Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
They didn't give him nearly enough time! RAGE!
what was he saying? presumably something incomprehensible, rambling, mental and probably meaningless?
-The 90s ideal of liberal, democratic capitalism and their supposedly symbiotic relationship (as envisioned by the breakup of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union) is beginning to vanish as China shows it can have a dynamic capitalism without democracy and as new types of "apartheid" appear in democratic states.
-The most pressing crises which affect us globally like climate change or the crisis of global capitalism are issues which EVERYBODY should have opinions on, and opinions on which they act, which are often at odds with the aims of democratic capitalism. But democratic capitalist states rob the commons of their voice by constantly deferring to experts who get no further with the debate and/or provide solutions which cannot be enacted by the state as it exists.
-By rigorous examination of the failings of the 20th centuries communist states, he hopes to find a way of applying the ideas of Marx to restoring the commons to power in addressing these issues which capitalist, democratic states are increasingly showing themselves to be unable to deal with.
And then just when it was getting interesting they cut him off in order to have a discussion on an MP calling John Bercow a "sanctimonious dwarf".
A genie tells a man he can have three wishes.
"Okay, my first wish," the man says, "Is to be Slavoj Zizek"
"You fool!" replies the genie. "You are already Slavoj Zizek!"
That is the joke.
"The Elvis of Cultural Theory"
Hilarious speaker, commentator on films, occasionally insightful (and ALWAYS insightful in his books) but mostly a massive and genuinely funny parody of himself, lisps a lot.
HE ISH VERY PROGRESHIV
HE HASH A WOMAN ASH THE LOOKOUT IN HISH BATTLE
SHE ISH THE COMMANDER
zizek: WE SHOULD GO TO THISH CAFE THEY DO A GREAT SHTEAK
producer, off camera: actually we're all vegetarains
zizek: DEGENERATESH. YOU'LL TURN INTO MONKEYSH.
any good youtube stuff you can recommend?
i mean i appreciate that there's still some sort of old fashioned continental style (read: polemical, obscurantist, shouty) philosophical icon around but i wish he'd just be a bit... clearer.
i'd watch The Pervert's Guide To Cinema, preferably twice. And then if you're interested in the Marxist political stuff, read First As Tragedy, Then As Farce. And if you're interested in the psychoanalysis stuff try Introducing Lacan (which in typical Zizek style turns out to have very little to do with Lacan but is very good).
Most of the clips of him on youtube are very very funny. "There ish a small, fat panda, who wants to be kung fu master - thish ish parable of modern democracy."
HE HAS PHALLUSH!
All this is good, particularly from about 4.30 where he talks about Kung Fu Panda :D
His books are so stupid as to beggar belief but he's an entertaining lad.
and he's friends with Laibach.
kinda imagine everyone in Slovenian knows each other though
he was a scientist that got really pissed of at post-modern cultural-theory jargon, so he came up with this fake thesis called....i dunno....'transgressing the boundaries of....' something, etc etc
anyone know what i'm talking about?
i think of him a lot when i read lyotard
I distrust people who take Zizek seriously, because he is very much in the vein of the worst kinds of postmodern thinking.
a lot of his stuff on ideology is interesting and well regarded
i distrust people who say roberto bolano is their fav writer
i guess we all got our axes to grind
the beeb has the habit of treating them at best, as an entertaining sideshow, at worst like a piece of shit.
Thing with Zizek is, hes at his best when hes given an unprovocative statement and left to ramble about why its actually total evil.
Anglo-American way of thinking about philosophy. Not just the BBC.
the establishment here (with one or two noble exceptions) continues to reject continental philosophy, even though some of it is now like, half a century old or more.
rejecting post-modern thinking is basically counter to societal progress, it's a desperately conservative attempt to ignore a new way of thinking about how the world is structured and the way people think, and it's deeply deeply boring.
its not that continental philosophy is rejected... just that it doesn't fit as well into the regarded academic institution as analytical. theres no possible way to teach it or mark it... its not as scientific in that respect. theres no way or churning out Firsts in continental philosophy so there are no institutionally accepted continentals.
that doesn't mean its not considered or appreciated. In fact in my opinion anybody studying philosophy academically needs to take it with a pinch of salt... its a framework or a method. its precisely the act of the process of refinement and argument... therapy as wittgenstein said... that you need to get a grip on before you can think about things properly.
im pretty disillusioned with the whole thing to be honest. they constantly tell you 'the whole point of philosophy is not to get answers and not to change anything... its basically just the art of good argument.' I'm not so sure. i guess it serves their purpose to say that.
but I think the beeb has to be called out as a particular culprit in this manner. Doesnt help that Zizek is very critical of notions of liberal tolerance that the bbc feels it has to adhere to in order to avoid the wrath of ofcom.
Without wanting to get into a large debate about this, the reason that most continental (non-analytical philosophy) is not taken seriously is not any kind of intellectual snobbery. You're talking about a fundamental disagreement about the nature of truth and proof, where those philosophies which aren't taken seriously are those that are either so obtuse as to be useless in any practical sense (see: much of what followed Derrida) or which denies that premises leads to conclusions, the whole foundation of analytical trends (again, see: much of what followed Derrida).
It's not true that British universities reject anything non-Anglo-American straight off - examples include the increasing appreciation of Merleau-Ponty amongst philosophers dealing with aesthetics and sensory perception, the continuing respect afforded to Sartre, and the disproportionate (compared to the general population, that is) love found for Hegel and Marx. What does get rejected is that which is so obtuse (like Zizek) as to be banal at best, pointless at worst.
I would also like to point out that the three propositions in your final paragraph are examples of rational fallacies (to whit, an appeal to novelty, a straw man argument, and an ad hominem attack). But then if you're endorsing continental trends as broadly as you appear to be then these sorts of rational counters are presumably invalid in some way...
vis a vis the nature of truth and proof are far more useful and practical than continuing a vague, rhetorical and essentially meaningless quest for logocentricism.
with this in mind, Zizek becomes much more useful. Philosophy of culture and inter-disciplinary thinking isn't obtuse; it's fruitful and makes plenty more sense at understanding a cracked multitude of realities and the way they operate at an everyday level (ideology particularly) than a continuing analytical project.
he is brilliant. I don't know a great deal about his actual philosophy though, and I find it kinda hard to believe people take him seriously.
cruel axing of Zizek.
Word on the street is he'll be on This Week tonight with Andrew Neill and Portillo!