A Methodology of Possession: On the Philosophy of Nick Land

by James Ellis

Garbage time never ends.

Genres: Philosophy

167 pages, Kindle Edition

First published November 10, 2020

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.

James Ellis (under the pseudonym 'Meta-Nomad')

Reviews

[Aung Sett Kyaw Min · Rating 2 out of 5]

Among the ascetic lessons of the First Critique, one lesson stands out in that it condenses the horror of the Copernican Revolution into a truism--you cannot experience the condition of possibility of experiential cognition. However, and this is the gateway to hell, Kant grants that you can 'think' these conditions, as well as pure concepts of understanding and noumena, through what he calls 'transcendental reflection' (the act of drawing up an inventory of our human cognitive capacities and sources of cognition, and sorting various representations as belonging to this or that capacity). In this way, thinking, always-already untethered from Sensibility, is free to wander in the noumenal hellscape but stripped of the right to designate the alien objects it comes into contact therein as 'knowledge' (for Kant knowledge is necessarily of spatio-temporal particulars, what Sellars calls 'this-suches'). Yet just because something isn't knowledge doesn't mean it is non-sense. Indeed, Kant himself was fully aware that some objects have their own transcendental sense abstracted from sensible intuitions. Ultimately, what happens to the "I or he or it (the thing) which thinks" when it thinks the noumena, or the transcendental condition of thought, with no sensible representations to accompany its inhuman ventures beyond the anthropocentric security system? You have arrived at the question of being possessed by the Outside. For to let the Outside in is to turn inside out the transcendental machinery that Kant installed as the interface between thinking and being. You will not find wisdom in this book, only non-knowledge.

[Stellar Offspring · Rating 2 out of 5]

As a fan of Nick Land, I was looking
forward to reading this. I'll also admit that I
bought it because of the use of the wojak on the
cover; I found this funny. The author promised
nihilistic theory fiction, and I suppose that is what
I got, so I shouldn't really say I was disappointed.
I can't say this is a good book, however. The
writing was spotty and the "fiction" part of "theory
fiction" was lacking altogether. The story was
frankly uninteresting. The conclusions that the
author reaches are the conclusion of any
typically depressed person, only more verbose.
Yes, there are some interesting segments about
time and perception, but nothing that you can't
find better stated elsewhere. Any confusion that
the reader may feel regarding some of the more
complex issues of this text are not due to some
kind of inaccessible complexity of the concepts
themselves, but rather because of a failure on
the part of the author.
I do not have the space nor the desire to dive
into any true analysis of the underlying
philosophical concepts behind this book, except
that I would like to point out that the conception
of the world as written about here relies on some
very important preconceptions about reality.
Namely, lack of anthropological teleology and a
belief in deleuzian-landian metaphysics. Apart from these qualms, the book is shockingly
poorly edited. There are many typos, and some
strange duplicates in the text that would be
caught be the most cursory proof reader.
I would not recommend this book whatsoever. If
you want fiction that explores existential despair
and loss of coordination, Ligotti will suffice. If you
want theory, go straight to Land. After all,
secondary writings are only there for people who
don't like to think for themselves. At least that
what Mr Ellis says.

[Alexander · Rating 5 out of 5]

It can be a familiar spiral but this time there is no stop sign. It makes you go through the motions of the futility of philosophy, all the way, whatever that means and it's great.

[Unconscious Abyss · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a deeply personal work and as such I have decided that to comment further would be futile.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

An entertaining first dip into the world of philosophical horror, evocative of some of Lovecraft's best stories with dashes of Nietzsche, Cioran, and Lyotard sprinkled in here and there.

I was expecting a little more hard theory heading in, but instead found Ellis' accounting of a bad trip through the philosophical canon all too familiar to anyone who's read Land. Much like Land's work, it sometimes felt like cutting through word salad, but the occasional pearls of brilliance made it worth the while.

[Chant · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting take on Nick Land’s philosophical project. I enjoyed this little piece of theory-fiction.

[Patrick K.]

A nihilist narrator who, by occult methods, is possessed by the Outside of Nick Land's philosophy and transported through a hallucinatory inner journey to a clockwork Königsberg to meet an automaton Immanuel Kant is a concept that might've made for a strange and seductive work of theory-fiction. Unfortunately, I sometimes felt like what was being narrated was "less even than a dream", to quote Kant in the Critique of Pure Reason. What occurs (or doesn't, either outside of space and time or in the narrator's mind) isn't related into anything like a story, even in an unconventional sense, nor is the character of the narrator sufficiently elaborated to make for compelling autofiction. (The author's Hermitix podcast, on the other hand, is worth listening to. He's an unobtrusive host and his guests are often scholars with arcane areas of expertise.)

[D · Rating 4 out of 5]

Creo que funciona mejor como un vehículo para reflexiones filosóficas que como un libro de teoría-ficción: como le pasa a Land, la parte de ficción no está a la altura.

[Rúben Batista]

If one examines textual discourse, one is faced with a choice: either reject
dialectic feminism or conclude that consciousness may be used to disempower the
proletariat. Thus, if presemanticist theory holds, the works of Rushdie are
postmodern. Bataille promotes the use of textual discourse to modify class.

“Culture is a legal fiction,” says Sartre. In a sense, Foucault uses the
term ‘subcapitalist dematerialism’ to denote a self-sufficient totality.
Dietrich states that we have to choose between textual
discourse and dialectic sublimation.

In the works of Rushdie, a predominant concept is the distinction between
within and without. Thus, Foucault uses the term ‘presemanticist theory’ to
denote not dematerialism, but predematerialism. If dialectic feminism holds, we
have to choose between presemanticist theory and neocapitalist nationalism.

In a sense, a number of theories concerning dialectic feminism may be
revealed. Sontag suggests the use of dialectic structuralism to challenge the
status quo.

However, the characteristic theme of the works of Rushdie is a postcultural
whole. The creation/destruction distinction intrinsic to Rushdie’s The
Moor’s Last Sigh emerges again in The Ground Beneath Her Feet,
although in a more self-fulfilling sense.

But the subject is contextualised into a textual discourse that includes
reality as a reality. Several theories concerning the defining characteristic,
and subsequent collapse, of capitalist society exist.

It could be said that Sartre’s essay on neocultural discourse holds that art
is capable of significance, given that the premise of dialectic feminism is
invalid. Von Ludwig states that we have to choose between
textual discourse and premodernist libertarianism.

[Alexandra Rizzi · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the infamous words of Spock; "Fascinating."
My knowledge of philosophy is limited. Sure, I know bits and pieces of the most notable ones, including those mentioned in this book. With one exception: I've never heard of Nick Land.
A quick Wikipedia check tells me that he is (or was) the creator of the "Dark Enlightenment" philosophy. Heavy stuff. But I haven't read any of his actual writings and I think this book would make more sense if I did.
Regardless, I'm actually fascinated by this book. J.E. throws about words I didn't know (always enjoy learning something new), so, I kept my I-pad next to me and just kept checking and searching.
This is a dark detour into the psyche. A "Dark Night of the Soul" if you will. But I couldn't tell you what the point of it was. Aside from "don't do that occult stuff".
Having said all that, I think I'll eventually re-read this one, maybe even dig a bit deeper on Nick Land and see if I can get more nuances out of it.

[Dan Contreras · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eeeeeeh...

... no se si el libro es brillante y yo estoy muy pendejo, o me están tomando el pelo.

El libro relata como el autor, tras leer las despotricaciones dementes de Nick Land, es poseido y llevado a un viaje astral al infierno. Un infierno aceleracionista claro.

Soy muy fan de Nick Land pero no estoy seguro que esta "obra de filosofia" no sea un shitpost de 4chan que se salió de control.

La filosofia de Nick Land es muy bizarra y siempre muestra sus corrientes de horror lovecraftiano, pero esto fue... extraño.

¿Se lo recomendaría a alguien? No te va a hacer nada de sentido si no conoces a Nick Land, Mencius Moldbug, el aceleracionismo, Lovecraft y todo el escenario de shitposters esquizofrenicos de twitter y 4chan.

[Damned Snake · Rating 3 out of 5]

Book is an example why someone with schizophrenia shouldn't read Land, but has some insights about his philosophy between the babble. Quick but not really obligatory read for fans of Land's philosophy, but author's brain is fried probably afterwards.

[Cameron M · Rating 3 out of 5]

I admire the attempt to synthesize the philosophy with the horror novel elements but I don’t think it ended up working all that well as either. Some of the analogies this synthesis allows were insightful, though.

[Salvador Kent]

distinctly adolescent — land floors the writer on a sentence level, just looks quite amateurish compared to anything being quoted. apparently his podcast is quite good, i’ll give it a listen. shame about this though

[Aaron Schuschu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Took longer than I wanted to, but par for the course on the genre. Decent. Though it makes me want to counter and say college was actually better than I want to remember it.

[Connor Campbell · Rating 4 out of 5]

reading this while stuck in the ER waiting room for 7 hours did not even remotely help my mental health but goddamn this is a solid depiction of pure, distilled philosophical misery.

[Remo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Its really weird but somehow after I read it, I had an different view on Life. This book is really scary somehow but also really Interesting.

[Caleb Bratcher · Rating 4 out of 5]

aint read much like it

[Cosmictimetraveler · Rating 2 out of 5]

Did not finish, read about 50%.

I did not understand this book at all. I was looking for something philosophical and obscure, which this book certainly is, but it was mostly incomprehensible. There were brief moments of fascination but I am not sure I even understood them properly. I was so confused by the book that I sought out the author’s podcast and binged listened to 5 or so hour long podcasts which were all completely reasonable and lucid presentations of somewhat difficult subject matter (Kant, Menger, some guy talking about perennial psychology, etc.). This only further threw my mind into disarray - why would an obviously intelligent and clear thinking guy write such a nonsensical book?

I will give the author the benefit of the doubt and assume that there are introductory Accelerstionist-like texts that I need to read first in order to understand this work. If anyone has any recommendations for EASY to read introductions to this field of esoteric philosophy then please leave them below. I would like to give this book another go with the correct understanding someday. I almost feel giving bad giving it 2 stars because the author seemed to know what he was doing, but I cannot in good faith recommend this to anyone I know until I understand what the hell is going on !