Is anything he's written worth reading? I remember thumbing through one of his books in the library when I was an undergrad and finding it very dense. I'm not that well versed in traditional philosophy and the only psychoanalytic literature I've read is some Jung.
Any place to start on this guy, and is it even worth it?
 |
 |
|
sublime object of ideology is where he made his lit theory bones, most of the shit after that is just a pop cash grab. here's some professor at yale taking him seriously and talking about his paper "courtly love" which apparently was significant.
https://oyc.yale.edu/english/engl-300/lecture-15
I think that is what I would like to read though, pop cash grab but from a fun angle that I haven't seen yet. His moviedoc where he analysis Hollywood films was really fun and I'd like to read something like that instead of endless musings of turning lacan on his head using hegel's unwashed dick or whatever pseud shit academic philosophers like to engage in.
Impressive that this yale prof mentioned him in the same breath as Deleuze and Guattari but I want something less serious rather than more.
If you are going to read his stuff and are not familiar with the lacanian stuff I would recommend the puppet and the dwarf first just to get some context before getting into his more serious academic stuff.
>published by mit
does mit press have have sales?
what about less than nothing or his book on schelling?
Do why do these pop "philosophers" write one or two actual philosophy books then spend the next 30-40 years talking about whatever the frick. Same thing with Jordan Peterson. Wrote a book back in 1999 and nowadays he is crying about being banned from Twitter.
there's not a lot of money in philosophy and even elite professors max out at like 200k unless you want to teach at some lame school in abu dabi or whatever so u shill books to plebs
Most academics wish they had an obscure useless book.to their name if the are lucky. Lucky to submit some unreproducible garbage that will never be cited by anyone with a future.
Not only are his books not worth reading, his epic comedy YouTube clips aren't either.
He is the JP for leftists.
nah, most lefties would get triggered by him
this. he literally critizes them all the time
>"why *spits* shcaren't *spits* you *spits* lefties *spits* raping *spits* enough *spits* children? *spits*"
only tankies get triggered by him
You surely mean pacifist classical liberals.
He is the JP for not-a-liberal leftists
He is unironically a very good scholar of German Idealism, Marxism, and Lacanian psychoanalysis, with the caveat that he never turns off the jokes and memes, even in his more "serious" works. I actually quite like this approach, especially given that I can go find a more traditional academic sources on Schelling or Kant if I want them, but people mistake this for lack of rigor which I think is to miss the point of what he's doing.
He does tend to publish a few different kinds of books--there's the more traditional academic texts, where he spells out the core of his thinking, and then there's the cash grabs other people have been describing. If you want the former, you're looking at Sublime Object, Tarrying With the Negative (his self-proclaimed favorite of his own works), The Ticklish Subject, The Parallax View, Less Than Nothing, Absolute Recoil, and a few others (some are more specialized works on one thinker). These texts are genuinely difficult and require a background in German Idealism and psychoanalysis (he'll get intto the weeds of Hegel debates, for instance). If you just want jokes and the gist, stick to the videos and movies. But Sublime Ideology is a decent starting point and isn't too long.
>but people mistake this for lack of rigor which I think is to miss the point of what he's doing.
I can't imagine something so extremely heterodox being very rigorous
No
>Any place to start on this guy, and is it even worth it?
Hegel, Engels, Lacan, Amphetamines, neue Slowenische kunst, history of fascism in Former Yugoslav states.
Serious question: would this guy even be known if it wasn’t for his behavioral idiosyncrasies and mannerisms?
Hegelians that promote US interests tend to have prominent careers no matter what (e.g. Adorno, Horkeheimer).