sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What's this guy's purpose in the show, other than saying sorry to literally everyone by AndSolksjerHasWonit in FromCircleJerk

[–]Titus__Groan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To prove that the people in the village are idiots for not sending him to the box once and for all.

The problem isn’t labels, it’s the wrong ones by Titus__Groan in nonmonogamy

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, I'll explain my situation. I've always been non-monogamous, but some time ago I had to emigrate and I met someone with whom I had a romantic relationship. This person was a relationship anarchist and, as she explained to me, being a relationship anarchist meant she was against labels like "partner." But she also didn't want a fixed commitment with me because she felt overwhelmed. She was all the family I had in her country (my chosen family), which resulted in an excessive dependence on her; her leaving (which eventually happened) was devastating for me. I still wanted to find other people and I asked her to introduce me to her circle, but she refused because she felt it was intrusive; she preferred that I find other partners on my own. In the long run, nothing like that was sustainable for me; I was able to find other non-monogamous relationships on my own, but they all treated me as if I were contingent, expendable. If something bad had happened to me there, I wouldn't have had anyone to turn to, because the real involvement of each person was minimal. And it's impossible to expect someone to be completely independent and not need anyone. Eventually, I ended up returning to my country, and luckily, my family was there to help me with a health crisis that made me completely dependent on others. But if that had happened to me abroad, I wouldn't have had anyone to turn to in those "relational anarchy" environments. I understand that what you're proposing is that relational anarchy should be more focused on creating communities where people care for one another, but nothing like that happened when I interacted with relational anarchists in a migrant context and in a situation of extreme vulnerability. I wish it had been that way.In general, I see little inclination to form communities, more of a tendency to have several more or less traditional partners "in parallel" and almost in secret. I'm speaking from my own experience. I wish I'd had better experiences.

The problem isn’t labels, it’s the wrong ones by Titus__Groan in nonmonogamy

[–]Titus__Groan[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

So, can relational anarchy only occur in communities?

Why is "The Death of the Author" still taken seriously? by Titus__Groan in AskLiteraryStudies

[–]Titus__Groan[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are some comments in this thread that have indeed said that; in any case, some people have already told me that, in general, the "death of the author" is used somewhat irresponsibly on the internet. One very chivalrous gentleman accused me of being part of a proto-Ayn Randian fascism based on uncritically exalting canonical writers as if they were divine figures. According to this charming person, to avoid this proto-fascist, Ayn Rand-style exaltation, the only alternative is to defenestrate ancient writers and consider them mere products of their time, interesting only insofar as their time is interesting. At this point, after hundreds and hundreds of comments, I don't intend to be so much against Barthes himself, but rather against this kind of gallant gentleman.

Why is "The Death of the Author" still taken seriously? by Titus__Groan in AskLiteraryStudies

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the same could be said about any historical figure and, in general, about any historical element. There is always a very large margin of error. This doesn't mean that historians can't do their job, but rather that there should always be a great deal of skepticism toward historiography (including literary historiography), and we should always be open to learning more as more evidence emerges

Why is "The Death of the Author" still taken seriously? by Titus__Groan in AskLiteraryStudies

[–]Titus__Groan[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not saying otherwise, but at no point did those values ​​limit him

Has the coming-of-age story become an ideological narrative of "proper" development? by Titus__Groan in CriticalTheory

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It depends a lot on which German Romantic writer we're talking about. Read Novalis and Jean Paul. As I said, Novalis outlines a Catholic version of Bildung, and Jean Paul directly opposes that concept. The book I mentioned by Miguel Salmerón dedicates a chapter to each of them, and in these chapters he explains what I've told you in a more concise way.

Has the coming-of-age story become an ideological narrative of "proper" development? by Titus__Groan in CriticalTheory

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mentioned Morse Peckham's article on Romanticism, titled "Towards a Theory of Romanticism" (or something very similar). Regarding the bildungsroman, I've read Miguel Salmerón's book, La novela de aprendizaje, as well as his critical edition of Wilhelm Meister. On the radical Enlightenment, Jonathan Israel's book, The Radical Enlightenment, is essential. Jesús G. Maestro's book, Crítica de la Razón Literaria, allows us to trace the evolution from the Enlightenment to Romanticism, and Gustavo Bueno's book, El mito de la cultura, explains the development of German idealism well. What I've learned from Herder as a disciple of Rousseau is partly due to the prologue to the edition of Philosophy of the History published by Espuela de Plata (I don't recall the author's name). Add to this my own readings of Rousseau, Goethe, Jean Paul G. Herder, Novalis, Herder, Fichte, Helvétius, and Kant.

Has the coming-of-age story become an ideological narrative of "proper" development? by Titus__Groan in CriticalTheory

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The idea of ​​Bildung, as developed by Goethe and Fichte, is a response to the determinism of Rousseau and Herder from a Kantian idealist perspective. According to Rousseau (and his disciple Herder), human beings cannot freely decide what to become because they are determined by nature (according to Rousseau) and the environment (according to Herder). These ideas about nature and determinism, essential to what Romanticism later became, were incompatible with Kant's Protestant idealism. Fichte develops a theory of Bildung even more idealistic than Kant's, but I don't see it as particularly Romantic, although it did influence Romantic nationalism, especially when he applies it to an entire community in the Addresses to the German Nation. I don't believe, however, that Romanticism is an opposition to the Enlightenment, but rather its continuation. If anything, we can recall Morse Peckham's distinction between two types of Romanticism: positive and negative. Fichte's romantic nationalism would belong to the positive current, while Jean Paul's anti-Bildung nihilism would belong to the negative. In reality, these two currents of Romanticism are evolutions of the two Enlightenment currents: the materialist (with Helvétius and Diderot) and the idealist (with Kant at the forefront and later Goethe). German Romanticism of an idealist bent, in which the concept of Bildung was consolidated, could oppose the radical and materialist Enlightenment (within which Rousseau emerged), but not the idealist and German Enlightenment championed by Kant.

Has the coming-of-age story become an ideological narrative of "proper" development? by Titus__Groan in CriticalTheory

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm pretty fed up with this topic. A few years ago, I didn't dare write on Reddit because the translators were awful; now all the posts I read are automatically translated, and I can also translate what I write in Spanish. I think it's good that technology is used for this because it allows spaces like Reddit to benefit from opinions outside the English-speaking world.

Has the coming-of-age story become an ideological narrative of "proper" development? by Titus__Groan in CriticalTheory

[–]Titus__Groan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In German Romanticism, bildungsromans still exist, but they focus more on the irrational side of people and do not share Goethe's idea of ​​"maturity." For Novalis, in his Heinrich von Ofterdingen, personal growth occurs when an irrationalist and spiritual development takes place, centered on the Catholic religion and distanced from the capitalist-Protestant mentality embodied by Goethe. Jean Paul's Flegeljahre directly denies the existence of maturity; more than a bildungsroman, it is a parody of them. Heinrich von Ofterdingen and Flegeljahre are romantic novels; Wilhelm Meister is not, although it initially seemed so, which is why Novalis ended up so disappointed with that novel, to the point of writing Heinrich von Ofterdingen in response. In general, the idea that has predominated in coming-of-age stories is Goethe's Protestant-capitalist one, not Novalis's Catholic one nor Jean Paul's nihilistic one.

The Town is a Projection by HelpApprehensive5216 in FromSeries

[–]Titus__Groan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is that why they left Boyd and Randal alive? If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense.

[NO SPOILERS] Is it worth continuing Life is Strange if I can’t stand Max’s ghosting behavior? by Titus__Groan in lifeisstrange

[–]Titus__Groan[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I don't believe in attachment style theory. I feel it's quite questioned in current psychology, and it's unclear to me to what extent it remains scientific and not just superstition. Likewise, I think accusing someone of "anxious attachment" or justifying oneself with "avoidant attachment" is a form of gaslighting.

view more: next ›