I was thinking of picking up these bad boys

you could spend the time taken to read that murakami novel with a big book that is actually good. I read it and while it may be cute at times, a large portion of it is interminably boring, the prose is fairly boring, and there is an absolutely meaningless sex scene between an old blind dude and an 8 year old girl. honestly that is the only part of the novel I remember. and I constantly confuse 1q84 with it. he seriously just writes the same thing over and over. read ulysses or some good meme the same size

someone told me it was a philosophical mind fuck. So I'm guessing it won't be anything like blade runner, ghost in the shell, serial experiments lain, or neon genesis evangelion?

don't tell us what to know you fucking nazi shit

Hu. It's kinda refreshing to hear the old nazi jokes again.

>philosophical mind fuck
>blade runner, ghost in the shell, serial experiments lain, or neon genesis evangelion
oh my god youre obnoxious

Cut him some slack, he is apparently not very well-read.

Dude, I fully accept my naivety and ignorance, I'm just your average man, I make nothing more of myself than that. So I don't appreciate what you're doing, but in spite of how I don't like the way you're talking to me, maybe there's somewhere between the divide where I can fish out something of worth from you. Do you think you can try to have a productive, intelligent conversation with me? Please, don't be afraid, but please don't be rude.

'The Ego and His Own' is a top tier book.

>Cioran
A+ choice, mom's proud of you
>Dada book about Tzara
progenitors of the modern """"art""""" cliquefaggotry meme, great for bonfires
>French post-structuralists
frauds like the dadaists
>Burroughs
I really enjoyed Interzone and Naked Lunch, never read these ones though
>Murakami
fluff
>Stirner
SPOOKS! I need to get around to reading this myself

Im sorry. Read Kafka on the Shore instead of WindUp Bird.

modern art is better than you faggot

cookie-cutter Veeky Forums opinions for the young and insecure

Society is always imposing restrictions and constraints on the individual.

Authority is a right, a right to make decisions on behalf of others, and enforce those decisions if necessary.

Any time someone implies that you ought to do this, or ought to refrain from that, because it's in the interest of society, they are attempting to get you to put society above your own self interest, and that is a type of authority because they are making decisions on your behalf and there is enforcement. Sometimes the enforcement may just be social pressure, but often it is violence.

You're drawing a distinction without a difference.

>>Dada book about Tzara
>progenitors of the modern """"art""""" cliquefaggotry meme, great for bonfires
I actually really like post modernism and the idea that knowledge and reason betray the senses. The dadaists and post modernists are at the forefront of some of my favorite art movements, like the early industrial music scene with genesis p orridge and william s burroughs. I believe that scene is also associated heavily with dadaism, the precursor to that. So for me, the william s burroughs books are a further exploration into this realm of thought. I also want to get some more books by nietzsche. I've been flirting with the idea of insanity lately, I sometimes wish that I could go insane, besides the fact that insanity is probably a scary thing, which I think is why the mind sub consciously defends against it. I believe nietzsche went insane, I feel like I've been close to it a few times in my life, but I feel like I'd really be pushed over the edge if I tried marijuana again. I like the sub conscious and the rejection of authority, and the rejection of society most of all, I like subversion and I hate justice. So, maybe you can understand why these things would interest me.

I suppose. I guess the distinction I was trying to make was between authority over another person and authority over yourself. Though I admit that the line is getting thin here.

My real complaint is that people try to read Stirner as an arnachist first and foremost, which I somewhat automatically assume someone is doing when mentioning Stirner in the same sentence as the ominous "authority". I disagree with that notion.

>paying money for information because you are sentimental about fondling dead trees

dadaism is based, it's like [s4s] avant la lettre, dank nihilist memes

Fair enough. I read Stirner as a nihilist first and foremost, and anarchist as a logical consequence of that.

kek.

How could someone reject modern art? The idea that art can be non representational and come directly from the consciousness and reject the ego is an astonishingly intelligent idea. Just look at a piece of modern art, it can evoke your emotions without having it represent something. Just think about how much more of an impact on your sub conscious mind this sort of artwork can have, that's where the action happens, that's where the motor runs, is in your sub conscious mind. That's what I believe modern art is, and I think if you reject modern art, you're either extremely opinionated and biased, or you're just a philistine and you don't appreciate art. I do.

How to be rebellious and not normie

>I feel like I've been close to it a few times in my life, but I feel like I'd really be pushed over the edge if I tried marijuana again. I like the sub conscious and the rejection of authority, and the rejection of society most of all, I like subversion and I hate justice. So, maybe you can understand why these things would interest me.
Not that guy, but you seem a bit blue eyed and 18-years-old. Keep reading until you are a boring cunt like all of us.

>Fair enough. I read Stirner as a nihilist first and foremost, and anarchist as a logical consequence of that.
I agree that nihilism is a much better approach: "Ich hab mein' Sach' auf Nichts gestellt." basically gives it away. (Or was it "nichts"? Stirner is sometimes arbitrary when capitalizing stuff.) "My cause stands on nothing/nothingness." is a decent translation, I think. But anarchism is not really the way to go from there, because Stirner does not really make an attempt of forming a new society (other than the somewhat half-assed "unity of the voluntary egoists"), and much rather describes how an individual lives within society. The Unique One and His Property can and should not be read as some kind of manifesto for a movement, it is a work for the individual, and it is aware that it wouldn't work on a societal scale - this is what, for me, departs Stirner from Rand. (That and I really like the cut of Stirner's jib.)

>I think if you reject modern art, you're either extremely opinionated and biased
Being opinionated and biased is exactly what differentiates 'good taste' from mouth-breathing morons like you.

And you've just sacrificed any possibility of an intelligent discussion. Way to go, being the exact opposite of what you pretend to be.

>referring to books as "bad boys"

mmmm

Junky really made me hate junkies.

drip drip in the slit
das it
full lit

cioran was a whiny shit who produced nothing of value. the only reason so many Veeky Forumsizens enjoy his works is because they, too, are whiny shits who produce nothing of value.

lookit them bad boys.
better pick those up before I do, brother.

all are shit

wow

polite sage

I was thinking of leave me out of it

>I've been flirting with the idea of insanity lately, I sometimes wish that I could go insane
Just pop some shrooms you insufferable bourgeois cunt

>come directly from the consciousness and reject the ego is an astonishingly intelligent idea
Yes, it is. It's in execution that we run into problems. In many ways the ego is required to give form to substance. And your consciousness is in expression nonetheless still distorted through the matrix of motor function and spatial awareness.

man people really love using that word. lemme just say fuck you, you fill my head with muck every time I have to think of the idea of you.