File deleuze-guattari/deleuze-guattari.0501, message 47

Subject: Re: [D-G] mona has
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:08:48 -0800

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 <> 
> 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 
>> <>:
>>> 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
>>> ---------------------------------
>>>  ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> List address:
>>> Admin interface:
>> --
>> Erstellt mit Operas revolution=E4rem E-Mail-Modul: 
>> _______________________________________________
>> List address:
>> Admin interface: 
> _______________________________________________
> List address:
> Admin interface: 
Ms. Sylvie Ruelle

List address:
Admin interface:


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005