One of the best philosophy book I've read in a while, but the way it has been received and it's talked about among the public (including the /lit/ one) testifies to the absolute lack of reading comprehension of the current average person. This is what happens when you destroy canonical reading in universities for centuries: that people will approach a reasonable and rather polite philosophical text such as Fanged Noumena and perceive it as if it were some sort of theoretical eldritch abomination. Had you properly studied the Critique of Pure Reason, Being and Time and some Nietzsche, this would be entirely intelligble to you, I assure you. And again, it would not sound at all "apocalyptic" or "weird", but rather polite and reasonable, in the sense in which a conversation is reasonable and polite. The problem is that for about forty years we seem to have forgotten how to properly converse with philosophers - that is, in a challenging, creative, deep way, connecting seemingly unrelated concepts - while Land did not.
>>24947103all i've read from it were the two essays on Trakl but they were both revelations
>>24947103Capeshit
>>24947111Meltdown is his most famous essay I'd say. It's a fun read too.
I'm not reading Land, no matter how hard you keep shilling him here.
>>24947103>Had you properly studied the Critique of Pure Reason, Being and Time and some Nietzsche, this would be entirely intelligble to you, I assure you. Yes, you would see through Land as puffed up sophism.
Posting a Land thread should result in a range ban.
>>24947103>Classics>Heidegger >NEETcheEven more ironic that both those figures horribly misrepresent the classical tradition for their shitty modernist projects. THEY are in fact prime targets for the charge of destroying the West.
>>24947103Writing philosophy in english is like trying to make a painting with play doh
>>24947111Yes, also for me. The thing that I am admiring the most and which I think is truly his greatest strength is the capacity of assuming a totally unexpected angle on a given philosophical position/theme. The parallel between the three Critiques and the behaviour of capital in relation to itself, its subjects (under law) and alterity in general may not be entirely original but it's discussed really well, and rather simply.The thing that really got me is connecting patrilinear heritage, market laws, the role of women and revolutionary feminism towards the end - it's like watching a chess master doing a weird move you hadn't foreseen. And again: all these parallels are highly debatable, but that's sort of the point, i.e. to debate them and see where the discussion goes. It's really refreshing to read philosophy which tries to make unusual connections like these.
>>24947111>>24947115>>24947257Land pseuds need to get OFF my board. Back to >>>/pol/ and >>>/x/. You have no place here.
>>24947192Okay, brownoid
>>24947261reminder that Land has never, and I mean NEVER been debunked
>>24947261so why did i love his writing on Trakl if i hate /pol/ and pity /x/? maybe you should try reading him yourself.
>>24947123>>24947261sybau
