Peter Sotos

I honestly don't think it matters if he is a pedophile. He's definitely got some screwballs rolling around in that noggin, they explain his ability to empathize with the violent and "sexually aberrant." He writes like he is one, that is, he writes like he has experienced living with a sexuality (whether it's pedophilia or sadism or the cross-wiring of the two) that society, law, and most other people are "horrified" by.

I sort of read "Pure" like I watched that British TV show "The Fall." Rather than a human monstrosity revelation, it's a work that exposes the creators denial of and simultaneous need for serious psychological treatment. But I would say that Sotos needs a psychologist as little as Allan Cubitt, since he seems to understand why he only enjoys sadistic fantasies, and not actual sadism. I've never talked to either though, so it's impossible to tell unless I do or until they evince a confusion of fantasy and reality (actually going out to rape-murder "kiddies").

No problema cabron. I hope you have a better time finding it than I did, had to order it through amazon and it still had a bookmark from its originating Floridian indie tomeshop.

That middle part is a little unclear. I mean, the fact that the creators of these works understand their sexual deviations as unhealthy is apparent in their work. They use their art to work through their "demons," rather than using a psychologist. As long as that works for the person, it's no problem, regardless of what "experts" say is the "generally best course of treatment" for X, Y, or Z deviance.

>Violence porn has been around since the earliest proliferation of the printing press.

Yes, but violence or detailed descriptions of forced acts never go beyond a sentence or two.

I have all of his books in digital format. They're interesting in the sense of "wow! this actually exists!" but their literary value must not be overstated.

Sotos has said a number of times he's writing his own fantasies in his books and considers people obsessed with "scratching the surface" a bunch of absolute morons.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes a boy bleeding from his anus while his drunk stepfather rapes him is just a boy bleeding from his anus while his drunk stepfather rapes him.

If you see that as a deconstruction of neo-colonialist politics or whatever then you're no better than the people who gave Butters the Nobel Prize for Literature.

>I have all of his books in digital format.
did you acquire them privately or is there somewhere to get them? I only ever see the Pure zines and Gates of Janus stuff.

There are ballads with entire passages of description devoted to the manner and physical facts of murder, e.g. Blaise Endres's spree killings. Both the killings themselves and Endres's execution are not only described in graphic detail, but are also accompanied by colored woodcuts.

Granted, the execution of the perpetrator was often expressed much more gratuitously than the murders. Early modern violence porn took the form of illustrations of the murderer's execution. There has simply been, through about 500 years of media creation, a lifting of the taboo on exploiting "unchristian" murders.

1. Go to:
>8
>ch
>.
>net

(sigh)

2. Go to the board "pdfs". Not "pdf" but "pdfs".

3. Go to catalog.

4. Ctrl + F "Sotos".

Boom!

The guy hangs out with Steve Albini, his work is his work. I don't think he's some disgusting sadist. I doubt Albini would keep the company of some sick pervert.

ah, unless I'm missing something this isn't his complete works and it's the same stuff you can find on slsk. this looks like Pure, Parasite, interview, Ian Brady afterword, and a few odds and ends. His bibliography is spotty but he has at least another dozen full-length books than what's listed there.

I doubt Steve cares enough to moralize over the whole thing. There are numerous people on the internet who describe Sotos as a pleasant guy to talk to. It doesn't really mean a thing.

>I've only read a little bit of his work and to be honest it's too disgusting for me to persevere through

I feel the same. The immediate wrong answer to a why would be that I think it's immoral or whatever. But when I really question myself about why I don't like it- I find it to be a purely aesthetic judgment. I think he's a bad artist. I feel same about filmmaker Gaspar Noe. I like shocking, I like taboo subjects, but they have to be done right. Kubrick, Nabakov, Salinger or Lynch are people who come to mind as people who got it right. That is- tackling those kinds of subjects. Not trying to compare sotos to a Master- that's unfair- but it's a good reference for understanding the difference between a momentary interest and a work of art that will stand the test of time.

Steve Albini IS a sick pervert.

Dude, Incredible

Have you read Albini's diary?
He wrote a lot about masturbating to child porn zines.

Irreversible is one of the most important works of art in any medium of the last two decades though. If you'd have said, Serbian Film, I'd be all in.

Truth. Most of his other films are shit, but Irreversible is more or less flawless. Even Ebert, who notoriously quavered in the face of intense violence, considered it a great film.
>inb4 "lmao you take a dead jawless fag's opinions seriously"

He also has a lot to say about the nature of art, specifically the image--photographs. I find that he echoes a lot of pomo thinking, but develops his ideas in a completely different way than any academic would. I think that he and Bennett are contemporary postmodern thinkers, but they refuse to be seen that way.

Also, he writes a lot about the nature of interviews and how they shape the resulting narrative. I'm reading Mine right now and the whole thing is an interview. It helps to read his other material first in order to get a handle on some of his philosophy.

I only mention him cuz he's worth mentioning, and if there was anything of real worth by Gaspar it's the short film Carne.

Irreversible is kind of a headache. And there are just straight boring parts

Noe is so based, he used infrasound to make the descent into the Inferno-esque gay dungeon that much more uncomfortable. If it was a headache, it was supposed to be. The film is supposed to make you queasy and squeamish.

Pardon - I didn't mean violence in general. I should've stated that I meant 'forced submission' of a girl or lengthy dominance and rape. I haven't read much Marquis de Sade or 50 Shades (I never plan to), but I'm curious to know if there are other authors who are into capturing and taking innocent maidens.

Beyond a line and a half.

I'm curious about Peter Sotos, so thank you for the introduction.

Sounds annoying

I haven't but now that I know that I don't want to.

And Noe is another peer of Sotos.

>gay dungeon

drop it like its hot

thanks for the info! about to take a peek into both and vampire movies

thanks for the info! will look into both this week, when i'm fully awake :) hm!

>And there are just straight boring parts
come on, you can do better than that. at least call the reverse timeline a gimmick or something. calling something "boring" is the weakest complaint imaginable.

/).(\ hold me

youtube.com/watch?v=M-3qVqM4VBM
wasn't he fired from Whitehouse years ago ?

he was with them off and on from like '84 to '03. dunno what resulted in him leaving but near the end of his stint he wasn't even playing an instrument, just trying to provoke people by spitting on them and shit.

He documented his take on leaving in a section of Selfish, Little. WH documented their side of it on a track or two after he left.

>just trying to provoke people by spitting on them and shit.
Why was he doing that?

>he wasn't even playing an instrument, just trying to provoke people by spitting on them and shit.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

He played the Derider (or maybe the Derrida?)

>WH documented their side of it on a track or two after he left.
what, ruthless babysitting?

the music is confrontational and vicious. it just comes with the territory. it'd be more upsetting if everyone was calmly sitting around while listening to "A Cunt Like You" at ear-splitting volume.

What the fuck is an endgame?

endgame; end game conditions; what criteria need to be met for him to have fulfilled his purpose; goal.

>petet soros
Fucking Jew Illuminati pizza kike

Steve always shouted some offensive shit hoping that people would get triggered by it. Have you ever heard some of his live shows with his band Big Black? The guy is extremely edgy.

>ywn be this untalented and annoying
feels good desu

Watch this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=WpJVnQMk1RQ

He sounds like a genuinly nice guy and he explains why he does what he does. He is not some sick child pedophile or anything else. Just watch the video.

>He is not some sick child pedophile or anything else
Have you ever met an actual pedophile? Do you think they have horns on their heads or something?
They are often just like that: the genuinely nice guy next door, who says hi to the kids in the courtyard and in private jerk off while fantasizing of having sex with them.

t. person who did not watch the video. he explains it in the beginning you lazy fuck.

Oh god, so he's just a neurotic sadsack who takes his misanthropy out in his art.

t. person who believes the excuses of a sick child pedophile and most likely something else
I mean, he just spells it out in his speech, creamed in apologism:
"I know what child pornography is, because I know what the appeal is. Hopefully you can separate the author from the draw --- I have done my best to keep these thoughts as real as words only."

Section from Predicate

Not excusing his crime, but he was the first person in the history of the United States to be convicted of possession of the pornography he was busted with. This was far from common law in the early 1980s.

Outside of that he is fairly interesting, very funny in person, and he's a hell of a writer whether you are interested in his subjects or not.

i still don't really get him. though it's embarressing how he can't go one sentence without saying "fucking" like a fucking 16 year old.

not as untalented and annyoing as you, twat.

Well he's mad

>He's a total libertine.
`meaning a a beta

>having something in your art means you endorse or sympathize with it

i don't care. i don't want to read about gay shit. it ruins everything. no need to see or read.

>He sounds like a genuinly nice guy and he explains why he does what he does. He is not some sick child pedophile or anything else. Just watch the video.

Fuck off, loser.

goddamnit

I think most of his most important themes are largely overlooked ...Boredom, self love due to self hate, the impotent wish for power worship.

also parttaking in a lifestyle that breeds degeneration. using the same words, going to the same places, looking at the same pictures. creating a sort of psychotic nest for himself

>self love due to self hate

By "self love" do you mean psychopathy?

(possible explaination) i think what peter does is to "explode" and to examine an underground subculture, to make sense of his desires through writing. he probably does love indulging himself with cocks but i don't know about "love".

So by "self love" you mean "desire love" which for him takes the form of "cock love"?

it's complicated because he's clearly fucking the men out of hatred but he loves recording the degradation