File Under…

…Things I don’t care about.

Just got this, which didn’t make it through the comment filter (note that he’s making a MAJOR appearance, not just a mere appearance AND the stupid invocation to “hide your tulips.” Ack):

Greetings from Verso Books NYC! Please help us promote this great event by posting it to your blog or adding it to your organization’s calendar of events.

Thanks for your time and support!

Verso Books
Brooklyn, NY

Slavoj Žižek reveals the signs of the coming apocalypse…

November 08, 2010. 7PM
The Great Hall at Cooper Union
7 East 7th Street, New York

Now Žižek will make a major New York City appearance at Cooper Union on November 8 to discuss the “End Times”—in which he identifies the terminal crisis of global capitalism. As Slavoj’s events always sell out, buy your tickets in advance. Regular admission includes a FREE copy of Living in the End Times, worth $29.95. (Already have one? Then give your new copy to a friend who’s in ideological denial …)

Special Note: There is now a $10 student discount available!

Slavoj Žižek is today’s most controversial public intellectual. His work traverses the fields of philosophy, psychoanalysis, theology, history and political theory, taking in film, popular culture, and literature to provide acute analyses of the complexities of contemporary ideology as well as a serious and sophisticated philosophy. The author of over 30 books, Slavoj Žižek’s provocative prose has challenged a generation of activists and intellectuals. His latest work is Living in the End Times.

More information about this event can be found on the Verso Website:

For press inquiries contact Julie McCarroll:

12 thoughts on “File Under…

  1. I can’t believe people will pay for this kind of thing. At the YMHA, I’ve paid to hear various writers read–Eco, Didion, Sontag, Vargas Llosa, but at B & N I’ve heard, only slightly truncated versions from the Y, also Didion, Rushdie, and others for FREE. I guess if you can get it, why not? Who says Sarah Palin is the only person with the Real New Charisma?

    I clicked on the link, and his publicity photo is as unattractive as possible. In fact, it’s insulting to be an overt slob, which he clearly wants to do with such a shit photo.

    • He is indeed. I personally think he should do what Eminem did – announce his retirement from “the game” and go into hiding – only to come out later with new books/albums that no one gives a shit about (have you heard of Relapse (2009) or Recovery (2010) much? exactly!)

  2. well, they’re down to bribing people to come out to see him (free book), so it can’t be long now until he will be left wallow in his squalor and stop spreading his bedbugs to the rest of the world…

  3. They fired this one at me too after a post on the man. I like the repsonse of Yugoslavs I know, who see him as a turncoat: instrumental in ripping apart Yugoslavia and now claiming to be socialist when it suits him.

    • lol >3 </3, whatevah turns ya on…yes, despite his unique genius which has rocketed philosophers like Arpege to stardom, he has not yet been yogic enough to discover fleet en(t)ema….

      • 8===D 8===B

        I cannot neglect to mention that it was these readings of Zizek that made Arpege the famous icon she is…although I’m not sure which one is more like ‘OFF’ repellent.

  4. I wouldn’t pay to go, but the academic attitude toward Zizek is suspicious at best.

    Admit it—he writes far better than most of the people in academia, and he’s not even writing in his native tongue. He doesn’t feel the need to hide between his abstractions—that is, his abstractions actually perform work.

    His examples are in a league of their own. Again, clarity.

    He actually understands Hegel.


    • Your argument is basically “he’s not as bad as some other philosophers” which is weak. Things are not as bad today as they were during the WWII, so what? Sure, academic writing is a drag for the most part, but there are good writers as well. I’d say for all of his idiosyncrasies, Terry Eagleton writes much better, and so does Martin Jay or Alphonso Lingis and so on…

      How do you know that he understands Hegel? Is he the only one who does? In many cases when Zizek references books I’ve actually read, I can’t help but think that he does not really read them from cover to cover, just opens them up, glances through, finds some ideas and then moves on. Nothing wrong with that, but don’t let’s assume he’s an expert on everything he cites.

      P.S. Writing in a language that is not your native tongue is not a fucking virtue (forgive my passion here) – many people do it on the regular basis and just because most of the English-speaking world is arrogant enough to assume that they need not bother with foreign languages (“knowing” the language counts as being able to read with a dictionary, for God’s sake, in most PhD language exams) does not mean it’s the attitude of the non-English-speaking countries. Plus, English is a very primitive language grammar-wise, it’s easy to learn!

  5. My argument isn’t ‘he’s not as bad as some other philosophers’. My argument is that he’s to my knowledge better than most other philosophers alive today, including (and maybe especially) on the subject of Hegel, and obviously on matters of culture, ideology, etc. Zizek uses Hegel to analyze the world. ‘For They Know Not What They Do’, among other works, exemplifies this unique ability.

    In terms of the academic attitude, let’s break it down further. Academics are threatened by the prospect of anyone that can exist (and do what they do) outside of academia. Simultaneously jealously arises among academics faced with the freedoms (of speech and style) that Zizek enjoys ‘on the outside’.

    I generally am suspicious of pop intellectuals, who almost universally underwhelm overwhelmingly, but I think Zizek is one of the exceptions.

    • I think your “to my knowledge” needs a bit of work – there’s plenty of decent philosophers who write much better books on Hegel, culture, ideology and so on. Zizek manages to do so in an entertaining way, or at least it is entertaining for the first 10 or so books, but I wouldn’t be so bold as to claim that he is somehow an authority on anything these days, even Lacan. He’s living off the dividends of some interesting original ideas he proposed in the past, the rest is clownery. And this argument that “I don’t like/disagree” means “I am threatened and jealous” is so idiotic, I’m just going to ignore it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s