About to reread. What can I do to absorb this book more holistically? I want to build a better feeling of tangibility with the concepts through some sort of action. Last time I just took lots of notes, and while I feel I got a lot of benefit (I feel extremely comfortable analyzing certain situations through a Deleuzoguattarian lens and find it very useful) I still have a nagging feeling that I haven't entirely internalized what I've read.
Read slower and focus on the smallest most irrelevant details. A good chef changes his knife once a year because be cuts. A mediocre chef changes his knife once a month because he hacks.
That is moronic metaphor, but it is a good idea to focus on small things. The totality of A Thousand Plateaus is really hard or almost impossible to understand, so it is better to find passages you can understand.
Also keep in mind, that schizoanalysis is a method designed to be used in all things libidinal, so try to use everything you read and see where it goes
im so glad people stopped pretending to like this garbage, those few years of this shit getting memed was miserable
Everyone, quick! Repost the classics so this anon can remember!
>the door opens and an impenetrable mass of marajuana smoke spills from the room into the hall
>stumbling through the smoke, two shabby shapes reeking of bongwater emerge
>pic related is held aloft by one of the men as several unshaven hippy french girls, nude save for flimsy veils tied low about their waists and showing mounds of unwashed pubic hair ripe with pthirus pubis, crowd with narcotic idiocy about their ankles and take lazy drags from the remaining roaches
>"we've done it, groovy G!" wheezes the man with the more putrid fingernails as the weed haze languidly disperses
>"*cough cough* we've *hits bong again* saved western philosophy!"
>a gimp-suit wearing, aids-riddled Foucault appears and congratulates the two intrepid french thinkers
>somewhere, Lacan is giving his dick, shriveled by age and impotence, a final and thorough tugging before a crowd of baguette wielding students and communist card carrying intelligentsia who all give an enthusiastic yet appropriately sardonic applause that stretches into a hollow perpetuity, erupting into the final simulacrum of sound the World would ever know before its descent into cosmic schizophrenia
I now appreciate two more things about this assemblage:
-Thousand Plateaus was published in late 1980. The Empire Strikes Back, the first apperance of the fictional Yoda character, was released in the middle of 1980. So it is just plausible that the boys could have acquired a Yoda bong in connexion with their boasting of their feat.
-the mental image of Lacan's turgid dick is of a piece with those awful, shitty cigars he would smoke.
I read it unironically as fiction and I find it very entertaining. It's literally funny to read.
Read Manuel Delanda so that you don't have to read Deleuze.
this
A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History
also check some books about D&G on libgen
Brian Massumi - A User's Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Deviations from Deleuze and Guattari
Eugene W. Holland - Deleuze and Guattari's 'A Thousand Plateaus': A Reader's Guide
Brent Adkins - Deleuze and Guattari’s A Thousand Plateaus: A Critical Introduction and Guide
i liked this a lot better than anti oedipus. strangely i found it a lot easier to read.
you've already started with many wolves, giving you about 10x as much work
>I feel extremely comfortable analyzing certain situations through a Deleuzoguattarian lens
Not so sure what can DG add to a perspective, for C&E were thought as a praxis. Moreover, most of Deleuze's own thought on 'how to think properly' was erased from that book (the entire critique of the organism is a ---pretty bad written--- abridged version of Deleuze's own account on intellectual determination [ie philosophical individuation vis aesthetic individuation vis scientific individuation]).
alright fellas
I have never read anything about these two except their names and I think it's about time I learned
what are their main ideas? what's their impact on culture and philosophy? where should I start? why are they so often called intelligible?
1. list your most loved things and experiences from your childhood.
2. connect them in a meaningful and impossible way.
3. witness the outcome. try undestanding that 'tis the BWO communicating with your higher self.
my granfather building legos on a sunny street, slurping on a cup of frozen juice
I don't know what I'm witnessing, it feels moronic
It's a metaphor for God building a temple under a scorching gaze of a tyrant.
that's an utterly arbitrary reading of the symbolism and I find it moronic to the point of being insulting to the memories
You are a repressed homosexual being afraid of 'moronicness'. It slows your flows making you immobile.
define "flows" and define "immobile"
>flows
Psychic movements that advance one's own being towards the truth and realization, if you are ''religious'', or simply towards even more life, if you are not. Understand that there are no such things as 'moronic': everything is potential, depending on your capacity of actualizing that potential.
The lesson here is to withhold judgements, and if the flows are not of your temperament just don't ACKnowledge them. And move on thy on rivers of might. Answering OP's initial question:
>What can I do to absorb this book more holistically?
Try reading Deleuze imagining him to be a reappearance of some minor Biblical prophet teaching his mystical hermeneutics.
I'm gonna stick to real philosophy, thanks anon
Your questions are too broad... but:
>where should I start?
If you want to read ATP, start by the Rhizome plateau.
If you want to read Deleuze and Guattari, start with What is Philosophy?.
If you want to read Deleuze, start with Nietzsche and Philosophy (or, if you have a philosophical background, start with Spinoza's Ethics).
>why are they so often called intelligible?
They are one of the most intelligible authors of their time's France. (Nonetheless, only Deleuze is intelligible by himself - Guattari's solo work is a mess). The problem is often that people are accustomed to extensive lens, and even non-actualist people have problems grasping what is really implicated in a riguroous account of immanence and univocity.
>what are their main ideas?
Of both, DG:
3. Everything actual is interconnected by something (even if non-perceptible)... That's based on the idea that the human (cultural-political) world is increasingly becoming closer to the world and ergo becoming flat with it.
2. The marginal are better positioned to cash-out this moment of the human species-history.
Of Deleuze:
Basically the theoretical background of C&E thesis - the communist idiocy (aka, that the human world is becoming flat and that marginals are an upgraded or augmented version of the proletariat) is all Guattari's. Left Deleuzianism is purely Spinozian (or, what amounts the same, Machiavellian).
>what's their impact on culture and philosophy?
Mostly trash. But Deleuze's solo impact is difficult to see, since he's part of a line that have never been terminated, even if it was buried underground for centuries. In some sense one might be tempted to say that Deleuze's influence began to be actualised before it's name or even it's author's person.
Thanks, anon, I actually understood everything you said except
>the human (cultural-political) world is increasingly becoming closer to the world
could you elaborate?
I've been reading philosophy on my own time and I'm starting a philosophy masters next fall (my bachelor is in an unrelated field but they let you in if you pass the oral exam)
do you have any advice for me?
Its just the idea that people is becoming more conscious that contradictions remain actual even after they are resolved - something attributed mostly to nature and not culture.
>he's part of a line that [has]* never been terminated
If I might add, the most philosophico-political implication of Deleuze is the irrelevance of 'love' to 'sapere' (I don't know if anglos have a word that amounts o is closer enough to that [that is not wisdom]). Deleuze's account on the intellectual aspect of the world has knowledge --whether philosophical, technical or scientific-- as secondary, and 'sapere' as undifferentiated from actualisation. One could say that Deleuze's 'sapere aude' --even if he doesn't use the phrase-- resolves any dialectical disposition in Plato's ouvre, at the same time it dismantles its whole moral indagation. The thing is --as historical accounts that are contemporary to Plato himself and as historical accounts on pre-platonic wisdom show-- that Deleuze's account is itself an actualisation of themes that are themselves pre-platonic (and also post-platonic and pre-deleuzian, and so on).
Contemplate the magical coalignment:
>Deleuze & Guattari
>Death Grips
>Drain Gang
to what doth the assemblage hints
You need to have a concrete understanding of the historiography of a post-modern working class rebellion. So that's either understanding Italian autonomism as factory / ghetto practice or the EZLN.
>understanding that buttholes are buttholes
I've done that exercise. The recent organized looting of stores recalls "autoreduction", a very pretty word for theft, although the scumbag Italians at least had the decency to give something resembling a theoretical basis to their crimes. The Americans engaging in like recent activity, many of whom are of the Basketball orientation, naturally don't bother about such ideas.
Actually, the best piece in the book about autoreduction focuses not on grocery stores (where such tactics are held to be unsustainable for obvious reasons) or high-value retail targets, but utilities, particularly electricity. A bloc of consumers and certain key people within the electrical companies themselves compel the companies to lower prices and hold customers harmless for pre-arranged and intentionally lowered payments. It works for a time until it doesn't. A pack of buttholes all the same.
BECAUSE WE DON'T USE GAS. WE STAY WARM BY MAKING LOVE NOT WITH EACH WITH OURSELVES.
a pointless rejoinder.
Utilities services are pretty fricking good at detecting unauthorised load loss where I live. Unauthorised load loss also lacks participation and community defence.
1