You are on page 1of 24

READING GUIDE TO Deleuze, G. and Parnet, C. (1987) Dialogues, tran Athlone Press.

[This was apparently written between Anti Oedipus and a Thousand Plateaus, more obscure bits of both pieces, especially things like the face. The last chap politics. The second chapter, on Anglo American literature, is appallingly pseu generalisations one turns on the fact, mentioned rather obscurely in the ear the verb to be, while Anglo American ontology is based on the conjunction a that French philosophers like saying what something definitely is, so that A is multiplicities more clearly by saying A and B. No wonder he had to disguise an

Claire Parnet has obviously managed to do some good work here in getting De really obscure and allusory sections, and Im going to incorporate one below i and kind of ultra leftist here in refusing to engage in a dialogue, for the usual binaries, hed rather work alone than waste time in conversations, and so on. when the lady grabs the pen and it is all rendered en clair {sorry}. I suspect I h chapters are not 'signed',and both seemed to have written a bit. I doubt if any second section of Ch 2 except Deleuze though ( see sample text below)] Deleuze Preface

Whitehead defined empiricism as the view that the abstract does not explain universals, we should find the conditions under which something new is prod the concrete always runs into difficulties because concrete is disunified, comp of the old relationship between theory and practice in education. That almost abstraction which always must encounter complexity in practice. Only some m

Empiricism works the other way round starting with states of things and tryin concepts ( vii)+. States of things are not unities or totalities but multiplicities. dimensions which are irreducible to one another. Every thing is made up in Multiplicities include various focuses, centres, or points which unify, totalize a growth. What counts is what is between the elements, the relations which ar middle like rhizomes. Lines do not proceed from point to point but pass betwe (viii).

Extracting concepts which correspond to multiplicities involves tracing and an or connect, focus or avoid focus. The lines are becomings, not unities and not and of individuations without a subject, as with objects. Concepts exist empir rather than being a subject. Empiricism is a logic of multiplicities. The aim is t Freud, for example. It is hard to think of multiplicities in themselves which do instead, normal terms take on different meanings: the indefinite article as pa without subject, the verb in the infinitive as pure becoming (ix). Anglo Ameri conceptions, and science maths and physics also aim at multiplicity. In politic under the arborescent apparatuses (ix).

The book is a collection of musings or reveries [ramblings as well], between A Guattari and himself and also between Parnet and himself. As usual, its not t

temporary, transitory and evanescent points of subjectivation, but the lines w the conversation format was abandoned and the idea was to show the growin becomings which were unattributable to individuals, since they could not be i became less sure of what came from one, what came from the other, or even meant to write. We wanted a rhizome rather a tree with binary logic. This re or end, but not without middle (x). [Compare this with the Gale collaboration individuals. I must say I find Deleuze evasive or arrogant in taking this view. I to ordinary mortals what on earth he is rambling aboutif we dont get it, its Translators introduction

The original format was an interview or question and answer dialogue, but th principle It is the book as war machine, the book as rhizome ( xi). Apparen seminar at Vincennes. Participants were invited to correct the dualisms to ge dualisms are the enemy. We can see pluralism at work here. However this a intellectual life which is already becoming curiously dated (xii). There are con appears as an empiricist and pragmatist of a particular type: not a passive pr constructive pragmatist whose aim is the manufacture of materials to harn [apparently a saying that emerged from one of the seminars -- sounds like De order words again. Chapter one A Conversation: What is it? What is it For? I [First bit by Deleuze cant you tell! second bit by Parnet]

It is hard to explain yourself to others. When asked a question, it is easy to fin questions. Better to focus on problems rather than solutions, and this doesn isnt adequate either. [There are strong philosophical reasons for this view in major cognitive activity of the reflexive self, a Kantian construction Deleuze w makes Deleuze wants to leave it and go on to something else, just to get out o but generating movement , often behind the thinkers back (2) *could be a d general questions about the future go round in circles, while we want imperce historical, involving orientations. For example there is a woman becoming future, and it is essential that women enter this by coming to get out of the p note that they use terms like woman-becoming to indicate something more th woman]. Revolutionary becomings are not the same as the fate of actual revo from the history of philosophy, but rather through marginals who remain unc

Becoming is not a matter of imitation or conformity to a model; there are no s exchange of terms. Conversations could outline becomings [doubtless what j becoming, have a change in themselves. Becomings involve doubled capture reigns. Nuptials are always against nature. Nuptials are the opposite of a cou wasp and the orchid are an example [again] (2). The wasp become part of the versa. There is a single bloc of becoming (2). Human beings and animals can asymmetrical deterritorialization (3). A commentator on Mozart [not refd] sa

becoming or a-parallel evolution.

Becomings are imperceptible and can only be expressed in a style and contain that matter, and words can always be replaced with other words: You can alw that one, if it doesnt suit you, take another, put another in its place. If each o one another and there is scarcely any reason to ask questions or to raise obje are no metaphors, no literal words, no exact words. We need extraordinary w designate entities.

A lot of journalism produces just empty words, and some books seem to be w treating the book as you would a record you listen to, a film or TV programme is no question of difficulty or understanding: concepts are exactly like sounds, you or not, which are acceptable or arent acceptable. Pop philosophy. There [so is he condemning pop philosophy or not?].

A style is an assemblage of enunciation. Its a kind of stammering in ones ow stammering. It follows from constructing a line of flight [examples include Ka Luca]. These people happen to be bilingual as well, but we can be bilingual ev language, introducing heterogeneity. We can read this way too, as a kind of t they lead to new usages and not new interpretations. The issue is to develop playing or imitating the child, the madman, the woman, the animal, the stam order to invent new forces or new weapons (5).

Life also consists of an awkwardness, a stammering, charm. Life is not history and chances, and this affirms life with strength and obstinacy, persistence in b only point of writing is to demonstrate life through combinations, showing the

Work requires absolute solitude, no disciples, no schools. It is moonlighting a populated with encounters, becomings or nuptials. You can encounter anythi as effects. These encounters produce single becomings, blocs, a-parallel evol but not plagiarism or copying, but creating something mutual even if asymme admires this and sees it as contriving yet improvising, the opposite of plagiaris preparation yet no rules]. Recognising, however, is the opposite of the encou judgements. This is what questions and answers do. Justice and correctness correct ideas [Godard is cited here, especially 6 times 2: showing encounters b between people, showing what the conjunction AND is all about].

Instead of wondering whether ideas are just all correct, its better to look for pass between the two. This encounter could be based on chance or by some learned. The idea is to pick up things [ better than the cut up, page 10, which [fictional?] chance encounter is then related, and Deleuze insists that althoug field or with ideas. Fanny inspired him in this way with ideas coming from beh tortoises [available online via Gutenberg] which meant animal-becomings to h encounter with sounds, gestures, ideas, attention, laughter and smiles [then s

We are deserts, but populated by tribes, flora and fauna (11). This desert is professors of the history of philosophy [one of whom was Hyppolite]. They ha

the Liberation. Sartre, however provided a breath of fresh air from the outsid phenomenology, howevertoo much methods, imitation, commentary and

The elements of power in the history of philosophy appeared, its conformism that students read everything and are still unable to compete with specialists. image of thought effectively stops people from thinking (13). There is a rela beautiful properly spiritual, displaying properties such as universality, metho recognition Always having correct ideas (13). There is also the notion of a R being the official language of the state. In this way The exercise of thought th dominant meanings and to the requirements of the established order (13). T becomings and the rest is denounced.

Even if the state no longer requires philosophy, there are still academic discip he mean methods?+, Marxism with its disturbing notion of a judgment of his when allied with linguistics [good stuff on this below]. Marx,Freud and Saussu imposing an image of language and thought through order-words [the style is without verbs]. Each has its clowns, its professors and its little chiefs (14).

Deleuze always preferred those who seem to have escaped the tradition [the Hume, Bergson, Spinoza and so on]. All express positive and affirmative tend including Spinoza and Nietzsche [but N despises S, at least in Beyond Good an

The encounter with Guattari changed a lot of things. It triggered a lot of beco named individual but something which was happening, and not a subject (16 and becomings. The earlier books described a new way of thinking that did no possible even if we failed (17). The desert expanded and became more popu stopped thinking of themselves as authors, they stole from each other. They used terms but understood them quite differentlywitness bodies without

In another example, Guattari was interested in black holes, while Deleuze was flight and how to overcome them. Its like transmitting signals from black hol wall are in fact a face, a broad face with white cheeks and pierced black holes abstract machine which produces faces, and this becomes politicalhow doe overcodes the body and head? (18). So the face has astronomical, aesthe metaphor, but using deterritorialized terms in order to reterritorialize anothe being identified, labelled, recognised (18). This shows how work proceeds to establishing a line between them.

This is the pick up method *apparently Fannys term+. Its a stammering, mult relation between ideas which are deterritorialized to form a bloc.

Deleuze doesnt want to reflect on these efforts, but talk about his new book them, many from Felixs side (black hole, micro politics, deterritorialization, a practising method, to produce something that doesnt belong to either, but lie must multiply the sides, break every circle in favour of the polygons (19).

II [Now Parnet's turn]...

Some questions can be servile or treacherous, and they tend to favour dualism interviewer and the interviewee, even in a colloquium, where choices are ofte worked out in terms of probable answers, constituting a kind of grid for under examples with its [populist ventriloquism nearly, page 20]. It is a kind of for possibilities.

Psychoanalysis often reduces meaning in this way, for example when a patien hippie+, the manipulator replies Why do you say big pee? *gros pipi+ (20) *o insists]. This is selective listening and forced choice. It is successful when it fo utterances and it renders meaningless those things that do not fit the grid. Ps name of the unconscious.

Binaries are an important aspect of power, generating dichotomies to pin dow deviancy You are neither white nor black, Arab then? (21). This is the whit importanteverything has to have the proper face for the role. In this way, they all have to be typical, or you will be labelled as an outsider. The ordinary

Linguistics and informatics proceed with binaries. However, language is index are claiming to be able to read non verbals?]. Language like this is meant to b much as information [with the school teacher singled out]. The normal mode redundancy intended to overcome noise, but rather redundancy intended to orders. Shouts, silence and stuttering can also be present, though, but mostly

In everything that Deleuze writes, there is the theme of 'an image of thought ofDifference and Repetition?]. [Parnet addresses Deleuze directly here, no do dialogue. There is almost a missing question mark at the end of each sentenc becoming and gaps between. The history of philosophy tries to crush though whole organisation which effectively trains thought to operate according to th moreover, installs in its an apparatus of power, sets it up as an apparatus of p certainly strong dominant ideology] Some tribunal or universal state regulates new images for thought, which would lead to correct ideas, based on the goo

The image of a common sense *implies+ harmony of all the faculties of the being set up as a model of the activities of the thinker which apparently is con error, turning on mistrusting external influences, and an image of knowledge questions and problems which are supposedly given. (24).

How can thought shake off these models? New thoughts might come from a discordance of the faculties; by resisting closure through recognition, and ope overcoming stupidity rather than error; it would focus on movements of learn own problems. Deleuze finds in the philosophers he likes not recognition, but these people were independent not just predecessors of himself. Spinoza dev aphorisms which are the opposite of an authors maxims (25), and Foucault

author. This function would subordinate thought to a conventional image aga

The work with Felix opposes rhizomes to trees, and again trees are about ima with origins and centres, a structure, a grid, or hierarchy. Power is always arb academic disciplines (25). Yet thought is not binary or dichotomous, but mult becoming, non parallel evolutions, connections between heterogeneous bein

Academic schools are arborescent, with their own tribunals and hierarchies. T predecessors. Schools now feature marketing, aimed at producing newspape books. It is complex though, because there is an implicit doubt about the auth to the views of critics, textual shifters, reading formations and all the rest?]. W the auteur in cinema [would she have used this line as a criticism of Deleuze, journalization of the writer (27), and vulgarization following from marketing. without authors? Others are claiming authority as enunciators as well.

Instead of subjects, we should think of collective assemblages of enunciation musicians and painters can find links in their encounters. This is what convers specialists. There is a constant struggle not to be domesticated by the media, living line, a broken line (28), to refuse to take part in schools or marketing, o (28).

Middles matter rather than beginnings or ends. Questions asking people to ta transform themselves, but not as embryology or evolutionthere is no past o but rather involution. This is the opposite of evolution but also of regression restrained step, just as elegance means the opposite of being overdressed, o underdoing it [the goldilocks school! The middle as the golden mean?]. Anim reference]. Experimentation is involution, so is an attempt to achieve simplici Becketts characters are an example. Sometimes people mask themselves to ends and beginnings.Deleuze wants Guattari to be his mask and vice versa [so

Rhizomes, at least as weeds, overflow, grow between. This is the theme in An grass. This is why there is no strongly established specialised English philosop from Miller and Woolf, page 30]. Middles are not averages and moderations. [the latter is the speed of movement between two elements, which traces the intensity. Nomads have no history only geography [lots of pseudy bits from Ka

Deleuze and Guattari suggest that nomads invented the war machine, which m can only try to appropriate war machines against nomads. It then became a m multiplicity. Nomadic thought shakes state apparatuses.

Speed is an important and also complex notion. It is found in becomings. Spe relative, for example in old becoming which defines successful old ages W people (32). It is the same for writing, which ought to produce speed of this lines and not points [with some weird pseudy stuff to follow about different k Blacks dance, they are not seized by a rhythm demon, they hear and perform

Conversations are not easy if you dont want to take stock and recollect. Dele

machines, but they seem to impose other dualismsacts of thought without machines against states, geography against history [good point Claire]. If ling there, in language. Linguistics enshrines them and we should be fighting agai of minority languages, variants as Labov says (34). We do not escape dualism adding the elements to a set depends on the choice which is itself binary [ano plateaus to include in their collective ramblings, was that a binary choice I wo is not the number of elements, but the relations between themconjunction appears as a third term. Dualisms can be undone from the inside, by examinin

The rest of this book could be like thateach chapter could have two parts, w relation between anonymous parts, including all the others in our lives, which Chapter two On the Superiority of Anglo American Literature I

Literature is about escape, flight or deterritorialization, and the French have n avoiding commitments, but something active. Its not just in the imaginary. S about fleeing as searching for a weapon appears here, page 36]. Following a l American authors show this well. American literature in particular is based on frontier. The French are too worried about future and past [absolutely ridicul Parisian salons?]. Structuralism demonstrates this systematic thinking and clo

There is no actual need to travel in order to fleea flight can happen on the s stay put appears here, page 37]. Maps display intensities, geography is more criticism of Melville says that the voyage was taken too literally, and he did no break. There is always the danger of rediscovering the old order, reproducing Fitzgeralds alcoholism or Woolfs suicide. It is necessary to constantly rescue and this is why it jumps from one writer to another (36). The French search pick up the line and join a segment to it, prolonging the middle. They prefer g counter point to trees, not rhizomes]the brain is a particular nervous syste Roses book, The Conscious Brain!].

For Thomas Hardy, characters are collections of intensive sensations (39-40) individuations without a subject, and their actions follow along the lines of c go off the rails(40) *so this is actually his own quote+.

A flight is demonic, jumping across intervals and featuring the betrayal of the deterritorialization of man, a turning away from God and vice versa. There ar 41]. Apparently the English understand the OT as the foundation of the nove lot, page 41]. French literature features lots of tricksters. Shakespeares Rich *apparently, when he chooses Anne, this displays a woman-becoming (42)+.

Ahab shows treachery by choosing the whale rather than the laws of the fishe becoming (42). *Further examples from Kleist appear page 42, and he appare German order+. The key here is the appearance of the Anomalous, which is

already suggesting becoming.

Writing traces lines of flight which one is indeed forced to follow, because in there (43). These becomings are found in writing itself. Writing inevitably pr their own account: minorities are formed by writing [actualised?]. Writing oft it is not the same as writing like a womaneven sexists like Lawrence or Mille Negro becomings Indian becomings, and animal becomings (43). Th the whale, and nor Lawrence the tortoise. It is rather an encounter between where each is deterritorialized...*a+ conjunction (44). These encounters are n writer becoming, where events they are describing stop them dead and lea create, lose ones identity, become unknown.

However, the final aim of writing is to become imperceptible. To pierce throu unknown at last (45). This is difficult to achieve, although Fitzgeralds notion system, which might be called the white wall/black hole system pins us down the black hole of our ego(45). The wall displays all the objective determinati production, a necessary one . Becoming imperceptible means breaking with t of the world (46). If you have nothing to hide, no dirty little secrets, no one c

Language attempts to interpret us and itself. The signifier is the little secret [f phantasm. Battaille made the phantasm the essence of literature, and its har cinema. The signifier invites interpretation. New versions of priests are alway wall/black hole.

It is necessary to turn into pure flux, without phantasm and without interpret reaction to Parnets comments?]. On a line of flight there is only experimenta here]. There are no phantasms, only programmes of life which are forever bei never endless interpretations and finished experiments, found in the laboriou (48). Kleist and Kafka develop programs for life, not manifestos, but reference [!], in that the interpretations are always being dismantled and there is no Fre

The line of flight does not flee from life, into the imaginary or into art, but cre reduces life to the personal, and finds some worthwhile end in itself or in the writing. It is often the most shameless unity of neurosis (49). Personal critic based on resentment, reducing the work to something pitiful. A lot of judgme appear.

In reality writing does not have its end in itself, precisely because life is not so personal power, abandoning any conventional territories or ends. The best w all the minoritybecomings of the world (50). This must involve deterritoriali these becomings and have no territory. They offer conjunctions, where life es bullshit about writing as a love letter, writing as a means to a more than pers II

Assemblages not words or ideas, concepts or signifiers are the minimum real are always collective and which refer to populations multiplicities, territories

not designate subjects but the relations between terms. Authors might be su are not. Writers invent assemblages starting from assemblages which have in another*!+ (52). Assemblages are not necessarily homogenous, but cofunctio interaction of bodies, and their accompanying populations. Were not talking

The author as enunciator can identify with characters, with the idea they repr create worlds though. Its necessary to speak and write with the world or wit outer worlds, being in the middle.

Distance and identification are traps. It is easy to get contaminated by neurot who try to convince us of their scientific observations. Instead, we need to st life, to assemble. This involves extraction of life forces from madness or from

[Then she admits there are some repetitions in this account, but recommends just ritornellos that track back, but all music, all writing] On Empiricism

Empiricism is philosophising as a novelist (54). According to the official (Fren what is intelligible comes from what is sensible, a typical way of stifling life an inevitably lead to dualisms [cf the dreadful classifications of A-level Sociology+ sensible (54), and first principles are not very useful except in getting things m

The real question is whether 'relations are external to their terms (55). This i experiment and never interpret. The notion of exterior relations implies a wo or conjunctions and separations. This is not reducible to just the one stateme rather the Hume-assemblage, page 56]. The likeness to novels bit comes in b

This geographic conception of relations is about why things actually are, whic to be and the quest for principles. English and Americans focus on conjunctio as the only process in thought. There are strong tendencies for judgements to conjunctions to be dominated by the verb to be, and they must be strongly re empiricists think like this. Their concept of the multiple is no longer an adject multiplicity which constantly inhabits each thing (57). A multiplicity is not jus AND.

England and America have imposed this conception, since their language is im on the practice of permitting all sorts of minority languages to find a place in i subtle syntax. It can provide the experience of being a foreigner in your own construct proper composite words, the English link words with an and, and de to make it move.

Empiricism is syntax and experimentation, syntactics and pragmatics, a matte On Spinoza

He has connected the soul and the body and thus explore the conjunction. He individuals of a lower order (59). Different individuals are assembled on a va

always contingent. Spinoza wants to ask what can a body do of what affects to move things]. Affects are becomings which can make us stronger or weake connected to the actions of the established powers (61). Bodies are capable affects, and even lice have considerable power to affect our lives. Even the si build webs. This shows the resilient obscure stubborn characteristics of life. souls.

The established powers tried to make us sad, persuade us that life is a burden transmitting neurosis and resentment. Free people need to organize more en make their bodies more than organisms, and thought more than consciousne argument for a single assemblage of soul and body, relationships, powers affe wanting to pass on his life to someone else, not just to seek salvation for it. On the Stoics

They inhabit the dark and agitated world with mixtures of bodies interacting w way to separate good compounds from bad ones, but there is 'a sort of incorp things, an extra being that surrounds normal beings, expressed in the infinitiv greening being a way to describe actual green objects+. The stoics drew a lin between things and events, states of things and compounds qualities and sub

[Then my notes on the section of actual text scanned in below, just so you can

Infinitive verbs are limitless becomings'(64) with no subject, attributed to sta indicates what can be communicated without reference to the conventional s verbs]. What they do is increase the speed of communication. 'True novels' o differentiation.

Physical depths and metaphysical surfaces are connected. It is tempting to th depths act as quasicauses, which trace a surface [and offer more possibilities independence from the bodies that have initiated them. They emerge. They pin down the exact location of a battle [further discussed in L of S]. There is a event. Love and death both show these additional dimensions, beyond the ph

Stoic morality argues that we must always be worthy of these dimensions, ne physical wound, but adopt a fatalistic stance towards the processes that prod but rather an act of counter- effectuation [counteractualization in L of S], an u

We live in danger of being dominated by our physical bodies, including those pain. The Stoical way is to try to be worthy of what happens (66), to will dea of love rather than simply wanting to be loved, to discover the pure event, ev events have this additional atmosphere. It is difficult to think of the event, an English have thought in this way' (66), and the example here is HP Lovecraft a he finds on the far side of the moon. [Now in pure Deleuzian]

p64 Dialogues

Verbs in the infinitive are limitless becomings. The verb to be has the charact least to a possible one, which overcodes it and puts it in the first person of th they refer only to an it of the event (it is raining) and are themselves attribu collectives, assemblages, even at the peak of their singularity. HE TO WAL YOUNG - SOLDIER TO FLEE, THE SCHIZOPHRENIC STUDENT OF LANG ORCHID. The telegram is a speed of event, not an economy of means. True p the elementary units of novels or of events. True novels operate with indefin undifferentiated, proper names which are not persons: the young soldier w Stephen Granes book, the young student of languages in Wolfson . . .

There is a strict complementarity between the two; between physical things How could an event not be effected in bodies, since it depends on a state an produced by bodies, the breaths and qualities which are interpenetrating he exhausted by its effectuation, since, as effect, it differs in nature from its cau bodies, which traverses and traces a surface, object of a countereffectuati bodies which collide, lacerate each other or interpenetrate, the flesh and the an impassive, incorporeal, impenetrable battle, which towers over its own ac question p65

Where is the battle? has constantly been asked. Where is the event, in wha spontaneously, Where is the storming of the Bastille? Any event is a fog of a move, to smile, etc., are events, it is because there is a part of them which becoming in itself which constantly both awaits us and precedes us, like a th dying is engendered in our bodies, comes about in our bodies, but it comes f like the battle which skims over the combatants, like the bird which hovers a that incorporeal surface which engenders it. So that, agents or patients, whe happens to us. Stoic morality is undoubtedly this: not bei ng inferior to the ev is something that I receive in my body, in a particular place, at a particular m impassive, incorporeal event. My wound existed before me, I was born to em to resign oneself, still less to play the clown or the mountebank, but to extra to counter-effectuate the event, to accompany that effect without body, tha immaculate part. A love of life which can say yes to death. This is the genuine fascinated by the little girl whose body is worked on by so many things in the substance. We live between two dangers: the eternal groaning of our body, w which lacerates it, an oversized body which penetrates and stifles it, an indig bumps against it, a germ which gives it a pimple: but also the P 66

histrionics of those who mimic a pure event and transform it into a phantasm succeed in establishing among men and works their being as it was before b songs of metaphysical suffering, how is one to trace out ones narrow, Stoica extracting something gay and loving in what happens, a light, an encounter, which was bankruptcy of the will, I will substitute a deathwish which will b loved I will substitute a power to love: not an absurd will to love anyone or a

extracting the pure event which unites me with those whom I love, who awa awaits us, Eventum tantum. Making an event however small - is the most drama or making a story. Loving those who are like this: when they enter a r atmospheric variation, a change of hue, an imperceptible molecule, a discret really changed. Great events, too, are made in this way: battle, revolution, lif is not easy to think in terms of the event. All the harder since thought itself t Stoics and the English have thought in this way. ENTITY = EVENT, it is terror, Lovecraft spoke of it, the horrific and luminous story of Carter: animal beco

Note 19...Joe Bosquet, Traduit du Silence,Paris: Gallimard, and Les Capitales, discussion of the event , notably in LEspace Litteraire, Paris: Gallimard 1955

[You see what I have to put up with]

Modern science may not be axiomatic any more. As well as attempting to dev still also delirious, pursuing lines of flight, despite the efforts of officials to con undiscoverable particles' (67). Sciences becoming event-centred, taking leaps rhizomatic movement. There is Thom's catastrophe theory, and the notion of There is no attempt to build a structure, although 'the apparatus of power wil

There is a difference between irony and humour [again discussed in LofS]. Iro humour is the art of consequences, pure events, surface effects. [And lots of

An assemblage is a multiplicity which is made up of many heterogeneous term them' (69). The only unifying element is cofunctioning or symbiosis, alliances assemblages which they enter, for example: 'MAN - HORSE - STIRRUP' (69), w knight. This change is both man and animal. It's not technology that makes a it and assembles it, its phylum *see DeLanda]. Machines can also affect socia culture. The conjunction of different elements should be understood as desire

An assemblage has states of things or bodies, and utterances which permit ne ideology, there is no ideology: utterances, no less than states of things, are co is no base or superstructure in an assemblage' (71) [either by definition or the any analysis.No becomings between one and the other? This would be too mu left with is endless production. They can't see how a politics can emerge eithe exactly? In what sense are they still marxists as D&G claim in Negotiations?] U claim to be doingthey are really 'assembling signs and bodies as heterogene follows that enunciation, part of an assemblage, has no subject , and refers no seems to be that utterances forge the unity of different components in an ass coexist absurdly with 'intense machinic formalization (71), producing 'One an bodily passions, Desire'[beats me].

Assemblages move within and without territories, showing re and deterritoria knights wander but required serfs to stay put. The territory therefore is an ele to deterritorialization and recoding, and both are combined in an assemblage elements which introduce heterogeneity, but there is also endless becoming, Lewis Carroll says, it is when the smile is without a cat that man can effectivel

sings or paints, it is man who becomes animal but exactly at the same time as

Painting, writing and composition differ only in terms of 'the abstract line they line. Philosophy only arises where there is deterritorialization in such activitie

Writing either reterritorializes by adopting the dominant code, occupying the involves becoming something other than a writer. Everything that becomes is a pure line which ceases to represent (74). [Then a lot of pseudy rubbish wh again]. [Then there seems to be some disappointment that the readership do writes only for illiterates', but then 'Only the animal in man is addressed' (75)] *Thank God that chapters over+ Chapter three Dead Psychoanalysis: Analyse I

Psychoanalysis breaks up productions of desire and prevents the formation of and positive role of the unconscious, and sees it as only producing failures or desire, but sees it as polymorphous perversion, lack. As one example, fellatio as cows udder/mothers breast, not as a pleasure in its own right. Everything are the oedipal or the death drive, and the only real objects are the partial dri broken up or reduced to these terms.

Instead, the unconscious has to be produced, not just seen as a residue of chi present and turn into childbecoming. There is no subject nor fixed object of either. Desire is the system of asignifying signs with which fluxes of the unco always revolutionary, seeking more connections, but psychoanalysis domestic

The same goes for utterances. Assemblages deal with indefinite articles and p be groups, animals, entities, singularities, collectives, everything that is writte (79). The assemblage is a material production of desire and an expressive ca to a subject, not overcoded by a tyranny of supposedly significant combinatio personal and the definite, usually the mother and father, single issues and nev

Little Hans has produced his own assemblage of buildings, buses, horses, but animalbecoming because every other way out has been blocked up (80). Fr as I recall, this is Hanss fathers reading, and Freud wants to add to it the inte horses pull as symbols for the womb and Hanss anxiety that his mother migh visiting his new cousins. The fallen horses whose feet drum was originally tho Hanss father said that this could not have been witnessed+. The whole story oversymbolic relationships (80). Desire has been coded or over coded.

Patients are not allowed to talk. Its possible to show this by listening to what psychoanalysts hear [so this must be Parnet writing. It is quite clear as well]. for Klein [details page 81, arguing for the importance of the analysts mapping to break Richard]

These days, Freudians do not interpret like this, but discover signifiers, structural functi has replaced my daddy' (81), but the dominant interpretations remain [the example o as able to interpret as the analyst! The terms have been swapped over, the symbolic, changed in the role of psychoanalyst as priest [Lacan himself is exonerated to some e than as an indication of the committee of the patient. The style is portentous, 'insole

Another change is that psychoanalysis has spread into therapy, even marketing, or it h still detectable.

(1) Psychoanalysis now looks at married life rather than the family, and claims to be ab element of childhood memory that is relevant. Patients are now referred by friends. belonging! Curing them would be bad for business [I'm putting it a bit crudely]. May now follows the idea of a political micro -contagion, not a private family model.

(2) Psychoanalysis has never been good at dealing with real madness, but rather with diluted the notion of madness, implying that we are all mad 'a whole "psychopathol the failure of psychiatry to deal with madness, and this appeal to the otherwise norm structured around a contracta flux for words for a flux of money (84). However, ev principle, based on a mass audience, involving a transition from contract to statute Freudian school (Ecole Freudienne de Paris] clearly presupposes this statute and the e certificates of citizenship (85). It became imperialist and regulatory, replacing indivi were hypocritical from the start (86). This is not to say that psychoanalysis is availab like social workers who get increments as a result of being psychoanalysed. Neverthe official language.

(3) There have been changes in theory, for example from signified to signifier, which pr interpretation to signifiance [sic]. This makes psychoanalysis now entirely internally s whether or not there is an actual cure. There is no experiment any more, only a signi deviance, but located in the established order. The point is to change the imaginary o psychoanalysis. Clearly there is a power relation. It is as Foucault says, every formati or officially as a symbolic order.

There is no State which does not need an image of thought which will serve as its axiomatic system or abstract m

inadequacy of the concept of ideology, which in no way takes into account this relationship. This was the unhap

Church and State, with the knowledge that suited them. Could we say today that the human sciences have assu

ideology, surely? They must have in mind the old base/superstructure Germ Bourdieu says]

Psychoanalysis attempts to do this, to replace philosophy, although the appar biology and informatics. But psychoanalysis does attempt to weld itself with are still too many rivals, and psychoanalysis is being abandoned by all the forc simply attempts to overcode assemblages to domesticate desire by reducing i subjective examples (88).

[This next bit can only be Deleuze] They have been accused of making blunde being read as though it was about the Law and lack. Only priests are intereste between a subject and object, the subject must necessarily be split and the ob

was more than something with personological or objectal coordinates (89). consistency, a field of immanence a body without organs as Artaud put it ( not tied to objects or subjects, not internal to a subject or connected to an ob attained except at the point where someone is deprived of the power of sayin object. Critics have said that therefore it is indeterminate and shows even mo abandoning subjects and objects means that you lack something [the bourgeo infinitive verbs are not signs of lack. The voids and deserts of the body withou example is the void of the anorexic body without organs (90), but is part of d things?]. Desert and voids host particles that cross them.

We often see the desert and the void as an image related to death, meaning t established plane of consistence which is identical to desire (90) is full of par Lawrence says, chastity is a flux (90). We can feel the plane of consistence ev finding places, assemblages, particles, and fluxes [not by reflection surely?]. D been called grace. Those who see it as lack are suffering from resentment, an something (91). Psychoanalysis has said its not worried about real privations construct a plane of consistence. When they do, they can pursue desires and outside (91) *learn to stop worrying about money and enjoy the sunshine?+

There is also a plane of organization which develops forms and subjects, altho organisedjust as the principles of composition emerge from a piece of perfo transcendence, a kind of design, in the mind of man or in the mind of a god (9 Bergson], although it is seen as a part of nature or the unconscious. The Law genres, themes, motifs Harmony of forms, education of subjects (92).

The plane of consistence on the other hand features relations of movement, s elements. Here we find, not subjects but haecceities [Deleuze offers his own e

Haecceitas is a term frequently used in the school of Duns Scotus, in order to designate the individuat this type. This is the thesis developed in Mille Plateaux with Felix Guattari.

individuation which is not that of an object, nor of a person, but rather of an event (wind, river, day or

These are intensities which combine into a perfect individuality which should formed subject (92). It can last as long as or longer than these developed for S -- roughly, virtual time not objective time]. Haecceities are degrees of pow affect and be affected, active or passive affects, intensities (92). [Woolf refer road example though]. Haecceities are expressed in indefinite articles, prope verbs. Things, an animal, the person are now only definable by movements a affects, intensities (latitude) (93) *anticipating TP. A note explains that these sense]. They show cinematic relations between unformed elements (93). Th assemblages. Nothing develops, but elements of haecceities arrive late or ea privileged rather than slowness.

This plane is opposed to the plane of organization. Its truly immanent, posse it. Its not a design but a geometrical plane. It includes Forces, plagues, avoid (94). [Delirium breaking out again] [musical examples of varying time signatu randomised page 94]. Spinoza was already on to this idea, so was Nietzsche,

formation but successions of catatonic states and periods of extreme haste .. the eternal return a fixed plane selecting the always variable speed and slown an assemblage which cannot be read twice, which cannot replay without ch elements (95)+. All this is contained within the process of desire.

Desire refers to speed and slowness in between particles, affects, intensities a apparently simple. Sleeping is desire, so is walking, so is spring, so is old age [ everything, which makes it a rather pointless concept?]. Critics have said this revolutionary festival. Critics point out that there are those who are prevente natural force? [Some sort of humanist anthropology?]. However, desire mus determinate assemblages. Groups and individuals must construct the plane o being domesticated and restrained: The only spontaneity in desire is doubtle exploited, enslaved, subjugated (96). But there must be something positive. in practice?+ It is revolutionary it is constructivist, not at all spontaneist (96). [inMassumis sense, they are therefore populist, not state organised not mola

There are no internal drives, especially no death drive, and no structural or ge of assemblages, not drives based on memories, but elements which can creat relations with the outsidelittle Hans and the street, the bus, the parents are politics of assemblages herein this sense everything is political (97). There things. Desire is not symbolic, not figurative, not signified or a signifier, but a does not preexist its assemblages.

Assemblages are continuums of intensities, fluxes and particles [and Schuman ritornello here is seen as a childhood bloc]. We understand his music as a mo assemblage. Guattari says desire is a ritornello, but this is an example only, a r example of a whole movement of re and deterritorialization.

Pleasure is different, but it interrupts desire as a discharge rather than constit affect, say in persons, in the face of overwhelming processes of desire. It is a which belongs to the notion of desire as lack. Other goals are possible, for ex how history is really about specifying different sorts of haecceities, page 100]. of religious and hedonistic elements, 'the warrior flux and the erotic flux' (101 not nature. Desire can also be ascetic. Desire explains the masochist assemb [procedure] to constitute a body without organs and develop a continuous pr would come and interrupt' (101).

Sexuality does not operate as an infrastructure in assembling desire, nor ener others. No assemblage can be reduced to just one flux. Pure sexuality is not is an unfortunate connotation of Guattaris phrase desiring machines, and it (101). Sexuality needs to be understood as producing haecceities in combinat phantasms. It is not just flow between two people, two sexes in a binary relat changes, for example as people age. The lines and coordinates that make us u to dead ends can be replaced by those which are more active.

Psychoanalysis has chosen a particular route through sexuality which leads to enclosing lines of escape. *Just above that, page 102, psychoanalysis is descri

coded narcissism', based on the idea that 'the masturbator the only one who II

Desire is misunderstood if it is related to lack or law; a natural and spontaneo (103). It is always assembled on a plane of immanence or composition which historically determined, but it is the real agent in an assemblage, so that one and lack as being excluded from one [quite a bit of backpedalling going on her

The term machinic does not mean mechanical or organic, it means a system w machine, where elements just need to be proximate [seems to contradict the centre of gravity which moves along an abstract line or produces actual lines. operator is present in the machine, in the centre of gravity or rather of spee cinematic auteurs?]. Human beings act only because they are parts of a mach addressing the issue of whether machines are universal, capable of doing eve structures, since they order heterogeneities. A social machine always comes its stock (104) *this is about the closest we get to understanding the social d a machine a socialmachine?].Individual tools only operate within machine ass objects *as in the horse and stirrup example+ *so no technological determinism primary sense (105).

It is the same with organisms which presuppose a body without organs, a wh organic functions and from mechanical relationships. The intense egg (105). desire continuums of intensity, blocks of becoming, emissions of particles, c define regimes of signs, where signs again presuppose a regime. There is no p particular, except to regimes into which the variables of desire enter (105).

As examples of possible regimes, one might be particularly dominated by a ce circle, and the whole of them refer back to the centre of significance [clear as indeed traced back to the central signifier, which recharges the whole regime radiating out to the circles [they actually seem to have in mind a centrist polit controlling a periphery through bureaucratic or priestly systems as in all the regimes, though, with packets or blocs of signs, offering finished segments. T with some decisive external event (106). This can be expressed as an emotio subjectivation, eventually producing a subject of utterance (107). This invol incomprehensible shit about faces turning away and appearing in profile, trea reverse Althusserian stuff about how subjects appear only by turning their ba bit like Bourdieu here}some kind of account of social change?]. This is appa

These regimes can be referred to any period or condition, social formations, p binary seems to underpin all the possibilities?]. Thinking of social formations unrefd] based on the Hebrew and the Pharoah, the latter being the despot, an segmented into various authoritarian processes or stages, with charismatic pr his back on God! I get it!].

We can also see the distinction in two types of deliriumparanoid and interp signifier, or a passionate external kind, but developed in little segmented stag

imagination. Early psychiatry confused these two. The more creative kind be focused on a particular person, not always ones self+, then develops a line of it is pursued with passion *maybe thats what they mean, page 109+.

These generalisations should be replaced by specific analyses, for example of whatever. *And what should we make of this: Homage to Fanny: the case of with other fluxes like the ones about clothes. The anorexic body without orga intensities. It is not a matter of a refusal of the body, it is a matter of a refusa makes the body undergo (110) *so thats that cleared up!]. Its not just a mat from the norms of consumption in order not to be an object of consumption o dependency on organic functions+. Anorexics betray hunger and betray the f politics -- because theres always politics as soon as there is a continuum of in simple lack.

Why does anorexia often end in self destruction? Apparently, dangers arise in that must be taken up by a method other than psychoanalysis (111) *verging

There are an infinite number of examples. They all show the regime of signs w an actual assemblage, such as a machine of subjectivation, and assemblages w and proximities, enabling development at different levels and locationsa pe enterprises. Delirium is not just personal, but world historical *with a long unr Negro... Deleuze has used this before and I could look it up if I could be bothe different concrete assemblages, and these in turn are made up of different ele ends with we know where relatives and associates, and never our neighbours from another planet. Only neighbours matter. History is an introduction to de introduction to history (113). What a dick!]

We should simultaneously study all the regimes of pure signs, from the point and also all the concrete assemblages, from the point of view of the mixtures are infinite]. [Some analysis of paintings ensue, based on different ways of de with varied types of regimes of signs and abstract machines. Psychoanalysis c composite [possibly using both structuralism and personifications, which lead while investigating personal passionate regimes as well].

Psychoanalysis should show how the different regimes of signs are found in a translated into another. This would be an account of how assemblages mutat language. The latter, at least in the structuralist guise can operate as an abstr language. But this is not abstract enough and proper analysis also involves an pragmatics, as committed to desire. This provides a heterogeneous flux pres itself the whole of linguistics (115), with Kafka and Barthes cited in support *I work]. Guattari has taken up some work of Labov above all, and argues that (1) pragmatics are essential, as the micro politics of language;

(2) there is no competence separate from performance, no invariants or unive

(3) abstract machines operate on language from the outside, providing it with

(there is no subject of enunciation), at the same time as they provide conte (there is no signifier of desire) (116);

(4) there are several languages in any one language, and this allows one to stu deterritorialize assemblages. Languages have lines of flight, displayed in rich line (116).

There are no functions of language, only regimes of signs and assemblages of to language [there are other signs in the regime?]. To consider language on it for considering writing on its own. Labov has discovered in language the imm or the development States of combinations of fluxes in content and express isSociolinguistic Patterns, 1972]. Words can be used in different regimes of si no metaphors, only combinations (117). [Examples from poets follow, and th Wolfson, mentioned in AO, I think, who invents his own mixture of languages]

So pragmatics refers to a context of machine components. Regimes of signs display lines of flight and discover new connotations or directions (118). The mutates. Everything depends on the plane of organization and the plane of co is imperialistic, but on the other it is constantly contaminated by other langua look at pragmatic or diagrammatic processes, mapping lines of flight, showing a war machine, or develop a work of art, how some are blocked and over cod depends on combinations of fluxes. [Much more empiricist than the general p Note by GD *as if we havent had enough from him!+

This interest in regimes of signs shows what he was trying to do when he anal only with Guattaris collaboration. He doesnt want to cause authors sadness are no longer objects or simply people we can identify with: Avoid the double (119). Recapture joy and energy. He thinks the book on Kafka would have ple book pleased nobody (119) *touchy again!+.

Criticism should be the outline of the plane of consistence of the work, show clinic *some strange French term?+ would pick out the lines and show how so psychoanalysis, interpretation, or linguistics. Only:

(1) an analysis of proper names as referring to haecceities not subjects, so tha more than a person (120). Specific named assemblages may be traced to bro some assemblages gain proper names and not others? Proper names also de emergence of a new haecceity from a previously mixed collection of symptom collective [maybe];

(2) the regimes of signs are self sufficient, not determined by linguistics or psy assemblages of enunciation and desire. The content of work is not just about of desire internal and external to the work, and which are composed along wi content and expression. Every assemblage is collective. Kafka combines the t Proust. Where there was expression in earlier regimes, this can become the c

occur;

(3) regimes of signs move along lines or gradients, variable with each author plane of consistence, an immanent real plane which was not preexistent (12 expresses in a flood of signs *maybe+ and a flood of influences, including dieta interacting, not forms arising from a structure, a genesis, or a human subject. (123). Literature may connect with minority languages to develop a new asse know. I think one of them might be Kafka who uses his minority Czech Germa proper name reaches its highest individuality by losing all personalityimperc Josephine the chick Why?+ Chapter four Many Politics

Individuals and groups are made up of lines. Some are segmentaryfamily to molecular which make detours, form a flux with a threshold. Becomings and line. They do not follow the same sequence as family histories. Professions h way. There is also a more wayward line, not foreseeablethe line of gravity o gradient (125). Perhaps not everyone has this line. Nevertheless it is primary lines are studied by What we call by different namesschizoanalysis, micro p cartography (125). Apparently a short story by Fitzgerald shows this, and refe also identifies lines of crack [see L of S] which do not coincide with the segme going well, sometimes on the career line and results in people not being able but also serenity, hence things can go well on the other lines. This dissatisfact but it can also be a political or affective appraisal which is perfectly correct (1 level. Fitzgerald then talks of a third option, rupture, when some absolute thr becoming imperceptible, a blending in [but not conformity], a feeling of being ends, but just in movement in the middle.

Autistic children can reveal similar developments, supple lines, ritornellos and leading to a cartography rather than psychoanalysis. This can relate to all chil detail: [groan]

(1) Segments depend on binary machines, social classes, sexes, ages, races. T other. They operate diachronically, in the form of choices [only in a strange lo then you must be a transvestite]. In this way, binaries are introduced sequen power which code and set the territory. Foucault has analysed things best he apparatus and thus of the single state or law. The State remains as the agenc machine [which is not the state itself], to organise dominant utterances, langu with Althussers notion of ideology in general]. The segments are homogenise fields as necessaryGreek geometry organised social space in the city. Which forms of knowledge are of most service to the stateinformatics? In any eve from abstract machines and from the actual apparatus of the state which rea certain plane of organization, which has the supplementary dimension of ove harmonisation of the form (130). These can also produce new segmentation

(2) Non segmentary lines are different, featuring thresholds, blocks of becomi than over coding. The plane is not one of organisation but of consistence or im

and subjects into affects. They individuate in the form of haecceities (130) [I segments are over coded, it seems?]. Binary machines cannot engage becaus asymmetrical and molecular [as an example, molecular masses which no long little lines which no longer respond to the great molar oppositions (131)+. No term disturbs binarity, and traces another line, in the middle of segments [the and West in world politics is destabilised by an north/south dimensionand t feminist movements, ecology, Russian dissidents] the great ruptures also feat (132). May 1968 was an explosion of such a molecular line, an irruption a f blocs which have lost their bearings (132).

Although there are two kinds of lines [I thought there were three!], this is not one, perhaps?]. You do not escape from dualism by adding other terms [as sh border which turns a dualism into a multiplicity [as she says again]. Assembla of segmentarity, with binaries, but also lines of flight. Power operates only on another dimension [I see herds of weasels coming this way]. Abstract machin form a dualism, but interact, struggle to overcode in one way and undermine [Stap me! The return of Struggling Man]. The different planes do not occupy a the fixed organisations that form the otherthey dissolve and fuse in a mult

One implication helps to answer the question why people desire their own re desire, or which subjugate it, themselves already form part of assemblages of particular line for it to find itself caught (133). There is no [anthropological] d peopleall these outcomes are lines of an assemblage. The lines are not pre other, just as assemblages are mixed. Its difficult to know which one will lea humanist desire for freedom and rhizomes, then]. We can see this in musical territories, and also emergent transforming features. We can detect the pow

Everything turns on movements of deterritorialization and reterritorialization in the evolution of men, removing front paws from the earth and then reterrit deterritorializing branches and then using them as sticks, featuring different s

[ is a cold and got so far been involved in the great man for this bloody there and speech thing thinks Im keen on Asian visual eyes Asian stupid bastards for hows that for a machinic delirium, produced b was talking to my wife. It looks better like this:

IS a cold and got so far. Been involved in the great man for this. Bloody there PILOTS. Wished. Only to sweeten you by Asians.READ- TERRITORIAL-EYES- ASI II

We must study these movements of deterritorialization, flux and continuums Some examples can be found in the 11th century with movements of peasants crusades, urbanism, the deterritorialization of the church and disposition of it adventures (135). Such lines of flight can be seen as primary in a society T gradation and its boundaries (135). This is recognisable in Marxist analyses o masses of all kinds. The lines of flight are creative, forcing developments in a

fleeing to pick up a weaponmaybe this is still Deleuze? Maybe the two are

Lines of flight are primary, not in a chronological sense and not in the sense o Fleeing Man really took off there shame]. There are untimely, like haecceiti example informing a class... Which benefits particularly from it, capable of (136) [the closest we get to the idea of social reproduction? This still seems to movements of masses, as entangled lines+. Apparently, this can explain why much depends on whether one really captures all the movements of the othe deterritorializations 'always compensated by the reterritorializations of which equilibrium and stabilisation'(136), and then the final stage with a convention nomadic line, another migrant and the third sedentary ... *and inevitably anot all the same as the nomadic)' (136).

Or perhaps there are only two lines because the molecular line can oscillate b and re]. Or else there is only one line where the primary line of flight which the third' (137) [if it makes no difference to you whether there are one or two perhaps this line is formed from the explosion of the other two. Moby Dick sh Ahab becoming, the whale and its flight. [What a preposterous series of argu

The regimes of signs might be relevantthe despotic regime banning lines of but there are lots of others'each time it is the essential element of politics. know in advance which way a line is going to turn'(137) [and who exactly is do worked on by the state: liberal ones simply direct the abstract machine, totali dangers. Each line has one. Our own segments tend towards a rigidity which dispense with segmentary lines? [At one level they seem to be part of 'our or

Supple lines also have dangers, like those above, but miniaturised'little oed (138). Crossing thresholds can also produce problems as in Guattaris 'micro f necessarily being centralised(138). Even if you leave behind segmentarity, yo self assured about your role and missionthe Stalins of little groups, local law schizophrenia abides in a black hole.

[In a note, GD adds that marginals scare him, that some speeches of madness psychoanalysis, although they can be equally self assured and certain. It is OK they slip into a black hole from which they no longer utter anything but the m giddiness: We are the avant-garde, We are the marginals (139). This seem became arrogant enough to think that his delirious ramblings were major con refused to discuss them with anybody else].

Sometimes the segmentary line and the more supple line can sustain each oth management of the molecular. Virilios picture of the modern state sees it as maintaining marginals in their own black holes as some kind of [bad totality].

Nor should we follow lines of flight or rupture without tracing them out first. into black holes. They can turn into lines of abolition or complete destructio writers end in suicide or madness. Sometimes death can be peaceful and hap it. The metaphor of war often appears, for example in Kleist or Fitzgerald. [Th

the clinic project, something to do with showing how life and work become th work ceases to be literary, page 141].

The war machine originates in a different way from the State. It was originally people, it features a focus on problems not theorems. The State itself persist overcodings, but the war machine is run through with various kinds of becom warrior (141)+. Various French authors have argued for the separation of war sometimes arise in order to resist centralization [am I mistaken, or is there an nation state?]. The war machine follows lines of flight [the example is Genghi compatible with its strategy. States actually have a problem of integrating the always a residual tension between the two. There is a particular danger that t and destruction as above. This does not reflect some death instinct, but show destructive war machine. The problem is to energise war machines without t

There is no duality between individual and collective (because there is no sub collective); none between natural and artificial (because both these elements spontaneous and the organised (since both of forms of organization); none be segments are part of the despotic apparatus). All these differences are entan pragmatic or micro political involves not interpreting but tracing the lines, and the rigid segments of binaries and overcodings, where are the others, what da where are the supple lines, fluxes, thresholds, re and deterritorializations, and avoid?;(3) where are the lines of flight, and are they free from destruction and not desiring our own repression? We need to take particular care when deve hardened empty envelopes, because their organic components have been blo cancerous and fascist (144).

There are no prescriptions, no globalising concepts. Even concepts are haecc machine or assemblage only have value in their variables. There are no lesso failure of revolutions. *Then a very strange piece: It seems to us that there w had kept up the same discourse as those who weep over them today (144-5) braver and more sincere, not bitter, not ambitiousbut it is an odd passage].

Its never been a matter of utopian spontaneity vs. State organization ( 145). dynamics, or to states of nature, or to becoming a lucid theorist of revolution question is organisational, not ideologicalcan we think of an organization w assemblages against the proximity to the state apparatus, develop a suitably m and its own powers of destruction? Luckily In a certain way it is very simple, is no need to organize a revolutionary apparatus on the scale of the state. Ev of its plans, it is also an experimenter (145-6) [shades of hegemony and the r

Modern states are unable to predict the future reliably. There are no master experimenters looking for lines of flight, trying to build new planes of consiste machines [and who are these people? French philosophers struggling against

As national states develop, they will require even larger abstract machines to fluxes (146), and they will need to develop even more widespread forms of c examples given include how industrial workers help to exploit third world wor

abstract machine is dysfunctional and fallible. States no longer have the mea market, and can no longer rely on the old repressive state apparatuses, or eve list of crisis tendenciesmarking out the new territories, controlling new econ unions, the army, and women, managing qualitative demandsquality of life

But people are increasingly demanding the right to desire. This gives minority the basis of the State. We should try to think that a new type of revolution is all the oscillations, were going to plump for optimism this time, as a sort of d combine into a plane of consistence which will undermine the plane of organi revolutionaries are not condemned to deformations of their plane. Everythin questions about revolutions, because this only encourages people not to beco already. [Is this the young and optimistic Parnet, to be compared with the pes

back to Deleuze page

You might also like