Date: Sun, 17 Sep 95 0:01 BST
From: WIDDER-AT-VAX.LSE.AC.UK
Subject: Re: Susan Says Here It Is, There It Isn't


No Chris, I wouldn't.  First of all, essence in Hegelian terms relates to
definition.    The sense in which essence comes 'after' existence is only the
sense that the world would exist if humans anyway if humans weren't around to
define things.  Second, the whole Hegelian project in this regard is to show
that there is no gap between essence and existence, because existence can be
totally represented in the concept.  In other words, when Hegel talks about
---  Let me start this last sentence again.  In Hegelian understandings of
essence and existence, the full expression of both with out any gap would be
the completion of the project of representation.  When Derrida and Heidegger
invoke a gap between essence and existence in this regard, they are talking
about the failure of representation, and hence are much more in league with
Deleuze.

Why do you think I have so often suggested that the way you're reading Deleuze
re-invokes a representative conception of language, which Deleuze himself 
wouldn't invoke (I think Melissa used to tell you basically the same thing)?

Nathan

     ------------------