Scan barcode
mindfroth's review
2.0
Didn't entirely finish, but what's the point if everything is just a perverted jumble of lost signifiers? Less a series of persuasive essays than a collection of academic prose poems, a take I've heard mirrored, the repetition of which makes it more true according to Baudrillard, or less? I don't fucking know. If we can agree on reality, it at least gives it a glimmer of objectivity, or at least intersubjectivity, and I think there's truth value even in that, in terms of structural truth that can be mutually navigated. The thing that's infuriating about Baudrillard is that he provides these roundabout insights, produced in the reader by creative engagement with the material—if not by clear and well-argued claims. And for every annoying turn of phrase, there's one that's remarkably poetic. If only this would come together, but perhaps any kind of revision for Baudrillard would require too many stages of simulation from the original manuscript. And any attempt to get on Baudrillard's level is going to itself require a guesswork simulation of his original argument. Although there's no such thing as a true original (supposedly?), and the real itself is only a reconstruction, an attempt to undo a simulation with yet another simulation (right?), and so where does he get the philosophical leverage to claim that his ideas (his precious original ideas) were butchered by The Matrix?
spacestationtrustfund's review against another edition
2.0
Je suis d'avis que le postmodernisme est un concept trop écervelé et pourtant il parvient à me donner l'impression que mon cerveau est en train d'être percé d'une perceuse.
schleyer's review
challenging
reflective
3.25
A post-modern foundational work, that focuses on all the ways our culture departs from reality, but frustratingly just leaves it there, without analyzing the real-world causes and effects of these systems. Ultimately, it's kind of an instance of what it diagnoses -- a turning away from reality and meaning.
spencerguo's review
3.0
Some interesting ideas on scientific discovery and animal cruelty (!) but I thought most of the book consisted of simple analyses obfuscated through rather impenetrable writing (although I think this was partially due to the difficulties of translation).
valeriebrett's review
4.0
Hard to rate this since so much of it went over my head BUT super interesting & somehow reads totally relevant in 2021 despite being 40 years old
virtualmima's review
slow-paced
3.5
He forgot to discuss the oldest and most obvious simulation, religion.
This is what the so-called "simulation hypothesis" was really supposed to be, not that bullshit Hollywood brain-in-a-vat thought experiment garbage that was disproven by Kant 240 years ago but which sci-fi obsessed pseudo-intellectuals love to talk about because they watched The Matrix and think they're deep.
This is what the so-called "simulation hypothesis" was really supposed to be, not that bullshit Hollywood brain-in-a-vat thought experiment garbage that was disproven by Kant 240 years ago but which sci-fi obsessed pseudo-intellectuals love to talk about because they watched The Matrix and think they're deep.
frogwithlittlehammer's review
funny
informative
reflective
fast-paced
4.0
This is a book of examples. And Baudrillard is really funny with it honestly he says “(mise en) scene of capital” or something like that and talks about watergate like a clown. The second half lost me when he started getting into dna.
mummey's review
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
5.0
This work was written in 1981 and the examples it cites place the work firmly in that time period. The book’s ideas however, are as relevant today as they ever were. Whereas Baudrillard proposed the idea of Hyperreality to describe the inability to consciously distinguish between reality and a simulation that can be triggered by the saturation of mass media. The growth of social media, leading to the development of concepts such as the algorithmic timeline and coordinated disinformation campaigns, feel like Baudrillard’s ideas reaching extensions of his conclusions despite none of his essays here acknowledging the Internet and its (potential at the time) impact.
Reading Simulacra and Simulation in 2022 feels like being pulled out-of-time as someone who was born around the time of its original publication. The book has gained a secondary purpose as a historical reference for 1960-70s pop culture. The references to Watergate feel fresh. Crash refers not to the 1996 Cronenberg film but to the 1973 novel it was based on. May 1968 took a Wikipedia search to why it was a notable event.
This is the first book in a long time where I did not know what I was getting myself into beforehand and within fifty pages realizing that once I completed the book I would definitely be reading it again.
edmondduong's review
4.0
Baudrillard pushes forth very (at least at his time) radical theories of media, and in hindsight, very well constructed. The entire book captures you with its interesting ideas, but forces you to trudge through a few of its weaker chapters (especially the later chapters). Some imagination required for reading.