interested in critical/media theory. are any of these worth reading?
also critical theory general, i guess
>Critical Theory
It's just a meme field created to cater Humanities pseudointellectuals, don't fall nito this trap.
Marshall McLuhan and Bob Dobbs
>>7876824
bourdieu
mcluhan
adorno/horkheimer
marcuse
debord
baudrillard
althusser
walter benjamin
>>7876824
>critical theory general
literally more cancerous than /pol/posting
>>7876824
>interested in critical/media theory
why?
>critical theory
A book on how to read is kind of stupid in isn't it
>>7876824
Why is there so much hate regarding this post and critical theory? Not everyone is good at being a critic.
>>7878012
Was is /lit/ this bad?
If you're going to study literature, you need to have a discussion on how to write about its production and its meaning; you need to discuss how to evaluate it.
How can /lit/ read achebe and not get this? Do you have any idea why he wrote a book about yams?
>>7876824
sure go for it. read the whole pile
then when you've done that, consider that you could have actually read and enjoyed six real books and formed your own opinions about them, instead of reading that pile of shit
>>7876824
What a terrible thread this has turned out to be.
OP, the Culler book is good, in part because he doesn't take it too seriously, even joking at one point that Theory is a game of one-up-man-ship.
The Richards is also good and foundational, but predates 'Theory' like you're looking for.
The real foundation place is to start is Saussure's Course in General Linguistics.
From there you'd do better to read books that explain the ideas, than jump right into the primary texts. I've found Structuralist Poetics and On Deconstruction, both by Jonathan Culler, very helpful.
>>7878670
>even joking at one point that Theory is a game of one-up-man-ship.
wow, i bet the evenings fly by at his house
>>7876824
you are about to fall into an endless pit that only gets harder and harder.
I think Hegel is the final boss
you should just go to Marxism, because Fredric Jameson says it is the untranscendable horizon of any other theory, so why waste your time with the other theories?
why it is untranscendable i have no idea and he can't seem to explain it hmiself.
>>7876832
>t. a true intellectual
>>7879084
because it's shit
>>7878687
>I think Hegel is the final boss
>>7879334
Voegelin argued that Hegel should be understood not as a philosopher, but as a "sorcerer" -- i.e., as a mystic and Hermetic thinker.[61] This concept of Hegel as a Hermetic thinker was elaborated by Glenn Alexander Magee[62] who argued that interpreting Hegel's body of work as an expression of mysticism and Hermetic ideas leads to a more accurate understanding of Hegel.
"I do not argue that merely that we can understand Hegel as a Hermetic thinker, just as we can understand him as a German or a Swabian or an idealist thinker. Instead, I argue that we must understand Hegel as a Hermetic thinker, if we are to truly understand him at all." Magee 2001, p. 2.
>>7879334
i cant even figure out what this absolute spirit is supposed to be and why is it not being
>>7878651
>/lit/
>reading
Lol@ all the retarded teenagers in this thread who are too pure for criticism.
No wonder you guys are memes.
kautsky is determinism
so is mcluhan
bernard stiegler is cool if you like labour
althusser is cool if you can BS
jameson is too hard to figure out desu, but he's probably a genius
i guess read all intros to neo-marxism if you like critical theory.
>>7879543
It's merely a phase in my experience. They'll get over themselves in due time. Until then, something for us to laugh at, no?
