File spoon-archives/deleuze-guattari.archive/deleuze-guattari_1998/deleuze-guattari.9806, message 216


Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:53:21 +0800
From: Paul Bains <P.Bains-AT-murdoch.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Brusseau book


Thanks for the 'info.'

Is there anything in the bk on the 'scholastics', other than a possible
referral to Scotus. Or any mention of Aristotle.
Brusseau sounds french - is it a translation.

There's a lot of code in your email. I wonder where it's coming from..

Paul. 


At 02:23 PM 6/23/98 +0100, you wrote:
><html>
><font size=3>At 10:09 22/06/98 +0800, you wrote:<br>
>>In all this fucking thinking could you write who/where Brusseau is
>and give<br>
>>the title/pub.date of the bk.<br>
>>Perhaps even his 'take' on D/G - or was it just D?<br>
>>What's 'nice' about it?<br>
><br>
>mm, quite right, nice is such a nasty word.  passing thought really
>and one borne of curiousity as to other thought.<br>
><br>
>details;<br>
>James Brusseau-<br>
>Isolated Experiences, Gilles Deleuze and the solitudes of reversed
>platonism<br>
>pub.suny, 1998<br>
>isbn-0-7914-3672-1<br>
><br>
>what was nice about it, if i'm going to come back to that word, is that
>it seems to have taken the spirit of some of deleuze's writings, or of
>his 'take' on thought, and worked close to or inside that spirit. 
>i'm thinking here of negotiations, which i'm also reading at the moment
>for a review,  and the lightness that comes through in that book,
>the flight, speed, whatever little jargon catchword we want to use to get
>at this 'event' or moment.  <br>
><br>
>but nice isn't really enough is it?  if i wanted nice i'd read eddie
>bunker or something, my novellistic focus at the moment ('dog eat dog'
>and 'no beast so fierce' down so far, another couple coming  through
>on order.  _these_ are great pulp fiction, apparently some of the
>inspiration for tarantino's film.  one day books you stretch to two
>or three days of flash reading.  fucking great.)  no, nice
>never seems enough when there's the matter of thought.<br>
><br>
>i'm still finsihing the book so a 'review' would be inappropriate, yet a
>few things have begun to come out.  the author puts forward an
>argument that rests heavily upon a notion of production and of
>'restricted ontology' that suggests deleuze aims towards redirecting
>philosophies work away from generalities, yet in such a way that a simple
>relativism, if there is such a thing, is not the route taken.  he
>also argues quite strongly that the disengagement with hegel is quite
>central to the 'method' or approach deleuze takes, a disengagement that
>is always going to be, to some degree, unacceptable to hegelians since it
>operates on the basis of the gesture of refusal through ignoring. 
>this chimed with passages from negotiations where deleuze says he is
>uninterested in 'criticisms', always wanting to move on to the next
>thought when a challenge arrives.   there are some brief and
>quite clear passages, such as one about halfway through teh book where he
>outlines the opening that bergson's virtual/actual division gives over
>the possible/real and here the notion of production seems to be beginning
>to actually get to work.  it's difficult, at the moment, to be a lot
>less vague than this.  probably not a lot of help but perhaps if you
>have a specific question then there could be something else.<br>
><br>
>keyman</font>
><BR>
><div>----------------------------------------------------------------------
</div>
><br>
><div>
><a href="http://www.indifference.demon.co.uk/"
EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://www.indifference.demon.co.uk</a></div>
><div>
><a href="http://www.indifference.force9.co.uk/"
EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://www.indifference.force9.co.uk</a></div>
><br>
><div>the only thing we have in common is the illusion of being
together....</div>
><br>
><div>INDIFFERENCE PRODUCTIONS</div>
><div>Pinion Pariahs of Film and Textuality</div>
><br>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
></html>
>


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005