“They saw their injured country's woe;
The flaming town, the wasted field;
Then rushed to meet the insulting foe;
They took the spear, - but left the shield.”
Pfft! :-)))And why not "literature of inka"? ;-)
Are they self-proclaimed communists, too?
My comment was a doubt that Zizek know something... anything, about "soviet literature"? ;-P
I have no doubt that his lnowledge is much more than extensive than my own.
Well. Of course. Cause your knowledge is pretty much unexistant.Well."In this video, philosopher Slavoj Žižek discusses his favorite Soviet Russian authors of the 20th century. He mentions Andrei Platonov as one of the greatest Soviet Russian authors of the 20th century and recommends reading his work to understand the "demonic side" of the twenties. He also mentions Varlam Shalamov as a writer he appreciates but finds too "soft humanist" in his approach. Žižek goes on to suggest that it is not simply a black-and-white image of good versus bad when it comes to Soviet writers, and that even some official Soviet writers had a minimum of honor. He ends by provoking viewers by stating that "Quietly Flows the Dawn" is a better novel than "Dr. Zhivago" and that he finds Anna Akhmatova to be "endlessly pretentious.""It pretty much explains it... his alignment in general.But... current events will make, already making... it all pretty much obsolete. ;-P
\\Žižek goes on to suggest that it is not simply a black-and-white image of good versus bad when it comes to Soviet writers, That is logically flawed. Derpy-style.Like he talking about ALL "Soviet writers"... while he operating just a very limited set of so-called dissident writers.It's like say that autor of "Simpsons"... is ALL what one need to know about USA. ;-P(or even better... autor(s) of South Park ;-) )
You could certainly do worse. Those are some of the best shows on television "High art" it is NOT. ;)
The point is to aspire to high art. Opera sans Supertitles, in German, Italian, French, Russian... to be fluid in all languages without Google translate. Like Zizek.
To read the great books and authors in the original Greek, Latin, Hebrew...
Not to study some narrow aspect of nuclear physics and work on brute- forcing some obscure new particle with a $5 billion contraption, one among the thousands of researchers at CERN.
The Hyperculture of data mining isn't worth 5 more minutes of my life.
I'd much rather walk into the Guggenheim, and not want to read a single placard next to a painting.
Finding the "Road to Larissa" without Google Maps.
\\You could certainly do worse. Those are some of the best shows on television "High art" it is NOT. ;)Unrepresentative subset.That is ALL what I have had meant.And devastative -- as you have near Zero knowledge about WHOLE.That is as in my talk with "intellectually honests Dems"... when they startted bragging that they know ALL about Russians... because they watched (with comments) some obscure and old film...about Ivan the Terrible ;-PThat is like learning about USA... from Fenimor Cooper. :-))))\\The point is to aspire to high art. Opera sans Supertitles, in German, Italian, French, Russian... to be fluid in all languages without Google translate. Like Zizek.Hah :-)))))))))\\To read the great books and authors in the original Greek, Latin, Hebrew...Unrepresentative subset. Again.
So what would your Emersonian "representative subset" look like?
Dunno.It's all so new to me. :-/
Ortega y Gasset, "Revolt of the Masses"As they say in the United States: "to be different is to be indecent." The mass crushes beneath it everything that is different, everything that is excellent, individual, qualified and select. Anybody who is not like everybody, who does not think like everybody, runs the risk of being eliminated. And it is clear, of course, that this "everybody" is not "everybody." "Everybody" was normally the complex unity of the mass and the divergent, specialized minorities. Nowadays, "everybody" is the mass alone. Here we have the formidable fact of our times, described without any concealment of the brutality of its features.— Chapter 1, "The Coming of the Masses"The Fascist and Syndicalist species were characterized by the first appearance of a type of man who "did not care to give reasons or even to be right", but who was simply resolved to impose his opinions. That was the novelty: the right not to be right, not to be reasonable: "the reason of unreason."— Chapter 8, "Why the Masses Intervene in Everything and Why They Always Intervene Violently"As for "mediocrity"...
Yawn... Evolution. "Strength in Numbers". Like lemmings. ;-P
"The Ortega hypothesis holds that average or mediocre scientists contribute substantially to the advancement of science. According to this hypothesis, scientific progress occurs mainly by the accumulation of a mass of modest, not so intelligent, narrowly specialized intellectual contributions. On this view, major breakthroughs draw heavily upon a large body of minor and little-known work, without which the major advances could not happen.Cit"Ehm???Isn't that self-evidant?Well, it formulated wrongly.Like that is some carpenters or potters, blacksmiths??? who do that "modest, not so intelligent, narrowly specialized intellectual contributions"... :-))))))))))))))))))))
Russians today must truely appreciate the impact of the weight of a tank on a muddy Ukrainian plain... mud 8-10 feet deep.
"Bullet summary:- The narrator is a sick and spiteful man who has never consulted a doctor out of spite- He used to work in government service and took pleasure in being rude to petitioners- He is now retired and lives in a wretched room with a smelly servant- He believes that too much consciousness is a disease and sinks into his mire of ugliness when he is most conscious of goodness and beauty- He has always hidden this fact about himself as a secret and enjoys his return home to his corner- He refuses to leave Petersburg despite the expense.":-))))))))))))))))))Well. Outdated.That is how it was year ago. In time of first ossensive.This time RFia trying to concentrate alogn paths with asphalt roads.Around Bahmut. ;-)
Funny, I found the narrator much akin to the mass (underground)-man of today. Lonely, isolated, resentful, devoid of life. He's make a great left-wing internet troll...
Yap... globalization. ;-P
Post a Comment