I haven't read a Stephen King book since like high school, but I liked the idea of the book so I gave it a shot. It's actually really good. I like how he didn't dick around for a 100 pages before the dome drops.....you start reading and boom, things start to get crazy.

I'm on page 750.

Can't wait for the HBO series that King said is in the works.

krastian! Haven't seen you round here in a time - how you been?

The Tropic of Cancer (a re-read)

Not too bad....just busy with work and whatnot.

Thought I'd stop by and shoot the shit.

250 pp into Imperial by Wm Vollmann, that's like 1/4 of it, the guy is a sadist, but I like it. It's almost too heavy to read in bed....

I just finished that today. I really liked it, especially his stuff on education, which i thought was spot on.

I read Alain Badiou's book on Sarkozy too, which I didn't really get into. I finished it but it was a bit of a slog, even for just over a hundred pages.He just seemed to be making the same point over and over again.

some poe...some whitman...keeping it 19th century for the winter

Shatner is the man.

Belladonna

who was it that was reading the psychic soviet? my copy just arrived yesterday and holy shit is it great.

At times the language/vibe of the book reminds me of a horror novel because he loathes tennis so much.

Big props to Andre for writing this himself and not getting a ghost writer....it is a really smooth and enjoyable read.

Currently reading this:




after a tiny feeling of disappointment about The Collector.

What is it? Sci-Fi? Horror? What?

Tripe.

Yeah, the Magus is the absolute paradigm of overwrought tosh.

The Fall of the Towers by Samuel R. Delany

I haven't read The Magus in years but I do remember really liking it at the time (which would've been about twenty odd years ago). Probably best that I leave it at that. Maybe if I read it again now I'd feel different.:confused:

i have spent months reading blogs that reference things i don't understand, at a loss as to which direction in philosophy to start in, i had a period were i thought i needed to work at hegel then marx but now i'm not so drawn to that area. i tried to have a go at badiou's theoretical writings but lack the proper conceptual grounding. when i have the net back i may try again since i can google at it to see if it opens up more. but at the moment i am very, very, interested in agamben/tiqqun and the points at which they converge. that, and gaining some sort of basic idea about what the hell speculative realism is all about. i've sustained myself thusfar on zizek and now have some slight insight into deleuze and a faint idea about what lacan was on about, altho i fear delving into him now when i have so much else to do. so first task is to get grounded in agamben and find the part of his work i have been obsessed with after reading an excerpt of on a blog and then forgetting.

I'm not qualified in any of this but I suppose a lot of the problems that come from starting with writers like Deleuze, Badiou, Zizek, etc, is that they all assume that their readers have an understanding of earlier more foundational writers and traditions. Glice, PBradley and some others here would be able to offer some good advice on that topic, although I imagine the best place to start would be with the Greeks.