What is the Hypernormalisation of literature? Who are Adam Curtis' literary influences?

What is the Hypernormalisation of literature? Who are Adam Curtis' literary influences?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=x1bX3F7uTrg
youtube.com/watch?v=slZGYmwrPGI
foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/21/putin-has-finally-reincarnated-the-kgb-mgb-fsb-russia/
opendemocracy.net/od-russia/irina-borogan-andrei-soldatov/kremlin-versus-bloggers-battle-for-cyberspace
youtube.com/watch?v=VDXgG29tB3U
pando.com/2015/05/17/neocons-2-0-the-problem-with-peter-pomerantsev/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Adam Curtis is a hack who throws together tangentially related bits of information he read on wikipedia and then reads them all off over archival footage.

I just watched that yesterday, to bad Curtis is an infantile liberal globalist or it could have been a lot better. His central thesis is fundamentally wrong on many levels. He has a rather superficial understanding of the actual deep nature of the post-Bretton Woods world order. You can't just reduce and interpret everything to some generalized [engineered] disillusionment.

If you want to how deep things really go here's some reading to start you off with:

The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective
Wall Street's Think Tank: The Council on Foreign Relations and the Empire of Neoliberal Geopolitics, 1976-2014
The Making Of Global Capitalism: The Political Economy Of American Empire
Forces of Production: A Social History of Industrial Automation
American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan
The Dual State: Parapolitics, Carl Schmitt and the National Security Complex


Something to really look into is the deep role that organized crime played in what happened to the USA economy beginning with the '60s and '70s mergers and acquisitions booms and especially the '80s leveraged buy-out boom... "Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America's Hidden Power Brokers" would be a good place to start with that

>What is the Hypernormalisation of literature? Who are Adam Curtis' literary influences?
i dont know

>le conspiracy theorist face

holy shit, he has a new one. i know he quotes and likely misinterprets richard brautigan. probably a lot of hippy shit.
it's a bit more old school than wikipedia, but yeah, he's pulling a dumas and who can fault him

I hate this fucking hack to no end.

Here is a good YouTube video disseminating his hack talents;

youtube.com/watch?v=x1bX3F7uTrg

nice ad hominem shill

nice rec, thanks

adam hackurtis just read a book by zola one day and then made "deep" documentaries by mashing together a bunch of bbc archive footage

his only ok work is Bitter Lake, and that is more or less just footage

you mean dos passos

Surprised people hate him so much. His ideas are tangential and often quite shallow but his work is very imaginative and grips you - like a pop-psychology/philosophy lecture fused with a narrative. Better than most things on Netflix or any other modern BBC documentary.

That he posits authority by talking in that deliberate manner seems more like a satire of your old school RP BBC presenter to me.

Style, yes. Substance, not really. Reminds me a bit of those 'Very Short Introduction' books but with topics that cover broad cultural material.

Like a simpler Baudrillard essay.

Anyone know of any books that substantiate or go in depth with his claims regarding Vladislav Surkov's theatricality in politics?

I'd also like to know this.

Gripping is subjective.

And "Pop Philosophy" is full of wishful thinking and outright pap.

Plus, he's pushing the agenda of the globalist elites - which makes his work scarcely worthy of wiping your arse with, and his head scarcely worth putting on a pike.

>Plus, he's pushing the agenda of the globalist elites

And Trump is doing what?

thanks for sharing

this desu. a shitty knock off debord with none of the talent but plenty of inane bourgeois sensibilities.

Look at this dumb faggots face lol

HN was an attempt by Adam Curtis to influence the 2016 US presidential election...
but he failed like so many gay nigger faggots failed and continue to fail like gay nigger faggots always do.

MAGA

>And Trump is doing what?
The important thing, and why he ultimately won, was he openly questioned the value of globalization to the working class. The fact that in reality he is just being disingenuous and already filling his cabinet with free traders and ultra-liberals will just drive further contradictions in the system and expose the American political system as a gigantic joke and hopefully suck all the legitimacy out of the system.
Communism means full unemployed and no wages or other incomes. Nothing will be sold because no one has any income to buy; the entire world economy will have to disappear into a black hole. You will never get from capitalism to communism without a massive catastrophe and this might be the first real chance for a global catastrophe to unfold since 1929.

youtube.com/watch?v=slZGYmwrPGI

> just accept vanguardism and Marx's stages of history

not today satan

Not sure why everyone in this thread is calling Curtis a liberal when he spends almost the entirety of HN showing that the left wing has accomplished virtually nothing in 40 years.

That said I think HN is too bloated and The Trap is his best work, imo.

I think Adam Curtis was a bit hysterical when he described Putin and Surkov. They aren't exactly a new type of Russian, they are very similar to old Russians. The most bizarre claim he made is that no one knows what Russia wants in Syria, when Russia has historical connections to Syria and wishes for oil to continue to be shipped out of the country rather than transported via pipeline to Europe.

Andrei Soldatov is my favorite Russian reporter, specifically for security issues. These are two of his articles on Russian security, the second mentions Surkov briefly. He also has some good books, so I've heard, but I have not read them.

foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/21/putin-has-finally-reincarnated-the-kgb-mgb-fsb-russia/

opendemocracy.net/od-russia/irina-borogan-andrei-soldatov/kremlin-versus-bloggers-battle-for-cyberspace

This quote form the second article is relevant to Veeky Forums:

This boiled down to an aggressive invasion of discussion forums used by liberal commentators, where vulgar and indecent language and personal insults were used with the aim of scaring off contributors and even shutting down the forums completely. The idea was that self-respecting people would stop accessing forums where discussions were conducted in such a way.

He's a neocon at the most.

Once again, most of Veeky Forums doesn't know what it is talking about.

My first orgasm was to a series of 80s footage of New City in an Adam Curtis doc

Adam Curtis is interested in the cultural and political attitudes as they manifest in popular media. I always see the criticism that his footage is somehow unrelated to his narrative, when that couldn't be further from the truth; the footage IS the narrative. The are cultural artifacts he had culled directly from the periods he covers. If you don't think there's any significance that it was THIS material that precipitated out of the the sociopolitical climate then you're thinking very narrowly about cultural evolution and the 'intercausality' of events.

This, it's pretty clear throughout his works that he's not a liberal and I agree with you that HN is bloated - it went on for half an hour too long imo. Bitter Lake always stands out for me.

this

'all watched over' had fascinating material to work with and made little of it.

>dude ayn rand

Yeah Curtis really made an effort to shit on Tony Blair and the Labour party in his 90s/00s docs. I feel like politically he's somewhere in between, he sees how power corrupts on both ends.

>the footage IS the narrative
youtube.com/watch?v=VDXgG29tB3U

The bigger problems with his filmmaking aren't with the lack of continuity between his 'artifacts' and his facts. It's just so absorbed by this smug-self awareness that, despite being a left-ish network, the bbc and curtis refuse to provide any interesting or well-reasoned response or critique of the developments of the last 40 years.

It's a blunt kind of impartiality which does little more than shrug and mumble "if you can't beat them..." in the placid, comforting tones of a BBC journalist, while saturating your attention with too much information (the running time is grotesque) in order to prevent the viewer from forming any kind of reasonably informed opinion. His filmmaking techniques are no less deceiving than the spectacles constructed by Surkov

What is this book and why do I keep seeing it here?

>literally just watched this
I enjoyed it a lot but I understand the flack against him
Century of the self is amazing IMO it's what got me started
I feel bad though asking for literary reference to his style

who /chapo/ here

It's the new Infinite Jest of meme books but way shorter, readable, funny, etc.

I don't think you know what disseminate means

liberal is not left wing you yank twat

An user wrote it and he spams it every chance he gets.

What's the difference, and who/what defined the difference?

/thread

>there isn't a viable leftist revolutionary movement anymore, we're fucked!!!

When will this bullshit idea end among some factions in the academia that we need a violent ideology for the world to be a promising place?

Stasis is death

So? Egyptians lived under the same system twice as long as Western civilization.
Just the shifting of dynasties was the only alternation they ever saw.
The Meso- and Neolithic era saw just one mode of production for longer than civilization itself.

Honestly.

David Icke

>a promising place

I think you meant just a good place. A 'promising place' implies progress and the idea of progress ( historical progress ) is that which already is ideological, which is what drives that faction.

But I generally agree. We could do without dreams about society and focuss that inclination towards ourselves.
Just like it always was.

postmodernism at its best

Hey fuckface, everyone in the thread was calling him a liberal in this thread, not me. Also he spends quite some time shitting on both hippies and New Labour.

Perfect parody

Nothing is true and everything is possible by Peter Pomerantsev

they're literally going soft as we speak. the left is dust.

Hypernormalisation is an update of Century of the Self for the internet era. It doesn't say anything new. Century of the Self is his magnum opus and can't be improved upon. It does the same thing but much better, without unnecessarily tying it into the internet age. You can extrapolate that yourself. It doesn't really add anything, since aside from the internet itself, not much has changed since then. Do yourself a favor and watch the first episode, which is the only Adam Curtis documentary you will ever need to see.

Pol is strong here, huh...

I like them but since the election live show disaster things have been going steadily in the direction of daily show snark and otherwise making it more obvious they have zero impact on anything and wield no power at all.

It's a funny parody and I agree with what it says about Curtis's actual argumentation, but I genuinely like his style. He constructs complex dramas out of scattered bits of informational debris, making the irrelevant profound. It's not sincere or insightful but it is entertaining

its a comedy podcast you tankie moron, what do you expect?

The film is so Peter Sloterdijk

I'm not sure about his arguments but his way with archive footage is remarkable. Recommend watching the above film with a Vaporwave playlist for maximum aesthetics.

Everything is death.

That's probably the best book but Pomerantsev is a very overt neocon shill in favor of opening Russian industries to looters, only opposed to Putin because Putin and his allies ares raiding their industries first.

He also makes the same mistake of trying to sell Putin and Surkov as a new type of Cold Warrior when they are merely adopting American tactics brought into Russia by vulture capitalists by the Yeltsin administration.

pando.com/2015/05/17/neocons-2-0-the-problem-with-peter-pomerantsev/

>calling me a tankie
Well memed.

To be quite honest with you family, his point that people are somehow forced by media/interwebs to get their information only from channels that confirm their beliefs is pretty valid and easily justifiable.

We're truly living in an era that shuns the cognitive effort of being presented with arguments that counter their beliefs, we easily categorize that kind of information as offensive/false/discriminatory or other and put it to the side.

Best example for this is Google ads, that feed us products that interest is based on some profile, in that exact same way we're fed news, not to mention the way information is propagated on social media, same trends there.

An example to that is the Egyptian revolution during the Arab Spring.

I never knew Veeky Forums was so against Adam Curtis
I like him although I must admit he hits a lot of the same points in his documentaries

it's just backlash against his popularity since he is overrated by plebs

Disregarding someone because their popularity is so pathetic.
Do these people twirl their moustaches while writing Adam Curtis critique?

I was hoping the film would tackle this phenomenon and the whole 'cyberspace community' more but it was just kind of there to support the political events

Well it's a documentary that justifies some political events. Some user above talked about century of the self, that's more what you're looking for.

What Curtis does is pretty much the equivalent of most of the modern literary criticism essays I've read.

Disconnected ideas spun in a clever way that prove nothing.