this book sounds more interesting to me than Revolt, but the writing style Evola employs in Revolt really put me off his writings, specifically how dense and rambling it is, plus the subject matter turned out being something I only really had a passing interest in anyway. I'm hoping Eros reads better. how does it compare? I've heard someone say it's his best book, or better than Revolt, at least

>>24559552 (OP)
>memed into reading Evola
>memed into taking Evola seriously

>>24559558
His books on esoteric topics are legit great so long as you keep in mind it's his take influenced by his worldview.

People have memed him to death like Mishima, but there's a fire under that smoke.

>>24560030
not to say he shouldn't be read but Guénon is much more interesting

>>24560063
I like Guénon more as a philosopher, but Evola's chops at framing myths are much better. Man should have been a prophet.

>>24559552 (OP)
Coeur has posted recently that Evola is a total mediocrity. I believe him.
captcha: 40N04

>>24560030
>His books on esoteric topics are legit great
Why not just read the primary sources?

>>24560030
>his book is written based on his take on his worldview

you should be skinned

>>24560621
Why, because I recognize the difference between a treatise and a pamphlet?

>>24560620
He makes interesting and insightful connections I haven't seen anywhere else.

But of course, I would encourage anyone to read primary sources.

>>24559558
>metaphysical illiteracy apparent

>>24560030
>>24560063
>>24560072
>>24560371
>>24560620
>>24560621
>>24560685
>>24560689
can you please answer the thread with something substantial and relevant to the post body