Subject: Re: [D-G] mona has Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:08:48 -0800 To: deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-AT-lists.driftline.org I think we must remember that Deleuze was a sort of noble. That he himself had the time to become so complex. One assumes that others do too. But this is not the case. Most have =20 no time for sinking themselves in the DG world. We must realize that doing so is the "noble" was of becoming in the world. A sort of sacrifice is involved. But this very sacrifice is the investment of desire leading to the true destiny of the artist. On Jan 18, 2005, at 3:21 PM, James Depew wrote: > I am not sure that understanding is the goal. Or that there is a goal > at all, for that matter. Deleuze and Guattari's background led them > to *express* something in a particular form. It seems to me that they > tried their best to show how much the form can vary, from artists to > scientists to perverts and philosophers. Life is there, they all say, > how do we find it? A field of forces that takes on unlimited forms. > Absolutely, the writing is extremely difficult. But the possibility > of connection is there. Once you start, you can't stop. Or, more > accurately, you have always been doing it. I don't know, however, if > conversing about it can work. You express yourself, I express myself. > And maybe this is your point. In order to avoid a kind of confusion > over what is being expressed, one has to take the time to attend, > intensely, to what is being expressed. And more than that, why it is > being expressed, and how... > That means investing alot of time and energy, just like reading D&G. > Except, are we really going to do that for each other and for > ourselves. Are we really going to take that much time to make sense > of what appears to be "the same old string of semicoherent slippages"? > > > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:47:16 +0200, Dr. Harald Wenk <hwenk-AT-web.de> > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> in my experience, reading Deleuze and Gusattari is more than hard, >> because the needed backround is vast. >> To be honest, such as you are writing in this group, I doubt >> that there is a lot of real understanding - which in my eyes is more =20 >> due >> to the unneceassarily complicated presentation of D&G, which, as it is >> tested by its seminars, >> Deleuze could do much better, clearer and understandable. >> The main point is in create a very complicated new code, or a lot of >> concepts, >> which are in no obvious relations with the other, also very >> complicated and >> elaborated concepts in Philosophy - if you are so kind to have a look >> at >> Husserl >> or Heidegger or original Kasnt or Hegel oe Schelling - even Spinoza is >> original >> not easy to grasp, what had led to a lot of misinterpretations. >> Now, one can ask, is it worthwhile? >> It would be concerning the schizophrenics. >> Physics, as you know, has really become great, as it left with >> Galilieo and >> Newton everyday experience - which has been code in arestotelian >> physics. >> The first law of Newton, that a moving body stays moving in a >> straight line >> with unaltered velocity is noot everdy, this is Aristotle, where is =20 >> to be >> a mover for keeping the movement, otherwiese it will stop sooner >> (mostly) >> or later. >> Now Quantum Physics and the the theory of relativity are based on >> experiments and mathematical theories, which are both far away from =20 >> everday >> experience (the Michelson Morley experiment is not everday, similar =20 >> with >> Plancks thermodynamical considerations of the radiation of black >> bodies >> leading to his quantum hypothsis). >> This had led to the for yoe all well known state, that modern physics >> is not understable for non specialist - or did anyone not studied in >> physics >> or mathematics really understand the popular writings of Hawking for >> example - and that is not >> in first regard due to Hawking? >> >> But, to come back to D&G, in the theories of mind and thinking >> especially philosophers are not to bring about not to >> start from everday thinking - what do I say - speaking or writing >> behaviour of normal people - as for example Heidegger in zthe preface >> of >> "Time and Being". >> This reminds strongly on Hegels "The way to truth is not to go in >> housegoat". >> =46rom the viewpoint of exploring the human mind it would be of >> much interest to give sophisticated interpretaion of schizophrenic >> experiences. >> As you all know, >> Freud has elaborated his theories mainly the experience with >> neurotics >> (with an overrepresentation of "hysteric" women). >> His tackling of psychosis canot be seriously be spoken of as >> satisfying. >> This one of the starting points of D&G in "Anti-Oedipus". >> This book is, as the title and the interviews around show, >> more of critical value. >> I think, there a few people who have read this book, who didn't ask >> themselves - >> as a question of character more or less in despair - what the hell >> a "machine of desire" should be. >> This a main thing. If you mention to a professional philosopher or >> psychatrist >> the name of D&G t >> they will mostly show, that they didn't read or understand it. >> So what should a poor psychotic patient do with this?. >> >> And that doesen't work. >> >> Things in this area are complicated enough and the tendency to >> bring it back to normal live - "This illnes doesen't really exist" - >> "Ok, sometimes they dont't think at all, >> sometimes they cannot controll their thoughts, >> sometimes they cannot stop thinking anyway - but do not we all have >> some times, where we have such experiences - so, it is quite normal, >> only the frequency >> is a little bit unusuall." >> >> D&G broke down almost every bridge to the >> rest of scientific discours and that in very >> hard to understand way - affording a lot of >> non standard background - >> so that there is no real influence and >> working further on their grounds. >> But the theme of schizophrenia or psychosis >> or non everday experience in the human mind >> as a field of rersearch for philosophy or >> new original psychology is almost blocked by them. >> This is not more than regrettable, this is a catastrophe. >> To speak as a chess player, they have made the worst out of >> this variant of thinking and publishing. >> >> To calm a little bit down. In "Chaosmose" of Guattari you can find, =20 >> if you >> are used >> to the slang, a more understable presentation. >> >> Greetings >> >> Am Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:30:25 +0000 (GMT) schrieb >> verlainelefou-AT-yahoo.com >> <verlainelefou-AT-yahoo.com>: >> >>> >>> Dearest Forest in the east is the priestof repression sounds like she >>> got yer number and its like finding the >>> >>> voice in deleuze sans guattari c'est n'est pas possible. >>> >>> Its all a creation and a becomings. >>> >>> Dada >>> >>> So this is the second deleuze-guattari list that I have joined just >>> intime to see it fall apart? Not enough for a pattern...not yet >>> atleast. Does anyone have a point? I have had poems sent to my >>> inbox,which are interesting and could stimulate discussion; I have =20 >>> had >>> someincoherent free-association pass my way, which also could >>> beinteresting; besides that, mostly banter, oh, and someone asking >>> foretexts. Do I have this straight? People are criticizing someone >>> forasking for texts? Under the pretext that it is some sort >>> ofhierarchically driven authority loving captialist request? >>> What???? >>> Am I missing something? (quite possible since I have only >>> justarrived) >>> Is it: promote creative conceptualisation but let's not readthe books >>> that inspired that idea because they have come to representthe >>> functioning of an overcoding regime? Those of you criticizing:you =20 >>> have >>> read Deleuze and Guattari, right? Or did the ideas manifestin your =20 >>> head >>> spontaneously?Now that would be >>> intersting...foris >>> >>> >>> all my words are on parole >>> http://fictionsofdeleuzeandguattari.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------- >>> ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >>> _______________________________________________ >>> List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org >>> Admin interface: >>> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari- >>> driftline.org >>> >> >> >> -- >> Erstellt mit Operas revolution=E4rem E-Mail-Modul: >> http://www.opera.com/m2/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org >> Admin interface: >> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari- >> driftline.org >> > _______________________________________________ > List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org > Admin interface: > http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org > > Ms. Sylvie Ruelle http://home.earthlink.net/~sylvieruelle rw_artette_lc-AT-yahoo.com _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Admin interface: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005