Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:55:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Rooney <rooney-AT-tiger.cc.oxy.edu>
Subject: RE: dialectic(can philosophers read deleuze?)




On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, michelle phil lewis-king wrote:

> Yes, I suppose this would be a Derridian view, that one can only go beyond a
> writer or philosopher through an incredibly in depth reading. His praise of
> Bataille's approach to Hegel shows this..Derrida demonstrates how Bataille
> works against Hegel from within.

I'm sure Nathan will reply to this on his own, 
but it should be pointed out that Derrida is
hardly unambiguous in his "praise" of Bataille.
"Restricted to General Economy", like most of
the essays in ED, wants to say that the urge to
go beyond philosophy (or, in this case, Hegel)
is, at least as typically conceived, abortive
and, if it is to be rescued from incoherence,
must be re-read through the double strategies
of differance.


> But then Deleuze isn't Derrida, rather he seems to enact the 'sovereign'
> writing that Derrida heralds. In fact Deleuze takes place 'beyond' Derrida.
> He is a Bataille.

Without going after that claim, let me remind
you that Deleuze is not exactly a fan of Georges
the Nutty Librarian.  I think there's a remark
or two in Dialogues, or maybe in AO or MP, which
is distinctly critical of Bataille's inverted
Catholicism/Hegelianism....


> Deleuze's 'philosophy' from a Hegelian perspective while poor Deleuze is
> only concerned with getting out of his knowledge of Hegel. As with Bataille
> surely we are faced with a writing which dvelops "untenable concepts". From
> a philosophical (hegelian) point of view surely, as Derrida writes of
> Bataille, Deleuze's texts are 'scandals'.

Okay, so you're going for Derrida's re-construction
of Bataille and want to extend it to Deleuze, since
it would seem to exempt Deleuze from having to make
sense or read Hegel fairly.  Frankly, before buying
JD's "we must deconstruct the philosophy in order
to save it", I'd prefer to let Deleuze speak for 
himself and be tenable or untenable on his own terms.
And I'd extend this courtesy to Bataille and Hegel
as well.


Cordially,

M.