to through, I always appreciate normal human characters in fiction.
The First Wall. Poor Perturabo, just end his suffering at this point: >‘It is only by my superior intellect that his plans will be broken, his conceit revealed to the universe!’ he roared>‘No,’ said Perturabo, but his rage was dissipating as his mind engaged with the issue presented. ‘No, he taunts me with this flaw. It is too perfect… A trap. Dorn would see me commit to this attack and then reveal some secondary ploy in order to ensnare me and see me executed.’>‘I would spend them (his legion)for good cause, not dash them against the walls while my brothers amuse themselves with inhuman delights.’
OH and the ending, at least the ending should be different >has dorn and his huscarls at the trigger of his guns>orders his troops to stand down, refuses to fight dorn >muh superior intellect >I will destroy your walls
Then after Perturabo's stunted rambling, Dorn, just like, leaves without saying anything, which make him, mr. walls conscripts and no fun allowed, look a lot cooler than anyone in the book. At least this is all in (bad) character for the Lord of Iron, Fulgrim tries to murder him, Horus uses him, angron has no respect for him even though they dueled, mortarion doesnt even know he exists, and he still thinks Dorn and the emperor are the bigger assholes. Still I liked this book, reading it in a single day, mostly because of Forrix and his march in the spaceport.
Sorry no internet, finished 2 more meanwhile.
Sons of Selenar, man some of the best characters of the entire heresy all die in a single novella. I really liked Frater thamatica, he died a nonsense death, as a machine spirit, not even AI, fried his brain. Meanwhile Aulus salamanca faced one the most dangerous AIs of the setting and won.
Then comes saturnine, a novel I am very divided with. In one hand it saves perturabo, abaddon and Dorn, all are better characters at the end of book. Perturabo finally gets a break from the other authors he shines as a strategist and a (surprisingly) cunning manipulator, Dorn finally gets to show his genius with the saturnine gambit and Abaddon at last gets some depth, his ecstasy after fighting like hell and almost dying is one the best scenes in the book. In the other hand we get bullshi*t(the author overused the word sh*t, there are so many more inventive ways to swear) like olly piers and erda. Saturnine is a great standalone novel but mediocre as vehicle for series of this magnitude, it does too much damage. Not that erda, astarte and piers could not exist as characters, but they should be written as mysterious and unreliable, just like the emperor is, not as the absolute truth foundations of the myths that set up 40k and the fan theories. Anyway, I'm probably in the wrong in this, I love Dan Abnett but I think Saturnine had even more potential.
I was reading "The Old Man and the Sea" by Ernest Hemingway, but I never finished it. It was pretty good, but I guess I lost interest at around he was being pulled by the giant fish. I feel like I know what happens in the end, but I just haven't read it. I did get a nice idea for a meal out of the book though. Maybe I'll read the rest of it some day.
> Sex and Character, Otto Weininger
This is a very interesting book. Some of Weininger's ideas can easily be labeled as pseudoscience gibberish by today standards while others are very sharp and worth considering.
This book is Weininger's project of identifying masculinity and femininity as eternal and contrasting platonic ideas rather than mere biological functions.
Nevertheless, Weininger starts his reasoning remarking that a perfect manifestation of these platonic ideas is impossible. The manifestations of these ideas observed in nature are always in between. They tend towards one of other of the extremes but a perfect incarnation is impossible. According to Weininger, each one of our cells contains masculine "substance" or feminine "substance" and the aggregate and sum of such substance in the cells determines the preponderant masculine or feminine character.
Weininger goes though a myriad of examples trying to support his ideas. I will omit that and go directly to the gist of the book. For Weininger, the feminine idea is a state of undefinition, malleability, indecision. Being feminine is like being an amorphous mass with no consistence, the feminine entity gains some shape because external elements are molding her. The feminine entity is always ready to be "penetrated" and receive her foundation from outside. Weininger goes as far as saying that human females lack from soul.
Such controversial idea requires some heavy explanation. What's soul to Weininger? He proceeds to describe soul and particullary the case of the genius. Geniality is the antipodal of femininity in all regards. Rather than a mass awaiting to receive substance and purpose, the genius is the order itself. The universe is a chaotic mess with no distinguible purpose by itself but thanks to the power of the genius everything comes in place. The genius qualifies and categorizes the world, extracts concepts and meaning from the world. The unique gaze of the genius builds the world. Geniality being the total opposite of femininity is labeled by Weininger as the characteristic mark of masculinity.
In the final chapters of the book, Weininger tries to compare judaism with femininity in the sense that both share this quality of being amorphous and undefinited, ready to adopt and sucumb to the external influx. This quality of undecision, the entity ready to be penetrated both in literal and metaphorical sense, is view by Weininger as something heavily negative. There is a very interesting idea from this part of the book: he considers Jesus as the greatest genius ever because he was capable of overcome the blurriness of judaism to attain truth and order.
The book ends with a pessimistic tone. Achieving perfect geniality and overcoming the fogginess and chaos of the world implies non existence and nothingness. Weininger killed himself at 23 years old. It is interesting to think that he was jew and probably homosexual.
The fury of magnus. the whole thing felt like a gamble by the author, a failed one that is. Malcador dies in a very stupid way(just to be revived in an even more stupid one), magnus is better at melee than vulkan, the emperor says a bunch of retarded stuff, perturabo brief respite ends miserably. What makes me angry the most is when the emperor says "hurr durr perty swore an oath he will not go back, it's worthless to try"(said while Magnus attemps to murder him), then in the next novel Perturabo does just that and quits the war. I've literally never seen a character so unlucky, both in-universe and as a victim from multiple writers.
Mortis is a boring book, all cool characters either have died, quit or the author just kinda forgot about them I think? Whilst he refuses to create or introduce new ones, the sole exceptions are Shiban khan and andromeda-17, their stories kinda surprised me. The chaos malefic influence was good, I really liked those parts. Rhe biggest problem is Dorn, he deploys ALL RESERVES at the same time when the emperor gives him some sign, after saving them for MONTHS and losing almost everything.
Warhawk, might as well be a white scars novel. And damn, it delivers, both as a novel and a remake of the original heresy myth. The khan finally showing some tactical acuity from a modern perspective, mortarion so deliciously deluded building up from the buried dagger. Erebus murdering erda was for the better. Dorn was sleeping at the wheels in this book, at least with chaos shenanigans excuses, unlike the previous one. The duel between Jagathai and Mortarion is truly amazing.
Echoes of eternity, a really fun read. I liked sanguinius in the book, obviously, I am only slightly disapointed that he does not hold eternity gate alone. Arkhan land and lotara stories are delightful additions. The background of the blood angels was a surprise to me, I knew they were bad, but not That bad, which is good. In the other hand: dorn manages to get himself encircled, even though he had time to dismantle the defences and cannibalize bhab bastion in advance(then he asks for reinforcements, imagine), just end him after this, he also acts like an autist, just like perturabo. Lots of strange terminology used, "cringeworthy" is saddest example and swearing (as we know it, I have nothing against creating a new lexicon of swear words)has sadly been cemented in this series. The author really has a hard on for moral relativism, which I don't agree with but don't care either, it's warhammer. A minor problem, however, is that I end up agreeing with the emperor all the time, the author doesn't seem know what to do with him, recoiled from making Him space hitler. Lastly there is the magnus/vulkan debacle that I will just ignore as if it did not happen. The author missed the opportunity of writing the book as a sanguinius novel, it would have been awesome… then he has the audacity of acknowledging this in the afterword.
Now I have to wait for The End and the Death.
Quality post mage, now I am interested in that book, it goes to my reading list.
A lot of overcompensating losers here will cry about is that he was a sex-haver and therefore literally NOTHING he ever said or wrote is relatable for a truwiz. meanwhile, they (the fucking faggot showrunners) still allow a hentai thread. oh, and what's this? v… 9k? hmmmm.
anyway, yes, bukowski is very relatable to anyone that isnt too stuck up their own ass, and his voice is relaxing
Why do normalfags seem to prefer fiction over non-fiction? It seems like the ones who read at all, only read fiction.
non-fiction and fiction are basically the same thing unless you're reading math's text books or something.
Philosophy, History etc are fiction
I spend hundreds of hours reading chan posts but I can't spend more than 10 minutes reading a book. I have a kobo and shelves full of books collecting dust.
This. It's all about the quality of the writing and thoughts.>>62652
It's because of (y)our internet addiction. I'm trying to minimize this useless time.
>>62651>Philosophy, History etc are fiction
How is history fiction?
I finished volume two in August and I'm going to start volume three in the winter, it feels fitting. My friends only read the core (first few stories) and mock me for continuing since they say it repeats and, while I admit some elements repeat, the similar stories are unique in their differences. Also, the repetition almost becomes a metacomment on it because of the repetition and fatalism within stories. Honestly a great work. I appreciate it that you recommended it. It has affected my worldview greatly, to the point that I'm much more fatalistic and yet this has brought me peace I never had. Shit will happen and yet I'll shrug and say "that's life." It is odd, having your "self" affected by a series of stories.
Historiography is an interesting subject
Glad you like it. The very act of reading all the stories plays an important part on the feelings the book is trying to convey. I read somewhere that for the scribes of the time, the number 1001 meant an enormous amount, like for us would be 1 million nights or something. When I was reading through I definitely felt boredom and tiredness but those feelings blend with the stories quite well actually and they become sort of a comforting haze. For me at least. The lenght and casual repetition really works in favor of the book.
Besides, every piece of fiction has some sort of repetition going on, it's not something exclusive to this one.
>A Confession, Leo Tolstoy
In this little book Tolstoy is confronted with the daunting problem of mortality, death and finding meaning in life when one is confronted with such abyss. The book is an essay and it could act as perfect comment to the Death of Ivan Ilyich.
The realization that death is unavoidable and that each second we are close to it no matter what we do, drove Tolstoy to a severe disenchantment with life and an excruciating mental pain.
The problem looks cliche but Tolstoy genius manages to convey the severity of the situation perfectly. We usually disregard death and meaning of life as something cliche but we can easily do that because we are absorbed by routine, daily chores, normal plans and goals. However, if one deeply thinks about death and how it will happen any day, well, I guarantee that you will feel creeping fear and disgust through your whole body.
Tosltoy was trapped in this situation, he couldn't stop thinking about death and that feeling completely ruined life for him. Life lost his charm.
Tolstoy first looked for answers in philosophy and science. This exploration only reinforced his hopelessness. Schopenhauer, Ecclesiastes, natural sciences: all of them reach the same conclusion: existence is grounded in nothing and death will destroy us all. Tolstoy was considering suicide at this point.
The unique solution for Tolstoy was Christianity. He argued that either you follow the conclusions of conventional human knowledge and you kill yourself or you resort to faith and you live. That's the only solution for him.
As the smart man he was, he couldn't ignore the coercive nature of religion and how it is and instrument of the status quo and power to control the masses. Yet, he still somehow clang to faith as the sole anchor to sustain life. Faith and hope has sustained people for millennia.
I think that pain was unbearable to Tolstoy and for that reason he resorted to faith. In my opinion, he deceived himself. However, it is very interesting to see the fears, pains and thoughts of a genius man like Tolstoy. Recommended book
>>62915> There is an Eastern fable, told long ago, of a traveller overtaken on a plain by an enraged beast. Escaping from the beast he gets into a dry well, but sees at the bottom of the well a dragon that has opened its jaws to swallow him. And the unfortunate man, not daring to climb out lest he should be destroyed by the enraged beast, and not daring to leap to the bottom of the well lest he should be eaten by the dragon, seizes s twig growing in a crack in the well and clings to it. His hands are growing weaker and he feels he will soon have to resign himself to the destruction that awaits him above or below, but still he clings on. Then he sees that two mice, a black one and a white one, go regularly round and round the stem of the twig to which he is clinging and gnaw at it. And soon the twig itself will snap and he will fall into the dragon's jaws. The traveller sees this and knows that he will inevitably perish; but while still hanging he looks around, sees some drops of honey on the leaves of the twig, reaches them with his tongue and licks them. So I too clung to the twig of life, knowing that the dragon of death was inevitably awaiting me, ready to tear me to pieces; and I could not understand why I had fallen into such torment. I tried to lick the honey which formerly consoled me, but the honey no longer gave me pleasure, and the white and black mice of day and night gnawed at the branch by which I hung. I saw the dragon clearly and the honey no longer tasted sweet. I only saw the unescapable dragon and mice, and I could not tear my gaze from them. and this is not a fable but the real unanswerable truth intelligible to all. The deception of the joys of life which formerly allayed my terror of the dragon now no longer deceived me. No matter how often I may be told, "You cannot understand the meaning of life so do not think about it, but live," I can no longer do it: I have already done it too long. I cannot now help seeing day and night going round and bringing me to death. That is all I see, for that alone is true. All else is false. The two drops of honey which diverted my eyes from the cruel truth longer than the rest: my love of family, and of writing – art as I called it – were no longer sweet to me. "Family"… said I to myself. But my family – wife and children – are also human. They are placed just as I am: they must either live in a lie or see the terrible truth. Why should they live? Why should I love them, guard them, bring them up, or watch them? That they may come to the despair that I feel, or else be stupid? Loving them, I cannot hide the truth from them: each step in knowledge leads them to the truth. And the truth is death.
"Notes from the Underground" by Dovstoyesky is the obvious recommendation: low status crab in 1800 Russia. It will resonate with most crabs but it could also work for wizards, if they still want other's respect.
You can also check something like "Hunger" by Knut Hamsun in 1800 Oslo:
"autobiographical novel recounting the abject poverty, hunger and despair of a young writer"
I wonder if there are any modern books that deal with low status male, not a novel, more like a non fiction one, any good wizard knows about it?
very vague when you say 'low status male'. If you mean crab you should just say that
No crab per se, but kind of marginalize male, outside of society, could be crabs, I'm interested about lives of low status male in general.
> The Fugitive, Marcel Proust
I'm now near the end of In Search of Lost Time. The events in this volume were rather anticlimactic.
The previous volume, The Prisoner, ended with Albertine breaking with Marcel, our narrator. The first section of this volume explores the attempts of our narrator to bring back Albertine and his mental state of denial (he tries to think that nothing serious happened and Albertine will return easily at any moment).
The first anticlimactic event is then the death of Albertine. Nothing announced it and it felt more like an "ass pull" to somehow conclude the relation between the narrator and Albertine.
However, after that plot twist, we again see the brilliance of Proust when the volume submerges in the mental process of the narrator digesting Albertine's death. The fear of separation and the nostalgia of the lost time and persons but that are still present in our minds are topics that flourish here as they have done in the best moments in the series.
Finally, after being desiring it through various volumes, our narrator travels to Venice with his mom. Such iconic city gives us also great passages from Proust.
Before the travel, Gilberte appeared again in the narrator's life and upon Albertine's death, Gilberte looks like a new hope. At Venice, the narrator receives a telegram, later revealed that it was from Gilberte asking something very important.
The volume ends with another plot twist when our narrator discovers that his best friend, Saint Loup is now engaged and will marry Gilberte. Our narrator is devastated and feels betrayed. Moreover, Saint Loup unexpectedly also turned homosexual following the steps of his uncle Charlus.
>>63076> For Albertine’s death to have suppressed my suffering, the mortal blow would have had to kill her not only in Touraine, but within me. There, she had never been more alive. To enter inside us, people have been obliged to take on the form and to fit into the framework of time; appearing to us only in successive instants, they have never managed to reveal to us more than one aspect, print more than a single photograph of themselves at a time. This is no doubt a great weakness in human beings, to consist in a simple collection of moments; yet a great strength too; they depend on memory, and our memory of a moment is not informed of everything that has happened since, the moment which it registered still lives on and, with it, the person whose form was sketched within it. And then this fragmentation not only makes the dead person live on, it multiplies her forms. In order to console myself, I would have had to forget not one but innumerable Albertines. When I had succeeded in accepting the grief of having lost one of them, I would have to begin again with another, with a hundred others.
The only booktube channels I find watchable are people that read pulp/fantasy stuff. They speak with such enthusiasm about the stuff they like it's a little bit contagious. I almost never read that stuff at all. So finally I decided to give it a shot at Burroughs, a very famous, well praised author by fantasy readers. I picked A Princess of Mars since I liked the idea of some guy going to another planet where he can fight aliens with medieval weaponry.
It's complete trash. lol
I don't know exactly what I was expecting it, but what I got is a story where a guy named John Carter solves all his problems by jumping really high. It felt like reading a golden age DC comics story. Jumping. That's all he does really. It's like a Coyote and Road Runner episode. All Road Runner has to do is run really fast. For Carter is jumping really high. Then he falls in love with a human princess from the human kingdom of Mars and by jumping really high he overcomes all the obstacles, kill all the bad guys and get the succubus. OK. The only interesting character development we get is of an alien called Sola and what's going on with her but that stuff barely comes up during the story, though it's easily the better part of this tale.
The funny thing about this book is that it presents a serious problem for the hero to solve right at the end, a problem John Carter can't solve by jumping really high, but then the novel ends! Better get him out of there, his jumping can only go so far. Tthat said I actually liked it for what it is. I don't think it deserves a series of 11 books, one is enough. I can see how hugely influential this stuff is for comic books, it reads like one.
It is trash, but in a honest, straightfoward manner. It doesn't try to be anything else and for that reason it works. It will be specially amusing to you if you're a reader of better literature. I finished Dead Souls and went straight to this, it's quite a change of pace, let's put it that way. The only thing Burroughs cares about is putting John Carter in situations he can solve by punching really hard or jumping really high. The ending is actually good and an obvious cliff-hanger. Not much of a mystery to us since we already know 10 books of more nonsense followed after this.
I say it's trash but it has a charm to it, it's literature from the days authors like him didn't feel like they were walking on eggs at every sentence. He wanted to tell a tale of high adventure about a guy using a rapier to fight against evil aliens and that's what he did. It silly, it's funny, it works. I'll not be reading 11 books of this schlock but it works. My favorite pulp author remains Clark Ashton Smith. He's the only guy I read that can mix the silly shit with more polished, interesting language. Sure, he's still writing about a super evil wizard called Maal Dweb, but he can do it better than most.
jumping is hardly the problem with the story when he has the strength of like 50 martians. they gave him too much power. he could easily just butcher everyone with brute force
Any great books about wizard, shut-ins, neets and crabs?
Against Nature by Joris-Karl Huysmans. I'm yet to read it but it has taken my interest.>a decadent, ailing aristocrat who retreats to an isolated villa where he indulges his taste for luxury and excess. Veering between nervous excitability and debilitating ennui, he gluts his aesthetic appetites with classical literature and art, exotic jewels (with which he fatally encrusts the shell of his tortoise), rich perfumes, and a kaleidoscope of sensual experiences.
The only thing I don't expect to like about it and what other neets may not like about is that main character is an aristocrat which isn't at all relatable.
literature on the Desert Fathers may be a good read as well.
And I wonder if the book based on the 'North pond hermit' 'The Stranger in the Woods' might be of interest as well.
You would think super strength wouldn't make much difference against extraordinary sharpshooters that can hit a coin half a continent away with their rifles. Carter was quite lucky the martians would use their elite shooting skills and excelent guns against everyone else but him. It is a pulpy 1900s fantasy adventure novel after all, I think it has its place but I would be surprised at anyone liking this enough to read 11 novels of it, unless they're doing it for completion's sake. Maybe someone who's really into comics would appreciate it as a historical curiosity.
the setting is what i liked, and because i keep in mind when it was written (over 100 years ago now), i'm able to enjoy it. also really like the artwork and what this genre developed into later on
it is weak on its own without context however
>>63097>also really like the artwork and what this genre developed into later on
You mean Sword and Planet as a genre? I tried to read more SaP stuff but I simply could not find anything that is not an outright clone or pastiche of A Princess of Mars. I tried to read The Maker of Universes and Transit to Scorpio but they keep so incredibly close to Burroughs I dropped it. It was a little disappointing and that's my experience with the genre.Would mind mentioning a couple of authors working in this sort of fiction that is worthy checking out? I didn't find any but then again I didn't try that hard to find it.
Just finished Stoner by John Williams. It was a solid work, but Goddamn is Edith annoying. His daughter annoyed me too, but not as much as his wife. Great prose, but I started to lose interest towards the end. 8/10
Currently reading Zero K by Don DeLilo, a sci-fi novel about people approaching death put in a kind of cryostasis until medicine/science can find a way to stop aging/death. It's good so far, some boring parts, but I'm interested. Never read a Don deLilo book before; I like his style of short, descriptive sentences. Feels very American. After I finish this, I'm going to tackle either The Iliad or The Necrophiliac book (the latter because I enjoy twisted shit like that, loved American PSycho, the book and the film).
hyperion by simmons. The author was obviously just making up the universe as we went along. Indulgent and often boring, although the core setting is interesting. Ends on a contrived cliffhanger. Later books are apparently terrible
>History and Utopia, Emil Cioran
This book is a compilation of 5-6 Cioran essays about the nature of history. Cioran approach to history is apocalyptic and messianic. He feels a morbid fascination with civilizations at the verge of death and extinction, those who have lost the will to live and are now mere bystanders awaiting to be swept away by the maelstrom of history. He's fascinated with things like being the last ancient Greek, the last roman pagan, the Aztecs upon the imminent defeat against the Spanish. He himself feels that western man is in the same state and all of his convictions and gods have died.
For Cioran, the impulse of history lies in our most irrational and brutal side. History can't go forward without barbarism and once the conscience of man have totally flourished and realized the pointlessness of all, then exhaustion, stagnation and eventual extinction come.
Cioran felt that West is depleted and thought that the torch of history would be carried by eastern europe and Russia where he saw primal energy still lingering (he wrote these essays when Soviet Union was in his prime). Now we can say that this prophecy was wrong and he was more searching for a dark messiah that would finally kill the decadent western civilization. It was more an inner desire of being one of the last men of a dying civilization rather than a serious prophecy.
He was wrong but anyway sooner or later this civilization will perish and that security and the realization that history is an endless display of barbarism and masses moved by the madness of convictions, awaiting for the final disaster, make this little book very touching.
This was some of the most fatalistic Cioran works and it reminds me other writers like Albert Caraco
> Life without utopia is suffocating, for the multitude at least: threatened otherwise with petrifaction, the world must have a new madness.
>>63125> He feels a morbid fascination with civilizations at the verge of death and extinction, those who have lost the will to live and are now mere bystanders awaiting to be swept away by the maelstrom of history. He's fascinated with things like being the last ancient Greek, the last roman pagan, the Aztecs upon the imminent defeat against the Spanish. He himself feels that western man is in the same state and all of his convictions and gods have died.
I also like reading death of civilizations more than their rise.
> History can't go forward without barbarism and once the conscience of man have totally flourished and realized the pointlessness of all, then exhaustion, stagnation and eventual extinction come.
This is so true that I have no words.
> Cioran felt that West is depleted and thought that the torch of history would be carried by eastern europe and Russia where he saw primal energy still lingering (he wrote these essays when Soviet Union was in his prime). Now we can say that this prophecy was wrong and he was more searching for a dark messiah that would finally kill the decadent western civilization. It was more an inner desire of being one of the last men of a dying civilization rather than a serious prophecy
He wasn’t wrong about this as western civilization dying and will be replaced by africans and muslims, eastern euros will be carriers of european civilization but not like socialist in any way.
>>63125>the conscience of man have totally flourished
*has totally flourished
>he wrote these essays when Soviet Union was in his prime
*in its prime>>63126>eastern euros will be carriers of european civilization
Why do you think so?
I was listening to this three part series about The Battle of Midway (attached), and I've been absolutely fascinated with it for the longest time. In particular, the attached kind of blew my mind because for one it makes it seem like the reason the Americans won was because their ships' fire suppression systems were so good that they could just tank hits. Like the Japanese would have a stray cigarette match fall from a plane and the ship would blow up, but the Yorktown:
- Had just been repaired from a previous battle.
- Got bombed once, but they just cleaned off the deck.
- Got bombed AGAIN, but was still going
- Had to be sneakily torpedoed like 3 or 5 more times before it finally sunk.
The attached also blew my mind because one of the reasons I've been fascinated with Midway is because I had the hardest time understanding why it was considered that the Americans won. I get it, they sunk the carriers. But when I watched the movie Midway I was really confused since the entire movie it felt like the Americans were losing. Every single aerial engagement the Americans lost. Then, out of fucking NOWHERE, bam, three carriers down. It just didn't make sense to me.
I think at the end of the 3-part series this guy lays down a timeline of events, and it basically makes it clear that all the aerial engagement kept the Japanese carriers' planes locked up. THAT was when it all clicked for me. It's also why SUDDENLY I realized why VT-8's sacrifice was so crucial: it's the one gap in time that the Japanese would've been able to throw up their airforce.
Everything about the battle is so amazing. There's just so much analysis and ways to think about it. For example, there are so many things you could say "Wow, that was lucky," but then if you think about it, there was a commander who purposefully made that decision expecting that to happen. For example, one of the scout planes went really close to the American task force and could have spotted it, but "just happened not to." But at the same time, Nimitz placed the American task force around thick cloud cover to avoid getting spotted by Japanese recon ships. Or VT-8's sacrifice was crucial to the timing of when the Japanese could release their ships. But at the same time, but the piecemeal launching of aircraft was a calculated move by Spruance.
Just so much amazing stuff.
young eastern euros are leaving their countries in droves*, their birth rates are in free fall, but somehow they are far right westerners' ray of hope for the future. tells you everything you need to know about how deeply unserious these people are. some loud conservative parties' empty posturing about idiotic american cultural war matters is enough to sway them
*this is a positive for these sleazy fucks as it means easier access to succubi and cheap land
Conspiracy Against the Human Race by Thomas Ligotti is a book that destroys the illusions placed by our own consciousness in order to remain ignorant of the fact that we are transient beings trapped in a decaying grotesque hump of fleash we call a body. He builds of the edifices of Zapffe and like Nishitani points out, shows how futile Nietchzes' attempt at transcending nihilism was. He covers specific cases of ego death such as U.G. Krishnamurti. I would not recommend reading this book unless you are already quite miserable, in fact Schopenhauers essays are much better.
The only antidote for this meaninglessness life is the relative painlessness of art.
>>63126>History can't go forward without barbarism and once the conscience of man have totally flourished and realized the pointlessness of all, then exhaustion, stagnation and eventual extinction come.
sounds stolen from eduard von hartmann
>>63141>[in von hartmann's philosophy] The history of the world is that given by natural science, and particular emphasis is laid upon the Darwinian theory of evolution. Humanity developed from the animal, and with the appearance of the first human being the deliverance of the world is in sight, for only in the human being does consciousness reach such height and complexity as to act independently of the Will. As consciousness develops, there is a constantly growing recognition of the fact that deliverance must lie in a return to the original state of non-willing, which means the non-existence of all individuals and the potentiality of the Unconscious. When the greater part of the Will in existence is so far enlightened by reason as to perceive the inevitable misery of existence, a collective effort to will non-existence will be made, and the world will relapse into nothingness, the Unconscious into quiescence.
>The essential feature of the morality built upon the basis of Von Hartmann's philosophy is the realization that all is one and that, while every attempt to gain happiness is illusory, yet before deliverance is possible, all forms of the illusion must appear and be tried to the utmost. Even he who recognizes the vanity of life best serves the highest aims by giving himself up to the illusion, and living as eagerly as if he thought life good. It is only through the constant attempt to gain happiness that people can learn the desirability of nothingness; and when this knowledge has become universal, or at least general, deliverance will come and the world will cease. No better proof of the rational nature of the universe is needed than that afforded by the different ways in which men have hoped to find happiness and so have been led unconsciously to work for the final goal. The first of these is the hope of good in the present, the confidence in the pleasures of this world, such as was felt by the Greeks. This is followed by the Christian transference of happiness to another and better life, to which in turn succeeds the illusion that looks for happiness in progress, and dreams of a future made worth while by the achievements of science. All alike are empty promises, and known as such in the final stage, which sees all human desires as equally vain and the only good in the peace of Nirvana.
I finally got back to "The Old Man and the Sea", and finished it. It was a short read with less than 100 pages, and the text wasn't that small. I liked the prose, and felt comfortable reading it. The details given in the book were never too much, and what was needed to be described, like the boat, was done well. He added some Spanish in there and technical fishing terms, and I think that added to the flavor.
Good book. I'm going to read more from him after I take a small break.
What are some good non fiction books about crab, wizards, NEET, hikikomori and outcast in general.
Why read a book when I can read the walls of text in this thread
I sometimes like to re-read some popular books using a different hermeneutical key. For example, I am re-reading these days The Lord of the Rings from the perspective the "bad guys" are actually right. The Elves, the Men, the Hobbits, the Istari and other "Free people" would be actually brainwashed, fanatical, reactionary and snob villains who want to affirm and protect the old Valar's status quo (Kinda like the Jedi order in Star Wars). In my headcanon Melkor and Sauron want to liberate all people and give all of them eternal life, happiness, material advantages and comfiness. I know a Russian writer already wrote a LOTR fanfiction book based on this view and I will read it in the future.
I can see this working with stories where the villains and events have a little more ambiguity to them, but not with stuff like LoTR and particularly not with Morgoth and Sauron. Those books have a very simplified, Manichaean morality to them. There's a large and clear gap between good and evil. I don't see anywhere in those books you can point and say Sauron is actually good, or neutral, even. The villains there are suppose to represent the dark side of mankind, so of course they'll be as evil as it comes with no redeeming qualities and live in places called mount doom. They don't want to liberate anyone, they would enslave, torture and corrupt all races to become moronic and obedient marauders which is quite well definited and explicit with the Orcs origin story.
The only ambiguity I can see there is through the eyes of Treebeard and the Ents. After the war of the ring, the mythical age of the world ends, humans are the only ones left and regular history begins, and we all know the how forests of this planet got pretty much fucked beyond repair after that happened. Humans ended up rediscovering industry and took it to levels well beyond Saruman's smelting factory in Isengard. So basically the Ents help the fellowship and as a reward got the shaft for it eventually.
Granted, I don't know how much better it would be for them if Sauron had won. He didn't seem to have much of a plan at all after victory. The evil guys in Tolkien act like viruses that just want to consume everything. I'm guessing once the earth was completely conquered and all sentient beings were corrupted to utter stupidity and oblivion, nature would reclaim everything. Probably. That said, this can still happen if humans end up destroying themselves which we have shown to be quite capable of. Maybe there will be an age of the Ent before the end after all.
Notes from the Underground is about a typical outcast who has a vitriol hatred for normalfags.
Solitude - Anthony Storr
Haven't read much of it
Sex and Character - Otto Weininger
Haven't read much of this either, but basically just talks about how succs are soulless and how Geniuses work.
Whatever - Michel Houellebecq
Typical crab book, it was a decent read.
I want a non fiction book that tell a overview of outcast people, but still, thanks for the recommendation
I really like that fellow. >In bourgeois society, the more considerable the mass of social wealth becomes, the smaller and smaller is the number of individuals by whom it is appropriated. The same takes place with politicalauthority. As the mass of citizens possessing political rights grows,and the number of elected rulers increases, real authority is con-centrated in, and becomes the monopoly of, an ever-smaller andsmaller group of individuals.
Bumpying for new recommendations
Picked it up, I’ll post when I’m done if I remember.>>63361
I recently finished a biography of the universe by paul murdin. It was pretty good, a bit dry if you don’t care about purely scientific concepts. He does include interesting stories about how certain things were discovered like the CMBR or earth’s solid core. I’m currently reading ways of being by James bridle and it’s pretty good too. It explores the way non-human things express intelligence and consciousness, such as dolphins, apes, trees, fungi, and computers. Some of it is a little more hippy than I prefer but it’s all backed up rather soundly. For example a scientist who is the author of multiple peer reviewed studies about plants being able to hear also claims she can talk to the plants personally and they have spirits that visit her in her dreams.
I have read Dostoevskiy's Notes from the Underground. It was surprisingly relatable. The main themes of the story were feelings of powerlessness and lack of control and of being inadequate, not good enough. Hits home for me.
How was Zero K? I enjoyed White Noise, so if Zero K was a decent book, I might pick it up next year.
That's nice to hear! Congratulations on finishing it. I said before and I'll say it again, it is a beautiful book and one of my favorites. I hope my posts convinced more people here to read it. I liked it better than Canterbury Tales, Decameron and even Quixote that a lot of people praise it (deservenly so), but something about the chaos that is the Nights creates a very special type of environment to explore, I don't know. Also, it's quite a coincidence you mentioned Proust since I started reading it myself this past month and I'm close of finishing the first volume. I found the first part, Combray, is pretty much the best written piece of text I've ever read in my life. In fact I ended up reading huge portions of it twice. Then once he starts to focus on Swann I lost some interest for it but it's mostly because I don't care as much about the subject matter. Still, it's definitely an amazing piece of literature and I'm having a great time with it.
I really hope I don't get attacked for this, but I've come to a slow realization that literature is more of a "higher class" type of art form compared to others.
Unfortunately this made me really depressed as I don't enjoy much of any other form of media anymore.
Maybe I'm just going through a severe anhedonia phase as I'm in a really stressful stage in my life. I really don't know.
It's also quite difficult for me as I actually don't read all that much because of ADD lol. So I'm really just left with not much to do in my day aside from staring at the wall or watching random videos on youtube.
>>63629>watching random videos on youtube.
stop hurting yourself
Solitude - Anthony Storr is about the archetypal genius outcasts as far as I have read. If you want to read from the typical outcasts I would recommend Leopardi essays and dialogues. Fernando Pessoa's "The book of disquiet" is also very "wizardly". But I haven't really read anything about the typical outcasts, the most accurate description of an outcast is notes from the underground.
Been on a fantasy book binge the past week or so.
The name of the wind was highly recommend but I was totally disappointed. The only thing it has going for it is good prose and a interesting magic system. The pacing and time wasting of it reminds me of French media and neverending shonen shows who pad their length but have very little to actually say.
I feel like my time was wasted and I was more annoyed waiting for shit to be told as the writer played hypeman poorly then entertained when things did happen. And of course it was left unfinished because the writer is as undisciplined as his storytelling.
92 chapters with no point or payoff.
Would have been better off watching a video description of the magic system and then imagined my own adventure using it.
I really don't recommend it.
It's an amusing book.
But also, the concept of a 2D entity seeing 3 dimensionally didn't make any sense. The sphere pushes the square out of his 2d plane, but that wouldn't suddenly make him able to see things 3-Dimensionally. That's not how that would work.
Oh who cares anyway it's a book about funny shape society. Pic related is my waifu
I'm seriously studying Buddhism again. Every time I take an honest and long look at the current state of the world it becomes clear that modernity is even more absurd than the religious speculations of the past. It's my personal conclusion that religion is the lesser imbecile and the more beautiful and serene, and of the religions available to my grasp due to my own sensibilities, thoughts, languages I speak and rich enough tradition to explore, Buddhism is the one that appeals the most to me. I've studied Buddhism before but my mistake was focusing on Chan Buddhism because of my obsessed reading of The Zen Teaching of Bodhidharma. I'm now reading the Pali Canon, which is something I should've done from the start, all those years ago. I just finished reading In the Buddha's Words: An Anthology of Discourses from the Pali Canon and after careful consideration I've decided it's worth the effort to read the entire canon. Currently I'm halfway through the Digha Nikaya, or The Long Discourses, the 34 suttas that begins Buddhist scripture. So far it's been pretty nice and it's interesting to see the polemics against materialists and nihilists and how ancient those positions are in the history of thought, seems like not much have changed after all. The first two suttas, Brahmajala and Samannaphala, are the most interesting to me because it really throws what you think you know about Buddhism in the trash. It really is more complex than what you pick up by leisure reading on the subject. My main objective is very simple; to reach enough trust in scripture in order to attain a certain peace of mind, and most importantly, a sort of direction to focus my intellectual curiosity and imagination. My mind is completely and annoyingly scattered, I can't take this anymore. I have to retreat somewhere and the idea of seeking refuge in the Dharma seems to appeal to this exact type of problem. We'll see how it goes. Now, I know how talking about religion goes in an ib. Don't waste your time trying to convince me religion is nonsense, I'm not going to respond. I've read every single argument there's to be made against religion, I'm not taking this path out of ignorance, but out of complete and total exhaustion the loud dissensions in this world cause to your mental state. I'm done, I'm so fucking done with it. It's time to progress in a single, ordinate path.
Congratulations I guess on mentally lobotomizing yourself plus for falling for the normalfag meme of religions. Especially Buddhism, which is the religion for pussys, faggots and betas. Why not Islam, paganism or occultism? You went and settled for the shittiest decision.
>Don't waste your time trying to convince me religion is nonsense, I'm not going to respond.
You make a post about how you want to mentally rape yourself and deluded yourself willfully so don't be surprised if people call you out for being an idiot. If you don't want anyone to argue with you or mock you then don't communicate with people. Your whole worldview seems to stand on weak legs if you can't even endure it when people argue against your worldview.> I've read every single argument there's to be made against religion
And yet you managed to still fall for the meme. That's even worse than normals who get raised up to believe in nonsense like this.>I'm not taking this path out of ignorance, but out of complete and total exhaustion the loud dissensions in this world cause to your mental state. I'm done, I'm so fucking done with it. It's time to progress in a single, ordinate path.
Typical loser slave mentality, you can't deal with the freedom you have and can't live for yourself so run to mommy religion to tell you what to do and think. How are you better than a normalfag, really?
>>63804>modernity is even more absurd than the religious speculations of the past
I wish my millieu adopted modernist beliefs, I live in a post-modern hell hole.
But on what basis do you say this? Isn't modernism a very
coherent, rationionalist belief system? No doubt, both modernism
and religious ideology both share some neuroticism, but it seems
like such a smaller portion to modernisn.
Perhaps we use to much jargon, without properly laying out its
definitions. Firstly modernism is the general and vague belief
that "science is enough" for knowing the mysteries of the world,
and that there is one global truth out there that we should
aspire to discover (hints of platonism, is that inherent to
humanism or just my reading?). Post-modernist rightly showed that
only a few, if any, things have a global truth that is properly
represented regardless of location, perspective, culture,
ideology, etc. Post modernism arrises in the despair of the
belief of Europoor unity being shattered with the first and
second World Wars. "Maybe we should reconsider this whole
'scientific knowledge is god' thing". The Nazi project (sorry
Godwin) unironically demonstrates what follies of modern ideology
imposed onto a society with free associatation. How do we know
that we won't be scape goated next? But whatever time period we
live in now I believe is much more receptive to eugenic and nazi
ideals, so perhaps we just havent seen post-modernism live long
enough to produce comparable atrocities.
PS my favorite modernists are the italian futurists, and my
favorite post-modernists are the left-marxian post-deluzian
folk. Who knows what will be a palatable ideology in the
>It really is more complex than what you pick up by leisure>reading on the subject
Isn't that all subjects that we investitage? Especially those
that are 3,000 years old.
>the polemics against materialists and nihilists and how ancient>those positions are in the history of thought
I like this idea and sentence. It feels in a way, very modernist in of itself,
despite it being ideas that certainly predate modernist tradition but I have
trouble telling myself whether thats due to your phrasing of the idea, or the
ancienty of the idea itself. Perhaps its just due to the fact that my
interprations and justificatoins for both nihilism and materialism are
post-modern. It especially reminds me of the suttra parabale about how neither
eternalism nor nihlism nor both nor neither.
>My main objective is very simple; to reach enough trust in scripture in order>to attain a certain peace of mind
This objective and perspective is what led me to the belief that most Buddhist
sects are not able to propely deliver an individual. Is that not exactly what
the Buddha proclaimed to teach: a freedom from our suffering? The fact that so
many Buddhist communities I encouter are ruled by broken people, enforcing a
type of culture and value onto their "sangha" (community of believers) makes me
believe that if there was a delivered way that the Buddha preached, we have
largely lost it. I think of it like this: today I would certainly turn away a
beggar at my door, and I would most certainly not listen to them prostelize and
accept life advice from them; aren't I in a better position to offer them help
than vice versa? It makes me think that a true-to-the-Buddha's-words teaching
must be very persuasive– what could you say, as a beggar knocking on my door to
believe that suffer might be extinguished? Was it a cultural phenomena? It feels
so alien to me, even if the modernist interpretatoin of Buddhism, and Buddhist
practice feel true enough. I like to think of Buddha-the-salesman, how did he
effectively get people to believe – was his technique that refined, was he just
>I have to retreat somewhere and the idea of seeking refuge in the Dharma
Luckily, no matter where you are, you may retreat into Dharma. I think the
must-monk mentality is poisonous. If you couldn't retreat in your lay-life for
just 10 minutes a day, why would you expect to be able to do it for every waking
minute? The crucial function of monastic Buddhism is to preserve knowledge, but
if it were not amenable to lay-people, why would we want to preserve it?
Thanks for your thought intriguing post. Enjoy and carry on your studies.
leave the guy alone. He's going to be happier by the end of it than you are
Mishima was a man destined to be misunderstood. The majority of people are unable to comprehend that a person can be both flawed and driven to higher ideals. Though Mishima undoubtedly fetishized death, it would be laughably ignorant to say he died simply because he wanted to die; Mishima had a vision for a greater Japan- of a people unburdened by the materialism of capitalism or socialism.
Honda is the best representation of who Mishima really was; a man that sat on the sidelines and watched others live the lives he wanted to. While his country lost the war that defined his generation, Mishima sat writing "effeminate" poetry (something he never really got over). He didn't want to be the man on the side composing poetry about the glories of other men– he didn't want to be like Honda; someone that ostensibly contributed to some justice or good, but who was ultimately a replaceable part of a machine and whose "good" was as nebulous as it was inconsequential.
He may have been Honda, but he chose to become Mishima. Was he deeply troubled? Yes. Was he also a complex person with hopes, dreams, and aspirations for a better future for his people? Yes as well. It's insulting to see so many reduce him to his pathologies merely. Instead of wondering if Mishima was right- instead of wondering if he really did fight for his people- they reduce him and his entire life to the level of a psychiatric basket case. Some pathetic, traumatized man that sought to kill himself in a spectacular way.
It makes things easy for the "normals" to assume anyone that doesn't fit in with their social structure to be insane; how could they be anything else? One would have to be insane to choose to fight for anything other than bourgeoisie neo-liberalism. The "normals" take this unhealthy, nihilistic, egoistic infatuation with preserving one's own life for the sole purpose of maximizing pleasure over the longest period of time possible and turn it into the golden standard for "normalcy." It's simple of course. In the words of Dr. Kaczynski:>The concept of “mental health” in our society is defined largely by the extent to which an individual behaves in accord with the needs of the system and does so without showing signs of stress.
Normies are driven by instinct, i don't think much about automatons
No, I won't leave him alone. He decided to post his crap opinions on a website, knowing full well how stupid he sounds. I have a right to shit on him.
And my main point was that he will be happy sure, like a coping retard is happy. He is no different from junkies or Jesus fags who believe everything shit that happens to them is for the better good. He is deluding himself but in different ways. A plastic, fake happiness like that is for children, normalfags and succubi. I don't want any part in a cope like that.>>63825
I hate the word post-modern. It is stupid and doesn't make any sense when you think about it. It's like adding "neo" to things, like neonazi, neomarxist, etc. it is unnecessary and doesn't make any difference.
>I like to think of Buddha-the-salesman, how did he
effectively get people to believe – was his technique that refined, was he just charming?
He was the son of a noble family, of course he could recruit followers easily. And you have to remember that asceticism and beggar monk lifestyle was already popular before Buddhism, in fact the Buddha found many of them to be unnecessarily strict.
>materialism and nihilism
It is true, they are probably the oldest philosophies in the world, along with hedonism. But that doesn't take away any value from them.>>63828
Wasn't he the bisexual fascist? lol Also, he pussied out when it was time to fight for his country, right? The average /pol/fag, really.
>>63839>he will be happy sure, like a coping retard is happy
We've been through this before, "blackpiller". You're a nihilist who religiously believes that happiness is unobtainable. A lie. That despair and anguish are the only truths in this world. We've told you before that you need to start your post with this to save us the time of reading the rest of it.
>"I've never picked my own strawberries, so anyone claiming they have or that I can just go and do it is a COPING LARPING LIAR"
^^^ your philosophy
so the Leftoid is the guy hating on buddhism now too. Materialism is babby's first philosophy kid, GL trying to explain consciousness with it.
>>63839>Wasn't he the bisexual fascist? lol Also, he pussied out when it was time to fight for his country, right? The average /pol/fag, really.>fascist
No. Read In Defense of Culture by Mishima. "Everything the is right wing is fascist OH MY SCIENCE!!!">Also, he pussied out when it was time to fight for his country, right?
Let's assume he's a /pol/fag. Throughout his life he wrote and shitposted about revolutions, attempting coups, and becoming a real world embodiment of Japanese ideals. Typical Japanese IRW stuff right? In 1975 he went to a military base with members of his own trained paramilitary group, tied up a standing officer, and attempted a coup. When he failed, he committed seppuku, a ritual Japanese practice that he was required to commit by his own ideals. Instead of pussying out when it was time to slice himself open, he did it. He did everything exactly as he preached.
No… He wasn't the average /pol/fag. You're just the average normie.
I thought Mishima's wife won a defamation suit about the gay accusations.
I read Detransition Baby due to someone posting the most compelling paragraphs on thos site. Those 7 paragraphs are the highlight of the book amd I regret finishing it. They didnt even raise a tranny and its all like 'Im a divorcrd asian lady in manhattan im the real tranny here'
I think it's likely that the opening chapter of Confessions of a Mask explains his "homosexual" tendencies, although I wouldn't bet on it.>While they were still smiling from their laughter, the grownups would usually set about trying to confute me with some sort of scientific explanation. Trying to devise explanations that a child's mind could grasp, they would always start babbling with no little dramatic zeal, saying that a baby's eyes are not yet open at birth, or that even if his eyes are completely open, a newborn baby could not possibly see things clearly enough to remember them. "Isn't that right?" they would say, shaking the small shoulder of the still-unconvinced child. But just then they would seem to be struck by the idea that they were on the point of being taken in by the child's tricks: Even if we think he's a child, we mustn't let our guard down. The little rascal is surely trying to trick us into telling him about "that," and then what is to keep him from asking, with still more childlike innocence: "Where did I come from? How was I born?" And in the end they would look me over again, silently, with a thin smile frozen on their lips, showing that for some reason, which I could never understand, their feelings had been deeply hurt.
Mishima, as a child, is asking an odd question about "that" and it causes his family to be scandalized. Obviously he's referring to something inappropriate that the family would rather forget. He also continuously describes, even as a child, that he knew there was something very wrong about his desires when he shouldn't have any knowledge of these topics:>What I mean is that toward his occupation I felt something like a yearning for a piercing sorrow, a body-wrenching sorrow. His occupation gave me the feeling of "tragedy" in the most sensuous meaning of the word. A certain feeling as it were of "self-renunciation," a certain feeling of indifference, a certain feeling of intimacy with danger, a feeling like a remarkable mixture of nothingness and vital power—all these feelings swarmed forth from his calling, bore down upon me, and took me captive, at the age of four. Probably I had a misconception of the work of a night-soil man. Probably I had been told of some different occupation and, misled by his costume, was forcibly fitting his job into the pattern of what I had heard. I cannot otherwise explain it.
He also shows a sign of a certain sort of child abuse that causes a child to "invert their role":>I understood, though vaguely, that the desire "to become Tenkatsu" and "to become a streetcar operator" differed in essence. Their most marked dissimilarity was the fact that in the case of Tenkatsu the craving for that "tragic quality" was almost wholly lacking. In wishing to become Tenkatsu I did not have to taste that bitter mixture of longing and shame. And yet one day, trying hard to still my heartbeats, I stole into my mother's room and opened the drawers of her clothing chest.
And he demonstrates clear desire for the attraction of a succubus early on, and in some way fetishizes it:>The night-soil man, the Maid of Orleans, and the soldiers' sweaty odor formed one sort of preamble to my life. Tenkatsu and Cleopatra were a second. There is yet a third that should be related.Although as a child I read every fairy story I could lay my hands on, I never liked the princesses. I was fond only of the princes. I was all the fonder of princes murdered or princes fated for death. I was completely in love with any youth who was killed.But I did not yet understand why, from among Andersen's many fairy tales, only his "Rose-Elf" threw deep shadows over my heart, only that beautiful youth who, while kissing the rose given him as a token by his sweetheart, was stabbed to death and decapitated by a villain with a big knife. I did not yet understand why, out of Wilde's numerous fairy tales, it was only the corpse of the young fisherman in "The Fisherman and His Soul," washed up on the shore clasping a mermaid to his breast, that captivated me.
But how could he desire a succubus's affection but not desire the succubus?:>Or was the moment teaching me how grotesque my isolation would appear to the eyes of love, and at the same time was I learning, from the reverse side of the lesson, my own incapacity for accepting love?…
It's clear that his preoccupation with death and sexualization was not healthy or normal for his young age. Saying Mishima was a homosexual or bisexual is a bit disgusting in light of this, when it's clear that he doesn't want his desires– that they're external "desires" imposed on him– rather than his own.
did you attach that painting to imply that homosexual pride is projected onto mishima as it is st. sebastian by wilde and others? that is what i take away alongside the body of your post.
i dont know anything about if he were sexually abused. you often see a lot of claims about the most masculine men being homosexuals. it doesnt bother me if they are, but i just wonder how much truth there is in each case.
alexander and hephaestion are a good example. i remember someone telling me that they postulate things like pederasty and significantly young marriage were recorded precisely because they were out of the ordinary to some degree. i cried over my grandfather's corpse in the hospital for two hours as he passed before me. i would have cried longer if i had been allowed and it had been reasonable to. alexander was similarly close to hephaestion and there was clearly no sexual attachment between my grandfather and me, so i question appraisals like these.
arent there plenty of gay icons from the ancient world? things were supposedly much more sexually liberal. the prominent neuroticism in me sees it as potential propaganda, although i am entirely fine with accepting that they are right. is there strong evidence for figures like mishima and alexander having engaged in homosexual courtship, willingly or otherwise?
just sageing again because a bit off-topic as was my first response. cant remember if there was a mishima thread here.
>>63851>arent there plenty of gay icons from the ancient world? things were supposedly much more sexually liberal. the prominent neuroticism in me sees it as potential propaganda, although i am entirely fine with accepting that they are right. is there strong evidence for figures like mishima and alexander having engaged in homosexual courtship, willingly or otherwise?
I would venture to say that it is in large part propaganda, partially intentional and partially unintentional. In the case of the former, a lot of people (sometimes out of misguided good-will) seek to find examples of homosexuality in the past to normalize it today, and in the case of the latter they view the actions of the past through the lens of modern sexuality. In both cases reality and history are grossly distorted.
A common argument for homosexuality is that of Classical Greece. There has been a lot of discourse on this topic, but the interesting point is this: If homosexuality was normal, why is it that the receptive partner is viewed as having a "shameful" lot in life? Most academics say Socrates was pro-homosexuality, yet in the Dialogue of Gorgias Socrates is speaking with Callicles and the topic of moral relativism, egoism, and hedonism is brought up. Callicles alleges that whatever is good is whatever is enjoyable, and that anyone ought to do as they wish. Socrates says this (here scratching is something that does not necessarily benefit oneself but is enjoyable nonetheless):>But what if the scratching is not confined to the head? Shall I pursue the question? And here, Callicles, I would have you consider how you would reply if consequences are pressed upon you, especially if in the last resort you are asked, whether the life of a catamite is not terrible, foul, miserable? Or would you venture to say that they, too, are happy, if only they get enough of what they want?
The party is absolutely scandalized by Socrates' statements. Callicles is utterly exasperated that Socrates would bring such a topic up to win a debate. The resounding answer is that it is very obvious that a catamite (a young male receptive homosexual partner) is living an unjust, unhappy, debauched life. That is from Callicles, an unabashed hedonist!
So if homosexual relations of their time are the same as today, how is it that they viewed things in this way? In a later dialogue, Socrates is the object of Alcibiades affection, and in another he is the one pursuing Alcibiades; yet in both cases Socrates refuses to have sexual relations with Alcibiades. Socrates makes it clear time and time again, though never directly stated, that the relationship is not good, and that Socrates genuinely loves Alcibiades- so he refuses to perform sexual acts. This is a reference to the later developed concept of Platonic love.
Anyway, my view of it is that, like today, a class of highly rich bourgeois homosexuals were in the business of grooming and abusing young men and Socrates sought to end that (and was later killed by said rich bourgeois homosexuals, perhaps for different reasons).
don't contest a lot with what you said, i am open to the final idea, has someone else put forth this claim? i think i understand some semblance of the point: if you truly love something then you won't impose sexual acts upon it.
(sorry if that misrepresents your idea)
Interestingly, sparknotes doesn't mention that statement of Socrates: https://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/gorgias/section5/
And there is very little written on that portion of the dialogue. This is the only thing about it from the Stanford Encyclopedia:>(4) Hedonism: Once the ‘strong’ have been identified as a ruthlessly intelligent and daring natural elite, a second point of clarification arises: of what, exactly, do they deserve more? Socrates already pressed the point at the outset by, in his usual fashion, posing it in the lowliest terms: should the stronger have a greater share of food and drink, or clothes, or land? These suggestions are scornfully rejected at first (490c–d); but Callicles does in the end allow that eating and drinking, and even scratching or the life of a catamite (a boy or youth who makes himself constantly available to a man for the man’s sexual pleasure), count as instances of the appetitive fulfilment he recommends (494b–e).
It's telling how indirect they are at mentioning this point. A lot of literature from the classical period very clearly makes it out to be understood that the catamite was in for a rough time– that it wasn't a good thing. Academics obviously avoid the topic because at this moment the Greece of antiquity is really the only example of a period in which homosexuality can even be remotely construed as 'accepted' and even then the position is tenuous at the absolute best.
Here's what litcharts says:>Socrates gives various examples, like someone who continuously scratches an itch, or the life of a catamite, to challenge Callicles. When Callicles objects to this shameful comparison, Socrates argues that this is what happens when one defines happiness as enjoying oneself, without discriminating between “pleasant” and “good.” Are there pleasures that aren’t good? Put another way, is goodness something other than “unrestricted enjoyment”?
Again, the position that homosexuality was accepted the same ways then as it is now is NOT indicated by the text, and the lack of direct commentary on this is telling. It really is indicative of a blasé attitude towards victimization of young men and teens because of the disgust they show towards the "lifestyle" and the fact that that point caused Callicles to fall back on his direct assertion that whatever is brings pleasure is good.
please someone recommend me book set in 19 century about vampires
I'm not saying happiness is unobtainable, but that to do obtain it you mustn't cope with childish fairy tales like religion.>>63841
I hate on Buddhism, yeah. It's a pleb tier religion and doesn't have anything to offer to anyone who isn't a normalfag.>materialism baby's first philosophy
Haha, okay. Tell that to the majority of people who lived and live now and who all indulge in some kind of idealism. Idealism is about thinking that your thoughts are omnipotent and that the mind is above everything. It's all so tiring, discoursing with idiots like you. Continue to chase phantasms and fairies all your life, boy.>GL trying to explain consciousness with it
What's there to explain? You have a part in your body called the brain. As long as it works properly you are conscious. Once it doesn't work anymore you aren't conscious anymore. How hard is that to grasp?>>63845
You left out the part conveniently where he evaded the military draft. And a gay suicide is the best thing he could do? Yeah, like I said, average /pol/fag. All talk and no action.
He wanted Japan to return to its pre-war state, no? That's pretty much fascist to anyone who is honest.>>63855>>63852
What do I see now? This thread is getting more and more ridiculous. Socrates was gay as fuck and anyone who bothered to read Plato knows this. You can grab out some sentences here and there, out of context, but that doesn't change the truth that your master was a homosexual and pedophile guy who chased young handsome men around. Some people just really can't handle the truth, huh?
He did nothing because it was a pathetic failure and half-assed attempt. Pretty much anyone could have done what he did. Killing yourself isn't exactly the pinnacle of human achievement.
You reek of a pseud that only watches youtube videos on literature and philosophy.
I hate the mishima ship but your argument is just plain shit
Why should a guy like him be a role model, again? Like I said he was a failure. He dodged the military draft when he could have fought for his country in the war, after that he was all talk and then when he finally decided to do something it was a pathetic attempt at best, more like some elaborate suicide plan. When you are known for the way you died then that's telling something about you and not in a positive way.>>63863
Probably read more philosophy than you since I know Socrates was a bisexual pedophile. What you or the other poster cited as an example "against homosexuality" was only directed against the role of the young boy getting fucked in the ass and not against homosexuality itself or the homo fucking him in the ass (which was the role of Socrates in relationships). What they say is that being the fuck boy is an inferior state. It's just like when hetero people shit on succubi, that doesn't make them any less hetero or less attracted to females, same in this case. But ofc, you have to cherrypick quotes here and there to justify your projection of what Socrates and ancient greek culture should have been like according to your christian-"conservative" brain. Greek culture was extremely homosexual, pedophile and bisexual. That's kind of what made it superior to other cultures. They naturally excluded females in almost any way from everything, even to the point of homosexuality and bisexuality. They were ultra manly but not according to your nazi or conservative values and this confuses you so much that you have to invent lies about how they were actually all pure hetero people. lol
I have never seen a post so embarrassing.
He was a loser normalfag, what's there to inspire us? Should have learned how to enjoy his life instead of running to his death like some moody teenager.>>63868>>63869
Back to the /pol/.
I just told you what to do you to appreciate Mishima you absolute faggot, why are you bickering with me like a contrarian loser instead of watching Mishima a life in four chapters? This fucking site….
I watched that movie ages ago. It was all right. But Mishima was still a faggot.> This fucking site….
Yeah, it's not like pol, huh?
>>63867>He dodged the military draft
Blatantly not true, he was disqualified from entry for medical reasons. He was even planning on becoming a Kamikaze pilot and told his parents. Your philosophy posts are beyond embarrassing and not worth engaging, but at least do your research before shitting out easily disproven claims.
It would be too easy for me to ignore you, so I won’t do it. I’ll have you know I read your response, so rest assured it wasn’t a waste of your time writing it, though I must say it completely failed to vex me. I’m afraid you can’t begin to imagine how much harsher I can be with myself, in fact how much harsher I am with myself, every single day, and how much deeper I know doubt than thinking it something as prosaic as religion is slave mentality. You think calling me gay, normalfag and loser is enough shaming? If only you knew the depths of anguish I made myself crawl through, having myself lower than a smudge of excrement, pushed endlessly through an open sewer the size of an ocean. I made myself so low as to be the vomit of a sick crow after eating the putrefied carcass of vermins. If you think calling someone a loser is enough, you haven’t seen much, and I wish I could show you the experience directly, instead of the simile I offer here. I thank you for taking the time to write to me.>>63825
Thank you for reading, friend. I won’t have a discussion with you about this, nor I’ll try to convince you of what I said about modernity, it should be self-evident by looking at it. It would take writing a whole book to point to you why I think so. To summarize, modernity is the improved means to disimproved ends. Our current system depends on the assumption of perpetual growth, a fairy tale on its own, on one side, and the idolization of self, the almighty Me, on the other; this “wonderful”, modern and improved, secular self, a constructed, involved, vile monster that, for commercial and slavering purposes, needs to have a perpetual, brain-dead, ever-growing and endless want. Look at its core and you’ll find its only ”virtue”, its only purpose: It covets. The nice, secular name for it is Consumer, but suffice a look at it for you to know what it really is. Everyone must be one with it, everyone must incarnate it. So modernity decrees, so modernity demands. Of course, how else are we going to sell all the useless shit around every corner? Machines are too productive, we have to shove all this manufactured shit down everyone’s throat before it piles up. And do it fast, ultra fast, on this very second, forever. It’s not only a matter of physical consumption mind you, it takes all roads, it must crush every other possibility. Everything else must be destroyed. Everything that doesn’t line up. Things like humility, patience, compassion, self-restraint, those must be destroyed, and they have, friend. Completely and utterly crushed and constantly mocked at, in the Holy Name of Trinkets, in the Holy Name of Me. Whatever is left of compassion or any other virtue in modernity is just a mask you put on in order to humiliate others and aggrandize yourself.
Every virtue and spiritual practice must be replaced by brain mushing activities like pornography and video games, so you can pretend to escape while running deeper inside the demon’s gullet, burying yourself evermore, and then feeling stupid and trying to “improve yourself” by studying to get a job it shouldn’t even exist anymore, or it won’t exist soon, and a perpetual sugar high, so you can deform your body and grow disgustingly fat and out of breath in order to be further humiliated to purchase a gym membership. Got to impress the ladies with your farm animal, protein drenched and rotten, chemicals injected body. All achieved through the massive destruction and complete disregard for the welfare of living things, all achieved through the complete degradation and commoditization of all sentient beings. With some “luck” you’ll also get sick and they’ll prescribe some more drugs. You can’t be depressed, you can’t be sad, God forbid, it might cut down on your consumption of garbage, it might cut down on your Self delusion, it might cut down on your trust of the artificial paradise, or worse, you might see through it, God forbid! That’s how all disease is seen in our age, really, reduction of your potential to covet. Thank God you can now have everything delivered to your door. Purchased with one click, defining your mighty self, one click at a time. Can you hear, friend, the mantra people sing? “we’re progressing we’re progressing!” “Try this, try that, try it here and there, there there, always out of reach, you’re not there yet are you?! How lacking! How embarrassing!” “Want this, want that, want everything, want everywhere”.
The nonsense never stops in modernity, it’s one colossal idiocy after another, from the enormous surplus of food that we burn and toss into the ocean, to people dying of hunger 2 hours away from a fully stocked warehouse, to wealth inequality, to apathetic, brainwashed slaves put into service to destroy each other with super tech weapons, to people donating money on streaming services so they can watch a pretty lady talking about her favorite icing colors on birthday cakes. Corner to corner, from top to bottom, inside and out, it’s absolutely and irredeemably evil, disgusting, appalling, deluding, absurd, atrocious, frightening, vain. And we have an army of lost people thinking “Well, whatever, soon I’ll be able to jump on a rocket and escape to some exoplanet! Hopefully all the liquid there will be Sprite.” It’s a tragedy, and what a well built tragedy it is, friend, at making people blind. Improved means to disimproved ends. It had a chance to be marvelous, it had a chance to be beautiful. It failed and it’s giving in under its own weight. It’s insanity and I won’t make one more word here about it. I will block it. I will cast it out.
As for your doubts about sanghas, it's a technical difficulty of the spiritual path for sure, and it’s not of today. Currently, the best I can do is to point you at scripture dealing with this exact problem, which begins, really, with the Enlightened One’s parinirvana. Check the Mahaparinibbana Sutta in the Digha Nikaya, 4.7 on. As for your comment about how Buddha taught and some lost teaching secret, it would be for the great benefit of mankind if we could talk to him and so many others who have passed. That is not, however, how the world works. You know this. Ananda attended the Buddha and personally heard him teach for 25 years. 25! Still, even him, when it was obvious the Enlightened One would not make it through the night, lamented: “I’m still a learner with much to do! And the Teacher is passing away, who was so compassionate to me!” If that was the situation with Ananda, the tathagata Ananda, imagine us. However this is not cause for despair. We’ll have to make due with what we have. We have the canon and we have the sangha and we have Buddha-nature. It has to be enough. it must be enough. The Enlightened One didn’t say, in his last, dying breath: “Give up and go home.” He said: "All conditioned things are of a nature to decay – strive on untiringly.” Strive on untiringly! What a shame, what a waste to have the keys of our liberation and lose it like some 1.99 bibelot from the dollar store.
Continues next post. Body is too long.
As for your comment about turning away beggars, I remind you, friend, monks beg, but they’re not beggars, they’re monks, and the fact they, in the very least, dared to stand up and go against the grain, against delusion, then and now, is worthy of our respect, admiration and gratitude, even if they fail. As for those who are not honest about the path, they shouldn’t be called monks and shouldn’t be a cause of discussion, or of our concern. As for your idea that the must-monk mentality is poisonous, I disagree utterly, completely. It’s a commitment to liberation and one should be so lucky as to find the necessary trust and martial discipline in his spiritual commitment to become a monk. The way I see it, everybody should strive to be one, to be like one. Every single person should become a monk. I dare believe in this, why should it be different, when I believe in the Noble Eightfold Path? We would be so lucky everyone could master it. As for my own situation, indeed I’ve been lacking, I’ve been indolent, I’ve been foolish, I’ve been found wanting in faith and discipline, I’ve been, most of all, wavering, nor here nor there, too easily exhausted and unwilling, uncommitted, and I confess, friend, many are the hours, days, months and years I wished, like so many of my contemporaries, to let myself go and be crushed gladly by samsara, not giving a shit, taking scraps of fleeting pleasure at some master’s table, not giving a fuck and fuck everything, fuck everyone: escaping blindly, eating blindly, sleeping blindly, walking blindly, masturbating blindly, mocking blindly, laughing blindly, accusing blindly, thinking blindly, and so on, lacking in every virtue, uncompassionate, dulled, uncaring, unwilling, gladly abandoning every good effort and hope, abandoning myself utterly, to the very end of my days. I too sometimes wish, like many others, to be left alone, to be spat on by the demons of the world.
But then, as I’m staring at the ceiling, lying on the floor, in a self-indulgent torpor, waiting to die, year after year, a sliver of Buddha-nature shines through the walls of waste and debris around me, and under its light, I see with most piercing eyes the decay of virtue, of discipline, the growth of delusion, I see myself chewing on excrement, the people around me chewing on excrement, in a hopeless and sad situation, suffering from every malice, adapting to every malice, laughing at a matter that is not at all a laughing matter. Then I bend and cry for hours until my breathing is difficult, and turn once again to the words of the Enlightened One, hoping I can force myself to stay a stream-enterer, to break the fetters and cut this world in one sweep, to dare to be enlightened, to be an arahant.
Well? I know failure all too well. By nothing and no one’s fault but my own. My own fault. And why I come to this cesspit in the back of beyond and spend my day writing this piece of text? Because, friend, there’s a splinter of a splinter of a chance, that someone here will read this, take it seriously, and have the little dust from their eyes removed and will come closer to realize his Buddha-nature. Deciding now to try himself, to instruct himself, to be a stream-enterer. Once trying it, in all likelihood, he will far surpass what little I have accomplished, and my mean attainments will look like dust beneath his feet. If I said nothing I would have done nothing. If I write this and nothing happens, at least I put in the effort, which is more than I can say for myself most days. If people read this and toss it aside, laugh at it, mock, scorn and decide it’s nothing but trash, lies and drivel, I can only tell those people we’re the same, and how are we the same? We’re all men living inside a burning house, and learned to think it funny, to think it charming, to be at the mercy of every accident and tragedy.
Anyway, back to the topic at hand, I’ll be finishing the Digha Nikaya >>63804
in a few days, it’s a long work. Once I finish it, I’ll write my impressions here. There’s a lot about those suttas I want to expose for the appreciation of others.
>>63825> think the must-monk mentality is poisonous. If you couldn't retreat in your lay-life for just 10 minutes a day, why would you expect to be able to do it for every waking minute?
The answer : Spending time away from human beings and society, in sense restraint in seclusion from pleasure, for an extended amount of time allows you to see your true relationship to your senses, and in turn see the danger and nature of the pressure of sense consciousness, feelings, and your taking ownership of them.
Buddhism is pretty humble in a sense that even in the age of the buddha they argued that being around a village was too much temptation and mental stress, so being in a hut 1 mile away from others was needed. Then once your seclusion and sense restraint is set in, and the revolt of mind towards them, allows you to see the nature of sensory dependence and safety from it. And blah blah then you are strong enough to maintain that when engaging in world. General argument is that average person needs that to see it and can't just get it as a balancing act with the lay life.
Also I forgot to tell you in >>63883
I call modernity the last 300 to 400 years to present, without bothering with "post" labels. I'm sure you get it.
Buddhism is just lies and most of what you did write is just bullshit although I don’t want to spend my 1 hour to refute and you’re just a coping loser that he thinks he’s smart because he cares about so many things. You’re just an average loser and nobody cares about most of you ddi write because they’re unimportant to them.
>>60032>SOCRATES: ‘And was that our agreement with you?’ the law would answer; ‘or were you to abide by the sentence of the state?’ And if I were to express my astonishment at their words, the law would probably add: ‘Answer, Socrates, instead of opening your eyes-you are in the habit of asking and answering questions. Tell us,–What complaint have you to make against us which justifies you in attempting to destroy us and the state? In the first place did we not bring you into existence? Your father married your mother by our aid and begat you. Say whether you have any objection to urge against those of us who regulate marriage?’ None, I should reply. ‘Or against those of us who after birth regulate the nurture and education of children, in which you also were trained? Were not the laws, which have the charge of education, right in commanding your father to train you in music and gymnastic?’ Right, I should reply. ‘Well then, since you were brought into the world and nurtured and educated by us, can you deny in the first place that you are our child and slave, as your fathers were before you? And if this is true you are not on equal terms with us; nor can you think that you have a right to do to us what we are doing to you. Would you have any right to strike or revile or do any other evil to your father or your master, if you had one, because you have been struck or reviled by him, or received some other evil at his hands?–you would not say this? And because we think right to destroy you, do you think that you have any right to destroy us in return, and your country as far as in you lies? Will you, O professor of true virtue, pretend that you are justified in this? Has a philosopher like you failed to discover that our country is more to be valued and higher and holier far than mother or father or any ancestor, and more to be regarded in the eyes of the gods and of men of understanding? also to be soothed, and gently and reverently entreated when angry, even more than a father, and either to be persuaded, or if not persuaded, to be obeyed? And when we are punished by her, whether with imprisonment or stripes, the punishment is to be endured in silence; and if she lead us to wounds or death in battle, thither we follow as is right; neither may any one yield or retreat or leave his rank, but whether in battle or in a court of law, or in any other place, he must do what his city and his country order him; or he must change their view of what is just: and if he may do no violence to his father or mother, much less may he do violence to his country.’ What answer shall we make to this, Crito? Do the laws speak truly, or do they not?>CRITO: I think that they do.>SOCRATES: Then the laws will say: ‘Consider, Socrates, if we are speaking truly that in your present attempt you are going to do us an injury. For, having brought you into the world, and nurtured and educated you, and given you and every other citizen a share in every good which we had to give, we further proclaim to any Athenian by the liberty which we allow him, that if he does not like us when he has become of age and has seen the ways of the city, and made our acquaintance, he may go where he pleases and take his goods with him. None of us laws will forbid him or interfere with him. Any one who does not like us and the city, and who wants to emigrate to a colony or to any other city, may go where he likes, retaining his property. But he who has experience of the manner in which we order justice and administer the state, and still remains, has entered into an implied contract that he will do as we command him. And he who disobeys us is, as we maintain, thrice wrong: first, because in disobeying us he is disobeying his parents; secondly, because we are the authors of his education; thirdly, because he has made an agreement with us that he will duly obey our commands; and he neither obeys them nor convinces us that our commands are unjust; and we do not rudely impose them, but give him the alternative of obeying or convincing us;–that is what we offer, and he does neither. ‘These are the sort of accusations to which, as we were saying, you, Socrates, will be exposed if you accomplish your intentions; you, above all other Athenians.’ Suppose now I ask, why I rather than anybody else? they will justly retort upon me that I above all other men have acknowledged the agreement. ‘There is clear proof,’ they will say, ‘Socrates, that we and the city were not displeasing to you. Of all Athenians you have been the most constant resident in the city, which, as you never leave, you may be supposed to love. For you never went out of the city either to see the games, except once when you went to the Isthmus, or to any other place unless when you were on military service; nor did you travel as other men do. Nor had you any curiosity to know other states or their laws: your affections did not go beyond us and our state; we were your especial favourites, and you acquiesced in our government of you; and here in this city you begat your children, which is a proof of your satisfaction. Moreover, you might in the course of the trial, if you had liked, have fixed the penalty at banishment; the state which refuses to let you go now would have let you go then. But you pretended that you preferred death to exile, and that you were not unwilling to die. And now you have forgotten these fine sentiments, and pay no respect to us the laws, of whom you are the destroyer; and are doing what only a miserable slave would do, running away and turning your back upon the compacts and agreements which you made as a citizen. And first of all answer this very question: Are we right in saying that you agreed to be governed according to us in deed, and not in word only? Is that true or not?’ How shall we answer, Crito? Must we not assent?>CRITO: We cannot help it, Socrates.
I wonder what Socrates would think of the modern state and its laws.
I've started reading "Alone With the Hairy Ainu or 3,800 miles on a pack saddle in yezo and a cruise to the kurile islands" by A. H. Savage Landor
>19th century neet goes to japan and transits around ainu areas
It's good but I'm probably too lazy to read it so I thought I'd share since I know some people here are into Japan.https://www.gutenberg.org/files/37873/37873-h/37873-h.htm
thanks wiz, looks right up my alley
>>63929>Release Date: October 28, 2011
wow that's awesome. can't believe i've never heard of this. i thought i found everything on guternberg about japan
if anyone has books by Kawashima, Chuji i would appreciate it. he wrote a lot about traditional japanese houses, minka
i checked libgen and see nothing but i found a cool video related to a book on minka in the process
50 Years Without Sex
My Life As An Involuntary Virgin
Kino reading - poignant book about a real wizard life.
>>63983>love-shy>My Life As An Involuntary Virgin>real wizard life
crab manifesto lmao
It's not a crab manifesto. It life story of, at the time, a 53 years old virgin.
>>63985>This book is an attempt on my part to examine and understand the circumstances and reasons surrounding the>fact that I am, as of this writing, an involuntary fifty-year-old, heterosexual virgin. When I say „involuntary‟, I>mean that I have not remained sex-free due to religious or moral beliefs, physical limitations, chosen celibacy,>“saving myself for marriage”, or any other restrictive behavior. As sad as it sounds, I am still a virgin simply>because, in my 50 years on this earth, I have never been able to get laid. No succubus whom I‟ve ever dated has>ever wanted to go beyond the friendship stage with me. Despite all attempts (which will be covered in detail in>this book) to seduce a succubus - not unlike what every man has done since the beginning of time - I have always>been rejected when it came to getting physical or amorous with a succubus.
it is the definition of a crab manifesto, and is from one of the dumbest fucking sites imaginable
NIGGER, so you know what "manifesto" mean and what is?
>>63988>>63984>it's a crab lmao>lmao
underage nigger calling a 53 year old wizard a crab. wizchan 2023. Kill yourself.
please explain how a man writing an entire book about his bitter failures to get laid (and resulting lifelong virginity) constitutes anything but a crab manifesto
please explain how he's not a crab
go on. or just call me a nigger again, that was really convincing of you. surely another will seal the deal haha
>>63992>please explain how a wizard writing about his life as a virgin constitutes anything but a wizard manifesto
it is nothing but whining about how he could not have sex. how he doesn't want to die without experiencing sex. how he is so confused why succubi don't wan to fuck him. mindless rambling about failed relationships and shitty romances
arguably dumber crab shit
dumb nigger once again proves not to understand the definition of what constitutes a wizard
yeah, i don't consider crabs to be wizards. only people who can post on wizchan hoenstly about their life, without being banned, are wizards to me
that is all my opinion, but it doesn't change the fact he is a crab and you are mad about this
it's wizchan dot org the site for sexless males you stupid cunt. Kvetch about this site on discord and fuck off the board
no, it's crab garbage. you should feel some shame posting that shit here
Lol, you're autistic and should get off this fucking site. Loveshy was being posted on ye old realwiz back in at least 2014. You will never pass as a man
i am not autistic, as much as i would like the opportunity for trying to get bux. and old wizardchan died for the new wizchan without crabs, though things are still changing, the sentiment of old r9k is long dead except maybe on dep now
What are some book there are pro-celibacy, pro-wizard life, pro-recluse life?
The World as Will and Representation by Arthur Schopenhauer. He was a recluse, a polymath and only had sex with prostitutes and a few love affairs which all went badly.>To be sure, the species has a prior, nearer, and greater claim on the individual than the transient individuality itself; and yet even when the individual makes some sort of conscious sacrifice for the perpetuation and future of the species, the importance of the matter will not be made sufficiently comprehensible to his intellect, which is mainly constituted to regard individual ends.
>Therefore Nature attains her ends by implanting in the individual a certain illusion by which something which is in reality advantageous to the species alone seems to be advantageous to himself; consequently he serves the latter while he imagines he is serving himself. In this process he is carried away by a mere chimera, which floats before him and vanishes again immediately, and as a motive takes the place of reality. This illusion is instinct.
Philipp Mainländer, Philosophy of Salvation. An apostle of Schopenhauer who thought that all things desire death, using Kant's epistemology he sort of predicted general relativity. He despised sexuality, and died a virgin.
Baruch Spinoza fits the wizard archetype very well.> (1) After experience had taught me that all the usual surroundings of social life are vain and futile; seeing that none of the objects of my fears contained in themselves anything either good or bad, except in so far as the mind is affected by them, I finally resolved to inquire whether there might be some real good having power to communicate itself, which would affect the mind singly, to the exclusion of all else: whether, in fact, there might be anything of which the discovery and attainment would enable me to enjoy continuous, supreme, and unending happiness.> (1) When I saw that all these ordinary objects of desire would be obstacles in the way of a search for something different and new–nay, that they were so opposed thereto, that either they or it would have to be abandoned, I was forced to inquire which would prove the most useful to me: for, as I say, I seemed to be willingly losing hold on a sure good for the sake of something uncertain. (6:2) However, after I had reflected on the matter, I came in the first place to the conclusion that by abandoning the ordinary objects of pursuit, and betaking myself to a new quest, I should be leaving a good, uncertain by reason of its own nature, as may be gathered from what has been said, for the sake of a good not uncertain in its nature (for I sought for a fixed good), but only in the possibility of its attainment.> (1) But love towards a thing eternal and infinite feeds the mind wholly with joy, and is itself unmingled with any sadness, wherefore it is greatly to be desired and sought for with all our strength. (2) Yet it was not at random that I used the words, "If I could go to the root of the matter," for, though what I have urged was perfectly clear to my mind, I could not forthwith lay aside all love of riches, sensual enjoyment, and fame.
Giacomo Leopardi died a virgin, Bhudda and Shanakara were celibates
Any good non-fiction or fiction books about wizards like us? Couldn't find any.
Strongly considering selling my books and only keeping several valuable ones with lifelong reading value
I almost exclusively read ebooks today
Most books have pretty low resell value.
Not sure if that influences your decision ether way.
>Lonely Passion of Judith Heare
Jesus, a very sad book about a very sad life of (good definition would be) femcel.
No, it not a modern book, is from the 50s.
Highly recommend to people read it.
Read this book because one of you recommend it. Good read for a Wiz.* WARNING: spoilers ahead
The guy is not a virgin at all, but he has a lot in common with Wizards.
Has severe social anxiety and cannot fully understand other people or fit into society. He is an outsider all his life.
He doesn't see a point in life and tries to commit suicide a couple of times.
He abuses alcohol and drugs every single day of his adult life to cope with it.
Never has a proper job, only does gigs as a cartoonist from time to time and ends living completely NEET after his family takes care of him due to his second attempt of suicide.
What separates him most from Wizards is that he is very good looking and thus succubi practically throw themselves at him. Two of them even decide to support him financially while he does nothing but to get drunk all day and smoke cigarettes.
It was a good recommendation by the original Wiz that post it, give it a try.
Been getting into magic the gathering stories/lore for the past month or so.
Just finished reading The Colors of Magic Anthology, which was mostly enjoyable. Some stories I feel were duds but most were ok with a few that were good.
Had a really hard time finding the book, like even finding a pdf was hard, but I found it here on this website that breaks down books into webpages. The formatting is a bit scuffed but it's still readable.
Lot better than paying $120+ dollars for the physical book.https://richard-lee-byers.freenovelread.com/310402-the_colors_of_magic_agic_the_gathering
Gave a handmaid's tale a short and boy oh boy was it a mistake.
It is the most aggressively midwit thing I have read in a very long time. It feels like it was written by someone who resented that no one cared about their feminist poetry while shitty romance novels sold thousands.
The prose and pacing is painfully dull and the inability to ever get to the point or stay on a point is irritating.
2 out of 5. The vocabulary is extensive but it's all for nothing.
surprised you even finished it. Atwood has written some truly awful content
What are some great books about wizards like us, aka:older recluse virgins
>Notes from the underground
No dead Russian, I want modern books post 1950 if possible, tired of xix century books.
Did you try reading the thread. This question gets asked nearly once a month.
Too long of thread, bro, just recommend books.
I think he for sure projected himself into Honda and growing old, decaying, living a normal life, etc were fears of him and he was already feeling like that. I agree with the rest of your post. Now that I grow old I wonder I he was right
>>64402>Notes from the underground
If you read this carefully you will realize that this work is pretty modern
> Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant
This was a monster to tackle and I'm sure that a lot of things flew through my head. As expected, Kant can get really dense but sometimes he can be pretty clear and produce beatiful texts.
Kant's project is to solve the long lived discussion in philosophy regarding the distinction between idealism and materialism, soul vs body, reason vs sensations.
Philosophers inclining towards idealism believe that sensations are mere products of an unstable and misleading external world. The true of reality lies within us and our faculty of reasoning would be proof of that. Moreover, this "being" that we feel inside us, apparently unchanged by the external influx, would be also proof of the eternity and indestructibility of the soul. The true of reality pertains to ideas attainable through reason alone and not vague and ever changing sensations.
On the other hand, empiricists believes that truest foundation of reality lies within sensorial stimulus. Through reasoning alone one could deduce anything but it that knowledge is not backed by empirical proof then is worthless.
This is the panorama Kant is trying to deal with. Kant says a miryad of things and he painstakingly writes about the topics he touches. Since this is a mere imageboard post and I didn't even grasp the thing completely (not even close), I will highlight the most valuable "findings" of Kant in this work in my opinion.
First, to achieve knowledge completely from stimulus is impossible, we need to have a "framework" inside us in order to give meaning to these stimuluses. This framework is built upon the notions of space and time. Both are not notions learnt from "outside" but already prebuilt inside us, they come "a priori". I think this is pretty interesting, revolutionary and one of the main pillars of Kant critique. To support this idea, he brings as example the way how postulates of geometry are almost axiomatic and they come naturally to us. However, since space and time are concepts inside us, they don't exist as thing in themselves but as tools to construct our experience.
That's what Kant has to say regarding our senses. We certainly receive external stimulus but it only "makes sense" when processed by the a priori notions we possess.
Regarding pure reason alone, Kant try to classify the mechanisms of reason into categories. These categories are related to the concepts of quantity, quality, relation, modality. Though Kant studies reason as an alone entity, he makes emphasis in stating that the mechanisms of pure reason only makes sense when related to external sensations.
That's roughly the system of Kant. With this, he explains how ideas created by philosophers like eternity of the soul, the existence of God as the perfect idea that sustains the whole world, assertions related to the nature of the world (the world has a beginning, the world is infinite, freedom vs causality, the world is composed of basic units, etc) are "mistakes" that reason produces when it goes beyond its scope.
This is the fruit of Kant: to stablish what can be known and can not be known. Certainly stimuluses are the primary source of knowledge but they need the a priori notions inside us (space and time) to make sense. Reason is the tool to categorize and built concepts upon the stimuluses received but it can't go beyond that. When reason goes beyond sensorial experience, it just produces speculation.
This system is both clarifyng but constrict us. According to Kant there must be something beyond sensorial experience namely the thing in itself, the noumenon but regarding that nothing can be say.
I guess this work is almost the metaphysical foundation of modern thought. It is difficult to refute Kant postulates, it is like we modern men live within them.
Fascinating book but I will have to read it again in the future, taking notes and perhaps following some scholar notes
I'm too low IQ to understand your post, let alone Kant himself.
[Last 50 Posts]
I've been wanting to read Kant. But tbh I find the whole topic of epistemology, how we know what we know, pretty boring.
But I do like Hegel and Schopenhauer. Strange pair I know. So I'm more interested in Kant as the founder of German Idealism for himself.
I want to read him as Schop reads him, even if its factually wrong, Kant is saying the same things the Vedas and Plato says.