>it's literally just smutWhy do pseuds love Batallie so much again?
>>24941966Did you only read a 50 page fiction book and judged the philosopher with only this knowledge?But story of the eye is pretty much only smut. It mostly only offers shock value. He stepped in the tradition of De Sade with this one.
>>24941974>and judged the philosopher with only this knowledge?Redpill me on him then.
>>24941966One good chapter of smut can get you all the way through high school.
>>24941974>But story of the eye is pretty much only smut. It mostly only offers shock value. He stepped in the tradition of De Sade with this one.so he was transgressive so its... le good?>>24941997read the accursed share, erotism and l'expérience intérieure bataille and pierre klossowski are the two most important french philosophers of the 20th century
>>24942001>read the accursed share, erotism and l'expérience intérieureAlright, will do. Cheers, anon.
>>24941966Read The Accursed Share if you want to be filtered so badly
>>24941966A French pervert? Sacre bleu! Surely this cannot be the case mon cher?
There's nothing erotic about it, it's an evil book
>>24942746Eroticism is mostly just evil
>>24942746I jerked off to it.
>>24941966You're ngmi to degree 0
>>24942746It made me cum
>>24941966Bataille, that high priest of voluptuous incoherence, writes as though language itself were a sacrificial animal to be flayed, dismembered, and paraded about in ecstatic tatters. His prose lurches between mystical fever and scholarly grimace, giving the impression of a librarian who has abruptly joined a cult mid–card catalog. He delights in exalting the sordid and solemnizing the absurd, working himself into such theoretical contortions that one wonders whether he is unveiling profundities or simply performing a burlesque in the vestibule of the Absolute. Reading him, one senses not a system but a séance; ideas materialize in gusts of incense and then evaporate, leaving behind only the rustle of his lavish, self-consumptive seriousness.And yet it is precisely this mixture of smoldering taboo and sacerdotal jargon that draws the pseuds to him like moths to a black flame. For the aspiring esotericist, Bataille offers the perfect camouflage: a swirling fog of sanctified obscenity in which one may posture as a fearless spelunker of the human abyss without ever needing a lantern of coherent thought. His pages provide the intoxicating illusion of participating in forbidden knowledge—knowledge one need not actually understand, for opacity itself is taken as proof of depth. In the generous gloom of his prose, the pseud may pirouette, whispering about transgression and sovereignty, convinced that the resulting shadows are their own emanations, rather than merely reflections cast by Bataille’s endlessly flickering bonfire of the cryptic.
>>24942746i can smell your leaky clitty
>>24941974>But story of the eye is pretty much only smutIt's also deeply sacrilegious.
>>24941966because it's smut
>>24944633You're unironically validating Bataille’s entire project while thinking you're dunking on him. You're completely missing that he literally defines coherence as servitude because he's not trying to build a system, he's burning the library down from the inside specifically to filter midwits who need a "lantern of coherent thought" to feel safe. He's wearing the scholar mask to rot the institution of reason with filth. And complaining about pseuds getting lost in the fog is hilarious because Bataille explicitly wrote for those who would misunderstand him. Opacity is the removal of the safety rails so you can experience actual expenditure. You didn't expose a fraud, you just admitted you can't handle a fire that doesn't exist to keep you warm.
>>24944942...hot
