male fantasies

theweleit’s fantasies by synkar. the original work, male fantasies, is available through university of minessota press

return to more works by theweleit here

observation 1: n/a

andrej synkar’s countertext to klaus theweleit’s male fantasies, titled: theweleit’s fantasies

notice: this is a preview page that corresponds to the general review synkar has performed on this work. for the full midhand piece, please wait for the release of the full countertext, which will be forthcoming on andrej's website general first comments:

1/5 upon immediate contact, the first wonder this work provokes is whether the books are written in such a way as to represent hard-shelled myths not involving the fluidity of women, with illusory and fabricated stories, with a sheer focus on the trajectory of stories and encounters with male officials, or is it that the medium itself required a war-bound memoir-istic disposition, and underlining this form of work was an intimate contact or a melancholic anti-contact aligning and corresponding with male fascist psyches? or in other words, even if male interiority is decrepit, it may be that it is hiding a disposition towards melancholia (or excitement) towards lost intimacy and fluidity, but it may even be that it isnt lost but only shows up in moments of intruige that are against the fashion of work of even the most intimate lettering, given the correspondences of the time? is this book certainly evaluating the psyche, or just the result of a product of its times? 2/5 so, in male fantasies klaus is performing a double operation? either the men are so unattached that loss is prevented and contact is topologically disallowed, or it is that they hold hidden motives to do so, that then must underscore a tenderness or weakness? this is the same contradiction as bachelors (now incels) or male loneliness epidemic, it hints at this dumb lacanian dilemma thats already overrated because desire can be positive instead of negative. the symptomatic documenticity of the writings is itself a fundamental product, there is no deeper interiority they could unveil, theyre a product of the times because genre is a trend of passion, not a revealing elucidation of hideness, the genre of products are always exterior to a deeper interiority. it doesnt matter what bullshit consequence this leads to, we all know about violence and what it is and what it can arise from (everything). in every misconsideration or non-consideration there is an infinite consideration nontheless, in every piece of art there are all the genres of art, all the "beauties" combine categorically. in every fascist romantic betrayal turns sexual domination turns violent death there is a bit of everything, there are all the failures to consider and the successes to consider by non-considering 3/5 the fascist soldiers constitute an ego that could afford the risk of affect, it is the one that precludes the risk of affect in the revelation of its subclusion, its subclusion is its pertinent inclusion, the same way the feminine's seduction and attraction is foregrounded (not revealed) in this way the ontotethical romance is buried in the tragedy of the murder and domination, it is a sign, a conceptual revelation foregrounded by its contradiction, it appears right there, manifests pre-emptively, it is buried everywhere where you cant find it in the text, its talking all the time. and then at some points, when its being purely positive (progressive towards its own contradictions) it even surpasses this into its own pure performative mode, but now no longer as a tragedy - and as such - no longer as a seclusion, but as a faithful, fair non-inclusion. this is how it dialectically surpasses the filter of fairness, it moves from unfair resolved to fair unresolved and then ends in either fair resolved or unfair unresolved, doesnt matter which one or why. i still disagree about there being no hidden motives. 4/5 i think the structuralist reading of this work is simply wrong, the narrative that the fascist soldier is conviniently structurally this way, instead of just latently (abstractly) this way. this can be the fascist mediated symbolic toy-figure positional condition, an aspect, a categorical effect of fascist essence, but not an actual revelation about their conditional state of egoic dissolution. the pre-condition for a symbolic foregrounding is a larger dialectical injury to the essence of the condition of a given attribution, their fascist substitution is only made possible by a higher call towards their own self-awareness about this contradiction, this is what can subconsciously or non consciously (they dont have to secretly know that this is the hidden mechanism) push them to their own performative model. there are no simple give or takes here, there is no robotic self-assessment. yes, the fascist subconscious foregrounds expenditure into a warm world by crafting a cold world of assorted revalatory clarity and self-impositionality into forensic humanistic common sensitivity (rationalistic impositionality) but the world itself cannot allow this impulse without topologically being far more nuanced than the condition of this concept itself can allow itself to be 5/5 all of this describes the essence of the figure of the subversive, of the power of subversion as something not cynical as akin to bildung-style german pedagological harshness, but a deeper more complicated relationship towards infrastructural affective coldness in social life, every resigned moment is the tragedy masochistically re-lived, and vice-versa, every moment of awareness of the new mode of coldness is itself a positive revalation about the failure of affectivity and its influence on our common life as no longer a backwards justification but a forwards power. there is no contradiction between these two modes in structure, but they structurally contradict themselves, yet naturally appear one after another, motivate one another, or dont have any contact with one another, but they all appear at once in the daily life of anyone, regardless of their affective state. these are temperatures that we are trying to falsely assign as models of structural contradiction rather than categorical choices 5.5/5 i will only respond to one claim, and as such it technically corresponds to the whole of the claims. it is precisely that, if it were true that there was no seductive (secret) communication in the back turning, that it was truly a common sense operative and not a deep hidden sad ritualized tragedy and yet at once and over-coming of feminine commonal fluidity into heightened mystic socio-functionalism (the divine goddess, also as nurse, also as a witness to my working war reportoire hostility, also as a dominated artifact of this worlds constraints) and if it is truly a non conceptual, intuitive commonality, then the economic man is not worth worrying over, there is no working memory that demands the type of affective frequency that enables subversion to become something more than neglect. subversion is intimate powerful and surprisingly nuanced, and it is also why fascist subjectivity is able to turn period blood into disgust, it turns fluids into margins, it overcodes on top of existing states using paranoic dispositions, its an extremely powerful mechanism, and if you were to give it credence, genuine consideration, you would realize where the reading fails if it assumes its ignorant disposition, thus it is not worth even talking over. if fascist subjectivity is weak, unimportant, ungenerous, and environmental-symbolically stupid, then its not worth as a discussion point, its just a primordial reality with no interpretability. the function of interpretability is in the intellectual artist, not in the actionable state of the world. thus it is an auto-failed system, and there i end my report on this seven marriages pages 1-3: this is a misinterpreted sign of romance, she's familiar with his back because he's showing it to her, not because he's hiding his face. the valor of the sexual fascist is revealed in his failure to reveal himself. there is a hidden deep romance involed in the neglect presented, but its being misconstrued as an intimate failure (more like a failure on the part of the interpretors to either understand or at most appreciate the implicit subversion happening here). the other part is just about how war logs (economic, no matter the level of "intimacy" of the note are about war reporting, not domestic reporting. the relationship of the officer and the stupid cottages naturally take reporting precedence. the domestic matter iss the private matter but not the hidden one, there is no reason to hide it? page 4: the beauty of the city highlights the beauty of the women (and children, but hidden because of the european incest mythology puritanism). also of course affairs are constitutive of privacy, the very word affair only promotes the privace, as if affairs have to be private events (for a critique of the affair see elsewhere). the childrens "impingement" on his life remain nameless because they are not a standard subset of the game, they give life to it, and as such, are excluded from dead giveaways. duh? page 5: on the contrary, as the book would further show, marriage in unity is a cultivated christian myth, marriage as self-containment is key. so either the implicit fascist man is complimenting womens unpredictable (therefore alive?) nature, or he isnt complimenting it by positing it as dead. naturally, marriages are dead false unifications, they are supposed to be containments, clarity is to be found in their disposition. the fact he puts risk as the highlight indicates the fascist man respects the level of adventurity and life-forming soulful essence that the other side commits to, even to a scary degree. this is nothing as honor, but still, the writer writes so much like a woman, in that he is complaining regardless of which side of the offensive margin the statements are supposed to sit on, simply that the offensivity is the key totality around which the rest of the expression circulates. what can you know about women? if they are as mysterious as the stupid "divine myths" that fascists go on impossible quests to hunt, then, the less they know, conversely the more important these same women would be, no? page 6: yes, obviously. because when we explain stories-as-facts instead of stories as affects, and the affects are the ones missing, then they are of most affective performance. if his intimacy with his wife isnt included, then that shows that this is also where he thinks the intimacy is, not that the intimacy isnt revealed in the paper, but that its their private consort. and even if somehow it wasnt their private consort but they were truly allergic to one another, the romance is in all the aspects they never got to experience but always repressed one another from reaching, its always there no matter which way you flip their script page 7/8: thewhales struggles with the idea that virginity was an important construct at some point, and that essential features of people were considered valuable over constructed alternatives. kidding, but the real point is that he wants to say that the fascist condition of men draw strong boundaries of identity as archetypal constraints on the live alternatives of those same things. however, if hes right that this condition is as naive as he says, then he cant call it a radical accident, because its an economic function to designate appropriations in this way during that time, removing the insult. otherwise, if it is indeed an extracurricular event, then from that perspective it makes sense from the guys perspective to make such designation. also, reading into the inability for the man to reveal his deepest points is precisely an autistic subversion that today is well known among the non-affective community, and a tell-tale sign of clear masterful vigilance and awareness over affective conditions, not a mistake by any means, but rather, a fair and even overly truthful admittance pages 9-10: what a useless and unprovocative two pages. thewhales continues to berade us about the non-namability without really ever explaining anthropologically why it happens (which would be useless anyways but somehow still more informative than what he's doing) followed by shitting on an otherwise very interesting segment where the fascist man in this instance is dealing with the realization of the humanity of women (which is of course their corrosion, given they are manifestly divine+erotic beings in our fantasies) and as such kills his own non sexual (illustrious, exquisite) eccentric lust for them, if not for some random phenomenological appearance of stocking margins, which is not a fetish object as thewhales wokely proclaims, but rather a sign of cognitive awareness, similarly reminiscent to the one pseudosexual scene in kafka's trial with all the weird shit going on. the example thewhales is trying and failing to criticize is more interesting here than he is, quite funny indeed pages 11-14: this is a wonderful part, and deserving of a de-criticized narration. thewhales points out how the construct of this particular male fascist is assimilated through the experience of "hunting" (bodies of people). interestingly, this activity is much like any content creation, any instrumental reason creation. the instrumental reason is the activity around which everything else, including social, economic and intimate relations are shaped. this is very common of autists today (however, autists now have taken the backseat and no longer are allowed to economically dominate society as once more). the way the male fascist here speaks of those he misses is retrospected by thewhale to include their disposition as living death, the ghosts of their memory haunt the participants of the memories in a way where they remember their general unimportance as anything but an asset, and a critical mis-rendering of any aspect that made them intimate, pure, worthy of higher considerations. indeed, thewhales pinpoints something provocative, that fascist society is entirely subjectively undisposed to characterism. war report style paragraphs attempt and fail to deliver characteristic portrayals of literally anything, character in fascism is predisposed to an attempted - and failed - quirky provocation, quirky letting-on's are failed attempts at maneuvering at the character of things. the stone-coldedness of that age isnt the inability to write or even notice the quirk or gimmick, its the general lack of gimickiness that allows for a greater removal of the gimmick. the fascist subjectivity doesnt just stop noticing the gimmick - in turn it also stops producing it. cold relations are substituted by further cold relations. assetification of human character is made the reprise, the main and highest honor grantable. this paragraph shouldnt be about the mans inability to speak of his forced wife's character (and force in that context is quite interesting, the pastoral figure of the father standing with his medal and the wheelchair bound wife was quite fascinating imigary on its own and a nice summary by thewhales) it only shows how asset-ims and assetifications are a part of the disorder of the age, its turning towards the warmth of war and economic dispositionality. the call towards the economic reality of the age as a form of ritualized theatricity is only further related to the treatment of domestic relations as assets. you may find quirks in mens relations to one another, but hardly will those be characteristic, even if slightly more notable than their consideration of women. also notable is the kanyewestification of the imagination of the fascist man in this part of the work. it is indeed about the fourthcalling of women as bodies, however the deterministic imperative to marry her at once may also be seen as a fated and intimate ritual, a call to action now missing from modernity. compelling, might be added! but probably not as spontaneous as mystification would have it.

the historical context and nature of the material pages 15-18: this is a story where affective concerns are yet again dismissed for economic ones, and a life of waiting awaits the affective subject of the woman, as she portrays herself in duty of her husbands activities against a supposed abstract red flood. it reminds that ideology doesnt exist in these circumstances where the economic call is equivalized to the domestic vechile. ideology shines when theres an interior confrontation with a plural exterior, not when theres an exterior confrontation with a plural interior. thats when ideology takes the stance of a symbol in an otherwise unanimous and monotonous externality, that of a world of reds, blacks or yellows that are all alike. this is the confusion a lot of thinkers make when they equate the supposed tragedies of war with their monotonous standings, whats really at stake is the idea of an anti ideological ideology, of a state of mis-certainty about the behavioral mode of civil society in the face of an inaffective urge, a heroic bout of sorts, an obviously paranoid overcoding or disposition that forcefully takes control of the narrative life of its agents. quite beautiful, naturally very sad biographical tradition pages 19/25: skipped for now due to being too culturally irrelevant to theory even if its important for his method partings pages 26/27: this chapter clarifies some of my earlier concerns quite well, whilst also calling into question why this book is divided in such a way as to display autobiographically a series of situations and only partially comment on them, just enough to let me raise interesting points against it but not enough to have a voice. bluher on the other hand seems quite fascinating, its hardly an error of belief, its a truly held conviction, one that seems difficult to erupt through, but finds a public very quickly, quite contrary to todays reactionaries that begin from the mindset of speaking about a "silent majority" when in fact theyre very much beginning from the perspective of a loud, eccentric, almost inventive minority, one that assimilates the otherwise even more disturbingly disregulated public sector into a controlled disturbism, but only falsely and pretentiously so. pages 28/29: this section has nothing to do with parting from your wife and child, and nothing to do with the horrors of war. it has only to do with the "jaws of the bolsheviks" and the splendor of leaving whatever activity there is to go and emulse yourself in that, even if you don't really want it (it indicates death in homoerotic phallic dispositionality). there is only but one thing this truly indicates. it indicates that whatever horrors exist at any time, the temptation towards jouissance is only secondary towards an even higher temptation towards the death drive. and yet again, the temptation towards the death drive is only secondary towards an enacted honorable higher purpose or power, no matter how frail and insignifcant it is to the actual life of the autist/fascist/perverse agent. even further more, this calling is indicative that the horrors of these men during war is nothing compared to the experience of having to justify yourself affectively in front of your wife. not because of the actual confrontation itself, but because what this indicates for you, what it means of you. it means you are a peter griffin, a family man, quite literally an object of drowning into a woman's world. this fight, this conquest, is fought on the terrain of making sense of yourself in the world, of really locating your nature. not really caring about finding this nature, but about striving towards it. all this really shows is that the fight for the nature is the most important principle of a fascist agents guided life and subjective composition. there is nothing in the world caring for nor missing out on, there is only the aesthetic of the machinery behind war, of the pain of trauma, of the challenge of really proving that beautiful and slow, peaceful experiences of life actually even exist at all? truly under it, there is always yet still a wave, a series of never quite accomplished strivings. these strivings are not to be called boredom, are not towards an object, nor do we attain satisfaction out of not reaching them. on the contrary, neither do we desire, nor secretly desire them. they are strivings of pain, a testament to the pagan, secret, hidden, gnostic world. a world where the machine of pain is a meta-abstraction, where the reflection is always tame, double, and clear. and most importantly, where the concept of the problem simply is never felt. we all call to this world from our condition of problematism, we seek to it in a way where they feel obligated to call it out, thats what they truly would think. that theres a gnostic world they are searching for, that they're trying to reach the hidden pact. there is nothing of this world left, nothing ever happens and so fourth. the ascetic compulsion towards higher experience is a false nihilism, the striving of the call of false nihilism. this is the highest ritual sacrifice concerning the concept of commonalities, the generic. this is all an experience of outward intense eccentricity, its the final fight against the existence of the abstraction of redundancy, the potential for something to be redundant is eradicated in the face of war. its the only time where categories and tropes steer clear, this is the way that men delete themselves out of the ability to seek the problem of the trope, is when they finally leave all passions and enter a nihilistic striving. asceticism is the opposite of a nihilistic striving, truly only war is able to capture the heart at the ritual against the generic. brides page 30: at the end of this section, thewhales presents his first apology to the reader, except ironically, its for the crime of finally developing a personality. this is no fault of thewhales, who is clearly both an excellent interpreter and an extremely capable assimilationist (as is clear with his wonderful transformation of the statements notes) but it in fact delivers to the reader that he is in all possibility only capable of rendering that which is common of fact, so that thewhales finds the reader on the contrary offensive for not thinking outside the box, although also knowing that up to thirty five pages into the book, he himself has done nothing but request this boring audience to be the target demographic for the writing, so on one hand, hes sacrificing all the readers thus far that have anthropologically straddled through this piece of shit, on the other hand, he's also clarifying to the few of the rest of us that he is indeed still here somewhere buried in this book, waiting for the right next moment to bring himself into it rather than passively sit way behind the wall whilst reading out bedtime stories. as for the writing, his reversal of the fact of one of the fascist men surprisingly never having copulated into in fact the ghost of a woman or the failure of their present signifiable existence into the mens lives, the fact of their unfacticity, was quite wonderful, as well as the turn of phrase of to believe as a declarative proposal or as an entrusted pact, and into a command, a declaration of belief for signing the leise to be at all included or even considered in the position of a "sexual fascist" (synkarism) now that is quite the honor! also notable is one of the other men's "notable crashes" given that these crashes were in fact the opposite of crashes, this obviously shows that crashes, as all other things in constructed social planes are really nothing but signifiers or symbolic betrayals, for the philosopher, or the one who experiences the world only representationally (all else are only cosplay philosophers) no such thing happens that isnt conceptually retreived as something else, be it an accident and even be it to themselves. affectively, the world is also registered this way, such as, say, hitting yourself on the head during a traumatic period signifying a rupture of sorts, but in the case of the philosopher, it neither signifies the concept nor confirms the intuition, but only exists in the subversive core of the removal of the point. the fascist man's airplane crashes are, yes, his escape from his wife and into the higher honor of nihilism, of the betrayed but honorable nothingness of the world, but even more interestingly, of his total avoidance of this ever being legitimized, nor even subtly subconsciously confirmed. the true philosopher sits in a confusion over the concept. what was the crash for? you must truly isolate yourself from your wife, your wife's fact as an existence, to truly confirm (in order to deny) the significatory value of the crash. the crash, the wife, the purpose, at some point they all blend together, and that's kind of the point... de-realization pages 35-36: the realization presented here can only lead to in fact a realization: the soldiers are expecting a ghostly appearance because the ghostly artefact of the world is a genuine libidinal investment, and not just a haunted proxy of false affective dissonance. the sexual-erotic excitement of the idea of something crumbling, attached, yet almost golden (silver) whilst also capable of having infinite depth, but shallowed out by its own glossy reflection, and its outward excitement, this type of pornographic display is a true opening or rupturing of the closed mechanical "fire-bound" warfare of the trenches. the machine guns that end up taking the revealing rupture of a displaced expectation in that described instance are detailed, complex, layered, fall into the scenery, realistic, toned down, the silver exacerbated women in comparison are the equivalent of cold water entering the inside of a freshly hot-showered body, they're a moment of triumph over the self-assured enviornment. what man wants the heat of a woman's realism to encounter him, after the existing realism of the concept of technical conflict already has? naturally, the spectacle of the ballad is to be expected instead, the reflection of the lake. the sexually fascist man seeks for this principle of excitement to tear apart his existing repressive complex note: the preview ends here.