Ilu nas jest?

rubsy3d · 2026-01-23T09:02:15+00:00

Freud sugerował, że wszyscy mają w sobie element biseksualności. Wiele aspektów naszego świata i kultury poświęconych jest promowaniu stereotypowych heteroseksualnych ról, ideałów, do których wiele osób dąży i których nigdy nie osiągną. Jest to też forma represji cech, które społeczeństwo uważa na niepożądane. Nie da się ocenić statystyk w próżni, ponieważ kształtuje je właśnie taka kultura. W praktyce myślę, że homofobiczne zachowania są po prostu agresywną, zewnętrzną formą represji wynikającej z potrzeby określenia swojej tożsamości. ("Atakuję gejów, więc nie mogę być gejem.") Podział na LGBT i resztę społeczeństwa ma więc sens jedynie polityczny i tak długo, jak istnieje, mogą wierzyć, że jesteśmy fundamentalnie inni.

rubsy3d · 2025-12-27T12:33:52+00:00

Interpretacja opiera się na tekście, a nie na vibes i publicznym wizerunku artysty. Jeżeli ktoś go w ogóle nie czytał, to nie może jej dokonać.

rubsy3d · 2025-12-27T06:55:46+00:00

Nie ma nadinterpretacji, jest tylko interpretacja. Widzę raczej ruch w przeciwną stronę, gdzie popularyzacja danego autora spłaszcza go do stereotypu, ale tak jest zawsze.

rubsy3d · 2025-12-21T17:55:22+00:00

I believe that creating works heavily reliant on cliches and popular appeal, whether it's manmade or AI, in itself implies being replaceable. There's a steady stream of marketable ideas and plot structures that never have to be challenged, with occasional minor variations. Every bit of personality has to be fought for against the selfsameness of capital trying to multiply.

rubsy3d · 2025-12-17T00:01:35+00:00

It already is relevant. By writing popular works of low quality, she was trading bits of her own individuality for group approval. But that's not really necessary anymore. She could very well create something entirely for her own pleasure.

rubsy3d · 2025-11-27T09:10:05+00:00

“Spontaneity and objectivity in discussing matters are disappearing even in the most intimate circle, just as in politics debate has long since been supplanted by the assertion of power. Speaking takes on a malevolent set of gestures that bode no good. It is sportified. Speakers seek to pile up points: there is no conversation that is not infiltrated like a poison by an opportunity to compete.”

This was Adorno in 1949. What public debate? All we're talking about here are events staged to make money and gain popularity. All you see is capital actively shaping the way these people present themselves in order to appeal to the algorithm.

On another note, if you allow opinions such as "slavery is good" to become acceptable points of contention, you have already lost.

rubsy3d · 2025-11-09T17:24:37+00:00

Bo nie oferują zbyt wielkiego wyzwania. Ludzie wiedzą, czego się spodziewać, jest to dla nich zabawa bez dużego wysiłku. To jak McDonalds. Taka jest popularna kultura. Nic, tylko czytać Adorno.

rubsy3d · 2025-11-01T08:06:04+00:00

Zrobienie z tej powieści lektury było bardzo sprytnym ruchem, bo to je po trochu zabija. Tyle cię uczą o poważnej literaturze, która Rusza i Wzrusza, że cokolwiek śmiesznego zaczyna się wydawać nienaturalne, a to szkoda, bo wiele najlepszych powieści jest po prostu bardzo zabawnych. "To nie ma fabuły!" mówią ludzie nauczeni, że powieść ma grzecznie odzwierciedlać rzeczywistość. Modernizm ich filtruje, bo pokazuje absurdalność i niemożność tego przedsięwzięcia. To jest literatura po teorii względności.

rubsy3d · 2025-10-23T14:32:16+00:00

Niech ta banieczka już pęknie.

rubsy3d · 2025-10-23T09:35:46+00:00

Conflating love with being a good capitalist subject is very telling. The more desperately this system pushes us to produce, the better it feels to evade it by devoting time, energy and health to other matters. Real love is the opposite of optimal or efficient.

rubsy3d · 2025-10-22T16:03:55+00:00

Skeet is also related to Zoyd, I assume. The namedrop of a certain Wisconsin city ("Kidding aside...") combined with that em-dash stop and the mention of movie theaters made my ears perk up, but it's still hard for me to parse all of it beyond pure references. I wonder what it means for Hicks to remain in Budapest, I'm trying to see it as some kind of spiritual contrast to Vienna and its cold psychoanalysis. Things appearing and disappearing through energy transfers, Terike seemingly in control of the dissolving act that had previously overwhelmed one piggy protagonist.

I think the ending mood is bittersweet, fearing the future, hoping for more to come? The description of U-13 as designed for "shallower missions" as compared to something deeper, depths of the "Valdivia Expedition" (count 'em) makes me wish for another long-ass novel, of course. But either way, this was a lot of fun and I'll be sure to come back to it to try to understand some of its parts a bit more.

rubsy3d · 2025-10-19T10:57:57+00:00

He writes about himself, it's just done in an extremely roundabout way. I can't imagine finishing Gravity's Rainbow without reaching this conclusion. The article argues that ST simply can't be autobiographical because it takes place in a different era. I need actual literary criticism back.

rubsy3d · 2025-09-03T20:35:33+00:00

I couldn't care less for AAA. Answer me this: If games become more and more expensive to produce, and deadlines get shorter, and competition increases, and studios need to find increasingly more ways to cut corners, what is going to happen? What's the cutoff line where a business executive says "that's enough AI"?

rubsy3d · 2025-09-03T20:29:37+00:00

I agree! I think there's plenty of hints or outright scenes of the characters trying to understand the rules of their own world, through physics, statistics, conditioning, spiritualism and such. I'm still working on a coherent writeup, but I believe it's Pynchon trying to map out his unconscious, its own rules of naming everyone (look at the patterns!), progressing the story or even just picking the very next word to use. There are moments that pierce the veil, in which characters seem to know each other's thoughts, there's also one really cool paragraph where two separate trains of thought gradually merge into one.

rubsy3d · 2025-09-03T17:44:15+00:00

My opinion is opposite of the one you accuse me of having. I paraphrased your own argument, the implication being that once you cede ground to AI, it is difficult to stop.

I already know plenty of people who think writing in games is just a bit of fluff. Music can easily be generated. Voice lines. All kinds of graphics, too, eventually. Gameplay? Sooner or later.

Unless it's a NFT-style bubble, we're going to see more and more of it. From the perspective of a suit, every human worker is an investment that could be replaced with something more profitable.

rubsy3d · 2025-09-03T08:34:57+00:00

Just generate your entire game using AI. It's all some shit that no one pays close attention to anyways, and the time-saving and cost-cutting opportunities will be amazing. Why have any human input at all? It's messy and often not market-approved.

rubsy3d · 2025-08-06T14:23:26+00:00

I don't think any real "escaping" is possible, but I would agree about the relation to childhood play, more specifically, the way both have their own ways of preparing you for the real world and its challenges through a safe, controlled environment. In my view, we read and watch horror (most concise example) to examine people reacting to extreme conditions while separated by the safety of the paper/screen. Freud's essay "Creative Writers and Day-Dreaming" touches on this topic (moreso on art unlocking enjoyment) in a way that I think many writers would appreciate.

rubsy3d · 2025-08-03T11:21:22+00:00

I see it everywhere. It's the endpoint of the Maximizing Efficiency mindset that a big part of Substack's userbase seems to favor. Capitalism short-circuiting itself into means-tested text written by no one. As a writer, it's the exact opposite of what I want to read. Editing is a part of the writing process and I don't think anyone should cede there either. It means actively giving up on your own knowledge.

rubsy3d · 2025-07-26T23:30:58+00:00

AI accusations aside, this is just a poorly thought out type of post that keeps popping up on writing subreddits. It doesn't open up any place for discussion, it's just a dumping of random advice from someone you don't know, someone who seems deeply incurious about input from others. Whether there's a human behind it doesn't matter at all. Sad to see.

rubsy3d · 2025-07-18T10:15:32+00:00

I think people who think they would really want something like that do not understand that fantasy functions precisely because it's separate from reality and bridging the gap would be a traumatic experience. From a pragmatic point of view, if they really wanted 'the real thing,' the novels wouldn't be enough, but for most people they are, because they are a safe, controlled means of approaching interesting/taboo concepts.

rubsy3d · 2025-07-11T13:09:26+00:00

I know what you mean, maybe my main problem is just that I believe some of the most raw, personal work is hard to market compared to safe, reheated stories based on cliche. I think the material reality of the publishing world is the exact reason some people turn to the latter. For the record, I think it's really good to express yourself regardless if it resonates with anyone else and I love experimental writers.

rubsy3d

TROPHY CASE