Sei sulla pagina 1di 164



1 ,,riilllllll

EDITED BY At-rnnr\r HAKr(

Th i s is t he f ir s t d i c ti o n a ry d e d i c a te d to the ' w ork of Gi l l es D el euze.

It provides an in-depth and lucid introduction to one of the most influential
figuresin coniinentalphilosophy.

The dictionary defines and contextualisesmore than 150 ter-rnsthat relate to

Deleuzel philosophy including concepts such as 'becoming','body without
and 'schizoanalysis'.
The clear explanationsalso-addressthe main intellectualinfluenceson Deleuze
as well as tl're influence Deleuze has had on suDiects such as feminism,
cinema, postcolonial theory, geographyand cultural studies.Those unfamiliar
with Deleuze will find the dictionary a user-friendlytool equippingthem with
definitions and interpretations both as a study and/or a teaching aid.

The entries are written by some of the rnost prominent Deleuze scholars
inciudingRosi Braidotti,Claire Colebrook,Tom Conley,EugeneHollarrdand Paul
Patton.Thesecontributors bring their expert knowledgeand critical opinion to
bear on the entries and provide an enrichingtheoretical context for anyone
interestedin Deleuze.

Adrian Parr is Professor of contemporary art and designat the SavannahCollege

of Art and Design. She is the editor, with lan Buchanan,of Deleuze ond the
Contemporory World, f orthcom i ng from Edinburgh U n iversity Press.

SBN 0-7 186-1899-6


9 8tr
Th e D e l eu ze Dicti onarv

Editedby Adrian Parr

EdinburghUniversity Press

C ontents

Acknowledgements vl
@ in this edition, Edinburgh University Press,2005
@ in the individual contributions is retained by the authors

Edinburgh University PressLtd Introduction Claire Colebrooh

22 George Squarg Edinburgh

Typeset in Ehrhardt Entries A-Z

by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Longsight, Manchester,and
printed and bound in Great Britain by
Bibliography 308
Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham, Wilts

A CIP record for this book is availablefrom the British Library

Notes on Contributors 315
ISBN 0 7486 18988 (hardback)
ISBN 0 7486 18996 (paperback)

The right of the contributors

to be identified as authors of this work
has been asserted in accordance with
the Copyright, Designs and PatentsAct 1988.
A ckn o w l e d g e ments Intr oduc ti on

First I would like to thank all rhe authorswho contributedto this proiect.
Claire Colebrook
Without you this dictionary would never have come into existence.
Everyonewho hasentriesincludedhereand my editor,JackieJones,have Why a Deleuzedictionary?It might seema particularly craven,disre-
beentremendouslycooperativeand helpful in more waysthan one.I would spectful,literal-mindedand reactiveprojectto form a Deleuzedictionary.
like also to thank Keith Ansell-Pearson,Ronald Bogue, Paul Patton and Not only did Deleuze strategicallychangehis lexicon to avoid the notion
JamesWilliamsfor their commentsand suggesgions, all of which havecer- that his texts consistedof terms that might simply name extra-textual
tainly strengthenedthe theoreticalrigour of this dictionary; any short- truths, he alsorejectedthe idea that art, scienceor philosophycould be
comingsareentirelymy own. I am very gratefulto MonashUniversityand understoodwithout a senseof their quite specificcreativeproblem. A
SavannahCollegeof Art and Design for their continuingsupport.Lastly, philosopher's concepts produce connections and styles of thinking.
the strongintellectand generosityof Ian Buchananand Claire Colebrook Conceptsareintensive:they do not gathertogetheran alreadyexistingset
havebeena wonderfulsourceof inspirationfor me and I would iust like to of things (extension);they allow for movementsand connection.(The
extend my warmestthanksto you both; this project would neverhaveseen conceptof 'structure' in the twentieth century, for example,could not be
the light of day without your continuingencouragement and support. isolatedfrom the problem of explaining the categoriesof thinking and the
imageof an impersonalsocialsubjectwho is the effect of a conceptual
Adrian Parr
system;similarly, the concept of the 'cogito' relatesthe mind to a move-
ment of doubt, to a world of mathematicallymeasurablematter,and to a
distinctionbetweenthought and the body.)To translatea term or to define
any point in a philosopher'scorpus involvesan understandingof a more
generalorientation, problem or milieu. This does not mean that one
reducesa philosophyto its context- say,explainingDeleuze's'nomadism'
asa reactionagainsta rigid structuralismor linguistics.On the contrary,to
understanda philosophy as the creation of a plane,or as a way of creating
someorientation by establishingpoints and relations,meansthat any phi-
losophyis more than its manifestterms, more than its context. In addition
to the producedtexts and terms, and in addition to the explicit historical
presuppositions, thereis an unthoughtor outside- the problem,desireor
life of a philosophy.For Deleuze,then, reading a philosopherrequires
going beyond his or her produced lexicon to the deeper logic of produc-
tion from which the relationsor senseof the text emerge.This senseitself
canneverbe said;in repeatingor recreatingthe milieu of a philosopherall
we can do is produce another sense,another said. Even so, it is this striv-
ing for sensethat is the creativedrive of readinga philosopher.Sq when
l)eleuzereadsBergsonhe allowseachterm and moveof Bergson'sphilos-
ophy to revolvearound a problem: the problem of intuition, of how the
humanobservercan think from beyondits own constituted,habituated
rrndall ttxl humanworld,

It would seem,then, that offering definitions of terms in the form of a

understanding the way philosophersproducesingularpoints,or the orien-
dictionary- as though a word could be detachedfrom its philosophicallife
tations within which subjects,objects,perceiversand imagesare ordered.
andproblem- would not only be at oddswith the creativerole of philosophy;
Any assemblage such as a philosophicalvocabulary(or an artistic style,
it would alsosustainan illusion that the philosophicaltext is nothing more
or a set of scientific functions) facesin two directions. It both givessome
thanits 'said'andthat becoming-Deleuzian wouldbe nothingmorethanthe sort of order or consistencyto a life which bearsa much greatercomplex-
adoptionof a certainvocabulary. Do we,in systematising Deleuze'sthought, ity and dynamism,but it alsoenables- from that order - the creationof
reducean eventand untimelyprovocationto onemore doxa?
further and more elaborateorderings.A philosophicalvocabularysuch as
If Deleuze'swritings aredifficult and resistantthis cannotbe dismissed Deleuze'sgivessenseor orientationto our world, but it alsoallowsus to
asstylistically unfortunate, asthough he really oughtto havejust sat down producefurther differencesand further worlds. On the one hand, then,
and told us in so many words what 'difference in itself' or 'immanence' a Deleuzianconcept such as the 'plane of immanence'or 'life' or 'desire'
really meant.Why the difficulty of style and vocabularyif there is more to
cstablishesa possiblerelation betweenthinker and what is to be thought,
Deleuzethan a way of speaking?A preliminary answerlies in the nexusof giving us somesort of logic or order. On the other hand, by coupling this
conceptsof 'life', 'immanence'and 'desire'. The one distinction that
conceptwith other concepts,such as taffectt'concept'and tfunctiont,or
Deleuzeinsistsupon, both when he speaksin his own voicein Dffirence
'planeof transcendence' and 'imageof thought',we canthink not just about
and,Repetitiozand when he createshis senseof the history of philosophy, life or the planeof immanencebut alsoof how the brain imagines,relates
is the 'imageof thought'. Philosophybeginsfrom an imageof what it is to
to, styles,pictures,representsand ordersthat plane.This is the problemof
think, whetherthat be the graspof ideal forms, the orderly receptionof how life differsfrom itself,in itself.The role of a dictionaryis only one side
senseimpressions,or the social construction of the world through lan- of a philosophy.It looks at the way a philosophy stratifiesor distinguishes
guage.The concepts of a philosophy both build, and build upon, that
its world, but once we haveseenhow 'a' philosophythinks and movesthis
image. But if the history of philosophy is a gallery of such images of
should then allow us to look to other philosophiesand other worlds.
thought - from the conversing Socratesand mathematicalPlatq to the There is then a necessary fidelity and infidelity,not only in any diction-
doubting Descartesand logical Russell- some philosophershave done , irry or any reading,but also in any experienceor any life. Life is both
more than stroll through this galleryto add their own image.Somehave,
cffectedthrough relations,suchthat thereis no individual or text in itself;
in 'schizo' fashion, refused to add one more proper relation between rrtthe sametime, life is not reducibleto effectedor actualrelations.There
thinker and truth, and havepulled thinking apart. One no longer makes
rre singularitiesor'powersto relate'thatexceedwhat is alreadygiven.This
one more step within thought - tidying up a definition, or correctinga
is the senseor the singularityof a text. Senseis not what is manifestlysaid
seemingcontradiction.Only when this happensdoesphilosophyrealiseits rrr denoted;it is what is openedthroughdenotation.Sq we might saythat
power or potential.
we needto understandthe meaningof Deleuze'sterminology- how 'ter-
Philosophyis neither correct nor incorrect in relation to what currently
ritorialisation' is defined alongside 'deterritorialisation','assemblage',
countsas thinking; it createsnew modesor stylesof thinking. But if all
'llody without Organs' and so on - and then how thesedenotedterms
philosophyis creation,rather than endorsement,of an imageof thought,
cxpresswhat Deleuzewantsto say,the intention of the Deleuziancorpus.
somephilosophershavetried to givea senseor conceptto this creationof llut this shouldultimately then leadus to the sense of Deleuze,which can
thinking: not one more imageof thought but 'thought without an image'. only be giventhrough the productionof anothertext. 1 can say,here,that
Deleuze's celebratedphilosophersof univocity confront the genesis, the senseof Deleuze'sworksis the problemof how thinking emergesfrom
rupture or violenceof thinking: not man who thinks, but a life or unthought life, and how life is not a being that is given but a power to give various
within which thinking might happen.When Spinozaimaginesone expres-
scnsesof itself (what Deleuzerefersto as'?being').But in sayingthis I have
sive substance,when Nietzsche imagines one will or desire, and when producedanothersense.Each definition of eachterm is a different path
Bergsoncreatesthe conceptof life, they go someway to towardsreally from a text, a different productionof sensethat itself opensfurther paths
askingaboutthe emergence of thinking.This is no longerthe emergence of lirr definition.So, far from definitionsor dictionariesreducingthe forceof
thc thinker,or one who thinks, but the emergenceof somethinglike a
itn iruthoror a philosophy,they createfurther distinctions.
minintrrlrclation,cvcntor pcrocptionof thinking,fronrwhich'thinkcrs'arc 'l'his clocsr.rotmcfln, as ccrtirin popular vcrsionsof Frcnch post-
thcn cll'cctctl.'l'hisnlcrulsthrrtthc rcrrlhistoryof'plrikrsophy rcquircs structuralismmight irrclicrrtc, thilt tcxtshuvclro nrcanings rnd thrt onc ctn

make anything mean what one wants it to mean.On the contrary, the life far from believingthat one might return thought to life and overcomethe
or problem of Deleuze's philosophy lay in the event: both the event of submissionto system,recognisesthat the creation of a systemis the only
philosophicaltextsand the eventof worksof art. The eventis a disruption, way one canreally live non-systemically.One createsa minimal or dynamic
violenceor dislocationof thinking.To readis not to recreateoneself,using order,both to avoidabsolutedeterritorialisation on the one hand and reac-
the text asa mirror or medium through which one repeatsalreadyhabit- tive repetitionof the already-ordered on the other.In this sense,Deleuzeis
ual orientations.Just as life can only be lived by risking connectionswith a child of the Enlightenment. Not only does he inhabit the performative
other powers or potentials,so thinking can only occur if there is an self-contradiction, 'Live in such a way that one's life diverges from any
givenprinciple,'healsodeducesthis 'principlethat is not one' from life. If
encounterwith relations,potentialsand powersnot our own. If we take
Deleuze'sdefinition of life seriously- that it is not a given whole with one is to lioe, theremust both be a minimal connectionor exposureto the
potentials that necessarilyunfold through time, but is t airtual power to outsidealongsidea creationor perceptionof that outside,with perception
createpotentialsthrough contingentand productiveencounters- then this being a difference.
will relatedirectlyto an ethicsof reading.We cannotreada thinker in order Deleuze'sontology- that relationsareexternalto terms- is a commit-
to find what he is saying'tous', asthoughtextswerevehiclesfor exchang- ment to perceivinglife; life is connectionand relation,but the outcomeor
ing information from one being to another.A text is immanent to life; it eventof thoserelationsis not determinedin advanceby intrinsic proper-
createsnew connections,new stylesfor thinking and new imagesand ways ties. Life is not, therefore,the ground or foundation differentiatedby a set
of seeing.To read a text is to understandthe problem that motivated its of ternls, such that a dictionary might provide us with one schemaof order
assemblage. The more faithful we are to a text - not the text's ultimate amongothers.The productionor creationof a systemis both an exposure
messagebut its construction,or the way in which it producesrelations to thosepowersof differencenot alreadyconstitutedasproper categories
among concepts,images,affects,neologismsand alreadyexisting vocabu- of recognising'man' and a radical enlightenment.Enlightenment is,
laries - the more we will havean experienceof a style of thought not our defined dutifully, freedom from imposed tutelage - the destruction of
own, an experienceof the powerto think in creativestylesassuch. masters.Deleuze'sdestructionof masteryis an eternal,rather than per-
One of the most consistentand productivecontributionsof Deleuze's petual, paradox. Rather than defining thought and liberation against
thought is his theory and practiceof reading,both of which are grounded anothersystem,with a continualcreationand subsequentdestruction,the
in a specificqonceptionof life. If there is one understandingof philosophy challengeof Deleuze's thought is to createa systemthat containsits own
andgoodreadingasgroundedin consistency anddoxa,which wouldreturn aleatoryor paradoxicalelements,elementsthat are both inside and outside,
a text to an assimilable logicandallowthoughtto remainthe same,Deleuze orderingand disordering.This is just what Deleuze'sgreatconceptsserve
placeshimself in a counter-traditionof distinctionand paradox.Neither to dol life is both that which requires some form of order and system
philosophynor thinking flowsinevitablyand continuouslyfrom life; reason (giving itself through differencesrhar are perceivedand synthesised)and,
is not the actualisationof what life in its potentialwasalwaysstriving to be, that which also opens the system,for life is just rhat power to d.ifferfrom
More than any other thinker of his time Deleuzeworksagainstvitalismor which conceptsemergebut that can neverbe includedin the extensionof
the idea that reason,thinking and conceptssomehowservea function or any concept.
purposeof life, a life that is nothing more than changeor alteration for the We canonly begin to think and live when we losefaith in the world, when
sakeof efficiencyor self-furthering. If there is a conceptof life in Deleuze weno longerexpecta world to answerto and mirror ourselvesandour already
it is a life at oddswith itself, a potential or power to createdivergentpoten- constituteddesires.Thinking is paradox,nor becauseit is simple disobedi-
tials.Admittedly,it is possibleto imaginethinking, with its concepts,dic- enceor negationof orthodoxy,but because if thinking hasany forceor dis-
tionariesand organon,as shoring 'man' againstthe forcesof chaosand tinction it hasto work againstinertia.If a body wereonly to connectwith
dissolution,but we can also- when we extendthis potential- seethinking whatallowedit to remainrelativelystableand self contained- in imageof the
asa confrontationwith chaos,asallowingmore of what is nrt ourselvesto autopoieticsystemthat takesonly what it can masterand assimilate- then
transformwhat we takeourselvesto be.In this sensethought has'majori- the very powerof life for changeand creationwould be stalledor exhausted
tarian' and 'minoritarian'tendencies, both a movementtowardsreducing by self-involved life formsthat livedin orderto remainthe same.Despitefirst
chnoticdiffcrcnccto uniformity and samencss and a tendcncytowards appearances a dictionarycanbe the openingof a self-enclosed system.If we
opcninglhoscsrmcuniticsto n'stttttcring'orinconrprchcnsion, I)clcuzc' nrc faithfulto thc lifc of Dclcuzc'sthought- rccognising it as n crcation

rather than destinedeffectof life - then we canrelive the production of this

systemand this responseasan imageof production in general.
must createa systemor be enslavedby anotherman's'- so declares
Blake'sidealpoet in the highly contestedand chaoticagonisticsof his great
poemJerusalem.Blake's aphorismswereindebtedto an enlightenmentlib-
erationism that found itself in a seeminglyparadoxicalstructure. If we are
condemnedto live in someform of systemthenwe caneitherinhabitit pas-
sivelyand reactively,or we canembraceour seemingsubmissionto a system
of relationsnot our own and respondcreatively. Blake'searlyresponsepro-
vided an alternative to the inescapability of the categoricalimperative
which still hauntsus today:if I am to speakand act asa moral beingthen
I can neither saynor do what is particular or contingent for me; living with
othersdemandsthat I decidewhat to do from the point of view of 'human- ACTIVE/REACTIVE
ity in general'.To speakor to live is alreadyto be other than oneself,and so
morality demandsa necessary recognitionof an initial submission.Such Lee Spinks
a final consensusor intersubjectivity may neverarrive, but it hauntsall life
nevertheless. By contrast,Deleuze'sparadoxical and eternalaffirmationof The distinction between active and reactive forces was developed by
creation begins from the inescapabilityof a minimal system- to perceive Friedrich Nietzsche in his Oz the Genealogyof Morality and rhe notes
or live is alreadyto be connected,to be other - but far from this requiring posthumouslycollectedas The Will to Power.In his seminalreadingof
a striving for a systemof consensusor ideal closure,this producesan infin- Nietzsche,Deleuzeseizedupon this distinction (and what it madepossible)
ite opening.It might seemthat the Enlightenmentimperative- abandon and placedit at the very heartof the Nietzscheanrevaluationof values.For
all externalauthority - comesto function asyet one more authority, and it Nietzsche,the distinction betweenactiveand reactiveforce enabledhim to
might alsoseemthat a fidelity to Deleuzeis a crime againstthe thinker of present'being' asa processrather than 'substance'. The world of substan-
difference.But the problemof Deleuze'sthought is iust this passage from tial being,he argued,is producedby the recombinationof multiple effectsof
contradiction to paradox. To not be oneselfis contradictory if one must be forceinto discreteideas,imagesand identities.There is no essential'truth'
eitherthis or that, if life must decideor stabiliseitself (form a harrative or of being;nor is there an independent'reality' beforeand beyondthe flux of
imageof itself). 'Becoming-imperceptible',by contrast,is an enablingand appearances; everyaspectof the realis alreadyconstitutedby quantitiesand
productive paradox.One connectsor perceivesin order to live, in order to combinationsof force. Within this economy of becoming,every force is
be,but this very tendencyis alsoat the sametime a becoming-other:not relatedto otherforcesand is definedin its characterby whetherit obeysor
a nonbeingbut a?being.A Deleuziandictionarycomesinto beingonly in commands.What we call a body (whether understoodas political, social,
its use,only when the thoughts that it enablesopen the systemof thought chemicalor biological)is determinedby this relationbetweendominating
to the very outsideand life that madeit possible. and dominated forces.Meanwhile Deleuze maintains that any two forces
constitutea bodyassoonastheyenterinro relationship.Within this bodythe
superior or dominant forcesare describedas 'active'; the inferior or domi-
forceare theoriginal qualitiesthat definethe relationshipof forcewith force.
If forcesare defined by the relative differencein their quality or power,
the notion of quality is itself determinedby the differencein quantity
betweenthe two forces that come into relationship. The characterof any
relation,that is, is producedthrough forces.There are no intrinsic prop-
erties that dctcrmine how forccs will relate:a masterbecomesa master
throughthe act <lfovcr.powcring,In thc-cncountcr bctwccnforccs,each

force receivesthe quality that correspondsto its quantity. Forces are potentiallysublimeelementin as much as they are ableto advancea new
dominant,or dominated,dependingupon their relativedifferencein quan- interpretation of life (the world of moral ideas, for example) and they
tity; but they manifest themselvesas active or reactiveaccordingto their supplyus with an original,althoughnihilistic,versionof the Will to Power.
differencein quality.Once the relationhasbeenestablished the quality of By inventinga transcendentideaof life in orderto judgelife, reactiveforces
forces- dominant or dominated- producesan activepower (that com- separateus from our power to createvalues;but they alsoteachus new feel-
mandsthe relation) and a reactiyepower (definedby the relation).The ings and new waysof being affected.What needsro be understoodis that
differencebetweenforcesdefined accordingto their quantity as active or there is a variation or internal difference in the disposition of reactive
reactiveis describedin terms of a hierarchy.An activeforce is the stronger forces;theseforceschangetheir characterand their meaningaccordingto
term and goesto the limit of what it can do. Its characteristics are domi- the extentto which they developtheir affinity for the will to nothingness.
nating,possessing, subjugatingand commanding.The expressionof activ- Consequentlyoneof the greatproblemsposedto interpretationis to deter-
ity is the expressionof what is necessarilyunconscious;all consciousness mine the degreeof developmentreactiveforceshavereachedin relationto
doesis expressthe relation ofcertain reactiveforcesto the activeforcesthat negationand the will to nothingness;similarlywe needalwaysto attendro
dominatethem. Active force affirmsits differencefrom everythingthat is the nuanceor relativedispositionof activeforce in terms of its develop-
weakerthan and inferior to itself; meanwhilereactiveforce seeksto limit ment of the relationbetweenactionand affirmation.
activeforce,imposerestrictionsupon it, and to recastit in the spirit of the
negative.Crucially reactiveforcecannottransformitself into a fully active
force; nor can a collection of reactiveforces amalgamatethemselvesinto Connectives
somethinggreaterthanactiveforce.A slavewho gainspower,or who bonds Bergson
with other slaves,will remain a slaveand can only be freed from slaveryby Genealogy
abandoningconsciousness. Consciousnessremains what it is, and is unlike Nietzsche
the active force of difference. Consciousnessrepresents and recognises Will to Power
activeforces,therebyseparatingactivity from what it cando. Suchsepara-
tion constitutesa subtractionor division of activeforce by making it work
against the power of its own affirmation. The remarkablefeature of the
becoming-reactive of activeforceis that historicallyit hasmanagedto form ACTUALITY
the basisof an entire vision of life. This vision embodiesthe principle of
Claire Colebrook
'ressentiment':a movementin which a reactiveand resentfuldenial of
higher life begins to createits own moral systemand account of human It might seemthat Deleuze'sphilosophyis dominatedby an affirmarionof
experience.The reactivetriumph expressedin movementsof conscious- the virtual and is highly critical of a wesrerntradition that hasprivileged
nesslike ressentiment,bad consciousness and the asceticideal depends arctuality.To a certainextent this is true, and this privilegecan be seenin
upon a mystification and reversalof activeforce: at the core of thesenew the way philosophyhastraditionallydealtwith difference.First, rhereare
interpretations of life reactive force simulatesactive force and turns it deemedto be actualterms,termswhich areextendedin time- havingcon-
againstitself.It is at preciselythe historicalmomentwhen the slavebegins tinuity - and possiblyalsoextendedin space.Theseterms arethen related
to triumph over the master who has stoppedbeing the spectreof law, to eachother, so differenceis somethingpossible for an alreadyactualised
virtue, morality and religion. entity. Difference is betweenactual terms, such as the differencebetween
An active force becomesreactive when a reactive force managesto consciousness and its world, or is a differencegroundedupon actuality,
separateit from what it can do. The historicaldevelopmentof reactive such as somethingactualbearingthe capacityfor possiblechanges.This
forcesis itself predicatedupon the affinity betweenreactionand negation, understandingof actualityis thereforeried to the conceptof possibility.
an affinity which is itself a weakform of the Will to Powerin so far asit is Possibilityis somethingthat can be predicatedof, or attributedto, a being
an cxprcssion of nihilismor thc will to nothingncss. Thc will to asceticism which rcmains the same.Now againstthis understandingof actuality,
rlr wrlrld-rcnunciittionis, lftcr rrll, still itn cxprcssionof rpil/. 'fhus, l)clcuzcsctsr diffcrentcouplc:actuality/potenriality. If thereis something
whilc rcnctivclirrccsrtrc wcnkcrthnn rctivc firrccs,thcy rlso posscssil rctualit is not bccirr.rsc
it trrkcsup timc,nor bccausc timc is that whichlinks

or containsthe changesof actualbeings;rather,actualityis unfold'ed' from rcvolution,the Russianrevolution,are specificand differentonly because
potentiality. We should see the actual not as that from which change and rrctualityis the expressionof an Ideaof revolutionwhich can repeatitself
differencetake place,but asthat which hasbeeneffectedfrom potentiality. infinitely.
Time is not the synthesisor continuity of actualterms, as in phenomen-
ology where consciousness constitutestime by linking the past with the
presentand future. Rather,time is the potential for variouslines of actual-
ity. From any actual or unfolded term it should be possible (and, for - Virtual/Virtuality
Deleuze,desirable)to intuit the richer potentiality from which it has
As an avowedempiricistDeleuzeseemsto be committedto the primacy AFFECT
of the actual:one should remain attentiveto what appears,to what is,
without invoking or imagining some condition outside experience. Felicity J. Colman
However,while it is true that Deleuze'sempiricismaffirmslife and experi-
ence,he refusesto restrict life to the actual.In this respecthe overturnsa Watchme: affectionis the intensityof colour in a sunseton a dry and cold
history of western metaphysicsthat defines the potential and virtual autumnevening.Kiss me: affectis that audible,visualand tactiletransfor-
accordingto alreadypresentactualities.We should not, Deleuzeinsists, mation producedin reactionto a certain situation, event or thing. Run
define what somethingis accordingto alreadyactualisedforms. So we irwayfrom me: affectedare the bodiesof spectreswhen their spaceis dis-
shouldnot, for example,establishwhat it is to think on the basisof what is turbed. In all thesesituations,affectis an independentthing; somerimes
usually,generallyor actuallythought.Nor shouldwe think that the virtual describedin terms of the expressionof an emotionor physiologicaleffect,
is merely the possible:those things that, from the point of view of the but all the while trans-historical, trans-temporal, trans-spatial and
actualworld, may or may not happen.On the contrary,Deleuze'sempiri- autonomous.
cism is that of the Idea,and it is the essence of the Idea to actualiseitself. Affect is the change,or variation,that occurs when bodiescollide, or
There is, therefore,an Idea of thinking, the potentialor power to think, come into contact. As a body, affect is the knowable product of an
which is then actualisedin any singlethought. We can only fully under- cncounter,specificin its ethicaland lived dimensionsand yet it is alsoas
standand appreciatethe actualif we intuit its virtual condition, which is indefiniteas the experienceof a sunset,transformation,or ghost. In its
alsoa real condition.That is, real conditionsarenot thosewhich must be largestsense,affect is part of the Deleuzianproject of trying-to-under-
presupposedby the actual- such as assumingthat for any thought there stand,andcomprehend,andexpressall of the incredible,wondrous,tragic,
must be a subjectwho thinks- rather,realconditionsare,for Deleuze,the painful and destructiveconfigurationsof things and bodiesastemporally
potentialsof life from which conditionssuchas the brain, subiectivityor mediated,continuouseyents.Deleuzeusesthe term'affection'to refer to
mind emerge. the additiveprocesss, forces,powersand expressions of change.
For example,if we want to understanda text historicallywe needto go Affectcanproducea sensoryor abstractresultand is physicallyand tem-
beyondits actualelements- not iust what it saysbut alsobeyondits man- porally produced.It is determinedby chanceand organisationand it con-
ifestcontext- to the virtual problemfrom which anytext is actualised. For sistsof a variety of factorsthat include geography,biology,meteorology,
instance,we should not readJohn Milton's ParadiseLost (1667)as a his- :rstronomy,ecologyand culture. Reactionis a vital part of the Deleuzian
torical documentrespondingto the English revolution,a revolutionthat concept of affectivechange.For instance,describingBaruch Spinoza's
we might understandby readingmore textsfrom the seventeenth century. study of the transformationof a body,a thing, or a group of things over a
Rather,we needto think of the potentialor Ideaof revolutionassuch:how period of spaceand time, Deleuze and Guattari write in A Thousand
Milton's text is a specificactualisation,fully different,of the problemof Plu,teaus: iA.ffectsare becomings'(D&G 1987:256).Affect expresses the
how we might bc free,of how powermightrealiscitscl[,of how individuals modificationof experiences asindependentthings of existence,when one
rrrightrclclscthcmsclvcs tirlm imposccl scrvituclc. Any lctu:rltcxt or cvcnt produccsor rccognisesthe consequences of movementand time for (cor-
is p<lssiblcorrlybccirusc rcrrlityhrrsl virtuitldintcttsion,il powcrto cxprcss porcirl,spiritual,:rnimirl,ntincral,vcgctlblcand or c<lnceptual) bodies.
thc l',nglislrrcvolttlion,tltc l"r'cnch
itscll'irrirlwirys Afl'cctis not only itttcxpcricntiallirrcc,it crrnbcconrcrrnrirtcriirlthing,irncl

assuch,asDeleuzedescribes, it cancompelsystemsof knowledge,history, Connectives

memoryand circuitsof power. Active/Reactive
Deleuze'sconceptionof affectdevelopsthrough his entire oeuvre.In his Arborescentschema
study of David Hume in Ernpiricismand,SubjectiaityDeleuzediscussesthe Becoming
linkagesbetweenideas,habitsofthought, ethics,patterns,and repetitions Experience
of systems;all the while describingthe relationshipbetweenaffect and Hume
differencein terms of temporally specificsubjectivesituations.Empiricism Lines of flight
and,SubjectioityalsosignalsDeleuze'sinterest in Henri Bergson,a key Multiplicity
thinker in the Deleuziandevelopmentof a theoryof affect.Bergson'sbook Rhizome
Matter and,Memory addressesthe corporeal condition of what he terms
'affection'inrelationto perception(D 1988a:l7). Deleuzealsoengages the
work of Spinozaand the latter'saddressof affectionsand affectin termsof
a modality of 'taking on' somethingin the Ethics(1677).In his essay'On ARBORESCENT SCHEMA
the Superiorityof Anglo-AmericanLiterature', Deleuzedescribesaffect
as verbs becoming events- naming affectsas perceivableforces,actions, CIiffStagoll
and activities. In relation to art in What is Philosophy?he and Guattari
describeaffectsasmore than sensateexperienceor cognition. Through art, The arboreal schemais one of Deleuze's many potent and prominent
we can recognisethat affectscanbe detachedfrom their temporal and geo- biologicaland organicimages.His criticism,and his useof the schema,is
graphicoriginsand becomeindependententities. scatteredacrosshis corpus,at varioustimestargetingapproaches to philos-
In accounting for experiencein a non-interpretive manner, Deleuze's ophy psychiatry literature, science,theoretical criticism and even every-
conceptionof affectexposedthe limits of semioticsthat tendsto structure day living. The notion of an arborescentor tree-likeschemais Deleuze's
emotional responsesto aestheticand physicalexperiences.Undeniably counterpointto his model of the rhizome,which he usesto challengeten-
a romantic conceptwithin his discussionof the regulation and production denciesin thinking and to suggestwaysof rehabilitating 'thought' asa cre-
of desire and energy within a socialfield, Deleuze'swritings of affect ativeand dynamicenterprise.
nevertheless enablea material,and thereforepolitical, critique of capital Deleuze'smodel of the tree-likestructure appearsto be quite simple.
and its operations. Within a Deleuzian framework, affect operates as Typically, at its top, is some immutable concept given prominence either
a dynamicof desirewithin an assemblage to manipulatemeaningand rela- by transcendentaltheorising or unthinking presumption. In Deleuze's
tions, inform and fabricate desire, and generateintensity - yielding works on epistemologyand ontology, he identifies Plato's Forms, the
modelsof the subjectespousedby Ren6Descartesand ImmanuelKant, as
different affectsin any given situation or event.Perceptionis a non-passive
well as the 'Absolute Spirit' of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel as
continual moulding, driven and given by affect.
Closelylinkedto Deleuzeand Guattari'sconceptsof 'multiplicity','expe- cxamples.All other conceptsor particularsare organisedverticallyunder
rience'and 'rhizomatics',the conceptof 'affect'shouldalsobe considered in this conceptin a tree/trtnk/root arrangement.The ordering is strictly
relationto theconceptsof'arborescence'and'lines offlight'. Situatedaspart hierarchical, from superior to subordinate,or transcendentto particular,
suchthat the individual or particularelementis conceivedaslessimport-
of the Deleuzian'and'of becoming,the molecularthresholdsof bodiesand
rrnt,powerful,productive,creativeor interestingthan the transcendent.
thingsaseventsaredescribedby Deleuzein terms of affectivehappenings;
occasionswherethings and bodiesare altered.To this end, affectdescribes The subordinate elements, once so arranged, are unable to 'move'
lrorizontallyin such a way as to establishcreativeand productiveinter-
the forcesbehindall formsof socialproductionin the contemporaryworld,
and theseaffectiveforces'ethical,ontological,cognitive,and physiological lclationshipswith other concepts,particularsor models. Rather, their
powers.In Deleuze'ssingularandcollaborative work with Guattari,affective position is final, accordingto an organisingprinciple implied or deter-
firrccsarcclcpictedasreactiveor activc(followingFriedrichNietzsche),tacit rnincd by the superiorconcept.
or pcrfrlrmccl.As l)clcuzc portrtys it, nffcctivcpowcr cirnbe utilisedto lfurthermorc, thc trcc is a self-containedtotality or closedsystemthat
cotttroltnd crcntivity,
rrbility,'rruthrlrity, is cqual just to tlrc sum of its parts.Rclationsbctwccnclcmcntsof the

systemare interior to and inherent within the model. They are stableor
even essentialin so far as, first, the superior concept is the all-powerful
definingforcethat dictatesthe positionor meaningof all elsein the system
Felicity J. Colman
and, second,the tendency is to think of the systemeither as complete in
itself or elseunconnectedto othersystemsin anymeaningfulway.The tree Deleuze'sdescriptionsof art remind us that it is one of the primary
is 'fixed to the spot' and static. Any remaining movementis minimal and mediums with which humans learn to communicateand respond to the
internal to the systemrather than exploratory or connective.Becausethe world. Art excitedDeleuzefor its ability to createthe domainsthat he
creativepotential of disorder and inter-connectivityis precluded, the saw,felt, tasted,touched,heard,thought, imaginedand desired.Besides
potentialinherentin conceptualisingand thinking in this manneris very publishing bookson singular writers and artists,including making specific
limited. manifestostylestatementsconcerningart asa categoryof criticalanalysis,
Deleuze'smodelcallsto mind the porphyriantree,a deviceusedby the Deleuze'sspecificactivitiesin respectto art extendedto writing short
philosopher Porphyry to show how reality and our conceptsare ordered cxhibition catalogueessaysfor artists (for exampleon the French painter
and how logicalcategorisationproceeds.The conceptof'Substance'can G6rardFromanger),andmakingexperimental music(with RichardPinhas).
be placedat the top of the tree,and dichotomousbranchingat eachlevel Deleuze'spreferredart works for his discussionsencompassed a range
obtainedby addinga specificdifferencesuchthat, at the lowestlevel,some of mediums, including music and sounds (birdsong), cinema, photo-
individual canbe identifiedasa sub-setof 'Substance'. graphy,the plastic arts (sculpture,painting and drawing), literature and
This versionof the arborealmodel alsohighlights somethingof its com- lrchitecture. Deleuze's philosophical interests also led him to discussa
plexity and ontologicalimportancefor Deleuze.The differenceevident numberof performativeand theatricalworks,usingexamplesfrom anthro-
betweenparticularsis subsumedby the similarity that definesthem in pologyto makecultural and philosophicaldistinctions.Deleuzeaddresses
terms of superior concepts in general and the transcendent concept the visual,aestheticand perceptualterms of art through distinctive polem-
(Substance)in particular.Rather than deriving conceptsfrom individual ical methodologiesdrawn from the sciences,such as biologicalevolution,
particulars(or interactionsbetweenthem), an abstractconceptis usedto geologicalformationsand concepts,and mathematics.
organiseindividuals and determine their meaning relative just to the Deleuzeleansupon a critical assortmentof art history critics, film critics,
organisationalhierarchy.Differencehasto be addedbackto eachelement literarycritics,architecturalcriticsandmusicalcriticsthroughouthis philo-
in order to define it asa particular,rather than having individual elements sophicalpractice: Wilhelm Worringer, Alois Riegl, Paul Claudel, Clement
serveasthe startingpoint for conceptualisation. In contrast,Deleuzeholds Greenberg,LawrenceGowing,GeorgesDuthuit, GregoryBateson,Andr6
that lived experiencecomprisesparticularity and uniquenessin each llazin,ChistianMetz, and Umberto Eco.As a writer,Deleuze'sliterarypre-
moment, experienceand individual, the inherent differencesof which clccessors figure prominently (seework in EssaysCritical and'Clinical). His
ought always to be acknowledged.By positing the concept over the cognitiveapproachtowardart comesfrom his adoptedphilosophicalfathers
particular, thinking of the arborealkind abstractsfrom lived experiencein including Immanuel Kant, Baruch Spinozaand Friedrich Nietzsche.In
its very structure. Nietzsche and.Philosophy,Deleuzeemploys'art' asa categoryof 'Critique',
For Deleuze,thinking in such a way stiflescreativity,leavessuperior trrkingon Nietzsche'sobservationthat the world is emotiveandsensory, but
conceptsrelatively immune to criticism and tends to closeone's mind to rrny analysisof this world is bound by epistemologicalstructures. For
the dynamism,particularityand changethat is evidentin lived experience. l)cleuze,the descriptivenature of art lies with art's ability not merely to
Not only is suchthinking necessarily abstract,it alsoservesto protectthe rcdescribe;rather art has a material capacityto evokeand to question
status quo and relieve dominant conceptsand positions from productive throughnon-mimeticmeans,by producingdifferentaffects.
critique. l)eleuze treatsplastic art movementsincluding Byzantine,the Gothic,
t hc Baroque,Romanticism,Classicism,Primitive,Japanese, and Art Brut,
rrstrans-historicalconceptsthat contributeto the field of art through their
virri<luspropositionsand developmentof forms, aestheticsand associated
Rhizomc Singulrrrilrtists,writcrs irnd composersincludingWilliam Blake,
.Klcc, 'Ihom:rs
Sullsllncc Vinccnt Virn (iogh, lhul (l6zrrnrrc,Prtul Hardy, Maric

Henri-Beyle Stendhal, Samuel Beckett, Antonin Artaud, William S. ARTAUD, ANTONIN (1895-1948)- refer to the entries on 'art',
Burroughs,Lewis Carroll,Leopoldvon Sacher-Masoch, FranzKafka,and 'becoming* performanceart', 'Bergson','Body without Organs','ethics',
Alain Robbe-Grillet are critically absorbedby Deleuze in terms of their 'feminism'r'Foucault* fold','hysteria','Lacan'and'linesof flight f art *
respectiveenquiriesinto the creationof art forms that translate,illustrate politics'.
and perform the forces of the world (such as desire), by making them
visible. Deleuze mentions in passingan enormous range of artists of
variousmediumsto makea point or an observation- from Igor Stravinsky
to Patti Smith, from Diego Vel6squezto Carl Andre. The means and AXIOMATIC
methodsby which art is ableto transformmaterialinto sensoryexperience
is of course part of the modernist contribution to art in the twentieth Alberto Toscano
century.In his discussions concerningart, Deleuzeis thus a contributorto Proposedby Deleuzeand Guattari in A Thousand, Plateaus'axiomatic'is
the twentieth-centurymodernistcanon. usedto definethe operationof contemporarycapitalismwithin universal
The methodologyof art forms the core of Deleuze'sstudy of Marcel history and generalsemiology.Originatingin the discourseof scienceand
Proust's work A lo recherche du tempsperdu (1913-27), a book that exam- mathematicalset theory in particular, 'axiomatic' denotesa method that
inesaspectsof temporality desireand memory.As in his bookco-authored neednot providedefinitionsof the terms it workswith, but rather orders
with Guattari on KaJba,in Proust,Deleuzeunderstandsart asbeing much a givendomainwith the adjunctionor subtractionof particularnorms or
more than a medium of expression. commands(axioms).Axioms thus operateon elementsand relationswhose
Deleuze'sbook FrancisBacon: TheLogicoJ'Sensation works through the natureneednot be specified.They areindifferentto the propertiesor qual-
complicatedconnectionsof Deleuzeand Guattari'sBody without Organs ities of their domain of application and treat their obiectsas purely func-
(BwO) and English painter FrancisBacon'streatmenrof the power and tional, rather than as qualitatively differentiated by some intrinsic
rhythms of the human body, to a discussionof the differencesfrom and character.Axiomsarein turn accompanied by theorems,or modelsof real-
similaritiesto the work of French painter Clzanneof Bacon'sown work. isation,which apply them to certainempiricalor materialsituations.
In this book,Deleuzeprivilegespaintingasan art form that affordsa con- An axiomaticsystemdiffers from systemsof codingand overcodingby its
creteapprehensionofthe forcesthat rendera body. capacityto operatedirectlyon decodedflows.In thisrespect,whilstit implies
In Deleuze'sfinal work co-authoredwith Guattari, What is Philosophy? a form of capture,its degreeof immanenceand ubiquity is far greaterthan
'art' is accordeda privilegedpositionin their triad of philosophy,art and thatof codingsystems, all of whichrequireaninstanceof externalityor tran-
science.Art is an integral componentof their three level operationsof the scendence.That is why Deleuze and Guattari defend the thesis of a
cerebralqualityof things(thebrain-becoming-subject). In this book,'art' as differencein kind betweencapitalistand pre-capitalist formations:the latter
a categoryhasdevelopedinto the meansby which Deleuzeand Guattari can code flows, while the former operateswithout coding. Within universal
operateaffect, temporality,emotion, mortality, perception and becoming. history the immanentaxiomaticof capitalismis activatedwith the passingof
The active, compounding creativity of artists' work are described as l thresholdof decodingand deterritorialisation, at the momentwhen, fol-
'percepts'- independentaggregates of sensation
that live beyondtheir cre- klwing Karl Marx, we areconfrontedby barelabourand independentcapital.
ators.DeleuzeandGuattarisignificantlycommentthat theinspirationfor art The axiomaticmethod,asinstantiatedby contemporarycapitalismand
is givenby sensations;the affectof methods,materials,memoriesandobjects: royal science,can be juxtaposedto schizoidpractice,which is capableof
'We paint,sculpt,compose, and write with sensations'(D&G1994:166). combiningdecodedflowswithout the insertionof axioms,aswell asto the
problematicmethod in the sciences,which is concernedwith eventsand
Connectives singularpoints rather than systemicconsistency. One of the bolderclaims
mlde by Deleuzeand Guattari is that we shouldnot think of the axiomatic
Affcct irsir notion analogicallyexportedfrom scienceto illustratepolitics.On the
llacon contrary,within scienceitself the axiomaticis deemedto collaboratewith
l')xpcricncc thc Statc in thc fixation of unruly flows, diagrams and variations.
Knlkrr rgcncythat subordinatcs
lisscntinllyit is rrstrrrtifyingor scmioticising the
BAcoN, FRANcr s ( t gog- gz) t9

transversalcommunicationsand conjunctionsof flowsto a systemof fixed

pointsand constantrelations.
As Deleuze and Guattari indicate,the unity of an axiomatic system
and of capitalismin particular,is itself very difficult to pin down, since
the opportunisticcharacterof the adjunction and subtractionof axioms BACON, FRANCTS (t909-92)
opensup the question of the saturationof the systemand of the inde-
pendenceof the axioms from one another. Moreover, though their John Marks
dependenceon the axiomsmakesmodelsof realisationisomorphic (for
exampleall statesin one way or anothersatisfythe axiom of production Deleuze'saim in FrancisBacon:TheLogicofSensation,as with all his other
for the market),thesemodelscan demonstrateconsiderableamountsof work on art, is to producephilosophicalconceptsthat correspondto the
heterogeneityand variation (suchassocialist,imperialist,authoritarian, 'sensibleaggregates'that the artist hasproduced.The 'logic of sensation'
social-democratic,or 'failed' states).The axiomaticsystemis therefore that Deleuzeconstructsshowshow FrancisBaconuses'Figures' to paint
not a closed dialectical totality, since it also generates'undecidable sensations that aim to act directlyon the nervoussystem.'Sensation',here,
propositions' that demand either new axioms or the overhaul of the refers to a pre-individual, impersonal plane of intensities.It is also,
system,and it is interrupted by entities(for examplenon-denumerable Deleuzeclaims,the oppositeof the facileor the clich6sof representation.
infinite sets)whosepower is greaterthan that of the system,and which It is at one and the sametime the human subjectand alsothe impersonal
thus open breachesto an outside. It is the capacityto conjugate and event.It is directedtowardsthe sensiblerather than the intelligible.
control flows without the introduction of a transcendent agency In developingthe use of the 'Figure', Bacon pursuesa middle path
(a totaliser) that makes the capitalist axiomatic the most formidable betweenthe abstractand the figural, betweenthe purely optical spacesof
apparatusof domination. abstractart and the purely 'manual'spacesof abstractexpressionism. The
Deleuzeand Guattariinsistthe capitalistaxiomaticestablishes relations 'Figure' retainselementsthat arerecognisably human;it is not a represent-
and connectionsbetweendecodedflows,that are otherwiseincommensu- ationalform, but rather an attempt to paint forces.For Deleuze,the voca-
rableand unrelated,and subordinatestheseflowsto a generalisomorphy, tion of all non-representational art is to make visible forcesthat would
such as the subjectwho must producefor the market.In this sensetoo, otherwiseremaininvisible.It is for this reasonthat Bacon'sfiguresappear
Deleuzeand Guattaridiscernthat the capitalistaxiomaticpointsto a resur- to be deformedor contorted,sometimespassingthrough objectssuch as
genceof machinicenslavement, onethat is all the morecruel becauseof its washbasins or umbrellas:the body seeksto escapefrom itself. There are
impersonality(its beyondforms of citizenship,sovereigntyand legitima- cven somepaintingsin which the 'Figure' is little more than a shadow
tion). In as much as its mode of operationcan entirely bypasssubjective within a 'scrambledwhole', as if it has been replacedentirely by forces.
belief or the codingof humanbehaviour,suchan axiomaticmovesus from ln short, Bacon'spaintingscan be consideredas an artistic expressionof
a societyof disciplineto a societyof control,wherepoweractsdirectly on l)eleuzeand Guattari'sconceptof the Body without Organs.
a decodeddividualmatter.Nevertheless, Deleuzeand Guattariarecareful Generallyin his work, Deleuzeseeksto contradictthe receivedwisdom
to note,it is not simplythe casethat flowscontinueto evadeand evenover- that artistssuchasBaconor FranzKafka arein somewayexpressinga deep
powerthe axiomatic,but that the globaland non-qualifiedsubjectivityof tcrror of life in their art. For this reason,he is at pains to point out that
capitalneverattainsabsolutedeterritorialisation, and is alwaysaccompa- llacon hasa greatlove of life, and that his paintingevincesan extraordin-
nied by forms of socialsubjection,in the guise of nation-states,and a rrryvitality.Baconis optimistic to the extentthat he'believes'in the world,
panoplyof territorialisations at the levelof its modesof realisation. but it is a very particularsort of optimism. Baconhimself saysthat he is
ccrebrallypessimistic- in that he paintsthe horrors of the world - but ar
thc sametime nervouslyoptimistic. Bacon'swork may be imbued with
Conncctives irll sorts of violence,but he managesto paint the 'scream'and not the
( lrrpitrrlisrl 'lrrlrror'- thc violcnceof the sensation ratherthantheviolenceof thespec-
Mirrx litclc- rnd hc rcpro:rchcs himsclf whcn hc feelsthat he haspaintedtoo
sis tttttclrhorrot'.'l'hc filrccstlut cirusctlrcscrcirnr
shouldnot bc confirscdwith
20 BA C o N , F R AN c Is (tgog-gz) BEC OM IN G 2l

the visiblespectacle beforewhich one screams.The screamcapturesinvis- BECKETI SAMUEL (190G89)- refer to the entries on 'art',
ible forces,which cannotbe represented, becausethey lie beyondpain and tspace'.
'minoritarian * cinema' and
feeling. So, cerebrally,this may lead to pessimism,since these invisible
forcesare even more overwhelming than the worst spectaclethat can be
represented.However,Deleuzeclaimsthat, in making the decisionto paint
the scream,Bacon is like a wrestler confronting the 'powers of the invis-
ible', establishinga combat that wasnot previouslypossible.He makesthe
activedecisionto amrm the possibilityof triumphing overtheseforces.He
allows life to screamat death, by confronting terror, and entering into 'logether with 'difference', 'becoming' is the key theme of Deleuze's
combatwith it, ratherthan representingit. The 'spectacle'of violence,on corpus.In so far as Deleuzechampionsa particular ontology,thesetwo
the other hand,allowstheseforcesto remaininvisible,and divertsus, ren- conceptsareits cornerstones,servingasantidotesto what he considersto
deringus passivebeforethis horror. be the western tradition's predominant and unjustifiable focus upon
It is for these reasonsthat Deleuze talks at some length about the beingand identity.This focusis replicated,Deleuzeargues,in our every-
importanceof 'meat' in Bacon'spaintings.For Deleuze,Baconis a great day thinking, such that the extent of the variety and changeof the expe-
painterof 'heads'rather than 'faces'.Baconseeksto dismantlethe struc- rienced world has been diluted by a limited conception of difference:
tured spatialorganisationof the facein order to make the head emerge. difference-from-the-same.Deleuze works at two levels to rectify such
Similarly, Baconsometimesmakesa shadowemergefrom the body asif it habitual thinking. Philosophically,he developstheories of difference,
werean animal that the body wassheltering.In this way,Baconconstructs rcpetition and becoming. For the world of practice, he provides chal-
not formal correspondences betweenman and animal, but rather azoneof lcnging writings designedto upset our thinking, together with a range of
indiscernibility. The bonesare the spatialorganisationof the body,but the 'tools' for conceivingthe world anew.At both levels,becoming is critical,
flesh in Bacon's paintings ceasesto be supported by the bones.Deleuze fbr if the primacy of identity is what defines a world of re-presentation
remarksupon Bacon'spreferencefor prone'Figures'with raisedlimbs, (presenting the same world once again), then becoming (by which
from which the drowsyfleshseemsto descend.This flesh,or meat,con- l)eleuze means 'becoming different') defines a world of presentation
stitutesthe zone of indiscernibilitybetweenman and animal.The head, rlnew.
then, constituteswhat Deleuzecallsthe 'animalspirit' of man.Bacondoes Taking his lead from Friedrich Nietzsche'searly notes,Deleuzeuses
not askus to pity the fate of animals(althoughthis could well be one effect thc term 'becoming' (deoenir)to describethe continual production (or
of his paintings),but rather to recognisethat every human being who 'rcturn') of difference immanent within the constitution of events,
suffersis a pieceof meat.In short, the man that suffersis an animal,and whetherphysicalor otherwise.Becomingis the pure movementevidentin
the animal that suffersis a man. Deleuzetalks of this in terms of a 'reli- changesbetween particularevents.This is not to saythat becomingrepre-
gious'aspectin Bacon'spaintings,but a religiousdimensionthat relatesto scntsa phasebetweentwo states,or a range of terms or statesthrough
the brutal realityof the butcher'sshop.The understandingthat we areall which somethingmight passon its journey to anotherstate.Ratherthan a
meat is not a moment of recognition or of revelation, but rather, for product, final or interim, becomingis the very dynamism of change,situ-
Deleuze,a moment of true becoming.The separationbetweenthe specta- rtlcd betweenheterogeneousterms and tending towardsno particular goal
tor and the spectacleis broken down in favour of the 'deep identity' of rlr cnd-state.
becoming. llecoming is most often conceivedby comparing a start-point and an
crrd-pointand deducingthe setof differencesbetweenthem. On Deleuze's
irccount,this approachmeansfirst subtractingmovementfrom the field of
rrctionor thinking in which the statesare conceived,and then somehow
Art rcintroducingit as the meansby which anotherstaticstatehas 'become'.
Becoming l'irr l)cleuze,this approachis an abstractexercisethat detractsfrom the
Intcnsity liclrncssof our cxperiences. For him, bccomingis neither merely an
Scnsitlion rttlrillutcofl nor tn intcrmcditrybctwccncvcnts,but ir charirctcristic
of thc

very productionof events.It is not that the time of changeexistsbetween Connectives

one eventand another,but that every eventis but a unique instant of pro- l)uration
duction in a continualflow of changesevident in the cosmos.The only Nietzsche
thing 'shared'by eventsis their havingbecomedifferent in the courseof
their production.
The continualproductionof uniqueeventsentailsa specialkind of con-
tinuity: they are unified in their very becoming.It is not that becoming B E CO MI NG + M U S I C
'envelops'them (since their production is wholly immanent) but that
becoming'movesthrough' everyevent,such that eachis simultaneously Marcel Swibod,a
start-point,end-point and mid-point of an ongoingcycleof production.
Deleuze theorisesthis productive cycle using Nietzsche'sconcept of 'Becoming' and 'music' are two terms that can be brought together such
'eternalreturn'. If eachmomentrepresentsa uniqueconfluenceof forces, that a becoming is capable of proceeding through music, for example
and if the nature of the cosmosis to move continually through states through the musical operation known as 'counterpoint', or the interweav-
without headingtowardsany particularoutcome,then becomingmight be ing of several different melodic lines horizontally where the harmony is
conceivedasthe eternal,productivereturn of difference. produced through linear combinations rather than using a vertical chordal
Deleuzebelievesthat eachchangeor becominghasits own duration, structure or setting. Counterpoint might most usually constitute a specif-
a measureof the relativestability of the construct,and the relationship ically 'musical' case in that when one speaksof musical counterpoint the
between forces at work in defining it. Becoming must be conceived ilssertions made regarding the term usually refer back to a given musical
neither in terms of a 'deeper' or transcendentaltime, nor as a kind of cxample: in short, counterpoint is something that we normally hear.
'temporalbackdrop'againstwhich changeoccurs.Becoming-differentls However, when counterpoint describes the interweaving of different lines
itsown time, the real time in which changesoccur.This time which does rs something other than what we can hear, then it opens up to a different
not changebut in which all changesunfold is not a Kantian a priori form function, a function that frees the term from a direct relation to properly
dependingupon attributesof a particularkind of consciousness. Rather musical content. Consider the work of the ethologistJakob von Uexkiill on
it is the time of production,foundedin differenceand becomingand con- the relationship between animal behaviour among certain speciesand the
sequent to relations between internal'and external differences.For cnvironments inhabited by these speciesthat led him to propound a theory
Deleuze,the presentis merely the productivemoment of becoming,the of this relationship based on a conception of counterpoint. To this extent,
moment correlatingto the productivethresholdof forces.As such,it rep- nature - in the very ways in which it can be figured through the inter-
resentsthe disiunction betweena past in which forces have had some rction of different lines of movement, between animals and their environ-
effect and a future in which new arrangementsof forceswill constitute ments, or between and across different species of animals - can be
new events.In other words,becomingper seis Deleuze'sversionof pure tunderstoodas constituting a counterpoint in a sensethat extends beyond
and empty time. rrstrictly metaphorical deployment of the term. From the perspective out-
Such a view of the world hasimportant implicationsfor conceptstrad- lined here, music enters into a relation of proximity to nature where music
itionally consideredcentralto philosophy.It undercutsanyPlatonictheory hccomes nature.
that privilegesbeing, originality and essence.For Deleuze,there is no If the term 'nature' is somewhat problematic as a rule in cultural theory,
world 'behind appearances', asit were.Insteadof beingabouttransitions it is to the extent that it cannot be unquestioningly presupposed as having
that somethinginitiates or goes throggh, Deleuze'stheory holds that rrny objective existence beyond the terms which define it, terms which are
things and states are prod'uctsof becoming.The human subiect, for often loaded. In the present case,the term aims at neither an objective con-
example,ought not to be conceivedasa stable,rationalindividual' experi- ccption nor a discursive one. Rather, this description attempts to restore to
encing changesbut remaining,principally,the sameperson.Rather,for 'nilture' a material dimension that extends beyond the confines of dis-
l)eleuzc,one'sself mustbe conceivedasa constantlychangingassemblage coLfrse,to the extent that discourse implies material processesthat cannot
of' lilrccs, rn cpiphcnomcnonarising from chanceconfluencesof lan- lrc rcduccd to intcrpretation or the status of fixed objects.To im-ply, in this
Hurl11c$, rlrgrtnisms,
socictics, litwsitnclstl tln.
cxpcctrttitlns, irrstirncc,is to cn-{irld, whcrcby langurgc can in somc instrnccsbc dcploycd

in waysthat foregroundits enfoldingof materialprocesses. Implicationin United States;JosephBeuys,Marina and Ulay, Valie Export, Hermann
this senseis illustratedby the useof the term 'counterpoint',a term which Nitsch and the Vienna Actionismusin West Europe;Jan Mlcoch, Petr
haslargely beenretainedby Deleuzeand Guattari in A Thousand, Plateaus Stembera,Milan Knizak, Gabor Attalai, TamasSzentjobyin EastEurope;
becauseit is highly amenableto a thinking orientedtowardsprocess. As was Stuart Brisley,and Gilbert and Georgein England;and Jill Orr, Stelarc
mentionedearlier,the term is mostoftenusedin a musicalcontextto figure and Mike Parr in Australia.More recentlyperformancehasbecomea sig-
the (harmonic)interactionsof melodiclines.As such it doesnot describe nificant, if not primary, ingredient of many artistic practices.Examples
a fixed object and the term's linguistic or semanticsenseis insufficient to include but are not restricted to: Coco Fuscq Guillermo G6mez-Pefra,
accountfor whatactuallyhappens when counterpoint takesplaceasit draws Ricardo Dominguez, Santiago Sierra, Franco B., VanessaBeecroft,
its contingentconnectionsbetweendifferentmelodiclines. Matthew Barney,TehchingHsieh, and AndreaFraser.
This characteristicof the term makesit amenableto the task of con- Stronglyinfluencedby Antonin Artaud, Dada,the Situationists,Fluxus
structing a different conception of nature, in that it is detachablefrom its and Conceptual Art, performance art in its early days tended to define
strictly musicalcontext in such a way that it still retains its capacityboth itself as the antithesisof theatre,in so far as the event wasnever repeated
to describeand at thesametimeto imply, or enfold process.This capacity the sameway twice and did not havea linear structurewith a clearbegin-
is what allowsus to usethe term to describenon-musicalaswell asmusical ning,middleandend.More importantly though,all performanceart inter-
interactions,wherethe ideaof the melodic line, strictly speaking,givesway rogatesthe clarity of subjectivity,disarrangingthe clear and distinct
to an expandedconceptionoflinear interactions,suchasthosetakingplace positions that the artist, artwork, vieweq art institution and art market
betweenthe bodies of different animals,animal species,their environ- occupy.
ments)and oneanother.This expandedsenseof the term permitsthe con- Trying to articulatethe changedrelationshipbetweenartist, artwork
struction of a renewedconceptionof nature that puts it in proximity rnd viewer that performanceart inauguratedcan at times be difficult but
to music, where na,turebecomes example of this proximity is the Deleuzian concept of 'becoming' is especiallyuseful here in that it
embodiedin the work of the French composerOlivier Messiaenwho allowsus to considerart in terms of a transformativeexperienceaswell as
famouslytranscribedthe songsof differentbird speciesbeforeincorporat- conceptualisethe processof subjectificationperformanceart sustains.
ing them into his musicalcompositions.The territorial codingsbetween 'Becoming'points to a non-linear dynamic processof changeand when
and acrosscertain bird speciesand their environments(transcodings)are usedto assistus with problems of an aestheticnature we are encouraged
carriedover into the music in the useof birdsong,such that therecan no not just to reconfigurethe apparentstability of the art object as 'object'
longerbe a binary or hierarchicaldistinctiondrawn betweenthe produc- definedin contradistinctionto a fully coherent'subject' or an extension
tions of tculturetand thoseof 'naturet. of that 'subject' but rather the conceptof art's becomingis a fourfold
Music becomes na,tureand naturebecomes musicand their resulting indis- bccoming-minor of the artist, viewer, artwork and milieu. It is in this
cernibility is the product of a philosophicallabour: to selecttermsbestsuited rcgardthat performancepromptsus to considerthe productionandappre-
to the tash of thinhing and,d,escribingprlcess.Counterpoint is such a term ciation of art away from the classicalsubject/object distinction that
becauseit is capableof putting music and nature into proximity and prcvailedby and largeup until the 1960s.
describingthe material implications that orient thought towardsprocess. A good example of this would have to be Acconci's Following Piece
(1969)that beganwith a propositionrandomly to follow peoplein New
Yrrrk.The ideawasthat the performancewould independentlyarriveat a
krgicalendpoint,regardlessof the artist'sintention and despitethe 'goal'
BECOMING + PERFORMANCE ART ot'the work beingachieved.Instead,it wasthe personbeingfollowedwho
lrrought the work to its final conclusion,such as when she enteredher
Ad,rian Parr irl)ilrtmentor got into her car and droveoff. In this instancethe work was
The early era of performanceart from the mid-1960sand through the grrovisionally structuredby a proposition,'to follow anotherperson',but
1970s includcd such figures as Allan Kaprow, Vito Acconci, Bruce tlrc cvcntualform the work took wasstructuredby the movementsof the
Nirunrirn,(lhris llurdcn, Adrian Pipcr, Lauric Anderson,Lacy lnd l)crsonbcing firllowcd.In fact, hcre the art can be consideredasa process
| ,lhowitz,I lannrrltWilkc,( llrolcc Schnccnrirnn,
anclAnirMcndictrrin thc scnsitivcto its own trrnsfilrmation;asthc artistwaslcd lround thc city at
26 BE R Gs o N , H E N R I ( r 859- rg4r) BERG SoN, HnNnr ( r 859- r g4r ) 27

the whim of someoneelse.There is a propositionto do 'X' then the activ- andperception.Along with the thoughtsof GottfriedWilhelm von Leibniz,
ity of doing 'X' activatesnew previously unforeseenorganisationsto take Baruch Spinoza,Friedrich Nietzsche,David Hume, Antonin Artaud,
place;the art is in the 'becomingof art' that is in itself social.Art of this Guattari and Lucretius, DeleuzeengagesBergson'sempiricism as a chal-
kind may be bestarticulatedas 'art without guarantees'; this is becauseit lengeto the rigidity of philosophy,especially in its useof transcendental ele-
existsentirelyin durationand amidstthe playof divergentforcesthat typi- ments,phenomenological assumptions, and the questfor 'knowledge'and
fiesDeleuze'sunderstandingof 'becoming'. 'truth'. Deleuze'sphilosophicalinterestin Bergsonis manifoldand central
What is more,with performanceart artisticvalueis producedsocially;it to his entire oeuvre.Although neglectedin philosophicalcanonsof the
is not an abstractvalue that is imposedoutside the creativeprocessitself. secondhalf of the twentieth century,in the early decadesof that century,
Hence,what we find is that this kind of artisticpracticeconcomitantlypro- Bergson'swork was well known and widely discussedin many artistic and
videsa radicalchallengeagainstthe wholeconceptof labourin a capitalist literaryarenas,from the FrenchCubiststo the Englishwriter T E. Hulme.
context.Valueis not decidedaccordingto profit marginsand the market, In BergsonDeleuzefinds an intellectualpartner for someof his core
rather it is a particular kind of socialorganisation.For example,when philosophicalpursuits: conceptsand ideasof temporality,the affective
Beuysarrivedat the Ren6Block Galleryin New York (May 1974)wherehe nature of movementand duration, the political implicationsof multipli-
lived with a wild coyotefor sevendaysin the gallery,the art wasin how the city and difference,the morphologicalmovementof genetics,and the tem-
two slowly developeda senseof trust in the other to the point wherethey poral causalityof eventsashabitualand associated series.Deleuzesignals
eventuallysleptcurled up together.The meaningthat emergedout of the his interest in Bergsonin his essayon Hume, Empiricismand Subjectiaity.
piecewas not universal,nor was it absolutelyrelative;as an a-signifying Then, in 1966,Deleuzepublishedhis book Bergsonism, in which he called
processthis wasan art practiceoccurringat the limits of signification. for 'a return to Bergson',through an extendedconsiderationof what he
In the examplesgiven,the art wasboth sociallyproducedand conceived sawasBergson'sthree key concepts:intuition asmethod,the demandfor
in terms of 'social formation', one that convergeddifferencesin their an inventionand utilisationof a metaphysicalorientationof science,and a
mutual becoming.Hence,what this demonstrates is that performanceart logicalmethodand theoryof multiplicities.Bergsonnot only questionsthe
turns its backon the opticalemphasisthat oncegovernedart. Instead,such logisticsof existencein terms of movement,but his writing indicateshis
practicesaim at producing an encounteror event, not in the simplistic genuinefascinationwith the subjectsand objectsof life - appealingto
sensethat it'happened' at a particularmomentin time, but in so far asit Deleuze'sown propositionsconcerningvitalism.
aspiresto bring a variety of elementsand forces into relation with one Bergson'sconceptsare influentialfor Deleuze'swork in Dffirence and
another.Ultimately, performanceart involvesa multiplicity of durations, Repetition,where Deleuze developsideas of differenceand repetition,
eachof which is implied in the art work asa whole. memoryand repetition,the intensiveand extensiveforms of time, and the
The crucialpoint is that performanceart cannotbedescribedwithin trad- physicalmovementsof time; all of which are indebtedto Bergson'sdis-
itional aestheticparametersthat reinforcethe validity of subject/object cussionof the paradoxicalmodalitiesof time in his book, Matter and
distinctions,consequentlythe conceptualapparatus'becoming'offersus MemorylMatiire et Mimoirel (1896).Bergsonproposesa movingmodelof
is descriptive. It helps us describe the processof change indicative of duration - a conceptof duration that is not spatiallypredeterminedbut
performanceart; an event that in its singularity concomitantlyexpressesa continually alters its past through cognitive movement.Then, later in
multiplicity of relations,forces,affectsand percepts. CreatioeEoolutionBergson incorporatesthe cinematic model into his
philosophical expression,noting the cinematographicalcharacter of
irncientphilosophyin its apprehensionof the thought of ordinary know-
lcdge(B 19l 1: 331-33).From this model(andthe Kantiannotionof time,
BERGSON, HENRI ( 1859-1941)
rrndHegelianconceptionof thought and movement)Deleuzedevelopshis
cxplicationof how the perceptualrecognitionof moving imagesof the
Felicity J. Colman
cincmaticscreenoperatesnot through the apprehension of that movement,
I )clcuzchm bccncrcditedwith restoringFrenchphilosopherHenri Bergson br.rtthrough specificmoments of sound and optical registration.This
Io lhc crrnonof'kcy thinkcrsof'his gcncration,
and Bergson's
work contin- f )clcuzcdiscusscs at lcngthin his two bookson the cinema,CinemaI : The
irllon disciplincsconccrncdwith timc, movcmcnt,nlcnlory
rucsl0 irnprirct trtt tttcrnutl-imageitncl()inL'ma2:'l'hc'l'irnc-I inuga.

Memory is conceivedof by Bergsonasa temporalblendingof perceptual contribute to; philosophical or otherwise. These engagementsare at times
imageryandthis ideabecomes centralto Deleuze'shypothesis
in his discus- fleeting and at times more sustained,and contribute to their strategy of pre-
sion of the philosophicalimportanceof cinema.In his secondbook on venting their position from stabilising inro an ideology, merhod, or single
cinema, The Time-lmage,Deleuze draws from Bergson'sinterest in the metaphor. In other words, they encouragephilosophy to occupy the spaceof
different types of possiblememory states- dreams,amnesia,d6ji-vu, and slippage that exists between disciplinary boundaries, and to question how
death.To theseDeleuzeaddsa breadthof memoryfunctions:fantasy,hallu- things are made, rather than simply analysing or interpreting the taken-
cinations,Nietzsche'sconceptof 'promise-behaviour' where we make a for-granted final result or image. This provides the foundation for the work
memoryof thepresentfor the futureuseof thepresent(nowaspast),theatre, presentedin I nti-oed'ipusandA TkousandPlateaus,andthe seriesof renewed
Alain Robbe-Grillet'sconceptof the 'recognition'processwherethe por- terms proposed by these texts (including schizoanalysis,rhizomatics, prag-
trayalof memoryis throughinventionandelimination,andnumerousothers. matics, diagrammatism, cartography,and micropolitics).
FollowingBergson,Deleuzedescribeshow the perceptualandcognitive Appearing predominantly in A Thousand, Plateaus,the term .black hole,
abilitiesof the dreamor wakefulreceptorof memoryeventsor imageryare has been sourced from contemporary physics. Referring to spaces that
dependentupon a complexnetwork of factors.As Bergsondiscussesin cannot be escapedfrom once drawn into, Deleuze and Guattari describe the
Matter andMemory,systemsof perceptualattentionare contingentupon black hole as a star that has collapsed into itself. while although this term
the 'automatic'or 'habitual'recognitionof things.Thesedifferentmodes exists literally rather than as a metaphor (becauseit maintains an effect that
of rememberingare further temperedthrough the degreeof attention is fully actualised, affective and real), it has been relocated away from its
givenin the perceptionof things,affectingnot only the descriptionof the original source in scientific discourse.As with many of the terms appropri-
object, but the featuresof the object itself. From Bergson,Deleuze's ated by A ThousandPlareaus,it is presented as being engaged in its own
mature conceptionof duration and the movementsand multiplicitiesof processof deterritorialisation that is independent from the text that it has
time aredeveloped. been woven into; these concepts do not exist for the newly bricolaged-
together text, but happen to come into contact with it or move through it as
l condition or processof their own moving trajectory or line of flight.
In the context of A Thousand.Pleteeus, the black hole is presented as
Cinema being one - unwanted but necessary- outcome for a failed line of flight.
Difference l)eterritorialising movement strays away from the concept and state of
Duration molar identity and aims to force splinters to crack open into giant ruptures
Hume rrnd cause the subsequent obliteration of the subject as he becomes
Memory cnsconcedwithin a processof becoming-multiple. Engaged in this process,
Multiplicity the subject is deconstituted, and becomes a new kind of assemblagethat
occupies what Deleuze and Guattari call the 'plane of consistency', which
is a spaceof creativity and desire. However, becausethis plane is also that
of death and destruction, traps are scattered throughout this process.
l')xisting as micro-fascisms across this plane, black holes threaten self-
conscious acts of transcendence and self-destruction alike, which is why
Kylie Message
l)cleuze and Guattari advise nomads to exercise caution as they dis-
DeleuzeandGuattaribelievethatthe roleof philosophyis to inventnewcon- organise themselvesaway from the molar organisations of the State. So, in
ceptsthat challenge the waythat philosophyitselfis written andformulated. sirlple terms, the black hole is one possible outcome of an ill-conceived
Because of this, they draw both from new ideasand from thoseof a multi- (which oftcn equates to overly self-conscious) attempt at deterritorialisa-
plicity ofalreadyexistingdisciplines,includingbiologicalandearthsciences, tion thirt is cirused by a threshold crossed too quickly or an intensity
andphysics. This interdisciplinary coverage is designed to maketheirphilo- lrcconrcdangcrousbcciruscit is no longer bcarable.
sophicll projcct h:rvcconcurrcnt signiticancc rlr (n<l
cffcct mattcrhowsmall) Arrotlrcrway of'thirrking lbout thc blrrckholc is in tcrms of how Deleuze
witlrirrthc lickl ol'r:ont:cpl thittthcylloth lpprollriltc li'otttitttd
rritlttritlriccs i ttttl (i ttl tl ti tt' i r cwr it c lhc r clit t iot t shipphilosophyir nclpsychoir r r alysis
hir s
30 BO DY BOD Y 3l
with desire and subjectivity. If the black hole is one possibleoutcome faced such a body; the animal body is another, but a body can also be a body of 1
by the overly convulsive, self-consumed desiring subject, then it works to work, a social body or collectivity, a linguistic corpus, a political party, or
illustrate their contention that every strong emotion - such as conscious- even an idea. A body is not defined by either simple materiality, by its occu-
ness or love - pursues its own end. As a potential outcome for both paths pying space('extension'), or by organic structure. It is defined by the rela-
of transcendenceand destruction, the lure of the black hole indicates the tions of its parts (relations of relative motion and rest, speedand slowness),
subject's attraction toward an absolute (lack) of signification. This and by its actions and reactions with respect both to its environment or
expressesthe absolute impossibility of representation at the same time as milieu and to its internal milieu. The parts of a body vary depending on
it actively works to show how grand narrative statementscontinually inter- the kind of body: for a simple material object, such as a rock, its parts are
twine subjectivity and signification. In appealing to a deterritorialising minute particles of matter; for a social body, its parts are human individuals
activity, Deleuze and Guattari problematise the processof subjectification who stand in a certain relation to each other. The relations and interactions
which, they claim, results either in self-annihilation (a black hole), or of the parts compound to form a dominant relation, expressing the
re-engagement with different planes of becoming. 'essence'or a power of existing of that body, a degree of physical intensity
In addition to presenting the black hole as a possibleend-point to certain that is identical to its power of being affected. A body exists when, for
acts of deterritorialisation, Deleuze and Guattari use it as a way of further whatever reason, a number of parts enter into the characteristic relation
conceptualising their notion of faciality. In this context, black holes exist that defines it, and which corresponds to its essenceor power of existing.
as the binary co-requisite of the flat white surface, wall or landscapethat Since nature as a whole contains all elements and relations, nature as
nominally symbolises the generic white face of Christ. In order to break a whole is a body, a system of relations among its parts, expressing the
through the dominating white face,or wall of the signifier, and avoid being whole order of causal relations in all its combinations.
swallowed by the black hole, one must renounce the face by becoming Deleuze is fond of quoting Baruch Spinoza'sdictum that'no one knows
imperceptible. However, Deleuze and Guattari advise caution when what a body can do'. The more power a thing has, or the greater its power
embarking on such a line of flight. Indeed, they claim madnessto be a def- of existence,the greater number of ways in which it can be affected. Bodies
inite danger associatedwith attempts to break out of the signifying system are affected by different things, and in different ways, each type of body
represented by the face.We must not, they warn, entirely reject our organ- being characterised by minimum and maximum thresholds for being
ising boundaries becauseto do so can result in the complete rejection of affected by other bodies: what can and what cannot affect it, and to what
subjectivity. Recalling the slogan of schizoanalysis,they tell us not to turn degree. Certain external bodies may prove insufficient to produce a reac-
our backs on our boundaries, but to keep them in sight so that we can dis- tion in a body, or fail to pass the minimum threshold, whereas in other
mantle them with systematiccaution. cases,the body being affected may reach a maximum threshold, such that
it is incapableof being affected any further, as in a tick that dies of engorge-
ment. A body being affected by another, such that the relations of its parts
are the effect of other bodies acting on it, is a passivedetermination of the
Molar body, or passion. If an external body is combined or 'composed' with a
Schizoanalysis body in a way that increasesthe affected body's power of being affected,
Space this transition to a higher state of activity is experienced as joy; if the com-
bination decreasesthe affected body's power of being affected, this is the
irffect of sadness.It is impossible to know in advance which bodies will
compose with others in a way that is consonant with a body's characteris-
t ic relation or ratio of its parts, or which bodies will decompose a body by
c:rr.rsingits parts to enter into experimental relations.
Bruce Baugh
Whcther the effect is to increaseor decreasea body's power of acting and
'liocly'tirr l)clcuzcis clcfinccl
itsirnywholccomposed of parts,wherethese bcing 1ll'cctccl,onc body affecting;anothcr, or producing effectsin it, is in
irrsorrrc to onc rlnothcr,
tlc(irritc lilr
rtnclhrs r citpacitv rcrrlityrrcrlnrbinirrgirnclrr mixing of thc tw<lb<lclics, irnclm<lstoficn 'bit by
Irt'ing :rlli't'tt'rl lr v ot lr c l lr or lic s . ' l' lr t ' lt t t r t t r t r t l l r x l v i s j t t s l o t t c c x i t t t t g l l t 'o l ' bi l ' , or pru' t by l) iu't . Sonr ct int cst his nr ixing lr llu's onc ol'lhc bodics

(as when food is alteredin being assimilated,or when a poison destroys dominant in the production of identity and consciousness, they suggest
a body's vital parts); sometimesit altersboth and producesa composite that implicit within, between,and all around theseare other - possibly
relationof partsthat dominatesthe relationsof both components(aswhen more affective- fieldsof immanenceand statesof being.
chyleand lymph mix to form blood,which is of a differentnaturefrom its Attention is refocusedawayfrom the subjectivity(a term which they feel
components);andsometimesit preservesthe relationof partsamongthem is too often mistakenfor the term 'consciousness') traditionallyprivileged
both, in which casethe two bodiesform parts of a whole. The characteris- by psychoanalysisas Deleuze and Guattari challenge the world of the
tic relationthat resultsfrom harmoniouslycombiningthe relationsof the articulating,self-definingand enclosedsubject.The BwO is the proposed
two componentbodiesinto a'higher individual'or'collectiveperson',such antidote(aswell asprecedent,antecedentandevencorrelate)to this articu-
as a community or an association,correspondsto a collectivepower of late and organisedorganism;indeed,they claim that the BwO hasno need
beingaffected,and resultsin collectiveor communalaffects. for interpretation.The BwO doesnot exist in oppositionto the organism
Since a body is a relation of parts correspondingto an essence,or or notionsof subjectivity,and it is nevercompletelyfree of the stratified
a degreeof physical intensity, a body need not have the hierarchical and exigenciesof proper language,the State, family, or other institutions.
dominatingorganisationof organswe call an 'organism'.It is rather an However, it is, despite this, both everywhereand nowhere,disparateand
intensivereality,differentiatedby the maximumand minimum thresholds homogeneous. In terms of this, there are two main points to note: firstly,
of its powerof beingaffected. that the BwO existswithin stratifiedfieldsof organisationat the sametime
as it offers an alternative mode of being or experience(becoming);
secondlgthe BwO doesnot equateliterally to an organ-lessbody.
In referenceto the first point, Deleuze and Guattari explain that
Body without Organs althoughthe BwO is a processthat is directedtoward a courseof contin-
Power ual becoming,it cannotbreak awayentirely from the systemthat it desires
Space escapefrom. While it seeksa mode of articulation that is free from the
Spinoza binding tropesof subjectificationand signification,it must play a delicate
gameof maintainingsomereferenceto thesesystemsof stratification,or
elserisk obliterationor reterritorialisationbackinto thesesystems.In other
words,suchsubversionis a never-completed process.Instead,it is continu-
ous and oriented only towardsits processor moyementrather than toward
any teleologicalpoint of completion.Consistentwith this, and in order to
Kylie Message
be affective(or to have affect)it must exist - more or less- within the
A phraseinitially takenfrom Antonin Artaud, the Body without Organs systemthat it aimsto subvert.
(BwO) refersto a substratethat is alsoidentifiedasthe planeof consistency Deleuzeand Guattari take Miss X as their role model. A hypochon-
(as a non-formed, non-organised,non-stratifiedor destratifiedbody or driac, sheclaimsto be without stomach,brain, or internal organs,and is
term). The term first emergedin Deleuze'sTheLogic of Sense,and was left with only skin and bonesto give structureto her otherwisedisorgan-
further refined with Guattari in Anti-Oedipusand A ThousandPlateaus. isedbody.Through this example,they explainthat the BwO doesnot refer
The BwO is proposedasa meansof escapingwhat Deleuzeand Guattari literally to an organ-lessbody. It is not produced as the enemy of the
perceiveas the shortcomingsof traditional(Freudian,Lacanian)psycho- organs,but is opposedto the organisationof the organs.In other words,
analysis.Rather than arguing that desireis basedon Oedipal lack, they the BwO is opposedto the organisingprinciplesthat structure,defineand
claim desireis a productive-machine that is multiple and in a stateof con- speakon behalf of the collectiveassemblage of organs,experiencesor
stant flux. And whereaspsychoanalysis proclaimsclosureand interpret- statesof being. Whereaspsychoanalysis privileges'lack' as the singular
trtion, their critique of the three terms (organism, significanceand lnd productiveforce that maintainsdesire,Deleuzeand Guattari claim
that organiseand bind us most effectivelysuggeststhe that by binding and judging desirein this way,our understandingand
possibilityof'opcnings nndsp:rccs
ftrrthc crcationof ncw modesof cxpcri- rclati<lnship with the real or Imaginarybecomesfurthcr removedand
crtcc'.l{itlhcr tltiin llrrrcccdingdircctly to invcrt rlr dcc<lnstructlcnlls cornpromiscd.

Elaboratingfurther on the natureof the BwO, Deleuzealsoinvokesthe BREUER, JOSEPH (I8+2-I925) - refer to the entrieson 'hysteria'and
German biologist,August Weismann,and his 'theory of the germplasm' tfeminismt.
(1885,published1893)to contendthat - like the germplasm- the BwO is
alwayscontemporarywith and yet independentof its host organism.
Weismannbelievedthat at eachgeneration,the embryo that developsfrom
BURROUGHS,WILLIAM (1914-97) - refer'to the entries on tart'
the zygotenot only setsasidesomegermplasmfor the next generation(the
* politics'.
inheritanceof acquiredfeatures)but it also producesthe cells that will
developinto the soma- or body - of the organism.In Weismann'sview,
the somaplasmsimply providesthe housingfor the germplasm,to ensure
that it is protected,nourishedand conveyedto the germplasmof the oppo-
site sex in order to createthe next generation.What comesfirst, the
chickenor the egg?Weismannwould insistthe chickenis simply oneegg's
device for laying another egg. Similarly, Deleuzepresentsthe BwO as
equivalentto the egg;like the egg,the BwO doesnot exist beforeor prior' CANGUILHEM, GEORGES (1904-95)-referto theentryon'schizo-
to the organism,but is adjacentto it and continuouslyin the processof phrenia'.
Insteadof slotting everythinginto polarisedfields of the norm and its
antithesis,Deleuze and Guattari encourageus to remove the poles of
organisationbut maintain a mode of articulation.They advisethat in
seekingto makeourselvesa BwO, we needto maintaina mode of expres-
sion, but rid languageof the central role it has in arbitrating truth and Jonathan Roffe
reality againstmadnessand the pre*symbolicreal.Relocatingdesireaway In the periodbeforehis death,Deleuzeannouncedin an interviewthat he
from a dichotomouslinguistictrajectory,Deleuzeand Guattari presentit would like to composea work which would be called TheGrand.eur of Marx.
as being contextualisedby the field of immanenceoffered by the BwO This fact clearlyindicatesDeleuze?s positiveattitudetowardsthe philoso-
rather than by the conclusivefield of language.As such, desireis always phy of Karl Marx, which he neverabandoneddespitealteringmanyof its
alreadyengagedin a continuousprocessof becoming.However,despite fundamentalelements.Certainlythe most important of theseelementsis
occupying(and in somecasesembodying)a field of immanenceor a plane capitalism.The Marxism of-Deleuzecomesfrom his insistencethat all
ofconsistencywhich areoften describedasbeingdestratified,decodedand politicalthought must take its bearingsfrom the capitalistcontextwe live
deterritorialised,the BwO hasits own modeof organisation(whoseprin- in. While mentioningcapitalismin passingin a number of places,it is the
ciples are primarily derived from Baruch Spinoza).Rather than being two volumesof Caphalismand Schizophreniawhich contain the most sus-
a specificform, the body is morecorrectlydescribedasuncontainedmatter tainedand radicaltreatmentof this theme.
or a collectionof heterogeneous parts. Deleuze and Guattari insist any given social formation restricts or
structuresmovementsor flows. They claim that theseflows are not just
the flows of money and commoditiesfamiliar to economists,but can be
seenat a variety of levels:the movementof peopleand traffic in a city,
the flows of words that are bound up in a language,the flows of genetic
Becoming code betweengenerationsof plants, and even the flow of matter itself
Body (the movementof the ocean,electronsmoving in metals,and so forth).
Desirc Thus, Deleuze and Guattari's political ,thought begins with the
Lacirn prcmissthat nature itself, the Whole of existence,is at once a matter of
l)sychorrnrrlysis fkrws,and that tny s<lcictymust structrlretheseflows in ordcr to subsist.
Spinozit All Stltc rncl prc-Strtc socictics- rrllthoscwhich irccordingto Murx lrc

pre-capitalist- on DeleuzeandGuattari'saccount,havesucha restriction Guattari that codedelementsof socialformation are entirely absent.It is
of flows astheir basicprinciple. rather the casethat certain fragmentsof Statesociety(in particular) are
Deleuzeand Guattari call this processof restriction, or structuring, put to work in the serviceof capitalism.Obviously,structureslike the
'coding'. They conceivecoding as at once restrictive and necessary. governmentand the family still exist in capitalism.As they note, there
Societies,as regimesof coding,aim to bring about certainfixed waysof could be no total decodedsociety- an oxymoronicphrase.Governments
existing(living, talking,working,relating)while denyingother more mal- and monarchiesremain,while having their real juridical power substan-
leable ways. However, without some structure - our own coherent tially reduced,asregulativemechanismsstabilisingthe growth of decod-
individuality and agencyfor example,which Deleuzeand Guattari con- ing/ axiomatisation.The nuclear family in particular, the kind of coded
siderspecificto eachsocialformationand alwaysoppressive - therewould entity that one might imagine would be dissolved by the decoding/
be no basisupon which to challengeand attemptto alter the givencoding axiomatisingmovementof capitalism,is for Deleuzeand Guattari the site
regime.Both Anti-Oed,ipusandA Thousand, Plateausinclude lengthy analy- of a surprisingminiaturisationof Statesociety,where the father takesthe
sesof differentkinds of societiesand the waysin which they codeflows. position (structurally speaking)of the despoticand all-seeingruler.
Capitalismis the radicalexceptionto this basiccentralunderstandingof None of thesepoints, howeveqmakesfor a celebrationof the libera-
the nature of society.There are four featuresto this exceptionalstatusof tory effectsof capitalism.Deleuze and Guattari remain Marxists in so
capitalismfor Deleuzeand Guattari. First, insteadof working by coding far as.they consider real freedom to be unavailablein the world of
flows,capitalismis a regimeof decoding.Second,and in tandemwith this, monetaryequivalenceenactedby capitalism.While imitating the decod-
the recodingthat would takeplacein non-capitalistsocietiesto recapture ing that makespossiblethe freeing up of flows and new ways of existing,
decodedflows is replacedby the processof axiomatisation.For example, capitalist society only produces a different, more insidious, kind of
the coding of sexualrelationsthrough marriage,the church, moralsand unfreedom.
popularculture - which in different societieslocatethe practiceof sexin
certaincontexts,whetherthat is marriage,prostitutionor youth culture-
hasbeendecodedin capitalistsocieties. This is first of all, for Deleuzeand
Guattari, a good thing, making possiblenew kinds of relations that were Freedom
excludedby the codingregimesin question.In capitalism,however,a cor- Marx
relativeaxiomatisationhas takenplacemaking possiblethe saleof sex as Oedipalisation
a product (what Karl Marx called a 'commodity'). Axioms operate,in
short, by emptyingflows of their specificmeaningin their codedcontext
(sexasthe act of marriage,the mealasthe centreof family life, and so on)
and imposing a law of generalequivalencein the form of monetary value.
Theseflowsremaindecodedin sofar asthey arefluid partsof the economy.
They cannot,ascommodities,be bound to a certainstateof affairsto have
value - for food to be a product it must be possibleto eat it in a context DeleuzeandGuattariarealoneamongpost-structuralists to resuscitate the
other than the family home,or tribe. notion of universalhistory. But by drawing on Karl Marx rather than
The third important aspectof capitalismfor Deleuzeand Guattari - GeorgWilhelm FriedrichHegel,they insistthat this is an'ironic'universal
drawingon Marx - is that this processof decoding,/axiomatisation hasno history,for three reasons:it is retrospective, singularand critical. [t is ret-
real limit. Given that all such limits would be codes,this movement rospectivein that the perspectiveof schizophreniaonly becomesavailable
effectivelyand voraciouslyerodesall such limits. This accountsfor the toward the end of history,under capitalism;yet at the sametime, capital-
sensein capitalistsocietiesof perpetual novelty and innovation, since ism doesnot representthetelosofhistory, but rather a contingentproduct
codcd flows are continuallybeing turned into commoditiesthrough this of fortuitous circumstance.This confirms the singularity of capitalist
proccss,furthcr cxtcnclingthe realmof monetaryequivalence. socicty:it is not somehiddensimilaritybetweencapitalismand previous
I krwcvcr,suclrir proccsscoulclncvcr bc total.Thus, fourthly,thc fact s<rcillfirrmsthrt makcsclpitrrlismunivcrsirl, but rathcrwhat M:rrx (in thc
in this waycklcsnot mcanfor I)clctrzcrrnd Orunilrisse\ cirllsthc 'csscntirtldifl'crcncc'bctwccrrit arrd thc othcrs: it

exposesthe sourceofvalue that previoussocietieskept hidden.And hence So while the capitalist market inauguratesthe potential for universal
capitalismoffers the key to universalhistory becausewith capitalism, history in its productionof difference,it is the eliminationof capitalfrom
societycan finally becomeself-critical. the market that will multiply differenceand realisethe freedom inherent
Capitalistmodernity representsthe key turning point in this view of in universalhistory.
universalhistory,for a crucial discoveryis madein a number of different
fields:by Martin Luther; by Adam Smith and David Ricardo;somewhat
laterby SigmundFreud,who will thereforebe considered'theLuther and
the Adam Smith of psychiatry'.The key discoveryis that valuedoesnot
inhere in objects but rather gets invested in them by human activity,
Alberto Toscano
whether that activity is religious devotion, physicallabour or libidinal
desire.In this fundamentalreversalof perspective,objectsturn out to be The conceptof 'capture'is usedby Deleuzeand Guattari to dealwith two
merely the support for subjectivevalue-givingactivity.Yet in eachof the problemsof relationality:first, how to conceiveof the connectionbetween
threefields,the discoveryofthe internal,subjectivenatureofvalue-giving the State,the war machineand capitalismwithin a universalhistory of
activity is accompaniedby a resubordination of that activity to another politicallife; and second,how to formulatea non-representational account
externaldetermination:in the caseof Luther, subjectivefaith freed from of the interaction of different beings and their territories, such as to
subordinationto the CatholicChurch is nevertheless resubordinated to the ground a thinking of becoming.In the first instance,capturedefinesthe
authority of Scripture; in Smith and Ricardo,wage-labourfreed from operation whereby the State (or Urstaat) binds or encaststhe war
feudal obligationsis resubordinatedto private capital accumulation;in machinb,therebyturning it into an objectthat canbe madeto work for the
Freud, the free-form desireof polymorphouslibido is resubordinatedto State, to bolster and expand its sovereignty.Apparatusesof capture
heterosexualreproduction in the privatised nuclear family and the constitutethe machinicprocesses specificto Statesocieties.They can be
Oedipuscomplex.To free human activity from theselast externaldeter- conceivedas being primarily a matter of signs;whencethe figure of the
minationsis the task of world-historicalcritique: Marx providesthe cri- One-EyedEmperor who binds and fixes signs,complementedby a One-
tique of political economy to free wage-labourfrom private capital; Armed Priest or jurist who codifiesthesesignsin treaties,contractsand
Friedrich Nietzscheprovidesthe critique of religionand moralismto free laws.Capturecanbe understoodasconstitutinga control of signs,accom-
Will to Power from nihilism; Deleuzeand Guattari provide the critique of panying the other paradigmatic dimension of the State, the control of
psychoanalysisto free libido from the private nuclear family and the tools.The principalontologicaland methologicalissuerelatedto this con-
Oedipuscomplex. ceptionof capturehasto do with the type of relationbetweencaptureand
If capitalismmakeshistory universal,this is ultimately becauseit pro- the captured (namely in the caseof the war machine as the privileged
motes multiple differences,becausethe capitalistmarket operatesas a correlateof the apparatus).
'difference-engine'. For Marx, the key human universalwas production: Deleuzeand Guattari'snotion of universalhistory evadesany explan-
the species-beingof humanity was defined in terms of its ever-growing ation by strict causality or chronological sequence.Rather, it turns to
ability to produceits own meansof life rather than simply consumewhat notionsdrawn from catastrophetheory and the sciencesof complexityto
nature offered.For Deleuzeand Guattari, the key universalis not just revivethe Hegelianintuition that the Statehasalwaysbeenthere- not as
production(not evenin the very broadsensethey grant that term inAnti- an idea or a concept,but as a thresholdendowedwith a kind of virtual
Oedipus), but specificallythe production of differencefree from codifica- efficacy,evenwhen the Stateas a complexof institutionsand as a system
tion and representation. The marketfostersan increasinglydifferentiated of control is not yet actual.The logic of captureis such that what is cap-
network of socialrelationsby expandingthe socialisationof production tured is simultaneouslypresupposedand generatedby the act of capture,
alongwith the divisionof labour,eventhough capitalextractsits surplus appropriatedand produced.Deleuzeand Guattari return to many of the
from thc differentialflowsenabledby this network,by meansof exploita- key notions in Karl Marx's critique of political economyto bolster the
ti<lnirnclthc ncvcr-cnclingrepaymcntof an infinite debt. Even though the thcsis of a constructivecharacterof capture,arguing, for instance,that
rlifl'crcrtcc-cnginc of' crrpitrrlfails firlly tu rcllisc universalhistory, it surpluslabourcanbc unclcrst<xrd to cngcndcrlabourpropcr(th<lughit can
noncthclcss tttitkcstrrrivcrsrrlity
possiblc; putsit on lhc lristoricirl
irgcndrr. irlsobc urrdclslood irstlrc irttcrrrplto llkrckrlr nranipulatc:r
flight from labour). Capture is thus both an introjection and determination
of an outside and the engendering of the outside as outside of the appar- CAPTURE + POLITICS
atus. It is in this regard that capture is made to correspond to the Marxian
concept of primitive accumulation, interpreted as a kind of originary vio- Paul Patton
lence imposed by the State to prepare for the functioning of capital. Here Deleuzeand Guattari deny that the Stateis an apparatuswhich emerged
Deleuze and Guattari are sensitive to the juridical aspectsof the question, asthe resultof prior conditionssuchasthe accumulationof surplusor the
such that State capture defines a domain of legitimate violence, in as much emergence of privateproperty.Instead,they arguethat Stateshavealways
as it always accompaniescapture with the affirmation of a right to capture. existedand that they are in essencealwaysmechanismsof capture.The
In its intimate link to the notion of machinic enslavement,the apparatus of earliestforms of Stateinvolvedthe captureof agricultural communities,
capture is proper to both the initial imperial figure of the State and to full- the constitutionof a milieu of interiority and the exerciseof sovereign
blown global or axiomatic capitalism, rather than to the intermediary stage power. The ruler became'the sole and transcendentpublic-property
represented by the bourgeois nation-state and its forms of disciplinary owner,the masterof the surplusor stock,the organiserof large-scale works
subjectivation. (surpluslabour),the sourceof public functionsand bureaucracy'(D&G
The notion of capture can also be accorded a different inflection, this 1987:428).Historically the most important mechanismsof capturehave
time linked to the privileging of ethological models of intelligibility within beenthoseexercisedupon land and its products,upon labourand money.
a philosophy of immanence. Here the emphasis is no longer on the expro- Thesecorrespondto Karl Marx's 'holy trinity' of the modern sourcesof
priation and appropriation of an outside by an instance of control, but on capitalaccumulation,namely ground rent, profit and taxes,but they have
the process of convergence and assemblagebetween heterogeneous series, long existedin other forms.In all cases, we find the sametwo key elements:
on the emergence of blocs of becoming, such as the one of the wasp and the constitutionof a general spaceof comparisonand the establishment of
the orchid. What we have here is properly speaking a double capture or a centre of appropriation.Together,these define the abstractmachine
inter-capture, an encounter that transforms the disparate entities that which is expressedin the different forms of State,but also in non-state
enter into a joint becoming. In Deleuze and Guattari's KaJha, such a mechanismsof capture such asthe captureof corporealrepresentationby
process is linked to a renewal of the theory of relation, and specifically to faciality,or the captureof political reasonby public opinion.
a reconsideration of the status of mimesis, now reframed as a type of sym- Consider first the capture of human activity in the form of labour.
biosis. Under the heading of capture we thus encounter two opposite but Deleuzeand Guattari arguethat 'labour (in the strict sense)beginsonly
entangled actions, both of which can be regarded as schemata alternative with what is calledsurpluslabour' (D&G 1987:490).Contraryto the wide-
to a dominant hylomorphic mode of explaining relation: the first, under- spreadcolonial presumption that indigenouspeopleswere unsuited for
stood as the political control of signs, translates a co-existence of becom- labour,they point out that 'so-calledprimitive societiesarenot societiesof
ings (as manifested by the war machine) into a historical succession, shortageor subsistence due to an absenceof work, but on the contraryare
making the State pass from an attractor which virtually impinges upon societiesof freeactionand smoothspacethat haveno usefor a work-factor,
non-State actors to an institutional and temporal reality; the second anymorethan they constitutea stock'(D&G 1987:491).Inthesesocieties,
defines a co-existence and articulation of becomings in terms of the productiveactivity proceedsunder a regimeof 'free action' or activity in
assemblage of heterogeneous entities and the formation of territories. continuousvariation.Such activity only becomeslabour once a standard
What is paramount in both instancesis the affirmation of the event-bound of comparisonis imposed,in the form of a definitequantityto be produced
and transformative character of relationality (or interaction), such that or a time to be worked.The obligationto providetaxes,tribute or surplus
capture, whether understood as control or assemblage,is always an onto- labourimposessuchstandardsof comparison,therebyeffectingthe trans-
logically constructive operation and can never be reduced to models of formationof freeaction into labour.
unilateral causation. The sametwo elementsare presentin the conditionswhich enablethe
extractionof ground rent, which Deleuzeand Guattari describeas 'the
vcry modcl of an apparatusof capture' (D&G 1987:441).From an eco-
nomicpoint of vicw,thc cxtrtrctionof grounclrcnt prcsllpposcs r mcansof
( lrrpit rrlisnr conrpirrirrg thc prtlcluctivity
ol'dill'crcntprlrtirlnsof' llrrrcl
42 c AR R o L L , L Ew IS (r832-98) C H A OS +3

exploited,or of comparingthe productivity of the sameportion succes-

sively exploited. The measurementof productivity provides a general
spaceof comparison;a measureof qualitativedifferences betweenportions
Alberto Toscano
of the earth'ssurfacewhich is absentfrom the territorial assemblage of
hunter-gatherersociety.Thus, 'labour and surpluslabourare the appara- This term canbe saidto receivetwo maintreatmentsin the work of Deleuze
tus of captureof activityjust asthe comparisonof landsand the appropri- and Guattari,one intra-philosophical,the other non-philosophical.In the
ation of land are the apparatusof captureof territory' (D&G 1987:442). first acceptation,chaos designatesthe type of virtual totality that the
One further condition is necessaryin order for ground rent to be philosophyof differenceopposesto the foundationaland self-referential
extracted:thedifference in productivitymustbelinkedto a landowner(D&G totalities proposedby the philosophiesof representation.In polemical
1987: 441). In other words, from a legal point of view, the extraction of juxtapositionto those systemsof thought that lie beyond the powersof
ground rent is 'inseparablefrom a processof relative deterritorialization' representation, this Deleuzianchaos,in which all intensivedifferencesare
because'insteadof peoplebeingdistributedin an itinerantterritory,pieces contained- 'complicated'but not 'explicated'- is equivalentto the onto-
of landaredistributedamongpeopleaccordingto a commonquantitativecri- logicallyproductiveaffirmationof the divergenceof series.Put differently,
terion' (D&G 1987:441).The conversionof portionsof the earthinhabited chaosenvelopsanddistributes,without identifying,the heterogeneities that
by so-calledprimitivepeoplesinto an appropriable and exploitableresourte makeup the world. In other words,Deleuzianchaosis formlessbut not
thereforerequiresthe establishment of a juridical centreof appropriation. undifferentiated.Deleuze thus opposesthis Joyceanand Nietzschean
The centreestablishes a monopolyover what has now becomeland and chaosmos,in which the eternal return selectssimulacrafor their diver-
assigns to itselfthe right to allocateownershipof portionsof unclaimedland. gence)to the chaosthat Platoattributesto the sophist,which is a privative
This centreis the legalsovereignand the monopolyis the assertionof chaosof non-participation.Moreover,he considerssucha chaosmos asthe
sovereigntyover the territoriesin question.That is why the fundamental principal antidoteto the trinity sustainingall philosophiesof representa-
jurisprudentialproblemof colonisationis the mannerin which the terri- tion and transcendence: world, God and subject(man).
toriesof the originalinhabitantsbecometransformedinto a uniform space In A Thousand, Plateaus,having moved away from the structuralist-
of landedproperty.In thosecolonieswhich wereacquiredand governedin inspiredterminologyof series(which chaoswasseento affirm), Deleuze
accordancewith British common law, the sovereignright of the Crown and Guattari provide a critique of both chaosmosand eternal return as
meantthat it hadthe powerboth to createandextinguishprivaterightsand an insufficientbulwark againsta (negative)return of 'the One' and of
interestsin land. In this sense,Crown land amountsto a uniform expanse representation.Against this they proposethe conceptsof 'rhizome' and
of potentialreal property which coversthe earth to the extentof the sov- 'plane of immanence'.When chaosmakesits reappearancein What is
ereignterritory.It followsthat, within thesecommon-lawjurisdictions,the Philosophy? it is asthe sharedcorrelateof the threedimensionsof thought
legalimpositionof sovereigntyconstitutesan apparatusof capturein the (or of the brain), alsodesignatedas chaoids;science,art and philosophy.
precisesensewhich Deleuzeand Guattari give to this term. The imposi- In this context,chaosis not definedsimply by the mannerin which it con-
tion ofsovereigntyeffectsan instantaneous deterritorialisation
ofindigen- tains (or complicates)differences,but by its infinite speed,such that the
ous territoriesand their reterritorialisationas a uniform spaceof Crown particles,forms and entities that populate it emergeonly to disappear
land centredupon the figureof the sovereign. immediately,leavingbehind no consistency, referenceor any determinate
Chaosis thus definednot by its disorderbut by its fugacity.It is then the
taskof philosophy,throughthe drawingof planesof immanence,invention
CARROLL, LEWIS (1832-98)- referto the entrieson'art'and 'incor-
of conceptualpersonaeand compositionof concepts,to giveconsistency to
chaoswhilst maintainingits speedand productivity.Chaosis thus both the
intimatethreatand the sourceof philosophicalcreation,understoodasthe
impositiononto the virtual of its own typeof consistency, for examplea con-
(lt'lZANNIi, PAUL (ltl39-1906)- rcfcr to rhc cnrricson 'irrr', 'sclrs:r- sistcncyothcrthrn thoscprovidcclby frrnctir)ns or percepts.Phiklsophy can
t c:ittcrttlt'.
liort',trtd 'scttsltlioit thusbc tccirstit1tcrtrtsof'iln cthicsof'chiuls,it pitrticularwrtyof'livirrgwith

chaos- and againstthe sterile clich6sof opinion (doxa)- by creating model, a symbolic blockage. Within these totalising and homogenising
conceptualformscapableof sustainingthe infinitespeedof chaoswhilst not approaches to film, repetition (redundancy) functions as a principle of
succumbingto the stupidity,thoughtlessness or folly of the indeterminate. unification, limiting - but never totally arresting - cinema's potentially
Philosophicalcreationis thus poisedbetween,on the one hand,the subjec- active and creative lines of flight. In place of these nomalising - infor-
tion of the planeof immanenceto somevarietyof transcendence that would mational and/ or symbolic - accounts of cinema, another approach devel-
guaranteeits uniquenessand, on the other, the surging up of a chaosthat ops an experimental-creative understanding of film in which an attentive
would dissolveanyconsistency, any durabledifferenceor structure. misrecognition abandons representation (and subjectification) to sketch
Chaosand opinion thus provide the two sourcesof inconsistencyfor circuits - and . . . and . . . and - between a series of images. The latter
thought, the one determinedby an excessof speed,the other by a surfeit describes Deleuze's 'crystalline regime', an intensive system which
of redundancy.Though chaosis a vital resourcefor thought,it is alsoclear resists a hierarchical principle of identity in the former present, and
that the struggleis twofold through and through, in as much as it is the a rule of resemblance in the present present, to establish a communica-
inconsistencyor idiocy of a chaotic thought that often grounds the tion betweentwo presents (the former and the present) which co-exist in
recourse to the safety and identity of opinions. In the later work with relation to a virtual object - the absolutely different. This direct presen-
Guattari it is essentialto the definition of philosophicalpracticeand its tation of time - a becoming-in-the-world - brings cinema into a relation
demarcationfrom and interferencewith the other chaoids,that chaosnot not with an ideal of Truth, but with powers of the false: opening, in the
be consideredsimply synonymouswith ontologicalunivocity,but that it is place of representation, a sensation of the present presence of the
accordeda suigeneris statusasthe non-philosophicaldimensiondemanded moment, acreative stammering (and . . . and . . . and).
by philosophicalthought. These two critical interpretations of film correspond to, yet cut across'
the separateaspectsof cinema dealt with in each of the Cinema books. In
Cinema 1, Deleuze identifies the classical or 'movement-image' as that
which gives rise to a 'sensory-motor whole' (a unity of movement and its
Plato interval) and grounds narration (representation) in the image. This
Representation movement-image, which relates principally to pre-World War II cinema,
Thought contributes to the realism of the 'action-image', and produces the global
domination of the American cinema. In Cinema 2, Delguze describes a
post-war crisis in the movement-image, a break-up of the sensory-motor
link that gives rise to a new situation - a neo-realism - that is not drawn
out directly into action, but is 'primarily optical and of sound, invested by
the senses'(D 1989: 4). As Deleuze describesit, even though this optical-
Constantine Verezsis
sound image implies a beyond of movement, movement does not strictly
Following his work on A ThousandPlateaus,Deleuze'sCinemabooks- stop but is now grasped by way of connections which are no longer
Cinemal: The mooement-image and Cinema2: The tirne-image- under- sensory-motor and which bring the sensesinto direct relation with time
stand film as a multiplicity, a phenomenon simultaneouslyoriented and thought. That is, where the movement-image and its sensory-motor
toward a network of reproductive forces, which make it a-signifying signs are in a relationship only with an indirect image of time, the pure
totality (a 'being-One'), and equally toward a network of productiae optical and sound image - its 'opsigns' and 'sonsigns' - are directly con-
forces, that facilitate the connection and creation of an encounter nected to a time-im age- a 'chronosign' - that has subordinated movement.
(a 'becoming-Other').The first interpretation of film finds its clearesr Appealing to Henri Bergson's schemataon time, Deleuze describesa situ-
expressionin two Breatmechanismsof cinematicovercoding- historical ation in which the optical-sound perception enters into a relation with
poeticsand textualanalysis- that havedominatedanglophone,academi- genuinely airtualelements. This is the large circuit of the dream-image
ciscclfilm intcrprctationsincethe mid-1970s.Eachof theseapproaches ('onirosign'), a type of intensive system in which a virtual image (the
rcpctitionas a kind of rcdundirncy, one that contril'rutcsto 'diffcrcnciittor') bccomes actual not directly, but by actualising a different
lhc. huhiluul rccttgttitioltof'tlrc sllnlc: ilr.rindustrirl rcprcscrrtirtiorrirl i nri tgc,w hi ch it sclf plays t hc r r llc of t hc vir t uit l im agc bcing r t ct ualiscdin
another, and so on. Although the optical-sound image appears to find its This thinking of the impersonal, of an earth beyond man, is given
proper equivalent in this infinitely dilated circuit of the dream-image, for remarkable,albeit divergent expression in films such as Fitzcarraldo (1982)
Deleuze the opsign (and sonsign) finds its true genetic element only when or Stroszek(1977), where it is accompaniedby the depiction of figures that
the actual image crystallises with its own virtual image on a small circuit. approximate what Deleuze called structuralist heroes: pure individuals or
The time-image is a direct representation of time, a crystal-imagethat con- larval subjects capableof sustaining their habitation by pre-individual sin-
sists in the indivisible unity of an actual image and its own virtual image so gularities and deformation by spatio-temporal dynamisms, attaining a point
that the two are indiscernible, actual and,virtual at the same time. Deleuze of non-distinction between man and nature. Herzog immerses the viewer
says:'what we seein the crystal is time itself, a bit of time in the pure state' in the (micro- and macro-) cosmosof sensationborne by beings of remark-
(D 1989:82). able fragility (akin to Bartleby) and great hallucinating, doomed visionar-
In a brief example, Chinatown(1973) is a perfectly realised(neo- ies.The cinematic ideasextracted from the work of Herzog intervene at two
classical)Hollywood genrefilm bur one that exhibitsan ability to exceed very significant moments in Deleuze's confrontation with cinema, first in
itself. Chinatzwncanbeunderstoodasa representationaland symbolictext terms of the large form and the small form of the action-image in Cinerna
- a detectivefilm and an Oedipaldrama.But its subtlepatterningof rep- 1, then in Cinema2 with the momentous introduction of the crystal image.
etitions- the motifsof waterand eye- while contributingto the film's nar- Herzog's 'action films' provide two extreme realisationsof those cinematic
rative economysketch the complementarypanoramicvision of a large schematapreoccupied with the transformative interaction of action and sit-
circuitindifferentto the conditionsof meaningand truth. Additionally,the uation. In the idea (or vision) of the large form (SAS'), a situation (S) poses
film's final repetition- a woman'sdeathin Chinatown- brings the detec- a problem to a character requiring an action (A) whereby the initial situ-
tive Gittes'pastandpresenttogetherwith hallucinatoryexactitudeto form ation (and the character herself) will be transformed (S'). Herzog's varia-
a smallcircuit in which the virtual correspondsto the actual.The final act tion on this schemaentails the staging of actions whose delirium is to try to
gesturestowardneithera diegeticnor oneirictemporality,but a crystalline transform situations that does not make any such requirement on the char-
temporality. acter. These are in turn split between a sublime or hallucinatory aspectthat
seeksto equal an unlimited nature, and a heroic or hypnotic one, which tries
Connectives to confront, through an excessiveproject, the limits imposed by nature.
What Deleuze isolatesin Herzog is thus a pure idea of the large, staged
Crystal as a mad attempt to delve into the abyssof nature by linking man and land-
Lines of flight scapein the creation of a sublime situation. While Herzog operateson the
Time imase large form by excess,making the two situations (S and S') incommensur-
able, he transforms the small form (ASA ) by weakening it to the extreme,
such that the actions and the characters bearing them are stripped oftheir
CINEMA + WERNERHERZOG use, reduced to entirely inoperative and defencelessintensities (whether in
Kinski's foetal figure in Nosferatu (1979) or in the films starring the schiz-
Alberto Toscano ophrenic actor Bruno S.). Sublimity and a kind of bare life are the meta-
physical foci of Herzog's implementation of the action image, which
Deleuze's affinity with WernerHerzog exceedsthe explicit references to reaches its most accomplished moments precisely when it stages their
the German filmmaker in the Cinema volumes. Herzog's films and docu- reversibility (the sublimity of bare life in Kaspar Hauser (1975), the desti-
mentaries of the 1970sare unmatched as contemporary representativesof tution of visionary greatnessin Aguirre (1972)).
a heterodox fidelity to romanticism, separating the latter from its Kantian The metaphysical import of Herzog's work is even more prominent in
presuppositions and Hegelian consequencesin order to discover a dimen- Cinema 2, where he is accorded the rare praise of having best realised the
sion in which materiality and ideality, nature and production, become crystal image: the smallest possible circuit joining, in a kind of perpetual
irrdisccrniblc.'l'his is thc kincl of romanticism which, in the referenceto oscillation irnd indiscernibility, the actual and the virtual. This point of
lf rrclrrrcrirt thc vcry ot.ltscrt
ol' ,'lnti-Octlipus,is a progcrritorof thc schiz<l- irrdisccrnibility signrrls il purc cxpcriencc of timc (indisccrnible from
r t t t r t lvitl ' s liln(' c . ctcrni t.y) i rrr d ol' c: r cr r t ion( indiscclr r iblc lir r r r t lhc int p: t ssivc) .I I cr z. og's

Heart of Glass(1976) is the key locus for the cinematic manifestation of opposedto Cartesianmovesfrom secureand inviolable basesout into the
this exquisitelymetaphysicaltype of image.Following on from an intu- unknown.Where Descartessituatesreasonat the heart of his method,as
ition of Gilbert Simondon,Deleuzeunderstandsthis film in terms of the shownby the role of thinking in the cogito,Deleuzeemphasises sensation.
relation betweena germ capableof crystallisationand a milieu of appli- Sensationis resistantto identity in representation.Thought must be
cation which is qualified as actually amorphous.But this amorphous- responsiveto sensationsthat go beyond its capacityto representthem.
nessis not that of a mere prime matter,sincefrom anotherperspectiveit Thesepoint to a realmof virtual conditionsdefinedasintensitiesand Ideas
is a virtually differentiatedstructure; and the germ, initially qualified a (the capitalindicatesthat thesearenot ideasto be thought of asernpirical
virtual image,is understoodasactual.Thus, thoughactualand virtual are things in the mind, rather they are like Kantian Ideasof reason).
ultimately indiscernible,they can be distinguishedby the perspecive Deleuzeholdsthat no thought is freeof sensation.The cogitocannotbe
taken on the relation at hand (for example germ/milieu). Heart of Glass self-evident,becausesensationalwaysextendsto a multiplicity of further
is, in Deleuze'seyes,a kind of alchemicaladventure,haunted by the conditionsand causes. The Cartesianhope of defeatingsystematicdoubt
uncertainty of the crystal, in which what is at stake is the encounter through the certaintyof the cogitomust thereforefail. Deleuzeoften turns
betweenthe red crystalglassand the world, suchthat the former canpass to dramatisationsfrom art, literature and cinemato convinceus of the
from virtual to actualimageand effectthe passageof the latter from actual insufficiency of the cogito. Wherever we presume to have found pure
amorphousnessto virtual and infinite differentiation. We can thus see thought,or pure representations, the expressivityofthe artspointsto sen-
how the crystalimageis not simply a matter of a certainkind of intuition, sationsand deeperldeas.
but involvesthe construction of scenarioswith their own very special A thought, such as the cogito,is thereforeinseparablefrom sensations
kinds of actions, revealing Herzog's genius for joining the most that themselves bring a seriesof intensitiesandIdeasto bearon the subject.
deprived and infinitesimal of creatures with the most cosmic and The 'I' is thereforenot independentbut carriesall intensitiesand all Ideas
grandioseof projects,an inspiration that can perhapsbe tracked else- with it. These are related to any singularthought in the way it implies
where in Deleuze'soeuvre. differentarrangements of intensitiesand differentrelationsof clarity and
You do not think without feeling.Feelingdefinesyou as an individual.
COGITO That singulardefinition brings someintensitiesto the fore while hiding
others(morehating,lessanger,greatercaring,lessjealousy).In turn, these
intensitieslight up Ideas in different ways making somerelationsmore
James Williams
obscureand others more distinct (The Idea of love for humanity took
Deleuze'scritical approachto the cogito of Ren6Descartes;the 'I think, centre stage,after their sacrifice).
thereforeI am' from the Discourse onMethodor the 'I think, I am' from the The subjectis thereforeextendedthrough the sensationsof singular
Meditations,can be divided into a critique of the Cartesiananalytic individualsinto virtual intensitiesand Ideas.Unlike the Cartesiancogito,
method, a critique of the self-evidenceof the cogitoand an extensionof which is positedon the activity of the thinking subject,Deleuze'sindi-
the Cartesianview of the subject. vidual has an all-important passiveside.We cannot directly chooseour
Descartes'foundationalmethod is the rationalist construction of a sensations, we are thereforepassivewith respectto our virtual 'dark pre-
systemof analytictruths. That is, he believesthat certainpropositionsare cursorst.
true independentlyof any others and that thereforethey can stand as a Deleuze'sphilosophydependson Descartes'rationalistcritics,notably
ground for the deductionof further truths accordingto reason.Deleuze's BaruchSpinoza,for the syntheticmethodandfor the oppositionto the free
synthetic and dialectical method, developedin Dffirence and,Repetition, activity of the subject, and Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, for the
dependson the view that all knowledgeis partial and opento revision. extensionof the subjector monad to the whole of reality.Deleuzeis not
Thus, any relativetruth is open to extensionthrough syntheseswith simply anti-Cartesian;rather, he extendsthe activesubjectthrough pas-
further discoveriesand through further experiments.The relation sivity and through the conditionsfor sensation.The cogitois an important
bctwccnthcsctruths is dialectical rathcrthananalytical and foundational, moment in philosophy,but it requirescompletingthrough synthesesthat
'fhcrc is r rcciprtrcirlproccssof rcvisionand changcbctwccnthcm, as
t" bclic its indcpcndcncc,

Connectives subject to metaphysicalillusion. The application of abstractconcepts

merely gatherstogether discrete particulars despitetheir differences,and
privilegesconceptsover what is supposedto be explained.For example,
one might understandthings as instancesof Being or usefulness,thereby
presupposingan ontologicalor epistemological privilegefor the conceptof
'Being' or 'utility' that is not evidentin immediateexperience.By bearing
in mind that the conceptat work relatesjust to this being or this useful
thing, hereand now,suchillusionsareavoided.
In Deleuze'swork, conceptsbecomethe meansby which we move
beyond experienceso as to be able to think anew.Rather than 'standing
Deleuzeunderstandsphilosophyas being the art of inventingor creating apart' from experience,a concept is defined just by the unity that it
concepts,or putting conceptsto work in new ways.He doesnot considerit expresses amongstheterogeneous elements.In other words,conceptsmust
to be very useful or productive,however,when it createsand usesconceprs be creativeor activerather than merelyrepresentative, descriptiveor sim-
in themannerthathethinkshastypifiedmuchof westernphilosophyto date. plifying. For this reason,in his work on David Hume, Deleuzegoesto
Too often, Deleuzeargues,philosophyhas used real experiencemerely as somelengthsto showhow causationis a truly creativeconceptby explain-
a sourcefor extractingor deducingabstractconceptualmeansfor categoris- ing how it brings us to expectand anticipateoutcomesbeforethey occur,
ing phenomena. [t hastendedthen to employthesesameconceptseitherto and evenoutcomesthat we don't observeat all. In suchcases,anticipatory
determineor expressthe essence of phenomena,or elseto order and rank creationis so powerfulthat it becomesa normal part of life, and causation
them in termsof the concept.An exampleis Plato'sconceptof Forms,the is a conceptthat representsthe creationof other conceptswithout the
absoluteand changeless objectsand standardsof knowledgeagainstwhich requirementfor senseperceptionsto ground them.
all humanknowledgeis but an inferior copy.Sucha conceptdoesnot help Moving from a reiterativehistory of philosophyto the practiceof philo-
us appreciateor contributeto the richnessof lived experience,Deleuze sophymeansengagingwith inherited conceptsin new ways.This means
argues,but only to order,labelandmeasureindividualsrelativeto anabstract for Deleuzethat philosophersought to engagein new linesof thinking and
norm. It is true, he argues,that conceptshelp us in our everydaylives to new connectionsbetweenparticularideas,argumentsand fieldsof special-
organiseand representour thoughtsto others,makingcommunicationand isation.Only then doesphilosophytakeon a positivepower to transform
opinion-formationsimpler; but Deleuzeinsists such simplicity detracts our waysof thinking. In his own work, Deleuzereappropriates numerous
from the varietyand uniqueness evidentin our experiencesof the world. conceptsinheritedfrom the greatphilosophersof the pastin termsof new
For Deleuzeand Guattari, conceptsought to be meansby which we problems,uses,terms and theories.Henri Bergson'sconceptsof duration
movebeyondwhat we experienceso that we canthink of new possibilities. and intuition, Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz's monad,Hume's associa-
Ratherthan bringing things rogetherunder a concept,he is interestedin tionism, and numerousconceptsfrom literature,film, criticism, science
relatingvariablesaccordingto newconceptssoasto createproductivecon- and evenmathematicsare reworkedand put to work in new and creative
nections.Conceptsought to expressstatesof affairsin terms of the con- ways. The apparent inconsistencyof their meaningsand uses,whilst
tingent circumstances and dynamicsthat leadto and follow from them, so a challengefor his reader,is a sign of Deleuze'srefusalto giveany concept
that eachconceptis relatedto particularvariablesthat changeor ,mutate' a single purpose or referent. By cutting routinely acrossdisciplinary
it. A conceptis createdor thought anew in relation to every particular boundaries,Deleuzeabidesby his proposalthat concept-creationbe an
event,insight, experienceor problem,therebyincorporatinga notion of 'open ended'exercise,such that philosophycreatesconceptsthat are as
the contingencyof the circumstances of eachevent.On sucha view,con- accessible and usefulto artistsand scientistsasto philosophers.
ceptscannotbe thoughtapartfrom the circumstances of their production,
and so cannotbe hypotheticalor conceiveda priori.
l)clcuzc'stheoryof conceptsis part of a potentcriticismof much phil- Connectives
osophyto drrtc.Hc is arguingthilt iuryphikrsophyfrrilingto rcspcctthc par- llcrgson
tictrlitlilyol' coltsc-iottsncss
irr lirvoulol' broirdcorrccpluirlskctchcsis |)urrtion

Hume So the connectionbetweenphilosophyand its socio-historicalmilieu is

Plato essentiallydiagnosticratherthan representative-scientific.Sciencesaim to
graspstatesof affairsasthey are;the point is to get reality right, to settle
on a correctunderstandingof the world. Philosophyaimsneverto settle,
but on the contraryalwaysto unsettleand to transformour understanding
of certainproblems,becausethey arethought to havebeenbadly posed,or
not posedat all, by previousthinkers,and/or becausethe problemsarehis-
toricallynew or havechangedso radicallyover time asto renderprevious
The centralactivityof philosophyfor Deleuzeis the creationof concepts, responses inadequate.HenceDeleuzeand Guattari insist that philosophy
and it is an activity forcedupon rather than initiated by the philosopher. for them 'doesnot consistin knowingand is not inspiredby truth. Rather
What is it that befallsphilosophersthat forcesthem to think?In the course it is categorieslike Interesting,Remarkable,or Important that determine
of his career,Deleuzehasgiventhreekindsof answerto this question.In his [its] successor failure' (D&G 1994:82).The creationof conceptsis thus
early works,it is paradoxthat provokesthought; here,the provocationto cruciallyselectiveaswell as(or aspart ofbeing) diagnostic,and in extract-
thoughtis internalto thoughtitself.In the latercollaborations with Guattari ing a philosophicalconceptfrom a historicalstateofaffairs, philosophical
(and perhapsbecauseof that collaboration),the locus of the stimulusto thoughtidentifiescertainaspectsof that stateof affairsasproblemsrequir-
thought shifts steadilyoutsideof thought, and eventuallyevenoutsideof ing new solutions.The utopianvocationof concept-creation thus consists
philosophy.The secondkind of provocationconsistsof topicsor problems in proposingsolutionsto the pressingproblemsof the time; in this way,
within philosophy(no longerlimited to logicalcontradictionsor paradoxes) philosophybecomespoliticaland 'takesthe criticismof its own time to the
that, in the estimationof a creativephilosopher, havebeenpoorlyconceived highest level' (D&G 1994:99).
and hencedemandto be reconceived. The third kind of provocationarises
from the connectionbetweenphilosophy and its socio-historicalcontext;
herethe problemsare not strictly speakingor originallyphilosophical,but
theynonetheless provokephilosophical thoughtto furnishsolutionstq or at
leastnewand improvedarticulationsof, thoseproblems- solutionsor artic-
ulationsthat areindeedphilosophical. Here,philosophydoesnot respondto John Marks
problemsof its own', but to problemspresentedto it or forcedupon it by Deleuzedevelopshis notion of the 'control society'at the beginningof the
its real-worldmilieu. And it is this kind of connection,betweenphilosophy 1990s.In the 1970sMichel Foucaultshowedhow, during the eighteenth
and socio-historical context that Deleuzeand Guattari will call utopian: and nineteenth centuries, a d,isciplinarysociety had developedthat was
'utopiais what links philosophywith its own epoch'(D&G 1994:99). based on strategiesof confinement.As Deleuze points out, Foucault
One of Deleuzeand Guattari'smain concernsis to distinguisha prop- carriedout this historicalwork in order to showwhat we had inheritedof
erly philosophicalrelationbetweenconceptand context from the better- the disciplinarymodel,and not simply in orderto claim that contemporary
known scientific(or socialscientific)relation basedon 'representation'. societyis disciplinary.This is the senseof the actualin Foucault'swork, in
Unlike the socialand natural sciences,philosophyis creative,servingas the senseof what we are in the processof differing from. Deleuzeuses
a kind of relaybetweenone practicalorientationto the world and another, Foucault'sinsightsasa startingpoint to claim that we aremoving towards
new and improvedone.Philosophyrespondsto problemsthat arisewhen controlsocietiesin which confinementis no longerthe main strategy.
a givenmodeof existenceor practicalorientationno longersuffices.Such Deleuze reminds us that disciplinary societiessucceeded'sovereign'
problemsarerealenough,but they arenot reducibleto reality.The purpose societies,and that they concentratedon the organisationof life and pro-
of philosophyis not to representthe world, but to createconcepts,and duction rather than the exerciseof arbitrary entitlementsin relation to
thcscconccptsservenot to replicateaccuratelyin discoursespecificseg- thesetwo domains.Disciplinarysocietiesdevelopeda networkof sitesand
rrcntsof thc w<lrklrrsit rc:rllyis (m scicnccckrcs), but to proposcarticula- institutions - prisons,hospitals,factories,schools,the family - within
tions ol'itttd/rlr soltttiorrsto problclns,to oll'cr rrcw ancl clill'crcnt which indiviclualswcrc locatcd, traincd ancl/<lrpunishcclrt vlrious
pcrsgtcctivcs ortrlricrrlrlions
l()wilr(lllrc wrlrlcl, tinrcsirrthcir lifc. Irr this wiry,thc figurcof'thc'po;rtrlirtior.r'cnrcrgcs

observable,measurableobject, which is susceptibleto various forms of The critiqueof contemporarysocietiesthat the notion of controlsociety
manipulation.Essentially, the disciplinarysystemis one of contiguity:the entailsmight in somewaysbe unexpectedin Deleuze'swork, giventhat it
individual movesfrom site to site,beginningagaineachtime. In contrast sometimeslooks like a conventionaldefenceof the individual threatened
to this, societiesof control - which emerge particularly after World by the alienatingforcesof globalcapitalism.One might expectDeleuzeto
War II - are continuousin form. The variousforms of control constitute be in favourof a movetowardssocietieswhich do awaywith the constraints
a network of inseparablevariations.The individual, in a disciplinary of individuality.However,it is the preciseway in which control societies
society,is placedin various'moulds' at differenttimes,whereasthe indi- dismantlethe individual that alarms Deleuze.Rather than encouraging
vidual in a contemporarycontrol societyis in a constantstateof mod,ula- a real socialengagementwith the pre-personal,they turn the individual
tion. Deleuze uses as an examplethe world of work and production. into an objectthat hasno resistance, no capacityto 'fold' the line of mod-
The factory functioned accordingto somesort of equilibrium betweenthe ulation.Although the Body without Organslacksthe discreteness of what
highest possibleproduction and the lowest possiblewages.Just as the we conventionallyknow asan individual that is not to sayit doesnot have
worker was a componentin a regulatedsystemof massproduction, so resistance.On the contrary,it is a zoneof intensity.It may be traversedby
unions could mobilisemassresistance.In control societies,on the other forces,but it is not simply a relay for those forces.
hand,the dominantmodel is that of the business,in which it is more fre-
quently the task of the individual to engagein forms of competitionand
continuingeducationin order to attain a certainlevelof salary.There is a
deeperlevel of modulation, a constantvariation, in the wagespaid to Body without Organs
workers.In generalterms) the duality of massand individual is being Fold
brokendown.The individualis becominga'dividual',whilst the massis Foucault
reconfiguredin terms of data,samplesand markets.Whereasdisciplinary Intensity
individualsproducedquantifiableand discreteamountsof energy,'divid-
uals' are caught up in a processof constantmodulation.In the caseof
medicine,which claimsto be movingtowardsa system'withoutdoctorsor
patients',this meansthat the figurein the individualis replacedby a divid-
ual segmentof codedmatter to be controlled.
Kenneth Surin
Although he is in no way suggestingthat we shouldreturn to disciplin-
ary institutions, Deleuze clearly finds the prospectof the new control In his shortbut prescientessay'Postscript on ControlSocieties'Deleuze says
societyalarming.In the domainsof prison,education,hospitalsand busi- that in the ageof the societies (as
of control opposedto the disciplinary soci-
ness,the old institutionsare breakingdown and, althoughthesechanges etiesof the previousepochfamouslyanalysedby Michel Foucault),capital
may be presentedasbeingmore closelytailored to the needsof individuals, hasbecomea vast'internationalecumenicalorganisation'that is ableto har-
Deleuzeseeslittle more than a new systemof domination.It may evenbe moniseinto a singleoverarchingassemblage eventhe most disparateforms
the case,he suggests, that we may cometo view the harshconfinementsof (commercial,religious,artistic,and so forth) and entities.In this new dis-
disciplinarysocietieswith somenostalgia.One reasonfor this is obviously pensation,productivelabour,dominatednow by the myriad forms of intel-
that techniquesof control threatento be isolatingand individualising. lectuallabourandserviceprovision,hasexpandedto covereverysegmentof
We may regret the lossof previoussolidarities.Another reasonwould be society:the exponentiallyextendedscopeof capitalis coterminouswith the
that we areconstantlycoercedinto forms of 'communication'.This means constantavailabilityof everythingthat createssurplus-value. Human con-
that we aredeniedthe privilegeof havingnothing to say,of cultivatingthe sciousness, leisure,play,andsoon, areno longerleft to'private' domainsbut
particularkind of creativesolitudethat Deleuzevalues.It appearsthat we areinsteaddirectlyencompassed by the latestregimesof accumulation. The
will incrcasinglylack a spacefor creative'resistance'.He suggeststhat the boundarybetweenhome and workplacebecomesincreasinglyblurred, as
movc towarclscontinuous:lsscssmcnt in schoolsis bcing cxtendedto doesthe demrrcationbetween'regular'work and'casual'labour.Capitalism
socictyirt gcncral,with thc cll'cctthat muchof lif'ctrrkcson thc tcxturc<lf bccomcsinfilrmrrliscd, cvcnasit bccomcsubiquitous.()apitalism's teloshx
llrc Hnrncslrowor lhc nrrrrkclirrg
sc,rnirrirr'. irlwnys irrvolvcd of irnccon<lmic
thccrcirti<ln oldcrthrt will bclrlllcto dispcnsc

with the State,and in its current phasethis teloshasbecomemore palpably of accumulation,capital is situatedat the crossing-pointof all kinds of
visible.WhereDeleuzeis concerned,this development doesnot requirethe formations,and thus hasthe capacityto integrateand recomposecapital-
Stateandits appurtenances to beabolished. Rather,thetraditionalseparation ist and non-capitalistsectorsor modesof production.Capital,the 'accord
betweenStateandsocietyis nowno longersustainable. SocietyandStatenow of accords'par excellence, can bring togetherheterogeneous phenomena,
form one all-embracing matrix, in which all capitalhasbecometranslatable and makethem expressthe sameworld, that of capitalistaccumulation.
into socialcapital,and so the productionof socialcooperation,undertaken Accordsareconstitutedby selectioncriteria,which specifywhat is to be
primarily by the serviceand informationalindustriesin the advanced includedor excludedby the termsof the accordin question.Thesecriteria
economies,hasbecomea crucial one for capitalism. also determinewith which other possibleor actual accordsa particular
This needto maintainconstantcontrol overthe forms of socialcooper- accord will be consonant(or dissonant).The criteria that constitute
ation in turn requiresthat education,training, business,never end: the accordsare usually defined and describedby narratives governed by
businesstime-scaleis now '2+/7'so that the Tokyo stockexchangeopens a certainnormativevision of truth, goodnessand beauty(reminiscentof
when the one in New York closes,in an unendingcycle;training is'on the the so-calledmediaevaltranscendentals,albeit translatedwhere necessary
job' as opposedto being basedon the traditional apprenticeshipmodel into the appropriate contemporary vernacular).A lessportentous way of
(itself a holdover from feudalism); and education becomes'continuing making this point would be to say that accordsare inherently axiological,
education', that is, something that continues throughout life, and is not value-laden.What seemsto be happening today, and this is a generalisa-
confined to those aged six to twenry-rwo. This essentially dispersive tion that is tendentious, is that these superimposednarratives and the
propensity is reflected in the present regime of capitalist accumulation, selectioncriteria they sanction,criteria which may or may not be explicitly
whereproduction is now meta-production,that is, no longer focusedin the formulated or entertained, are being weakenedor qualified in ways that
advancedeconomieson the useof raw materialsto producefinished goods, deprive them of their force. Such selectioncriteria, policed by the State,
but rather the sale of services(especiallyin the domain of finance and tend to function by assigningprivileges of rank and order to the objects
credit) and already finished products. Social control is no longer left to they subsume ('Le Pen is more French than Zidane', 'Turks are not
schoolsand police forces,but is now a branch of marketing, asevenpolit- Europeans',and so on), asthe lossor attenuationof the customaryforce of
ics hasbecome'retail politics', in which politicians seekdesperatelyfor an such accords makes dissonancesand contradictions difficult or even
imageof themselvesto market to the electorate,and when public relations impossibleto resolve,and, correlatively,makesdivergenceseasierto affirm.
consultants are more important to prime ministers and presidentsthan Events, objects and personagescan now be assignedto severaldivergent
goodand wisecivil servants.Recording,whetherin administration or busi- and even incompossibleseries.The functioning of capital in the control
ness,is no longer basedon the written document kept in the appropriate societiesrequiresthat the Statebecomeinternally pluralised.
box of files, but on bar-codingand other forms of electronictagging.
The implicationsof the above-mentioned developments for statetheory
are momentous. The state itself has become fragmented and compart-
mentalised,and has accruedmore power to itself in somesphereswhile
totally relinquishingpowerin others.However,if the Statehasmutatedin
Ad,rian Parr
the era of control societies,it retainsthe function of regulating,in con-
junction with capital,the 'accords'thatchannelsocialand politicalpower. In developingthe idea of 'creative transformation' Deleuze draws on
In his book on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, Deleuzemaintainsthat a variety of philosophicalsources.Initially in his work on Henri Bergson
stateand non-stateformationsare constitutedon the basisof such 'con- he picks up on the philosopher'sconceptof 'creativeevolution'and 'dur-
certs' or 'accords'.These 'accords'are organisingprincipleswhich make ation', revampingthesein Dffirence and,Repetitioninto a discussionof the
possiblethe grouping into particular configurationsof whole rangesof productiveunderstandingof repetition,all the while embracinga concept
events,personages, processes, institutions,movements)and so forth, such of differencethat beliesthe negativestructureof a 'differenceto or from'
that the resultingconfigurationsbecomeintegratedformations.As a setof in favourof 'differencein itself'. Keen to expandupon the generativeand
rtcc<lrds rlr axiomsgovcrningthe accords thatrcgulatcthc opcrations of the dynamicimplicationsof Bergsoniancreativeevolutionhe turns to Baruch
vnriouscomponcnts of ln immcnsclypowcrfhlnndcomprchcnsivc systcm Spinoza'sEthic's,in particularthe conceptionof bodiesthat Bergsonand

Spinozashare:a body is constitutedon an immanent plane. The next and fixed boundariesthat proceeds'from the middle, through the middle,
philosophicalinfluencein Deleuze'suseof creativetransformationwould comingand goingratherthan startingand finishing'(D&G 1987:25).It is,
haveto be Friedrich Nietzsche'sconceptof the 'eternalreturn'. Then, in however,importantto notethat their useof 'open' hereis not conceivedof
his collaborationwith Guattari, creative transformation takes a turn negatively,which is to sayit is not the antithesisof being 'closed';rather,
through biophilosophy,bypassingboth the human condition and teleo- the machinic character of a rhizome arises out of the virtual and the
logical theoriesof evolution characteristicof Jean-BaptisteLamarck in dynamicboundariesthat constituteit.
favourof a transhumantheoryof heredity. In A Thousand, Plateausthe force of life is describedby Deleuze and
The questionof 'life', namelythe force that persistsover time and the Guattari asinherently innovative and social.Inheritance is not articulated
changesthat ensue,is addressedby Deleuzeasan experimental,spontan- within an essentialistframeworkthat placesthe emphasison species,genes
eous, and open processof transformation. As it was articulated in andorganisms,because Deleuzeand Guattarirecognisethat it is the power
Dffirence and Repetitiozl, evolutionis construedasa processof repetition of affect that is creative- to produce affectsand being open to being
that is inherently creative:it is productiveof difference.In the handsof affected.Here creativity is taken to be a machinic mode of evolution that
Deleuze(remember,like Michel Foucault,conceptsaretools for Deleuze), is productivein and of itself. The whole question of transformationis
creativetransformationbecomesa systemof involutionwheretransversal clearlysituatedby both Deleuzeand Guattari in an experimentalmilieu
movementsengagematerialforcesand affects. and the creativityof this milieu is necessarily
In both his 1956 essayon Bergson and his 1966 book Bergsontsm
(D 1988a)Deleuzeutilisesthe idea of 'evolution'proposedby Bergsonin
terms of transmission.Expandingon this a little more,Deleuzeshiftsthe
focusof inheritanceawayfrom determinationandthe continuance of a fixed Bergson
essence that is passedon overtime.Like Bergson,Deleuzechooses to bring Difference
to our attentionthe creativedimensioninherentin evolution.It is the force Representation
of life that persists,thus,through change,the vitality of life and difference Spinoza
are affirmed.Accordingto this schemacreativetransformationis imma-
nent, taking placeon a planeof consistencythat precedesunivocalBeing.
In BergsonDeleuzefindsthe possibilityfor a philosophythat graspslife in
termsof durationandthe inhuman.The temporalityof durationis not con-
ceivedof chronologically,wherebythe end of onemomentmarksthe begin-
Felicitjt J.
ning of the next; nor is it a measurabletime, that is broken down into
seconds,minutes,hours,days,months,or years.Put differently,Deleuzian The multifacetednatureof a geologicallyproducedcrystalform fascinated
durationneedsto be construedasthe flow of time; it is intensiveasmuchas Deleuze.Initially he co-joinsexistingscientificand artisticconceptionsof
it is creativein so far as it is the movementof time that marks the force of the formal properties and concepts of a crystal to work through the
life. Hence,durationmaintainslife in an openstateof indeterminacy. Platonic conceptionof a real image and its counterpoint:virtual image.
The theory of creativeinheritanceand the emphasisplacedon non- The crystalthen becomesa conceptthat Deleuzemethodologicallyusesin
organiclife is then given a makeoverand turned into the conceptof the his considerationof thought, time and differencesin becoming.The
'rhizome' in his collaboration with Guattari. Early on in A Thousand, conceptof the 'crystal' is engagedby Deleuzein his book Cinerna2: The
PlateausDeleuze and Guattaricharacterise a rhizomeasindeterminateand Time-Image asthe'crystallinesign'or'hyalosign',the'crystal-image',and
experimental.Steeringthe emphasisawayfrom representational interpret- the 'crystallinestate'.Thesevaryingconceptsareenmeshedwith the idea
ative frameworks,they clearly state that a rhizome is a map not a trace. that the figure of the crystal is representativeof specificstatesof tempora-
Explaining this distinction they write that what 'distinguishesthe map lity, as discerned through images.The crystal is configured through
from thc tracingis that it is entirelyorientedtowardan experimentationin Deleuze'samalgamationof writers, philosophersand filmmakerswhose
contlrctwith thc rcal' (D&G 1987:12).'l'hc rhizomcis conccivcclof asan workscrcatcdfigurcsof time-spacc.T'hescincludeHenri Bcrgson'svital-
o;rcnnrultiplicity,rrndrrlllifb is r rlrizonrlticnrrxlco1'clungcwithoutfirm ism; Mauricc Mcrlclu-Ponty'scxpcrimcntswith thc lrticulirtionof' thc

perceptionof things; Friedrich Niezsche's suspicionof linguistic phe- into effect. Affection may not be instantaneous;affectiveexperiencesmay
nomenology; Gaston Bachelard'sstudy of reciprocal, affective imagery; be delayedin their consciousor corporeal acknowledgement,perception
and Alain Robbe-Grillet and Alain Resnais'play with socialfolds of time, and utilisation. The crystal'sspecificstatesof formation, mutation and
contextand form. transformationarethus effectsof differentprocesses of time.
Deleuzedescribesa crystallinestructureas a processand placeof the
'exchange'thatis enactedbetweenthe actualand virtual (D 1989:69).This
processis from Bergson'sconceptof'reflective perception',describedin Connectives
his 1896bookMatter and.Memory (B 1994:105)that Deleuzereworksin Actuality
his second book on cinema: The Time-Irnage(D 1989: 289). Deleuze Affect
describesthat the exchangestructureof virtual-actualrelationsmeansthat Bergson
the crystal-image is an amalgamatedform of virtual and actual in its Time-image
various stagestoward infinity. In The Time-Image,where examplesof the Virtual/Virtuality
crystal-imageand the conceptof 'crystallinenarration' are discussedat
length, Deleuzeequatesthe crystallinestructureof the cinemawith the
nature of its self-reflexivity and the temporal medium. A crystal-image
involves a multilayered and infinite register of montaged 'realities'. As
Deleuzedescribesit, cinema'stechniqueof acknowledgement and exper-
imentationwith the crystal-image's medium achieves divergentmodalities
of the image. Dependent upon the component layers of time-space
montage,the resultant crystal-imagein turn producesan external repre-
sentationof an imageof thought.The crystalis thusa philosophicalmech-
Bruce Baugh
anism that is illustrative of concept production, and in relation to the
image,the crystalconceptis the productionand apprehensionof time. Death is many things: a state of affairs,when a body's parts, through
In TheTime-Image,Deleuze describesa threefoldsystemfor the crystal's external causes,enter into a relation that is incompatiblewith that body's
variationsof past-present-futuretime. This systemis from St Augustine's continued existence;an impersonal event of dying, expressedthrough an
understandingof temporalrelations,and Deleuzeutilisesit to describean infinitive verb (mourir,to die); the experienceof zero 'intensity' that is
image'sconfigurationof a memory,or recollectionof an event.Together implicit in a body's feelingor experienceof an increaseor decreasein its
with the Bergsonianconceptof time as a 'thought-image',Augustine's forceof existence;a 'model' of immobility and of energythat is not organ-
system enablesDeleuze to discuss the crystal-image as a modality of isedand put to work; and finally the 'deathinstinct', capitalism'sdestruc-
knowing time and its possibleconstitution. Over time, the effectsof time tion of surplusvaluethrough war,unempleyment,famineand disease.
alter the molecularstructureof things (includingcinematicinformation), A body existswhen its parts composea relationthat expresses the sin-
and the crystal-imageis employedby Deleuzeto encompass vastshifts in gular forceof existenceor 'essence'of that body,and ceases to be when its
meaningcausedthrough the exchangesbetweenpast, presentand future parts are determined by outside causesto enter into a relation that is
images,in their variousstatesof virtual and real.Through thesethree vari- incompatiblewith its own. Death in this sensealwayscomesfrom outside
ationsof the crystal-image, Deleuzedescribesthe cognitiveand physical and assuchis both fortuitousand inevitable:it is the necessary and deter-
apprehension of time asperceptual'affectation'and 'modification'. mined resultof a body'schanceencounterswith otherbodies,governedby
Configuringthe crystalasa temporalconceptwith affectiveproperties purely mechanicallawsof causeand effect.Sinceeverybody interactswith
enablesDeleuze to addressthe associatedimplications for relationships other bodies,it is inevitablethat at somepoint it will encounterbodiesthat
generatedby movement,time, memory, perception and affect - each 'decompose'the vital relation of its parts,and causethoseparts to enter
within a particular circuit of meaning,medium or surround. Deleuze's into new relations,characteristicof other bodies.
'crystal' sccks to dcscribc a cognitivc processwhcrcby the temporal Dcath, as thc dccompositionof a body's characteristicrclation, forms
rcgistrltiono1'fhcmovcnrcrrts irnd firrnrsof lffcct lrc cxprcsscd,
and put thc brrsisof thc pcrsonal:rndprcscntclcathof thc Sclf or cgo.'lir thisclcath,

asfoundedin the personalself and the body,Deleuzecontraststhe 'event' it producesthrough anti-production or the production of lack, such as
of dying, which is impersonaland incorporeal,expressedin the infinitive war, unemployment,and the selectionof certain populationsfor starva-
verb 'to die' and in the predicatemortal. Dying is not a processthat takes tion and disease.The death instinct is thus historical and political, not
placein things,nor is 'mortal' a quality that inheresin things or subjects. natural.
Rather,the verb and the predicateexpressmeaningsthat extendover the
past and future, but which are never physicallypresentin bodies and
things,eventhoughthe deathof a body effectuates or actualises this dying.
In impersonaldying,'one'dies,but oneneverceases or finishesdying.The Body
deathof the Self or 'I' is when it ceases to die and is actuallydead:when Body without Organs
its vital relationsaredecomposed, and its essence or powerof existenceis
reducedto zerointensity.Yet,at this very instant,impersonal dying makes
deathloseitself in itself,asthe decompositionof one living body is simul-
taneouslythe compositionof a new singularlife, the subsumptionof the DERRIDA, JACqUES (1930-2004) - referto theentrieson'becoming*
deadbody'sparts under a new relation. and'virtual/virtuality'.
During its existence, bodiesexperienceincreases or diminutionsof their
poweror forceof existing.Other bodiescancombinewith a body either in
a way that agreeswith the body's constitutiverelation,that resultsin an
DESCARTES, RENf (1596-1650) - referto theentrieson 'arborescent
increasein the body'spowerfelt asjoy,or in a waythat is incompatiblewith tplanet,'Spinozat
schemat, and'thought'.
that relation,resultingin a diminution of power felt as sadness. Poweris
physicalenergy,a degreeof intensity,so that everyincreaseor decrease in
poweris an increaseor decrease in intensity.When the body dies,and the
Self or the egowith it, they are returnedto the zero intensityfrom which
existenceemerges.Every transitionfrom a greaterto a lesserintensity,or
from a lesserto a greater,involvesand envelopsthe zero intensity with
Alison Ross
respectto which it experiences its powerasincreasingor decreasing. Death
is thus felt in everyfeeling,experienced'in life and for life'. 'Desire' is one of the central terms in Deleuze'sphilosophicallexicon.
It is in that sensethat the life instincts and appetitesarise from the In his work with Guattari, Deleuzedevelopsa definition of desireaspos-
emptinessor zero intensity of death. The 'model' of zero intensity is itive and productive that supports the conception of life as material
thus the Body without Organs(BwO), the body that is not organisedinto flows.In eachof the featuresusedto definethis conceptionof desire,an
organswith specificfunctions performing specifictasks,the energy of alternativeconception of desire as premised on 'lack' or regulated by
which is not put to work, but is availablefor investment,what Deleuze 'law' is contested.The psychoanalyticconceptionof desire as an insa-
calls death in its speculativeform (taking 'speculative'in the senseof tiable lack regulatedby Oedipal law is one of the main inaccuraciesof
financialspeculation).Sincethe BwO doesnot perform any labour,it is desire that Deleuze tries to correct. Instead of desire being externally
immobile and catatonic.ln TheLogicof Sense,the catatonicBwO arises organisedin relation to prohibitions that give it a constitutiverelation to
from within the depthsof the instincts,asa deathinstinct, an emptiness 'lack', for Deleuzedesireis definedasa processof experimentationon a
disguisedby everyappetite.In Anti-Oedipus,Deleuzeretainshis defini- plane of immanence.Added to this conceptionof desireas productive,
tion of the deathinstinct asdesexualised energyavailablefor investment, is the conceptionof desireaspositive.Whereasin psychoanalytictheory
and as the source of the destructivenessof drives and instincts, but desireis locatedwithin the individual as an impotent force,the positive
arguesthat ratherthan a principle,the deathinstinctis a productof the and productive dimension Deleuze ascribesto desire makesit a social
sociallyclctcrmincclrclationsof procluctionin thc capitalistsystcm. Thus rcinterpretcd,desireis vicwcdnot iust as an cxperimental,
| )crrtlrbccomcsrn instinct,a cliflirscdirndimnrirncntttnction of thc c:rp- procluctivcfirrcc, but also as :r f<lrcclblc t<l firrm conncctionsand
itrrlistsystcrrr. spccilicirlly,
itbsorptiorrot'llrc surplusvirltrc cnlrrrrrcctlrc lxrwclol'bodicsirrthcir cor.rrcclion.'l'lrcsclwo lcrttttrcs

used to distinguish the experimentationof desire from any variant of Connectives

naturalism; and Deleuze defines desire accordingly in his work with
Guattari as assembledor machined. This conception of desire works
across a number of themes in Deleuze's writing with Guattari.
Productive and positive desire works in their writing as an operative
vocabularythrough which they explain fascismin politics as the desire
for the repressionof desire,and they advancea new ethics of'schizo-
analysis' whose task is the differentiation between active and reactive
desires, all the while explaining simple activities such as sleeping
walking or writing as desires.
Desire is alsoa crucial elementin Deleuze'scritique of philosophical
dualism.Such dualism,whetherin ImmanuelKant or psychoanalysis, is
ableto submit desireto a iuridical systemof regulationpreciselybecause
it first distinguishes the domain of existencefrom those transcendent
valuesthat arrangeit in relation to ordering principles.In the caseof Schizoanalysis usesthe pivotalterm 'desiring-production',in tandemwith
psychoanalysis this exerciseof transcendentregulationerroneouslycon- 'social-production',to link SigmundFreud and Karl Marx: the term con-
tainsdesireto the field of the subject'ssexualityandturns it into a problem joinslibido andlabour-powerasdistinctinstances of production-in-general.
of interpretation.Against psychoanalysis, Deleuzetries to de-sexualise Justasbourgeoispoliticaleconomydiscoveredthat the essence of economic
and de-individualisedesire.Sexualityis one flow that entersinto coniunc- value doesnot inhere in objectsbut is investedin them by subjectiveactiv-
tion with others in an assemblage.It is not a privileged infrastructure ity in the form of labour-power,bourgeoispsychiatry discoveredthat the
within desiringassemblages, nor an energyableto be transformed,or sub- essence of eroticvaluedoesnot inherein objectsbut is investedin them by
limatedinto other flows(D 1993b:140). subjectiveactivityin the form of libidinal cathexis.Schizoanalysis addsthe
Deleuzeis particularlycriticalof thealliancebetweendesire-pleasure-lack discoverythat labour-powerand libido arein essence two sidesof the same
in which desireis misunderstood aseitheran insatiable
internallack,or asa coin,eventhoughthey areseparated by capitalismin its historicallyunique
processwhosegoalis dissolutionin pleasure.Whetherdesireis relatedto the segregation ofreproductionfrom productionat largevia the privatisationof
law of lack or the norm of pleasureit is misunderstoodasregulatedby lack reproduction in the nuclearfamily.
or discharge. Againstthis allianceDeleuzedescribes desireasthe construc- The conceptof desiring-productionpreventsdesirefrom beingunder-
tion of a planeof immanence in which desireis continuous.Insteadof a reg- stoodin terms of 'lack' (asit hasbeenin westernmetaphysicsfrom Plato
ulationof desireby pleasureor lackin whichdesireis extractedfrom its plane to Freud): desiring-productionactually produces what we take to be
of immanence, desireis a processin which anythingis permissible. Desireis reality (in the sensethat a lawyerproducesevidence)through the invest-
accordinglydistinguishedfrom that which 'would come and break up the ment of psychicalenergy (libido), just associal-productionproduceswhat
integralprocessof desire'(D 1993b:140).This integralprocessis described we take to be reality through the investmentof corporeal energy (labour-
inA Thousand, Plateaus asthe constructionof assemblages. The term, which power).Desireis thus not a fantasyof what we lack:it is first and foremost
is developed in response to the subjectivistmisinterpretationof the desiring- the psychicaland corporealproduction of what we want - eventhough
machinesof Anti-Oedipus,underlinesthe view that desireis experimental under certainconditionswhat we want subsequentlygetstakenawayfrom
and relatedto an outside.It is this relationto an outsidethat underpinsthe us by the repressivefigure of a castratingfatheror the oppressivefigureof
social dimension given to desire in Deleuze'sthought. Understood as an an exploitativeboss(amongothers).By restoringthe link betweendesir-
assemblage, desire in Deleuze'svocabularyis irreducible to a distinction ing-production and social-production,schizoanalysisdeprives psycho-
between naturalism/artificeor spontaneity/law.For this reason when analysisof its excusefor and justification of repression;that psychic
Deleuzearguesagainstthe dualismthat prohibitsor intcrruptsdesircfrom repressionis somehowautonomousfrom social oppression,and exists
thc cxtcrnd pointsof lackrlr plcirsurc, hc alsomakcsasccsis an important independentof socialconditions.Schizoanalysis insistson thc contrary
conditiorrfilr thc proccsscs thirtc<lnstruct
irsscmhhgcs <lf'clcsirc. thrt 'sucill-productionis purcly nnd simply dcsiring-prrrcluction itsclf

under determinateconditions'(D&G 1983:29),and that psychicrepres- (D&G 1987:88).In their book on the novelistFranzKafka, they describe
sion therefore derives from social oppression: transform those social a Kafkaesqueliterary deterritorialisationthat mutates content, forcing
conditions,and you transformthe degreeand form of psychicrepression enunciationsand expressionsto 'disarticulate'(D&G 1986:86). In their
aswell. final collaboration- What isPhilosophy? -Deleuze and Guattari posit that
There are two basicforms of desiring-production:schizophrenia,the deterritorialisationcan be physical,mental or spiritual (D&G 1994:68).
free form of desire promoted half-heartedly by capitalism and whole- Given this seemingly broad spectrum of descriptions two questions
heartedlyby schizoanalysis; and paranoia,the fixed form of desiresub- emerge.First, how doesthe processof deterritorialisationwork?Second,
jected to socially-authorised belief (in God, the father, the boss, the how is deterritorialisationconnected to reterritorialisation?Perhaps
teacher,theleader,and soon). There arethreemodesof social-production, deterritorialisationcan best be understood as a movement producing
eachof which oppresses,/represses desiring-productionin a specificway. change.In so far as it operatesas a line of flight, deterritorialisation indi-
Of the three,capitalismis the mostpromising,because it at leastis ambiva- catesthe creativepotential of an assemblage. So, to deterritorialiseis to
lent: it activelyfostersboth forms of desiring-production,whereasits pre- free up the fixed relationsthat contain a body all the while exposingit to
decessors alwaysdid their utmost to crush the one in favourof the other. new organisations.
Capitalism frees desiring-productionfrom capture and repressionby It is important to rememberthat Deleuze,as well as Guattari, is con-
codes and representations,while at the same time it recapturesand cerned with overcomingthe dualistic frameworkunderpinning western
represses desiring-productionin mostly temporarycodesand representa- philosophy(Being/nonbeing,original/copyand soon). In this regard,the
tions,but alsoin the moreenduringforms of State-sponsored nationalism, relationshipdeterritorialisationhasto reterritorialisationmust not be con-
the Oedipuscomplexand the nuclearfamily. struednegatively;it is not the polar oppositeof territorialisationor reter-
It is becauseschizoanalysis insiststhat social-productionalwayspro- ritorialisation(when a territory is establishedonce more). In fact, in the
videsthe determinateconditionsunder which desiring-productiontakes way that Deleuzeand Guattari describeand usethe concept,deterritori-
shapethat it can hold the mode of social-productionresponsiblefor that alisationinheresin a territory asits transformativevector;hence,it is tied
shape;that is, schizoanalysis evaluates a modeof social-production accord- to the very possibilityof changeimmanentto a giventerritory.
ing to the form of desiring-productionit makespossible.The valueof cap- Qralitatively speakingthere are two different deterritorialisingmove-
italism as a mode of social-productionis not only the extraordinary ments:absoluteand relative.Philosophyis an exampleof absolutedeter-
materialproductivity so admiredby Marx, but evenmore its propensity ritorialisationand capital is an exampleof relative deterritorialisation.
for generatingschizophreniaas the radically free form of desiring- Absolutedeterritorialisationis a way of moving and assuchit hasnothing
production.And the correspondingchallengeto schizoanalysis asa revo- to do with how fast or slow deterritorialisingmovementsare; such
lutionarypsychiatryis to eliminatethe countervailingforcesthat recapture movementsare immanent, differentiatedand ontologicallyprior to the
free desire and subject it to paranoiaand belief, forcesoperating in insti- movementsof relative deterritorialisation.Relative deterritorialisation
tutions ranging from the nuclearfamily and Oedipal psychoanalysis, to movestowardsfixity and as such it occursnot on a molecularbut molar
the bureaucracyof private enterprise,all the way up to and including plane as an actual movement.Put succinctly,absolutedeterritorialising
the State. movementsare virtual, moving through relativedeterritorialisingmove-
mentsthat areactual.
There are severaldifferent theoretical contexts Deleuze and Guattari
DETERRITORIALISATION / RETERRITORIALISATION discussandusedeterritorialisationin. Theseinclude:art, music,literature,
philosophyand politics.For instance,in the westernvisualarts,facesand
Adrian Parr landscapesare deterritorialised.Meanwhile in philosophy,thought is
deterritorialisedby all that is outsideof thought.In this regard,it is not the
There are a variety of ways in which Deleuze and Guattari describe questionthat is deterritorialisingbut the problem,becausethe question
thc proccss<rfdetcrritorialisation.In Anti-Oedipusthcy speakof deterri- sccksan answcr,whcreasthe problcm positsall that is unrccognisable or
trrriirlisrfionrrs 'il corning unclonc'(l)&G l9tl3: 322). In A 'l'housuntl unknowrrblc. 'l'hcy suggcsttlrlt whirt is dctcrriturialisccl irr music rrrc
lhc cultingcdgcol'ln irsscnrltlirgc frtrnrrrrrvoiccsirnd thc rcli'nirr(ritournrllt).A hclplirlcxirrrrplchcrc would

be the composerOlivier Messiaenwho, from around 1955on, usedbird- it wasthe French psychoanalyst JacquesLacan who influencedGuattari.
songin his compositions.[n theseworkshe did not iust imitate the songs For Lacan, 'territorialisation'refers to the way in which the body of an
of birds; rather he brought birdsong into relation with the piano in a infant is organisedaround and determined by erogenouszones and the
mannerthat transformedthe territory of the musicalinstrument (piano) connectionsit forms with part-objects.This organisationalprocessis one
and the birdsongitself Here the distinctiverone, timbre and tempo of of libidinal investment.As the infant undergoesa processof territorial-
birdsongswere fundamentallychangedthe moment theseelementscon- isationits orificesand organsareconjugated.In the psychoanalyticsense,
nected with musical organisation.Similarly Messiaen'scompositional to deterritorialiseis to free desirefrom libidinal investment.This freeing
style alsochangedwhen it enteredinto a relationwith birdsong,whereby up of desire includes setting desire free from Oedipal investment
thesecompositionscould be describedin rermsof a becoming-bird. (desire-as-lack). Accordingly,the upshotof Deleuzeand Guattari'srecon-
Yet asthe bird singsits songis it simply beingrerritorial?Here we may figuration of Lacanian'territorialisation'is that the subjectis exposedto
considerthe way in which the bird refrainis a territorial sign.Deleuzeand. new organisations;the principal insight being: deterritorialisationshat-
Guattari usethe biologicalunderstandingof 'territoriality' asdiscussedin ters the subject.
the studiesof birds conductedduring the earlyto mid-twentiethcentury; In additionto the bioethologicaland psychoanalytic antecedentsfor the
however,they push this work in a different direction. Bernard Altum, concepts of deterritorialisationand reterritorialisation,Deleuze and
Henry Eliot Howard and Konrad Lorenz all suggested malebirds aggres- Guattari extend a political use to them. Leaning upon Karl Marx, they
sively defenda particular territory as a way of sociallyorganisingthem- posit that labour-poweris deterritorialisedthe momentit is freedfrom the
selves.These studies of bird activiry undersrood territoriality as a meansof production. That selfsamelabour-powercan be describedas
biological drive pitched towards the preservationof species.Instead, beingreterritorialisedwhen it is then connectedto anothermeansof pro-
Deleuzeand Guattari addressterritoriality from the position of what is duction. Eugene Holland explains, when the English Enclosure Acts
produced by the biologicalfunction of mating hunting, earing and so (1709-1869)enclosedcommon land for purposesof sheep-grazing,the
forth, arguing that territoriality actually organisesthe functions. The peasants wereconcomitantlybanished(or 'freed') from one meansof pro-
problemthey havewith Lorenz, for example,is that he makes,aggressive- duction only to havetheir labour-powerreterritorialisedonto other means
nessthe basisof the territory'(D&G 1987:315).They claim functions, of production, such as when they becamefactory workers in the textile
suchasmating,areorganised'because they areterritorialised'(D&G 1987: industry (H 1999: 19-20). During the early phasesof industrialisation
3 I 6). In this wag they usethe undersrandingof territory advancedby the when capitalismwas really gaining momentum, a systemof deterritori-
ethologistJakobvon Uexkiill, to help shift the focusawayfrom a mechan- alising flows prevailed:markets were expanding,social activities were
istic understandingof life onto an expressive one. undergoingradicalchanges,and populationsmoved from rural to urban
Von Uexkiill proposed thar there is no meaning outside of a milieu environments.In one sense rural labour-power was deterritorialised
(Umweh).For him a 'territory' refers to a specificmilieu that cannotbe (peasantand landowner) but in another senseit was reterritorialised
separatedfrom the living thing occupyingand creatingthe milieu, so that (factory worker and industrial capitalist).Commenting on capitalism,
the meaningof a milieu for Von Uexkiill is affective.This is important Deleuzeand Guattari insistthat deterritorialisedflowsof codearereterri-
when we cometo considerthe supposedslippagebetweendeterritorialis- torialisedinto the axiomaticof capitalismand it is this connectionbetween
ation and decodingthat happensin Anti-Oedipusbutnot in A Thousand, the two processes that constitutesthe capitalistsocialmachine.
Plateaus.To decode,in the waythat Deleuzeand Guattariintend it, means
to strike out at the selfsamecodesthat producerigid meaningsasopposed
to translatingmeaning.Rather than understandingdeterritorialisationas
destabilisingthat which produces meaning, in A ThousandPlateaus Becoming
Deleuzeand Guattariregardit asa transversalprocessthat definesthe cre- Lacan
ativity of an assemblage: a nonlinearand nonfiliativesystemof relations. Lines of flight
Apart from biologythc tcrm'tcrrit<lrialisation'can alsobc foundin psy- Nomadicism
choirnirlysis. As crrrlyrrs l9fifi Guattari uscclthc psychoanrrlytic tcrm - PirrtirlObjcct
isitliritt' : in his lxx>k Piltrfuutlutlltsc
'f crrilrrrirtf tt 'l'rtnstttrytlit(.llcra. Ithizonrc

When Deleuzeand Guattari suggestthat societiesare definedby their

lines of flight or by their deterritorialisation,they meanthat fundamental
socialchangehappensall the time, evenasthe societyreproducesitself on
Paul Patton
other levels.Sometimeschangeoccurs by degrees,as with the steady
The concept of deterritorialisationlies at the heart of Deleuze and erosionof myths aboutsexualdifferenceand its role in socialand political
Guattari'smaturepoliticalphilosophy.Processes of deterritorialisationare institutions. Sometimes,changeoccurs through the eruption of events
the movementswhich definea givenassemblage sincethey determinethe which breakwith the pastand inauguratea new field of social,politicalor
presenceandthe qualityof 'linesof flight' (D&G 1987:508).Lines of flight legal possibilities.The rioting of May 1968 was an event of this kind,
in turn define the form of creativity specific to that assemblage,the 'a becomingbreakingthroughinto history' (D 1995:153).Other examples
particular waysin which it can effect transformation in other assemblages include the suddencollapseof EasternEuropeancommunismor the dis-
or in itself (D&G 1987:531).From the point of view of socialor political mantling of apartheidin South Africa. These are all turning points in
change,everythinghingeson the kinds of deterritorialisationpresent. history after which somethings will neverbe the sameasbefore.The key
Deleuzeand Guattari define deterritorialisationas the movementby question,however,is not whetherchangeis slowor suddenbut whetheror
which somethingescapesor departsfrom a given territory (D&G 1987: not it is animatedby a positiveforceof absolutedeterritorialisation.
508).The processes of territory formation, deterritorialisationand reter- Deleuzeand Guattaridistinguishfour typesof deterritorialisationalong
ritorialisationare inextricablyentangledin any given social field: 'The the twin axesof absoluteand relative,positiveand negative(D&G 1987:
merchantbuys in a territory,deterritorialisesproductsinto commodities, 508-10).Deterritorialisationis relativein so far asit concernsonly move-
and is reterritorialised on commercial circuits' (D&G 1994: 68). ments within the actual order of things. Relativedeterritorialisationis
Deterritorialisationis alwaysa complexprocessinvolvingat leasta deter- negatiyewhen the deterritorialisedelementis immediatelysubjectedto
ritorialisingelementand a territory which is being left behind or recon- forms of reterritorialisationwhich encloseor obstructits line of flight. It is
stituted. Karl Marx's account of primitive accumulation in Capital positivewhenthe line of flight prevailsoversecondaryreterritorialisations,
illustratesthe operationof'vectors of deterritorialisation'in a socialand eventhoughit may still fail to connectwith otherdeterritorialisedelements
economicterritory: the developmentof commodity marketsdeterritori- or enter into a new assemblage. Deterritorialisationis absolutein so far as
alisesthe socio-economicterritory of feudal agricultureand leadsto the it concernsthe virtual orderof things,the stateof 'unformedmatteron the
emergenceof large-scale commercialproduction. planeof consistency'(D&G 1987:55-6). Absolutedeterritorialisationis
Deterritorialisationis alwaysbound up with correlativeprocessesof not a further stagethat comesafter relativedeterritorialisationbut rather
reterritorialisation,which doesnot mean returning to the original terri- its internal dynamic, since there is 'a perpetualimmanenceof absolute
tory but rather the ways in which deterritorialisedelementsrecombine deterritorialisationwithin relative deterritorialisation'(D&G 1987:56).
and enter into new relations. Reterritorialisationis itself a complex The differencebetweenpositiveand negativeforms of absolutedeterrito-
processwhich takesdifferent forms dependingupon the characterof the rialisation correspondsto the differencebetweenthe connection and the
processesof deterritorialisationwithin which it occurs. Deleuze and conjugationof deterritorialisedflows.Absolutedeterritorialisationis pos-
Guattari distinguishbetweenthe 'connection'of deterritorialisedflows. itive when it leadsto the creationof a new earth and new people:'when it
which refersto the waysin which distinct deterritorialisations can inter- connectslinesof flight, raisesthem to the powerof an abstractvital line or
act to accelerate one another,and the 'conjugation'of distinct flowswhich drawsa planeof consistency'(D&G 1987:510).Sincereal transformation
refers to the ways in which one may incorporateor 'overcode'another requiresthe recombinationof deterritorialisedelementsin mutually sup-
thereby effectinga relativeblockageof its movemenr(D&G 1987:220). portiveways,socialor politicalprocesses aretruly revolutionaryonly when
Marx's accountof primitive accumulationshowshow the conjugationof they involveassemblages of connectionratherthan conjugation.
the streamof displacedlabour with the flow of deterritorialisedmoney
capital provided the conditions under which capitalist industry could
dcvelop.In this casc,thc reterritorialisationof thc flows of capital and
hbour lclclst<ltlrc cnrcrgcnccof ir ncw kinclof lsscmbhgc,nirnrclythc DIAGRAM - rcfcr to thc cntries on 'axiomatic'.'black hole'. 'fold'.
itxiontut ic ol' cirllitirlisnr. * t'old','plirtciru','scntiotics'irncl'virtuitl/virturlity'.

DIFFERENCE every aspctof reality evidencesdifference,and there is nothing 'behind'

suchdifference;differenceis not groundedin anythingelse.Deleuzedoes
CliffStagoll not mean to refer, however,to differencesof degree,by which he means
distinctionsamongstitemsthat areconsideredidenticalor in anysensethe
Deleuzeis often labelledas a 'philosopherof difference',an assessment same.Instead,he meansthe particularityor'singularity'of eachindividual
that highlightsthe criticalplaceof 'difference'in his work. He is concerned thing, moment,perceptionor conception.Such differenceis internalto a
to overturn the primacy accordedidentity and representationin western thing or event,implicit in its beingthat particular.Evenif thingsmight be
rationality by theorising differenceas it is experienced.In doing so, conceivedashavingsharedattributesallowingthem to be labelledasbeing
Deleuze challengestwo critical presuppositions:the privilege accorded of the samekind, Deleuze'sconceptionof differenceseeksto privilegethe
Being and the representational model of thought. He considersboth to individual differencesbetweenthem.
haveimportantand undesirablepolitical,aestheticandethicalimplications Such individuality is, for Deleuze,the primary philosophicalfact, so
that a disruptionof traditionalphilosophycanhelp to surmount.Deleuze that, rather than theorisinghow individualsmight be grouped,it is more
useshis notion of empiricaland non-conceptual'difference in itself in the importantto explorethe specificand uniquedevelopmentor'becoming'of
serviceof sucha disruption. eachindividual. The genealogyof an individual lies not in generalityor
Differenceis usuallyunderstoodeither as'differencefrom the same'or commonality,but in a processof individuationdeterminedby actualand
differenceof the sameover time. In either case,it refers to a net variation specificdifferences,multitudinous influencesand chanceinteractions.
betweentwo states.Sucha conceptionassumes that statesarecomparable, Deleuze'sdifference-in-itselfreleasesdifferencefrom domination by
and that thereis at basea sameness againstwhich variationcanbe observed identity and sameness. Indeed, on this account,identity must alwaysbe
or deduced.As such, differencebecomesmerely a relative measureof referredto the differenceinherentin the particularsbeing'sweptup'in the
sameness and, being the product of a comparison,it concernsexternal processof constructinga relationshipbetweenthem. To realisethis is to
relationsbetweenthings. To think about such relationstypically means meetDeleuze'schallengeof developinga new perspectivein orderto resist
groupinglike with like, and then drawingdistinctionsberweenthe groups. transcendence. However,to do so routinely is not easy.Only by destabilis-
Furthermore,overand abovesuchgroupingsmight be positeda uniztersal ing our thinking, disrupting our facultiesand freeing our sensesfrom
grouping, such as Being, a conceptionof presencethat alonemakesthe established tendenciesmight we uncoverthe differenceevidentin the lived
groups wholly consistentand meaningful.It is becauseGeorg Wilhelm world, and realisethe uniquenessof eachmoment and thing.
Friedrich Hegel drew a comprehensive and cohesiveworld of Being that Deleuze'stheory of differencealso challengesthe traditional theory
madehim sucha significanttargetfor Deleuze'scritique. of representation,by which we tend to consider each individual as
On such an account, difference is subordinatedto sameness,and re-presenting('presentingagain')somethingas iust anotherinstanceof a
becomesan objectof representationin relationto someidentity.As such, categoryor original.On sucha view,differenceis somethingthat might be
it is never conceivedin terms of 'difference-in-itself',the uniqueness predicated of a concept, and so logically subordinated to it, whilst the
implicit in the particularity of things and the momenrsof their concep- conceptcan be applied to an infinite number of particular instances.To
tion and perception.Rather,differenceis understoodin terms of resem- think in terms of difference-in-itselfmeansto set the conceptasideand
blance,identity, opposition and analogy,the kinds of relations used to focusinsteadon the singular,and the unique circumstances of its produc-
determine groupings of things. Yet this rendencyto think in terms of tion. Awarenessof such specificcircumstances meansthat the notion of
samenessdetracts from the specificity of concreteexperience,instead some'thing in general'canbe setasidein favourof one'sexperienceof this
simplifying phenomenaso that they might 'fit' within the dominant thing, hereand now.
model of unity. Deleuze's'liberation' of differerrcefrom sucha model has
two parts.First, he developsa conceptofdifferencethat doesnot rely on
a relationshipwith sameness and,second,he challcngcs the philosophyof Connectives
rcprcscntirti<ln. Crcativetransformation
l)clcuzcilrgucstlrlt wc ought n<ttto prcsunlcir prc-cxistingunity,but T'ltcrnirlrcturn
irtstcirdlirkcscliorrsly.thcnirlurcol'thc worldirsit is llcrccivcd, l,irr hinr, llcpctition

levelof the axiomsis without importance;on the contrary,it is determin-

ing (at the most diverselevels:women)sstrugglefor the vote,for abortion,
for jobs;the struggleof the regionsfor autonomy;the struggleof the Third
Paul Patton
World . . .'(D&G 1987:470-l). At the sametime, however,in order to
Deleuze'sontologicalconceptionof a world of free differencessuggestsa draw attentionto the sensein which the reconfigurationof the majority is
defenceof the particularagainstall forms of universalisation or representa- dependentupon a prior processof differentiation,they introducea third
tion. Every time there is representation, he argues,there is an 'unrepre- term in addition to the pair majority-minority,namely'becoming-minor'
sentedsingularity' which does not recogniseitself in the representant or 'minoritarian',by which they meanthe creativeprocessof becoming-
(D 1994:52).However,neither this critique of representationnor rhe onro- different or diverging from the maiority.
logicalpriority of differenceestablishes a politics of difference.Identities This processof becoming-minor,which subjectsthe standardto a
presupposedifferencesand are inhabited by them, iust as differences processof continuousvariationor deterritorialisation(D&G 1987:106),is
inevitablypresuppose andareinhabitedby identities.A politicsof difference the real focus of Deleuze and Guattari's approach to the politics of
requiresthe specification of politicallyrelevantkindsof difference. difference.They do not denythe importanceof the installationof newcon-
Deleuze and Guattari's concept of minority and their support for stantsor the attainmentof maiority status,but they stressthe importance
minoritarian politics provides a novel understandingof the kind of of the minoritarian-becomingof everyone,including the recognised
differencewhich is relevantfor democraticpolitical change.They define bearersof minority statuswithin a given maiority. They insist that the
minority in oppositionto majority,but insist that the differenceberween powerof minorities'is not measuredby their capacityto enter and make
them is not quantitativesincesocialminoritiescanbe morenumerousthan themselvesfelt within the majority system,nor evento reversethe neces-
the so-calledmajority.Both minority and majorityinvolvethe relationship sarilytautologicalcriterion of the majority,but to bring to bearthe forceof
of a group to the largercollectivityof which it is a part. Supposerhereare the non-denumerablesets, however small they may be, against the
only two groups and supposethat there is a standardor ideal type of denumerablesets. . .' (D&G 1987:471).By this they meanthat the limits
member of the larger collectivity: the majority is defined as the group of the potentialfor transformationarenot determinedby the normalising
which most closely approximatesthe standard,while the minority is power of the majority but by the transformative potential of becoming-
defined by the gap which separatesits membersfrom that standard.In a minor, or becoming-revolutionary. They do not mean to suggestthat
socialcollectivity,majority cantakemany simultaneousforms: minoritiesdo not enter into and produce effectsupon the majority.
Their insistenceon the transformativepotentialof minoritarianbecom-
Let ussuppose thattheconstant or standardistheaverage adult-white-heterosexual- ingsdoesnot imply a refusalof democraticpolitics.Thoseexcludedfrom the
European-male speakinga standard language. . . It is obviousthat'man'holdsthe majority as definedby a given set of axioms,no lessthan thoseincluded
majority,evenif heislessnumerous thanmosquitoes, children,
women, peas-
blacks, within it, arethepotentialbearersof thepowerto transformthat set,whether
ants,homosexuals, etc.That is because he appears twice,oncein the constantand in the directionof a new setof axiomsor an altogethernewaxiomatic(D&G
againin thevariablefrom whichtheconstantis extracted. Majorityassumesa state 1987:471).Everyonemay attain the creativepowerof minority-becoming
of poweranddomination, nottheotherwayaround.(D&G 1987:105,cf.291) that carrieswith it the potentialfor new earthsand new peoples.

A liberal politics of differencewould simply defend the right of the

minoritiesto be includedin the majority.In other words,it would seekto
broadenthe standardsothat it becomesmaleor female- Europeanor non-
European- hetero or homosexualand so on. Social minorities are here
Adrian Parr
conceivedas outcastsbut potentially able to be included among the
majority.Deleuzeand Guattari insist upon the importanceof suchpiece- The conceptsof 'differentiation'and 'differenciation'are primarily eluci-
mcll changcsto thc [<lrmandcontentof a givcnmajrtrity.After rcdescrib- datcd by Dcleuzc in Bergsonism(D 1988a: 9G8) and Dffirence and
irrg thc non-coinciclcncc of minority and mliority in thc lirnguirgcof (l) 1994:20tt-14)rnd the distinctionhe formsbetweenthe two
sctthcory,'thcy itsscrr,'this
is trotlo silythrrltlrcstrugglcon thc is ln imporfiultinFrc(licntof'his dill'crcntialontrtkrgy.'ftr bcgin with hc

appealsto the mathematicalconceptof differentiationin order to unlock Representation

his understandingof the Whole asa unified system,preferring insteadto Virtual/Virtuality
think of openwholesthat continuallyproducenew directionsand connec-
tions. In effect, what are differentiated are intensitiesand heterogeneous
qualities and this is what makesthe virtual real but not actual. In short,
differentiationin the way Deleuzeintendsit happensonly in the virtual DISJUNCTIVE SYNTHESIS
realm. Continually dividing and combining, differentiation can be likened
to a zone of divergenceand as such it is fundamentally a creativemove- Claire Colebrook
ment, or flow,that conditionsa wholein all its provisionalconsistency.
Meanwhile,what is differenciatedis the heterogeneous seriesof virtual At its most general,the disjunctivesynthesisis the production of a series
differentiation.ln BergsonisrnDeleuze pointsout that differenciationis an of differences. The significanceof the conceptof disjunctionin Deleuze's
actualisationof the virtual. Actualisationcan be either conceptualor work is threefold.First, whereasstructuralismconceivesdifferencenega-
material such as an 'eye' which Deleuze describesin Dffirence and tively,suchthat an undifferentiatedor formlessworld is then differentiated
Repetition asa'differenciatedorgan'(D 1994:21l).The problemthis poses, by a structure.Deleuzeregardsdifferencepositively,so disjunction is a
given that Deleuze is not a representationalthinker, is how difference mode of production.There is a potentialin life to produceseries:a desire
differenciates without itself turning into a systemof representation? That can attachto this, or this or this; a vibration of light can be perceivedas
is to say,if differenciationis the processof actualisingthe virtual how does this, or this, or this. Second,the differencesofdisjunction aretransversal.
this avoidthe representational trap of similitude and identity?Why isn't There is not one point or term (suchas consciousness or language)from
differenciationsimilar to, or a version o( the virtual it differenciates? which differencesare unfolded or connected;consciousnesscan connect
For Deleuze,the actualiseddifferencesof differenciationdo not enioy with a language,a machine,a colour, a sound, a body, and this meansthat
a privileged point of view over the differencesmaking up the flow of seriesmay traverseand connect different potentials.Sexual desire,for
differentiation,nor is differenciationa processthat unifies heterogen- example,might leavethe seriesof body parts- breast,or mouth, or anus,
eous qualities; rather it simply affirms these qualities and intensities or phallus - and invest different territories - the desire for sounds,for
without completelyhalting the flow in its tracks.The actualisationthat colour,for movements.Finally, disjunctionis not binary.Life should not
differenciationproducesis not'like'differentiation, as this would imply be reducedto the miserablelogic of contradictionor excludedmiddle -
that the differentiationit is like is in itself a fixed subjectmore than an eitheryou wantliberalismor you don't; eitheryou'remaleor female;either
intensivesystemcontinually undergoingchange.Put simply, what this you're for the war or for terrorism - for disjunction is open and plural:
meansis that the processof differenciationis a questionof variationmore neitherliberalismnor terrorism,but a further extensionof the series.
than identity and resemblance becauseDeleuzeprefersto think of it as The conceptof synthesisis centralto both Dffirence andRepetitionand
a dynamicmovementthat bringsdifferencesinto relationwith oneanother. Anti-Oedipus. ln Dffirence and, Repetition Deleuze rewrites Immanuel
Overall,Deleuzeconsidersactualisationin termsof creativitll whereby Kant's three syntheses(from the Critique of Pure Reason).For Kant, our
the processdoesnot simply mark a changeinto what waspossiblein the experiencedworld of time and spaceis possibleonly becausethere is a
first instance.To be truly creative,differenciationneedsto be understood subject who experiencesand who connects (or synthesises)received
assomethingnew insteadof somethingthat resembles virtuality.Carrying impressionsinto a coherentorder. For Deleuze,by contrast,there is not a
on from here he outlines that the virtual differenciatesitself; without this subject who synthesises.Rather, there are synthesesfrom which subjects
the virtual could not be actualisedbecausethere would be no lines of are formed; thesesubjectsare not personsbut points of relativestability
differenciationthat could enableactualisationto happen(D 1988a:97). resultingfrom connection,what Deleuzerefersto as 'larval subjects'.In
Anti-Oed,ipu.r Deleuze and Guattari expand the concept of the three
synthesesinto political terms: association,disjunction and conjunction.
Connectives Association is thc connection, not justof data(asin Kant'sphilosophy), but
Acturrlity alsoof'bodicsor tcrmsinto somcmanifillclrlr cxpcricnccd thing,an'asscm-
ion blitgc'.l)isjunclion,llrc sccorrclsyrrtlrcsis,
is lhc subscr;ucntpossibiliry
78 DURATI O N ( DUR E E ) D U R ATIo N ( D U R EE) 79

relationsbetweenor among such assembledpoints of relative stability, adoptedby Deleuzewhen developinghis philosophyof difference.Typical
while conjunctionor the third synthesisis the referralof thesetermsto the of Deleuze'susualapproachto Bergson,his interpretationand use of the
ground or planeacrosswhich they range. conceptis at oncealmostentirelysympatheticbut strikinglyidiosyncratic.
The disjunctivesynthesisis important for two reasons.First, Deleuze Accordingto Deleuze,one canonly comprehendthe notion of duration
arguesthat all syntheses (or waysof thinking aboutthe world) havelegit- by using Bergson'smethod of philosophicalintuition (intuitionphilor
imate and illegitimateuses,or an immanent and transcendentemploy- ophique),a deliberatereflectiveawarenessor willed self-consciousness.
ment. Synthesesare immanent when we recognisethat there are not Intuition revealsconsciousness (or, more generally,mental life) to be essen-
subjectswho synthesisethe world; there is not a transcendentor external tially temporal; ongoing mental activity that constitutes,in its dynamism
point beyond the world from which synthesisemerges.Rather, there are and the mutual interpenetrationof its states,a time internal to one'sself.
connections,syntheses, (desires)from which pointsor terms areeffected. Mental life is, then,a kind of flowingexperience, anddurationis the imme-
No point or term canbe setoutsidean eventof synthesisasits transcend- diateawareness of this flow
ent ground,sotherecanbe no transcendental synthesising subjectasthere Bergsonbelievesthat intuition's findingsare bestexpressedin images,
wasfor Kant. Second,the subjectionof modernthought liesin the illegit- and soexplainsduration by usinganalogieswith music.Mental statesflow
imate use of the disjunctivesynthesis.From relationsor syntheses(pas- togetheras if parts of a melody,with previousnoteslingering and future
sions,sympathies)among bodiescertain terms are formed, such as the onesanticipatedin the unity of a piece,the permeationof eachnote by
mother,fatherand child of the modern family.We should,then,.seemale- othersrevealingthe extremecloseness of their interconnection.To try and
femalerelationsor genderasa production,asa way in which bodieshave graspthis flow asa completeset of notesis pointless,becausethe musicis
beensynthesised or assembled. One canbe maleor female. alwayson the vergeof endingand alwaysalteredby the addition of a new
The Oedipuscomplexis the disjunctivesynthesisin its transcendent and note. To speakof 'mind' or tconsciousness' as a comprehensive systemis
illegitimateform: eitheryou identify with your fatherand becomea subject to ignore an analogousattribute of duration: it is alwaysflowing, overtak-
(thinking'man') 0r yottdesireyour mother and remainother than human. ing what might be calledthe 'not yet' and passingawayin the 'already'.
An immanentuseof the synthesiswould refusethisexclusioe disjunctionof Bergsonconsidersquantificationof duration to be inconsistentwith its
'one mustbe this or that, maleor female'.Insteadof insistingthat onemust immediate,lived reality.It can be contrastedwith 'clock time', the time of
line up beneaththe signifierof man or womanand submit to the systemof physicsandpracticallife, which eitherspatialises time by situatingelemental
sexualdifference,Deleuzeand Guattariopenthe disjunctivesynthesis:one instantsend-to-endon a referential grid or usesthe digitsof a time-pieceas
can be this or this or this, and this and,this and,this: neither mother nor a crassandimprecisephysicalimage.Whenarrangedin accordance with these
fatherbut a becoming-girl,becoming-animal or becomingimperceptible. models,timebecomes a seriesof separable inst4nts,consciousness is'situated'
in time asa seriesof temporallydisparate mentalstates, andmovementis con-
ceivedin terms of relationsbetweenstatic positions. In other words,clock
time abstractsfrom the notion of duration by distorting its continuity.
Becoming But constitutiveintegrationof momentsof duration must not be over-
Desire emphasised.Bergson'sintuition confirms also that consciousness is not
Kant 'one long thought', asit were,but a flowing together of mental states that
Oedipalisation are different from one anotherin important ways.Bergsoncontendsthat
differencesbetweenmentalstatesallow us to mark one kind of thought or
one particular thought from another,whilst constituting simultaneously
a singularflow,a mergingof thoughtsasone consciousness. As such,dur-
ation is the immediateawareness of the flow of changesthat simultaneously
Scvcralcharacteristics of durationarecriticalfor Deleuze.In his early
I lcrrrillcrgsonintcrcstsl)clcuzcbccrtusc dcparturcfiom philrr
of'hisrrrdicrrl workson DrrvidHumc, l)clcuzcusccldurationasan cxplicatoryt<xrl,rcn-
solrfty's rlrlltockrxy.
| )unrtionQlurttt)is orrcol'scvclirlol' llcrgs<ln's
kcy iclcirs dcringlncw I lunrc'sirccounts o1'hrbit,itssociittion lncl tintc.Subscqucntly,
80 EARTH,/LAND(rrRftr) EARTH,/LINo (rnnnn) 8l

Deleuzeadoptsit asa meansfor exploringdifferenceand becomingaskey 'territory' (territoire) expressmanners of occupying terrestrial spaceby
elementsof life. If duration 'includes',as it were,all of the qualitative differentsocialmachines:the nomadwar machine,the territorial tribe, the
differences ('differences
of kind') of one'slived experience,
Deleuzeargues, overcodingState.Earth can also mean the virtual realm or Body without
then it also emphasisesthe productive, liberating potenrial of these Organs(BwO), while 'a new earth' (unenouaelleterre),called,for at points in
differences.Even in the continuity of one'sconsciousness, there is a dis- A Thousand, Plateausand madea focal point of What is Philosophy?, entails
connectionbetweeneventsthat allowscreativityandrenewal.For example, new human relationshipsto the creative potentials of material systemsto
one is ableto call upon new conceptsto reinterpretone'smemoriesor per- form consistencies, war machines,or rhizomesfrom a varietyof means.
ceivesomevistaanewin the light of one'sexposureto a work of art. ln A Thousand, Plateau.s, Brian Massumi usestwo English words to
Deleuze usesduration to make some important philosophicalpoints translatethe French terrerwhichcanmeanboth'earth'in the astronomical
abouttime and difference.For philosopherssuchasImmanuelKant, time senseofour planetand'land' in the geographical senseofa cultivatedarea.
is both a form ofreceptiveexperienceaboutthe world and a necessary con- There is no consistencyin Deleuzeand Guattari'suseof the majusculein
dition for any human experienceat all. As such, for Kant, time is not an the French text; both Terre and,terre are used in the senseof 'earth' and
empiricalconceptbut an a priori necessityunderlyingall possibleexperi- 'land'. The anglophonereadershouldkeepin mind the closeproximity of
ence.Furthermore,he considerstime to comprisea homogeneous seriesof terre('earth' and 'land') with territoire('territory').
successive instants,standingin needof synthesis. First, 'earth'is equivalentto the BwO, otherwiseunderstoodby Deleuze
In contrast,durationis alwayspresentin the'givenness'ofone'sexperi- and Guattari as the virtual plane of consistencyupon which strata are
ence.It doesnot transcendexperience, andneithermustit be derivedphilo- imposed(D&G 1987: 40). Second,'earth' is part of the earth-territory
sophically.Furthermore,duration, unlike matter,cannotbe divided into (terre-territoire)systemof romanticism,the becoming-intensive of strata.
elementswhich, when dividedor reconstituted,remainthe samein aggre- Hence 'earth' is the gathering point, outside all territories, of all self-
gateas their unified form. Duration, as lived experience,brings together orderingforces('forcesof the earth') for intensiveterritorial assemblages
both unity and differencein a flow of interconnections. For Deleuze,these (the virtual seenfrom the point of view of territorialisingmachinicassem-
contrastsrepresentthe differencebetweena dictatorialphilosophythat blages).Third, the 'new earth' (nouaelleterre)is the becoming-virtualof
creates'superior'conceptsthat subsumeand order the multiplicitiesand intensive material. Put differently, the 'new earth' is the correlate of
creativityof life and one that createsopportunitiesfor changeand variety. absolutedeterritorialisation(the leavingof all intensiveterritorial assem-
blagesto attainthe planeof consistency); it is the tappingof 'cosmicforces'
Connectives (the virtual seenfrom the point of view of the abstractmachinescompos-
ing it, not the machinicassemblages that actualisea selectionof singular-
Bergson ities). Hence, it marks new potentials for creation (D&G 1987: 423;
Intuition 509-10).In this sense,it is unfortunatethat Brian Massumi translateszae
Kant nouaelleterreas'a new land' (D&G 1987:509).
Land,(terre)is constitutedby the overcodingof territoriesunderthe sig-
nifying regimeand the Stateapparatus(D&G 1987:440-l). Land refers
exclusivelyto striatedspace,and is that terrain that canbe owned,held as
stock, distributed, rented, made to produce and taxed. Land can be
gridded, distributed,classifiedand categorisedwithout evenbeing phys-
ically experienced,and a striking exampleof this is the township-and-
EARTH/LAND (rrRR.E) rangesystemof the US that imparted striatedspaceto a vast part of the
North Americancontinentaheadof actualsettleroccupation.The system
John Proteai of stockpilingterritories and overcodingthem as land for the Statedoes
not stop at thc firrm or evcn thc ranch,but extendsto the forestlands(as
As prrrt<rf'whrtl)clcuzcirnclGuirttaricomcto calla gcophilosophy in llhat 'nrttionrl'fbrcsts)irnd to thc unusablcspacesthat becomenltional parks,
is l'hilovph.y?,in,.1I'hounnl Pluttttus'cilrth'rrkrngwith ,ground'(.vrl)
rrnd bi<lsphcrc rcscrvcsr itnclso filrth. 'l'hcscspilccslrc hcld irsrcftgcs firr Statc

subiectswho seekto escapefrom private property to find some sort of immanenceand univocity. In Dffirence and RepetitionDeletzearguesthat
becoming-earthcommons. Duns Scotus,Baruch Spinozaand Nietzscheaffirmedunivocalbeing.It is
ln What is Philosophy?,'a new earth' becomesthe rallying cry in the only with Nietzsche,accordingto Deleuze,that the joyful ideaof univoc-
'geophilosophy'of Deleuze and Guattari, in which 'stratification' is the ity is thought adequately,and this is becauseNietzsche imaginesa world
processwherebythe implantationof codesand territoriesform dominat- of 'pre-personalsingularities'.That is, there is not a 'who' or 'what' that
ing bodies.This is opposedto the constructionof a 'new earth' that entails then has variousproperties;nor is there someoneor somethingthat ri.
new human relationshipsto the creativepotentialsof material systemsto Each differenceis a power to differ, with no event of differencebeing the
form consistencies, war machines,or rhizomesfrom a varietyof means.In ground or causeof any other. By going through this affirmation of
the constructionof the new earth, caremust be takennot to confusethe difference,and by abandoningany ground or being before or beyond
structural differenceof strata and consistencywith an a priori moral cat- difference, both Nietzsche and Deleuze arrive at the eternal return.
egorisation,but ratheralwaysto retainthe pragmaticand empiricalnature If differenceoccurredin order to arriveat someproperend - if therewere
of Deleuzeand Guattari'swork and perform the ethicalevaluationof the a purposeor properend to life - then the processof becomingwould have
life-affirming or life-denying characterof assemblages. some ideal end point (even if this were only imagined or ideal). But
Strata,along with codesand territories,are alwaysneeded,if only in differenceis an event that is joyful in itself; it is not the differenceo/this
providingrestingpointsfor further experimentsin forming war machines. beingor for this end.With eacheventof differencelife is transformed;life
Strataare in fact 'beneficialin manyregards'(D&G 1987:40),though we becomesother than itself becauselife is difference.Consequently, the only
must be carefulnot to laud the stabilityof strataasinstantiatingthe moral 'thing' that 'is' is difference,with each repetition of differencebeing
virtue of unchangingself-identityespousedby Platonism.The mere fact different.Only differencereturns, and it returns eterna,lly. Time is what
that an assemblage or body politic is flexibleand resilient,however,does followsfrom difference(time is difference);differencecannotbe locatedin
not guaranteeits ethical choice-worthiness,for what Deleuzeand Guattari time. Eternalreturn is thereforethe ultimateidea.
call 'micro-fascism'is not rigid at all but rather a suppleand free-floating This difficult and enigmatic idea, developedmost concertedly in
body politic.Eveniffascistsarereterritorialisedon the'blackhole'oftheir Nietzsche'sThus Spake Zarathustra,has proved controversialin phil-
subjectivity:'thereis fascismwhen a war machineis installedin eachhole, osophicalcircleswhere it has generallybeeninterpreted aseither an exist-
in everyniche' (D&G 1987: 214)and not only thosepracticesthat 'intend' entialor inhumanvision of existence. Accordingto the existentialreading,
to producea life-affirmingassemblage will resultin such. the thought of eternalreturn compelsus to considerhow we ought prop-
erly to live. This thought can be expressedin the following way: were we
suddenlyto recognisethat everyaspectofour lives,both painfulandjoyous,
Connectives was fated to return in the guiseof a potentiallyinfinite repetition,how
Body without Organs would we needto live to justify the recurrenceof eventhe most terrible and
Blackhole painful events?Conversely,the inhuman or cosmologicalreadingunder-
Deterritorialisation standsNietzsche'spropositionasthe fundamentalaxiomof a philosophyof
Plato forces in which active force separatesitself from and supplants reactive
Space forceand ultimatelylocatesitself asthe motor principleof becoming.
Virtual/Virtuality Deleuze'ssignalcontribution to the post-warphilosophicalrevisionof
Nietzschewas to establishthis secondreadingof eternal return as the
return and selectionof forcesat the heart of modern theoriesof power.He
explicitly repudiatesthe naivereadingof Nietzschethat envisages eternal
ETERNAL RETURN return asa doctrineproclaimingthe infinite recurrenceof everyhistorical
moment in exactlythe sameorder throughouteternity.The perversityof
Lee Sltinks this naivcreading,Deleuzeargues,is that it convertsNietzsche'svision of
'l'hc conccptof''ctcrn:rlrcturn', which l)clcuzcclrirwsfrom lfricdrich bcingasthc cndlcssbccomingof clifl'crcntial furccsinto a simplcprinciplc
Nictzschc,is crucirll lo tltc rrrdicrtlcxlcrtsiot't
ol'tlrc llhikrsollhyof' ot'idcntity.Yctwc firilto undcrstirnd tlrcctcrnirlrcturnif'wc conccivc ot'it

as the ceaselessreturn of the same; instead, eternal return inscribes Difference

differenceand becomingat the very heart of being.For it is not being that Kant
recurs in the eternal return; the principle of return constitutes the one Multiplicity
thing sharedby diversity and multiplicity. What is at stakeis not rhe repe- Nietzsche
tition of a universalsameness but the movementthat produceseverything
that d,ffirs. Eternal return is thereforeproperly understoodasa synthesisof
becomingand the being that is affirmed in becoming.It appearsasrhe fun-
damental ontological principle of the differenceand repetition of forces
that will bear the nameof Will to Power.
To think the eternal return is to think the becoming-activeof forces. John Marhs
The return selectsforcesaccording to the quantity of Will to Power that Throughout his work, Deleuzedraws a clear distinction betweenethics
they express.Deleuze characterisesthis processas a d,oubleselectionby and morality.Morality is a setof constrainingrules that judgeactionsand
the activity of force and the affirmation of the will. In accordancewith intentionsin relationto transcendentvaluesof good and evil. Morality is
the principle that whateverwe will, we must will it in such a way rhat we a way of judging life, whereasethicsis a way of assessing what we do in
also will its eternal recurrence, the eternal return eliminates reactive terms of waysof existingin the world. Ethics involvesa creativecommit-
statesfrom the becoming of being. This first selectioneliminates ali but ment to maximising connections,and of maximising the powers that
the most powerfully reactive forces - those which go to rhe active limit will expand the possibilitiesof life. In this way, ethics for Deleuze is
of what they can do and form the basisof the nihilistic impulse and the inextricably linked with the notion of becoming.Morality implies that we
will to nothingness.Thesestrongreactiveforcesaresubsequendyincorp- judge ourselvesand others on the basisof what we are and should,be,
oratedinto the eternal return in order to effect the overcoming of neg- whereasethicsimplies that we do not yet know what we might become.
ation and the transformation of reactive into active force. Such For Deleuze,there are no transcendentvaluesagainstwhich we should
revaluationtakesplace becausethe eternal return brings the nihilistic measurelife. It is rather 'Life' itself that constitutes,itsown immanent
will to completion:the absolutespirit of negationinvolvesa negationof ethics.An ethicalapproachis, in this way,essentiallypragmatic,and it is
reactive forces themselves.Within this negation of negation reactive no surprise that Deleuze admiresthe American pragmatist model that
forces deny and suppress themselves in the name of a paradoxical substitutesexperimentationfor salvation.Deleuzesetsthe ideal of this
affirmation: by destroying the reactive in themselves, the strongest pragmatism- a world which is 'fn process'- againstthe 'Europeanmoral-
spirits come to embody the becoming-active of reactive force. This ity' of salvationand charity.It rejectsthe searchfor moral consensusand
movement of affirmation constitutesthe secondor doubled selection the construction of transcendentvalues,and it conceivesof societyas
undertaken by the eternal return: the transvaluationofreactive forcesby experiment rather than contract: a community of inquirers with an
meansof an affirmation of negation itself. This secondselectiontrans- experimentalspirit.
forms a selectionof thought into a selectionof being: somethingnewis FriedrichNietzscheand BaruchSpinozaarethe two main influenceson
now brought into being which appearsasthe effectof the revaluationof Deleuze'snotion of ethics.From them, he takesthe idea that ethicsis a
forces.The eternal return 'is' this movemeRtof transvaluation: accord- form of affirmation and evaluation.Such an ethics applies the accep-
ing to its double selectiononly action and affirmation return while the tancethat the world is, asDeleuzeputs it, neithertrue nor real,but'living'.
negativeis willed out of being.The return eliminateseveryreactiveforce To affirm is to evaluatelife in order to set free what lives. Rather than
that resistsit; iu so doing it affirms both the being of becomingand the weighingdown life with the burden of higher values,it seeksto makelife
becoming-activeof forces. light and active,and to createnew values.Both thinkers reorientatephi-
losophyby callinginto questionthe wayin which morality conceives of the
relationshipbetweenmind and body.For the systemof morality,mind as
consciousness dominatesthe passionsof the body.Spinoza,however,pro-
Active/reactive posesan ethicalroute that is lator takenup by Nietzsche,by rejectingthe
Ilccoming supcriorityof mind ovcr body.It i$ not r cirscof giving ficc rcign to thc

passionsof the body,sincethis would be nothing more than a reversal,a Connectives

licenceto act thoughtlessly. Rather in claimingthat there is a parallelism
betweenmind andbody,Spinozasuggests a new,morecreativewayof con-
ceivingof thought.
For Deleuze,Spinozais the greatethicalthinker who breakswith the
Judeo-Christiantradition, and who is followed by four 'disciples'who
developthis ethical approach:Nietzsche,D. H. Lawrence,Franz Kafka
and Antonin Artaud. They areall opposedto the psychologyof the priest,
and Nietzschein particularshowshow judgementsubjectsmanto an infin-
ite debt that he cannotpay.This meansthat the doctrineof judgementis
only apparentlymore moderatethan a systemof 'cruelty' accordingto
which debt is measuredin blood and inscribeddirectly on the body,since Deleuzeintroduced the conceptof the 'event' in The Logic of Senseto
it condemnsus to infinite restitution and servitude.Deleuzegoesfurther describe instantaneousproductions intrinsic to interactions between
to showhow thesefour 'disciples'elaboratea wholesystemof 'cruelty' that variouskinds of forces.Eventsare changesimmanentto a confluenceof
is opposedto judgement,and which constitutesthe basicsfor an ethics. partsor elements,subsistingaspure virtualities(that is, real inherentpos-
The dominationof the body in favourof consciousness leadsto an impov- sibilities)and distinguishingthemselvesonly in the courseof their actual-
erishmentof our knowledgeof the body.We do not fully explorethe cap- isation in somebody or state.Loosely,eventsmight be characterised(as
acitiesof the body, and in the sam way that the body surpassesthe Deleuzedoes)in termsconsonantwith the Stoicconceptof lekta:asincor-
knowledgewe haveof it, so thought also surpassesthe consciousness we poreal transformationsthat subsistover and abovethe spatio-temporal
have of it. Once we can begin to explore thesenew dimensions- the world, but areexpressiblein languagenonetheless.
unbnownof the body and the unconscious of thought- we arein the domain As the prod,uctof the synthesisof forces,eventssignify the internal
of ethics.The transcendent categories of Good and Evil canbe abandoned dynamic of their interactions.As such, on Deleuze'sinterpretation,an
in favour of 'good' and 'bad'. A 'good' individual seeksto makeconnec- eventis not a particularstateor happeningitselflbut somethingmadeactual
tions that increaseher powerto act, whilst at the sametime not diminish- in the Stateor happening.In other words,an eventis the potentialimma-
ing similar powersin others.The 'bad' individual doesnot organiseher nent within a particularconfluenceof forces.Take as an examplea tree's
encountersin this way and either falls backinto guilt and resentment,or changingcolourin the spring.On Deleuze'saccount,the eventis not what
relieson guile and violence. evidentlyoccurs(the tree becomesgreen)becausethis is merelya passing
Deleuze'scommitment to ethicsis closelyconnectedto the conceptof surfaceeffector expression ofan event'sactualisation,andthus ofa particu-
becoming,and in particular that of becoming-animal.The ethical drive lar confluenceof bodiesand other events(such as weatherpatterns,soil
for the 'great health' that allows life to flourish is all too often channelled conditions, pigmentation effects and the circumstancesof the original
into serving the petty 'human' ends of self-consolidation and self- planting).Thereforewe oughtnot to say'thetreebecamegreen'or'the tree
aggrandisement.One way of going beyondthis calculationof profit and is now green'(both of which imply a changein the tree's 'essence'), but
lossis to'become'animal. The drive for justice,for example,must over- rather'the tree greens'.By using the infinitive form'to green',we makea
come itself by learning from the lion who, as Nietzschesays,refusesto dynamicattribution of the predicate,an incorporealitydistinct from both
rage againstthe ticks and flies that seekshelterand nourishmenton its the tree and green-nesswhich capturesnonetheless the dynamismof the
body. In a more generalpolitical sense,it is a question of maintaining event'sactualisation.The event is not a disruption of some continuous
our 'belief-in-the-world'. We do this by creatingforms of resistanceto state,but ratherthe stateis constitutedby events'underlying'it that, when
what we are becoming (Michel Foucault's 'actual') and not simply to actualised, mark everymomentof the stateasa transformation.
what we are in the present. Rather than judging, we need to makc Deleuze'spositionpresentsan alternativeto traditionalphilosophiesof
s<lmcthing cxist. substance,challengingthe notion that reality ought to be understoodin

terms of the determinatestatesof things. This notion was expressed Connectives

clearlyby Platq who established a contrastbetweenfixed and determinate Becoming
statesof things definingthe identity of an objecton the one hand and, on Plato
the other,temporalseriesof causesand effectshavingan impact uponthe
object.Deleuzewould saythat thereis no distinct,particularthing without
the eventsthat define it as that particular,constituting its potential for
changeand rate of change.Instead,an eyentis unrelatedto any material EXPERIENCE
content,being without fixed structure,position,temporalityor property,
and without beginningor end. Inna Semetsky
Deleuze'seventis a sign or indicator of its genesis,and the expression
of the productivepotentialof the forcesfrom which it arose.As such, it Deleuzeconsideredhimself an empiricist,yet not in the reductive,tabula
highlights the momentaryuniquenessof the nexusof forces(whetheror rasa-like,passivesense.Experienceis that milieu which provides the
not to someobviouseffect)whilst preservinga placefor discontinuity in capacity to affect and be affected;it is a-subjectiveand impersonal.
terms of someparticular conceptor planeof consistency.Three charac- Experienceis not an individual property;rathersubjectsareconstitutedin
teristics highlighted in Deleuze's texts point to this distinctiveness. relationswithin experienceitself, that is, by meansof individuation via
First, no event is ever constituted by a preliminary or precedentunity haecceity. The exteriorityof relationspresents'a vital protestagainstprin-
betweenthe forcesof its production, being insteadthe primitive effect ciples'(D 1987:55).Experienceis renderedmeaningfurnot by grounding
or changegeneratedat the moment of their interaction.Second,events empirical particulars in abstract universals but by experimentation.
are produced neither in the image of somemodel nor as representative somethingin the experientialworld forcesus to rhink. This somethingis
copiesor likenessesof a more fundamentalreality,being insteadwholly an object not of recognitionbut a fundamentalencounterthat can be
immanent, original and creativeproductions.Third, as pure effect, an 'graspedin a rangeofaffectiverones'(D 1994:139).In fact,novelconcepts
eventhasno goal. are to be inventedor createdin order to makesenseout of singular experi-
Deleuzeis careful to preservedynamismin his concept.An event is encesand, ultimately,to affirm this sense.
neither a beginningnor an end point, but rather always'in the middle'. Experienceis qualitative,multidimensional,and inclusive;it includes
Eventsthemselves haveno beginning-or end-point,and their relationship 'a draft, a wind, a day,a time of day,a stream,a place,a battle, an illness'
with Deleuze'snotion of dynamicchange- 'becoming'- is neitherone of (D 1995:l4l): yet, an experientialeventis subjectless. we are madeup of
'joining momentstogether'nor one in which an eventis the 'end' of one relations,saysDeleuze(2000),and experiencemakessenseto us only if we
productiveprocess,to be supplantedor supplementedby the next.Rather, understandthe relationsin practicebetweenconflicting schemesof the
becoming'moves through' an event, with the event representingiust a said experience. The difference embedded in real experience makes
momentaryproductiveintensity. thought encountera shockor crisis,which is embeddedin the objective
In his theoryof the event,Deleuzeis not interestedjust in the machin- structureof an eventper se,therebytranscendingthe facultiesof percep-
ationsof production,but alsoin the productivepotentialinherentin forces tion beyondthe 'given' data of sense-impressions. Differenceis an onto-
of all kinds.Eventscarry no determinateoutcome,but only new possibil- logical category,'the noumenonclosestto phenomenon'(D 1994:2zz),
ities,representinga momentat which new forcesmight be broughtto bear. which, however,is neverbeyondexperiencebecauseeveryphenomenonis
Specificallyin terms of his model of thinking, he doesnot meanjust that in fact conditioned by difference.Transcendentalempiricism is what
'one thinks and thus creates'butthat thinking and creatingareconstituted Deleuzecalledhis philosophicalmethod:thinking is not a naturalexercise
simultaneously. As such,his generaltheoryof the eventprovidesa means but alwaysa secondpowerof thought,born under the constraintof experi-
for theorisingthe immanentcreativityof thifking, challengingus to think enceasa materialpower,a force.The intensityof differenceis a function
differcntlyand to considerthingsanew.This is not to saythat he meansto of desire,the latter embeddedin experiencebecauseits objectis .the entire
chrrffcngcurito think in termsof cvcnts,but rathcrt<lmakcthinkingits own surroundingl which it traverses' (D&G 1987:30).
cvcntby cnrbrrcingthc rich ch:rosof'lifc andthc unitprcncss tnd potcntial If rclati<lns
lrc irrcduciblcto thcir tcrms,then the wholedualisticsplit
ol' citclt lllo nlc nl. llctwccttthrlughtitndworld,thc insidclnd thc outsiclc, bccontcs invalicl.
relationallogic is the logic of experimentationnot 'subordinateto the verb
to be' (D 1987: 57). This logic is inspired by empiricism because'only
empiricism knows how to transcend the experiential dimension of the
Bruce Baugh
visible'(D 1990:20) without recourseto Ideas,moral universals,or value
judgements.The experientialworld is folded,the fold being'the insideo/ In French,the word expirience meansboth 'experience'and 'experiment'.
the outside'(D 1988a:96),wherethe outsideis virtual yet realby virtue of To experimentis to try new actions,methods,techniquesand combinations,
its pragmatics.It unfolds in an unpredictablemanner,and it is impossibleto 'without aim or end' (D&G 1983:371).We experimentwhen we do not
know aheadof time what the body (both physicaland mental) can do. know what the result will be and haveno preconceptionsconcerningwhat it
Becausethe body, acting within experience,is defined by its affective shouldbe. As an open-endedprocessthat exploreswhat'snew and what's
capacity,it is equally impossibleto know 'the affectsone is capableof' cominginto beingrather than somethingalreadyexperiencedand known,
(D 1988b:125):life becomesan experimentaland experientialaffair that experimentation is inseparablefrom innovationanddiscovery. The elements
requires,for Deleuze,practicalwisdom in a Spinoziansenseby meansof with which we experimentare desires,forces,powers and their combina-
immanent evaluationsof experience,or modesof existence.As affective, tions,not only to 'seewhat happens',but to determinewhat different entities
experienceis as yet a-conceptual,and Deleuzeemphasisesthe passionate (bodies,languages, socialgroupings,environmentsand soon) arecapableof.
quality of such an experience:'perhapspassion,the State of passion,is Deleuzeholdsthat'existence itself is a kind of test',an experiment,'like that
actuallywhat folding the line outside,making it endurable. . . is about' wherebyworkmentestthe quality of somematerial'(D 1992:317).In liter-
(D 1995:116). ature, politics, painting, cinema,music and living, Deleuzevalorisesan
The Deleuzianobjectof experience, beingun-thought,is presentedonly 'experimentation that is without interpretation or significanceand restsonly
in its tendencyto exist, or rather to subsist,in a virtual, sub-representative on tests of experience'(D&G 1986:7), the crucial experiencebeing the
state. It actualisesitself through multiple different/ciations. Deleuze's affectiveone- whether a procedureor combinationproducesan increasein
method,compatiblewith Henri Bergson'sintuition, enablesthe readingof one'spowerof acting(ioy) or a diminution (sadness).
the signs,symbolsand symptomsthat lay down the dynamicalstructureof Experimentationcanbe an investigativeprocedurethat seeksto explain
experience. Experience,in contrastto analyticphilosophy,is not limited to how assemblages function by analysingthe elementsthat composethem
what is immediatelyperceived:the line of flight or becomingis realevenif and the links betweenthoseelements;an'assemblage'being anycompound
'we don't seeit, becauseit's the leastperceptibleof things' (D 1995:45). in which the parts interact with each other to produce a certain effect.
Thinking enriched with desire,is experimentaland experiential:experi- However, experimentation is also a practical dismantling of assemblages
encethereforeis future-oriented,lengthenedand enfolded,representingan and the creativeproduction of new combinationsof elements;evenwhen
experimentwith what is new,or cominginto being.Experienceconstitutes experimentationconcernsthoughtsor concepts,it is nevermerely theor-
a complexplace,and our experimentationon ourselvesis, for Deleuzerthe etical. Experimentationdoes not interpret what something,such as a
only reality.By virtue of experimentation,philosophy-becoming, like a text, an idea or a desire,'means',but seeksto discoverhow it works or
witch's flight, escapesthe old frame of referencewithin which this flight functions by uncovering an order of causes,namely, the characteristic
seemslike an immaterialvanishingthrough someimaginaryevent-horizon, relations among the parts of an assemblage- their structures, flows and
and createsits own terms of actualisationtherebyleadingto the 'intensifi- connections - and the resulting tendencies.Effects are demystified by
cationof life' (D&G 1994:74)by revaluatingexperience. being related to their causesthat explain the functions and usesof an
assemblage, 'what it doesand what is done with it' (D&G 1983:180).
Experimentationis necessary to reveal'what a body or mind can do, in
a given encounter', arrangementor combination of the affects a body is
Difference capableof (D 1988c: 125);and alsoto revealthe effectsof combinationsof
Force different bodiesand elements,and especiallywhetherthesecombinations
Power or encounterswill increasethe powersof actingof the elementscombined
Spinoza into a grcatcrwhole,or whcthcrthe combinationwill destroyor'decom-
cmpiricisnr posc'onc or nlorc of thc clcmcnts.'l'hc conrpttibilityor incompntihility

of differentelementsand bodies,and the effectof their combination,can Immanence

only be ascertained through experience;we haveno a priori knowledgeof Lines of flight
them through principlesor axioms.An experimentalmethodof discovery
through the experienceof new combinationsof things encounteringeach
other is contrary to any axiomatic-deductivesystemor any system of
judgement using transcendentalcriteria. Becauseoutcomescannot be EXPRESSION
known or predicted in advance,experimentationrequires patienceand
prudence,ascertaincombinationsmay be destructiveto the experimenter Claire Colebrook
and to others.On the other hand, the knowledgegainedthrough experi- 'Expression' is one of Deleuze's most intense concepts.If we take
mentationwith differentconjunctionsand combinationsallowsfor an art Deleuze'sdefinition of a concept- that it is a philosophicalcreationthat
of organising'good encounters',or of constructingassemblages (social, producesan intensivesetofordinates- then expressioncanbe understood
political, artistic) in which powers of acting and the active affects that astruly conceptual.Indeed,the conceptof expressionis tied to Deleuze's
follow from them are increased. understandingof conceptuality.It is not that we havea world of set terms
Life-experimentation, through a set of practiceseffectingnew combin- and relations, which thought would then have to structure, organiseor
ations and relations and forming powers, is biological and political, and name- producing organisedsetsof what exists.Rather, life is an expres-
often involvesexperientiallydiscoveringhow to dissolvethe boundariesof sive and open whole, nothing more than the possibility for the creation of
the ego or self in order to open flows of intensity, 'continuums and con- new relations;and soa concept,or the thought of this life, must try to grasp
iunctions of affect' (D&G 1987: 162). Active experimentation involves movementsand potential, rather than collectionsof generalities.A struc-
trying new procedures,combinations and their unpredictable effects to ture is a set of coordinates,a fixed set of points that one might then move
producea 'Body without Organs' (BwO) or a 'field of immanence'or 'plane among to establishrelations, and is extensive,with its points alreadylaid
of consistency',in which desires,intensities,movementsand flows pass out or set apart from eachother. So a simple mechanismtakesthe form of
unimpeded by the repressivemechanismsof judgement and interpret- a structure; if we read a poem as a set of words that might be linked in
ation. Experimental constructions proceed bit by bit and flow by flow, meaning,with the meaninggoverning the proper relation and order of the
using different techniquesand materials in different circumstancesand words, then we are governed by a structure. If however,we approach a
under different conditions, without any pre-establishedor set rules or poem asexpressive,we seethe words as having unfolded from a potential,
procedures,as similar effects(for example,intoxication) can be produced a potentialthat will producefurther relations- all the readingsor thoughts
by different means(ingesting peyote or 'getting sousedon water'). 'One producedby the poem. Thus, expressionis tied to a commitmentto the
neverknowsin advance'(D 1987:47), and,if one did, it would not be an creationof concepts;for expressionis the power of life to unfold itself
experiment.Experimentationby its nature breaksfree of the past and dis- differently, and one would create a concept in trying to grasp these
mantlesold assemblages (socialformations,the Self),and constructslines differentunfoldings.
of flight or movementsof deterritorialisationby effecting new and previ- Conceptsarenot structuresbecausealthoughthey establishdifferences,
ously untried combinations of persons, forces and things, 'the new, the differencesareintensive.An extensiveterm - suchas'all the catsin the
remarkable,and interesting'(D&G 1994:lll). In literature,politics,and world that areblack'- is a closedset,whereasan intensiveconceptis infin-
in life, experimentsarepracticesthat discoverand dismantleassemblages, ite in its possiblemovements.In the caseof expression,this conceptcovers
and which look for the linesof flight of individualsor groups,the dangers the potentialfor movements;it is not that therearepoints or potentialsin
on theselines,andnewcombinationsthat will thwart predictionsandallow life which thenundergoan expression.Rather,thereare expressions, with
the new to emerge. the unfolding of life in all its differencebeingexceededby expressiveand
excessive potential.The conceptof expressionthereforerefersto intensity,
Connectives for it allowsus to think a type of relationbut not anyconcludedsetof rela-
tions,And it is an ordinatefield,establishinga temporalityratherthana set
Body withoutOrgans of terms.Thc conccptof cxpression is a styleor possibilityof thinking.We
I)csirc cannotundcrstrnclthis conccptof cxprcssionwithout bringingin a ncw
9+ EXT ER I O R I TY, / I N TER I O R I T Y Exr ER t o nr r v, / I N T ER I o R I T Y 95

approachto what it is for somethingto be, and what it isto thinb that being. Deleuze'suse of the term 'interiority' refers to the thought, dominant
With expression,we no longerimaginea world of substance - that which in westernphilosophysince Plato, that things exist independently,and
remainsin itself, remainsthe same,and then haspredicatesaddedto it acci- that their actions derive from the unfolding or embodying of this essen-
dentally.There is not a substancethat then expressesitself in various tial unity. The Cartesianegocogitowould be the most familiar exampleof
different styles.Rather, there are stylistic variations or expressions,and this thought, whereby the human mind - indivisible and immortal -
substanceis the thought of the open whole of all theseexpressions. With forms the interior of the self,and where the body and the physicalworld
the conceptof expressionwe begin with a relation, rather than a being that in general form a contingent exterior. [n other words, 'interiority' is a
then relates,but the relation is also external: nothing determinesin word indexedto transcendentunities,things that haveno necessarycon-
advancehow potentiality will be expressed,for it is the nature of expres- nection to anything else,and which transcendthe external world around
sive substanceto unfold itself infinitely, in an open seriesof productive them. Deleuze'sphilosophy is rigorously critical of all forms of tran-
relations. scendence.FIe wants to come to grips with the world as a generalised
In his conclusionto his book on Baruch Spinoza,a book which is exteriority.
avowedlydedicatedto expressionism in philosophy,Deleuzedistinguishes In his first book on David Hume (Empiricismand Subjectahy,1953),
the expressionism of Spinozafromthat of Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz. Deleuzeinsiststhat for Hume, there is no natural interiority (conscious
For Leibniz thereis not a world that is then expressed or perceivedby sep- willing, for example)involved in human subjectivity. Rather, the subiect
arate subjects.Rather, the world is made up of monadsor points of per- is formed from pre-subjectiveparts which are held together by a network
ception. A being is just its specificperceptionof the world, and each of relations.This is part of the Humean philosophythat strikesDeleuze
perceivingmonad is an expressionof one being. God is the only being as particularly important, and he comes back to it a number of times.
who perceivesthe world perfectlyand completely;eachfinite beinggrasps DeleuzeconsidersHume to be the first to insistthat relationsareexternal
infinite being only dimly. For Spinoza, a more radical and immanent to their terms - and this presagesmuch of Deleuze's mature philosophy.
expressionis possible,one which allows Deleuze to imagine divergent In other words,in order to understandany stateof affairs,we must not
expressionsor planesof life. While there is still not a self-presentworld look to the internal or intrinsic 'meaning','structure' or 'life' of the terms
that precedesexpression,Spinoza'simmanenceprecludesany point of involved(whetherthey be people,a personand an animal,elementsin a
perfect expressionthat would ground particular expressions.A being iust biological system, and so on). This will not provide anything relevant,
is its expression,its powerto act. The world is not an objectto be known, sinceit is in the relationsbetween(or externalto) things that their nature
observedor represented,so much asa planeof powersto unfold or express is decided.
differentpotentialsof life. Likewise,in his bookson Baruch Spinoza,he demonstratesthat organ-
ised beings are not the embodiment of an essenceor an idea, but are the
resultof enormousnumbersof relationsbetweenpartswhich haveno sig-
nificanceon their own. In other words, specificbeingsare produced from
Spinoza within a generalised milieu of exterioritywithout referenceto any guiding
So, rather than being a philosophyconcernedwith showing how the
interior reasonor structure of things is brought about in the world - the
interior consciousintentions of a human speaker,or the kernel of social
structure hidden within all of its expressions- Deleuze insists on three
Jonathan Rofe points. First, that there is no natural interiority whatsoever:the whole
One of the underlying themesof Deleuze'sphilosophyis a reiection of philosophical tradition beginning with Plato that wanted to explain
the valueof interiority in its varioustheoreticalguises.In fact, he goesso things in referenceto their essenceis mistaken.Second,this meansthat
far asto connectthe sentimentof 'the hatredof interiority' to his philoso- the interior/exterior division lacksany substantialmeaning,and Deleuze
phy. On the other hand, tcrms likc 'outside' and 'cxtcriority' play a somctimescaststhc distinctionasidc.Third - and this describesone of
ccntrnlrolc. thc grcatcstnspcctsof I)clcuzc'sphilosophicrrl lahrur - hc insiststhrrtthc

interior is rather produced from a generalexterior, the immanent world are projectedand from which they rebound or are reflected.Facialityis
of relations.The nature of this production and its regulationproved to thus constitutedby a systemof surfacesand holes.The face'is a surface:
be one of the foci of his philosophy.Hence,human subjectivityasa pro- traits, lines, wrinkles; a long, square,triangular face; the face is a map'
duced interiority undergoeschangesaccordingto its social milieu, its (D 1987:170).A seriesof layersor strata,the facebecomesa landscape
relations,its specificencounters,and so forth: this is a topic that the two when it is abstractedfrom the world at large and understoodas a deter-
volumes of Capitalismand,Schizophreniadeal with, and can be summed ritorialisedspaceor topography.It is a displacementof what a perceiver
up in the following Deleuziansentiment:'The interior is only a selected makesof the milieu and the facesthat he or shediscerns.
interior.' Deleuzerelatesfaciality to the close-upin film, the cinematictechnique
Finally,on the basisof thesepoints,Deleuze'sphilosophyalsoembodies that generallyusesa lens of long focal length to bring the faceforward and
an ethicsof exteriority.In sofar asinteriority is a 'caved-in'selectionof the soften the edgesof the frame, or else,to the contrary,deploysa lens of
externalworld of relations,it remainsseparatedfrom the life and move- shorterlengthto obtain afacialprojectionor distortionat the centreofthe
ment of this world. The aim of what Deleuzecallsethicsis to reconnect imagewhile the surroundingmilieu is seenin sharpfocus.In either mode
with the externalworld again,and to be caughtup in its life. the rotundity of a person'scheekscanresemblehillocksor mesas;the eyes
might be reflectivepoolsand ponds;the nostrilslairs and caves,and earsat
oncequarriesand cirques.Yet the landscapeor facealsolooksat its spec-
tators, calling their gaze into question or even psychically 'defacing'
Hume them. Suchis the effectof close-upsthat establishsequences in a gooddeal
Immanence of classicalcinema (Deleuze's preferred directors being Jean Renoir,
Plato Alfred Hitchcock, David Wark Griffith, Georg Wilhelm Pabst, Sergei
Spinoza Mikhailovich Eisenstein,Luis Buffuel). The face emits signs from its
Subjectivity surfaceat the sametime that the viewer seeksto fathom meaningfrom its
darkeror hidden regions.If the faceis a 'white wall' it is connotedto be
what resistsunderstandingor semiosisin general.
He further elaboratesthe conceptthrough referenceto literature.For
Marcel Proust,describingin Un amourd,eSwannthe faceof the beloved
(but delightfully crassand despicable)Odette de Cr6cy in the eyesof the
awestruckSwannis an abstractionthat allowshim - aesthetethat he is -
to wax poeticalby recallinginfinite expressions, drawn from memoriesof
worksof art, musicalnotesand sculptedsurfacesin his fantasies. Yet once
she disillusionshim the jealouslover discoversthat her faceis a fetish or
Tom Conley
even a black hole. Proust meticulously describesSwann's passionfor
The concept of faciality, theorised in detail in A Thousand.Plateausand Odette's visage,Deleuze observes,in order to sanctify faciality in the
applied to cinema in the chapters of Cinema I: The moztement-image name of art. To counter Proust's reductiveturn, he showsthat Henry
devotedto the close-up,standsat a crossroadsof subjectivationand sig- Miller undoes the face by travelling over it with artistic dexterity. The
nifiance.The former belongsto the languageof psychogenesis (how a authorof Tropicof Capricorn(1939)makesit lessa goalor an essence than
living beinggrowsinto and negotiatesthe ambientworld) and the latter to a surface- a white wall or the blank sheetof a future map- on which a cre-
semiotics(denoting,contrary to polysemy,signsthat disseminateinfinite ative itinerary can be drawn. In Miller's descriptionof facesa processof
meaningin both consciousand unconsciousregistqrsand in directionsnot deterritorialisationmakesthe work of art not an end in itself but a process
under the control of languagerules). Subjectivationand signifianceare and an adventurethat plots the faceinsteadof diving into it.
correlated,respectively,with the 'blackhole' or unknownareaof the face In A ThousandPlateausfaciality is formulated to serve the ends of
in which the subjectinvcstshis or her affectivcencrgics(that can range a political polcmic.To discerndetailsof the facewithout wishing to ide-
from f'carto prtssioi)nnd with thc 'whitc wnll', a surfhccon which signs nliscits iluril or charm constitutcsrrmicropoliticsthtrtcallsinto qucstion

the powerof facialimages.Implied is that Deleuze(with Guattari) seeks, to rigid boundariesof thought and actionand fix bodiesto pre-established
first, ro be finishedwith the facewhereit would be a site of psychological patterns of flows, thus attenuating the fascist obsessionwith erotic
inquiry or of a reassuringhuman essenceor goodness.He and Guattari perversion.
wish to divest the faceof any auratic or seductivepower of the kind that Deleuze and Guattari discuss both micro- and macro-fascismin
contemporarymedia- cinema,advertising,television- conferupon it. By A Thousand Plateaus.Micro-fascismis a cancerousBody without Organs
turning it into an abstraction(but not an idea)and a siteof multiple possi- (BwO). The cancerousBwO is the third type of BwO discussedin
bilities of affectivity(and neithera hearthnor a site of warmth) they turn A Thousand, Plateaus,after the 'full' (positively valued in A Thousand,
it into a zoneof intensity.The latter finds a powerful visual correlativein Plateous,thoughnotin Anti-Oedipzs,where the full BwO is catatonia),and
Deleuze'streatmentof the paintingsof FrancisBacon.The headsof the the 'empty'. The cancerousBwO is the strangest and most dangerous
artist'sportraitsmeld the faceinto the body and thus confusethe facewith BwO. It is a BwO that belongsto the organismthat resideson a stratum,
its tradition asa'veil of the soul'with the humananimal.In'the text of The rather than beingthe limit of a stratum. It is runawayself-duplicationof
Logic of Sensationthat studiesBacon'sportraiture Deleuzeshowsthat the stratification.Sucha cancercanoccurevenin socialformations,not just in
head is not what lacksspirit; rather, it is the spirit in a corporealform, the stratanamedorganism,significanceand subjectification.The key to
a bodily and vital breathwhoseend is that of und,oing thefoce.In sum, a tracking down fascismlies here in the cancerousBwQ that forms under
forceful reconsiderationis madeof the facework in philosophy,aesthetics conditionsof runawaystratification,or more precisely,runawaysedimen-
and political theory. tation, the first 'pincer' of a stratum.By endlesslyrepeatingthe selection
of homogenisedindividuals in a processof 'conformity' the cancerous
Connectives BwO breaksdown the stratum on which it lodges:social cloning and
assembly-line personalities.
Bacon The cancerous BwQ then, occurswith too much sedimentation,that is,
Black hole too much contentor codingand territorialising,with insufficientovercod-
Molecular ing. The result is a cancerof the stratum, a proliferation of points of
Subjectivity capture, a proliferation of micro-black holes: thousandsof individuals
completeunto themselves;legislatorsand subjectsall in one; judge,jury
and executioner- and policeman, private eye, home video operator, the
FASCISM neighbourhoodwatch organiser.Micro-fascism is then the construction of
a 'thousand monomanias'in 'little neighborhoodpolicemen' resulting
from 'molecularfocusesin interaction. . . rural fascismand city or neigh-
John Protezsi
borhoodfascism,youth fascismand war veteran'sfascism,fascismof the
ln Anti-Oed,ipus, the pole of paranoiddesireis opposedto schizophrenic Left and of the Right, fascismof the couple,family, school,and office'
or revolutionary desire.Perhapswe owe the impressionthat a major focus (D&G 1987:214). Such micro-fascismsspreadthroughout a socialfabric
of Anti-Oed,ipzsis fascism to Michel Foucault's preface to the English prior to the centralisingresonancethat createsthe molar apparatusof the
translation,in which he callsthe text'An Introduction to the Non-Fascist State.In micro-fascismeachbody is a 'micro-blackhole that standson its
Life' (D&G 1983:xiii). But in fact historicalmanifestationsof fascism- own and communicateswith the others' (D&G 1987: 228). Although
asFoucaultacknowledges - are explicitly addressedin Anti-Oed,ipus rela- Deleuzeand Guattari do not do so, we can call micro-fascism'molecular
tively infrequently. Despite the lack of attention to historical fascism, molarity': eachsubjectiveunit is self-contained, orientedto unity, an indi-
Deleuzeand Guattari'scritiqueof analyses of fascismin termsof ideology vidual (molar), but they interact in solely local manner,independently
is important. Ratherthan being the result of fooling peopleby falsecon- (molecular).
sciousness, fascistdesirehasits own properconsistency, and spreadsunder In contrast to Anti-Oedipzs'srelative neglect of historical fascism,
ccrtain social,economicand politicalconditions.Roughlyspeaking,in A Thousand Plateausdevotesat leasta few pagesto an analysisof histori-
,4nti-Ocdipu.rf'ascistdcsircis thc dcsirc for codesto rcplacethc dccoding crrl manifcstirtions of macro-firscism (in its Nazi ftrrm rathcr than its
thrttf rccsfklwsunttcrcrrpitrrlist
lxiomltics; suchcoclcswould fix subjccts Italirrnor S;rirnishfirrrns).'l'hc Nazi rcginrcis charnctcriscd,firlkrwirrgthc
t00 F AM IL Y FE MIN IS M l0r

analysesof Paul Virilio, as a 'suicidestate'rather than a totalitarianone, activitiesand theoriesconcerningsexuality,equality,difference,subjectiv-

which is 'quintessentiallyconservarive'(D&G 1987:230;StalinistUSSR ity, marginalisation, and economics.The conceptof a 'limit to be reached'
is the target here).Here it is not a State army taking power,but a war is in itself one of the key critical systematicassumptionsthat Deleuzeand
machine that takesover the institutions of State power.This triggers the Guattari dismantle.
last form of the line of flight, the self-immolating, self-destructiveline. With the exception of his cinema books,where core conceptualpoints
This reversionof the line of flight to self-destructionhad 'alreadyani- are made through reference to canonical twentieth-century filmmakers
matedthe molecularfocusesof fascism,and madethem interact in a war including MargueriteDuras and ChantalAkerman,referencesto women
machineinsteadof resonatingin a State apparatus'(D&G 1987:231). are few in Deleuze's works. In A ThousandPlateaas,Deleuze and
Such a runawaywar machine,onceit reachesa consistencyenablingit to Guattari's discussionof 'becoming-woman'focuseson the processesof
takeovera Stateapparatus,forms a 'war machinethat no longerhad any- subjectiveformation,through the writing of Virginia Woolf. Indicativeof
thing but war asits objectandwould ratherannihilateits own servantsthan the twentiethcentury'sdivisionand demarcationof labourrolesaccording
stop the destruction' (D&G 1987:231).ln A Thousand, Plateaus,then, to normative patriarchal gender and biological functions, Deleuze'swrit-
fascismis too fast, a cancer;what we could call, echoingBataille,a 'solar ings are suffusedwith examplesof published male philosophers,writers,
nihilism', rather than being too slow or the freezing, paranoid, lunar scientistsand artists.
nihilism it is portrayed,asin Anti-Oed,ipus. However,Deleuzeis attentiveto the genderbiasesof westernmythology
and the patriarchallyproduced behaviourof both genders.The ethical
constructionof the body asa constituent/contributorof a pre-configured
Connectives (and hencegendered)organisationis continuallypointed out by Deleuze.
Body without Organs ln Anti-Oed.ipusDeleuzeand Guattari attack and reject the psychoanalyt-
Desire ically enframedfamilial unit and genderedhistorical zonesfor its bourgeois
hierarchy and assumptionsof an Oedipally figured desire.Valuablefor
feminism is Deleuzeand Guattari's discussionof a body in terms of its
potentialitiesandcapabilities,onceit is conceivedof not in termsof its past
structure,but in terms of a future modality.Deleuzedrawsupon Baruch
FAMILY - refer to the entry on 'psychoanalysis'. Spinozato developthe playwright-poetAntonin Artaud's conceptof the
Body without Organs(BwO). This 'body' is one that affordsa creativesite
for the collection and expressionof the formation of desire. Placing the
body on a platfurm of the systemsof exchangeprovides spatial and tem-
FEMINISM poral zonesfor analysisof genderedcategorisations.
Deleuzeand Guattari's phrase'becoming-woman'is a critique of all
Felicity J. Colman
aspectsof anthropocentrism;that is, whereman is regardedasthe central
Deleuze did not advocate'feminism' as the movementhas historically and most important dynamicin the universe.Becoming-womanrefersto
come to be known. Yet in his writings one messagethat is continually everydiscoursethat is not anthropocentric,and is thus codedby all eco-
relayed is: Do not ever smugly assumethat you have reached the limit nomic, social,cultural, organic,and political circuits as 'minority'. With
edges,or causalorigins of knowledgeof any forn.ror thought. To do so the conceptof a'minority discourset,and tbecomingwomant,Deleuzeand
would be at once to assumeand position an organisationof recognition Guattari take the body not to be a cultural medium but a compositionof
basedon prior resemblances, givenstructures,and relationshipsthat have sociallyand politicallydeterminedforces.
beencodedaccordingto linguistic and economics_ystems. These systems Deleuze'suseof the 'difference'of womenundergoestheoreticaldevel-
operatemost efficientlythrough prescribedgenderwork and leisureroles. opment in the 1960s,in turn this changeinfluenceshis later theoriesof
F'cminism'sthcorcticalhistory and legacyhavebeensuchthat its foun- differenceand minority groups,as well as public and capitalistgenerated
<htionll prcmiscsof'pointingout thc incclurrliticsandrcstrictionsimposcd clcsircand its cffccton thingsin thc world. Deleuzc'stheoriesrecognisethe
by thirrkingiur(l priictisirrgwithirr givcn hrundirricsbcclmc principll in politicrrlrrnclpublicshapingof'an incliviclual's culturitlrcrlm nnd milicu.
t02 FO LD FOL D 103

This philosophicalposition on the narrarionof the multiple may appear Specifically, the conceptof the fold allowsDeleuzeto think creatively
abstractand antitheticalto feministmethodologies that focuson the analy- aboutthe productionof subjectivityand ultimatelyaboutthe possibilities
sisand identificationof the personal.YetDeleuze'sideasconsistentlypoinr for,andproductionof, non-humanformsof subjectivity.In fact,on onelevel
out how a method that points toward the 'truth' of a particular represen- the fold is a critique of typical accountsof subjectivity,that presumea simple
tation hasa universalisingtendencyand doesnot refer to the 'forces'that interiority and exteriority (appearanceand essence,or surfaceand depth).
shapebeliefs,thoughtsor structures. For the fold announcesthat the insideis nothing more than a fold of the
Deleuze'swork demonstrates how,becauseof its history,subjectivityis outside.Deleuzegivesus Foucault'svivid illustrationof this relation,that
a political constirurion not the result of an individual community. beingthe Renaissance madman,whq in beingput to seain a ship becomes
Individual historical figures are utilised by Deleuze to examinethe struc- a passenger, or prisoner in the interior of the exterior; the fold of the sea.In
turation of bodiesvia historicalorganisation,culturalaffiliationsand social Deleuze'saccountof Foucault this picture becomesincreasinglycomplex.
differentiation.The formation and reformationof suchbodiesand things There is a varietyof modalitiesof folds:from the fold of our materialselves,
are questionedin terms of the waysin which relationshipsand qualities our bodies,to the folding of time, or simply memory.Indeed,subjectivity
provide identity reality and virtuality.The economic,ethical,logicaland might beunderstoodaspreciselya topologyof thesedifferentkindsof folds.
aestheticconstitution of these bodies is also consideredby Deleuze in In this sense.the fold can alsobe understoodasthe namefor one's rela-
terms of their structuraland systematicconstitution.Deleuze'ssystemof tion to oneself (or, the effect of the self on the self). The Greeks were the
thinking through conceprsof identity givenby history,and maintainedin first to discover,and deploy,this techniqueof folding,or of (selfmastery'.
capitalism,providesa valuablerevolutionaryand unorthodoxapproachfor They inventedsubjectivationtakento mean the self-productionof one's
feminism'scritique of the surfaceeffectsof genderroles,as well as its subjectivity.Subsequentcultures,suchasChristianity,haveinventedtheir
projectof rewriting historiesof exclusion. own forms of subjectivation,or their own kinds of foldings;and of course
it might be saidthat our own time hasits own folds, or eventhat it requires
new ones.This imbuesthe fold with explicitly ethicaland politicaldimen-
sions,for as Deleuzeremarks,the emergenceof new kinds of struggle
Body inevitablyalsoinvolvesthe productionof new kinds of subjectivity,or new
Body without Organs kinds of fold (hereDeleuzehasthe uprisingsof 1968in mind).
Desire As for Deleuze's use of Foucault and Leibniz, the fold names the
Oedipalisation relationship- one entailingdomination- of oneselfto (and 'over') one's
Psychoanalysis 'self', Indeed, one's subjectivity for Deleuze is a kind of Nietzschean
Woman masteryover the swarm of one'sbeing.This canbe configuredasa ques-
tion of ownership,or of folding. To 'have'is to fold that which is outside
inside. Meanwhile, in the Leibniz book we are offered other diagramsof
our subjectivity.One exampleis the two-floored baroquehouse.The lower
floor, or the regimeof matter,is in and of the world, receivingthe world's
imprint asit were.Here matteris foldedin the mannerof origami,whereby
Simon O'Sulliaan
cavernscontainingother caverns,in turn contain further caverns.The
Although appearingthroughoutDeleuze'swork, the 'fold'is particularly world is superabundant,like a lake teeming with fish, with smallerfish
mobilised in the books on Michel Foucault and Gottfried wilhelm von betweenthesefish, and so on ad infinitum. There is no boundary between
Leibniz. In eachcasethe fold is developedin relation to another'swork. the organicand the inorganichereaseachis foldedinto the other in a con-
We might even say that thesebooks, like others Deleuze has written, tinuoustexturology.
involvea folding- or doubling- of Deleuze'sown tliought into the thought The upper chamberof the baroquehouseis closedin on itself,without
of anothcr.We might go further and saythat thought itself,enigmatically, window or opening.It containsinnateideas,the folds of the soul,or if
is rrkinclof ftlld,ln instanccof whatDclcuzecallsthc 'firrccsof thc outsidc' wc wcrc to folkrwGuattarihere,this might bc dcscribcdasthc incorpor-
thrrtfirkl thc irrsiclc. cal aspccto1'our subjcctivity.And thcn thcrc is tlrc firlclbctwccnthcsc

two floors. This fold is like one's sryle in the world, or indeed the style a personis involvedin what Deleuzeterms an'unlimited finity' (D 1988b:
of a work of art. It is in this sensethat the upper chamber paradoxically 131);that being a fold in which a 'finite number of componentsyields a
'contains' the Whole world folded within itself. This world is one practicallyunlimiteddiversityof combinations'(D 1988b:13l). This is the
amongst many 'possible worlds' each as different as the beings that differenceand repetition of Deleuze, or what we might term his 'fractal
expressthem. The world of a tick, for example,is different from that of ontology'. Put differently, it is the radical discoveryof a person'spotential
a human, involving asit doesiust the perceptionof light, the smell of its or the revolutionary activationof immanence. /
prey and the tactile sensationof where best to burrow. This is not the However,the'superfold' still involvesrelationswith an outside.In fact,
tick's representationof the world but the world's expression,or folding for Deleuze,the superfoldwill be the result of three future folds: the fold
in, of the tick. of molecularbiology,or the discoveryof the geneticcode;the fold of silicon
As with Deleuze'sbook on Foucault, the later parts of his Leibniz with carbon,or the emergenceof third generationmachines,cybernetics
book attendto future foldings.Deleuzecallsattentionro rhe possibilityof and information technology;and the folding of language,or the uncover-
a new kind of harmony,or fold, betweenthe two floorsof our subjectivity. ing of a 'strangelanguagewithin language',an atypicaland a-signifying
This new kind of fold involvesan openingup of the closedchamberof the form of expressionthat existsat the limits of language.As with the other
upper floor and the concomitantaffirmation of difference,contact and two this is a fold that openshumansout to that which is specificallynon-
communication.Echoing his book on Foucault,here we might say that human.That is, forcesthat canbe foldedback'into' themselves to produce
thesenew foldingsare simply the namefor thosenew kinds of subjectiv- newmodalitiesof beingandexpression.The first twofoldsinvolvethe util-
ity that emergedin the 1960s,in the variousexperimentsin communal isationof technologyin the productionof new kinds of life and new kinds
living drug useand sexuality,aswell asin the emergenceof new prosthetic of subjectivity.They might producedissenting,politicallyradicalsubjects:
technologies. Donna Harraway's'cyborgs'orMichael Hardt and Antonio Negri's'New
Barbarians'for example.But they might equally produce simply new com-
Connectives modified and alienatedsubiectivities,or military assemblages. It is in this
sensethe third fold is crucial. It is a fold that breaksdown, or deviatesfrom,
Foucault dominant signification,counteractsorder-wordsor simply foregrounds
Leibniz the affective,intensiveand inherentlycreativenatureof both languageand
Nietzsche life. This amountsto sayingthat the first twofolds must themselvesbe
Subjectivity stammeredby the third.
In Deleuze and Guattari's book on Franz Kafka this attention to
stuttering or stammeringis seenas characteristicof a minor literature.
FOLD+ART+TECHNOLOGY A minor literatureutilisesthe sameterms asa major one,but in a different
way (it producesmovement from within the major). Another way of
Simon O'Sullitsan putting this is that a minor literature namesthe becomingrevolutionary
of all literature (the other two accompanyingcharacteristicsof a minor
In his appendixto his bookon Michel FoucaultDeleuzecontinueshis naed- literature being its inherently collectivenature and its alwaysalready
itation on the fold, but looksto the future.If the fold is the operationproper political nature).Can we perhapsextendthis notion of a minor literature
to man, then the 'superfold'issynonymouswith the superman- understood to other realms?Might there be a sensein which a resistantand radical
as that which 'frees life' from within man. The supermanis in chargeof politics today must involve a stuttering, or stammering, of language?In
animals(the capturing of codes),the rocks(the realmof the inorganic),and the visual arts, for example,this might involve turning awayfrom domin-
the very beingof language(the realmof affect'below' signification).This ant regimes of signification, or at least a stammering in and of them to
new kind of fold no longerfiguresthe humanbeingasa limiting factoron producenew kinds of 'stuttering' subjectivities.This might be a descrip-
thc infinite (the classicalhistoricalformation),nor positionspeoplesolely tion of some of the more radical avant-gardegroups of the twentieth
in rclationshipto thc frrrccsof finitudc,suchas lifc, labourand language
ccntury,ftrr example,Dada or the Situationists(from collageto d'6tourne-
(thc tirrnrrrtion
of'thcninctccnth ccntury).llrrthcr,in thisncw kind of firld mcnt). It might irls<lnamc thttsc 'cxpandcd prrrcticcs'thitt p<lsition
106 F ORCE FOR C E t07

themselvesoutsidethe galleryor simply stutter the dominant languages to a conceptualunderstandingof existence.To try and capturein a few
of sculpture and painting. Examples would be art practices, from words or sentenceswhat is learned through intuition is impossible.
performanceand installation art to the relational aestheticsof today,that Generally, though, 'force' means any capacity to produce a change or
turn away from typical definitions of art, or indeed typical notions of 'becoming',whetherthis capacityand its productsare physical,psycho-
political engagement.We might add that many of thesepracices are also logical,mystical,artistic,philosophical,conceptual,social,economic,legal
often specificallycollectivein nature.In all thesecasesart doesnot trans- or whatever.All of realityis an expressionand consequence of interactions
port us to an elsewherebut utilisesthe stuff of the world (we might say betweenforces,with eachinteractionrevealedas an 'event' (in Deleuze's
the stuff of capitalism) albeit in a d,ffirent way. Art here is the discovery specificsenseof the term). Every event,body or other phenomenonis,
of new combinationsand new waysof folding the world 'into' the sel{ or then, the netresultofa hierarchicalpatternofinteractionsbetweenforces,
put more simply,new kinds of subjectivity. colliding in someparticular and unpredictableway.
Of course there may still be other foldings, for example,the Oriental This enigmatic characterisationof forces is developed in Deleuze's
fold, that asDeleuzeremarks,is perhapsnot a fold at all, and consequently accountof their activity.Every force exertsitself upon others.No force can
not a processof subjectivation.The relationof art to this non-fold might exist apart from its inter-relationshipswith other forcesand, sincesuch
be one of ritual. Which is not to saythe productionof possibleworlds,or associationsof struggle are alwaystemporary,forces are alwaysin the
eventhe productionof subjectivity;rather it is both of these,in so far as processof becomingdifferentor passingout of existence,so that no par-
they allow accessto something,suchasthe void from which theseworlds ticular forcecanbe repeated.
and subjectshaveemerged.There is an unfoldingthen that alwaysaccom- Deleuze holds that types of forcesare defined in both quantitativeand
paniesthe fold that, in turn, producesnew foldswhilst alsoopeningus up qualitativeterms,but in specialways.First, the d,ffirencein quantity li the
to that which is yet to be folded. quality of the differencein forces.Second,a forceis'active'if it seeksdom-
inance by self-affirmation, asserting itself over and above another, and
'reactive'ifit startsits struggleby first denyingor negatingthe other force.
Whereas'quality' usually refers to a particular complex, or body that
resultsfrom interactionsbetweenforces,Deleuzeusesit to refer insteadto
tendenciesat the origin of forces,regardlessof the complexthat derives
from them. On his reading,Nietzschefinds the origin of both quantitative
Deleuze'sconceptionof force is clearestin his interpretativereadingsof and qualitativecharacteristics of forcesin the Will to Power,and a kind of
Friedrich Nietzsche,but implicit throughouthis corpus.Much of what he genealogyshould be usedto tracequalitativeattributesof forcesto particu-
writes on the subject is borrowed directly from Nietzsche,although the lar culturesand typesofpeople. I
way in which he usesthe notion to theorise differenceand becoming is Having no substance,forcescan act only upon other forces,eYenthough
Deleuzetsown. the interactionsbetweenthem might result in an apparentlysubstantial
For Nietzsche,the world comprisesa chaoticweb of natural and bio- reality.'Things'aremerelya temporaryoutcome,andsooughtnot to be con-
logicalforceswithout anyparticularorigin or goal,and which nevercomes sideredashavinganindependentexistence or essence.Contraryto Immanuel
to rest at a terminal or equilibrium state.Theseforcesinteractceaselessly, Kant, for example,thereareon this view no 'things-in-themselves', andnor
constituting a dynamic world-in-flux rather than a collection of stable are there, contrary to Plato, perfect originalsof which all things are but
eptities.The world is alwaysin the processof becomingsomethingthar it copies.Furthermore,a physicalworld cannotbe consideredasan inevitable
is not, so that, for Deleuze,the principal(andeternal)characteristic of the or permanentconsequence of the cognitiveequipmentof a perceiveror of
world of forcesis differencefrom whateverhasgone beforeand from that the natureof whateveris beingperceived.
which it will become. Indeed,for Deleuze,this dichotomousunderstandingof the perceiver
Neither Deleuzenor Nietzscheprovidesa clear definition of 'force'. and the perceivedis also groundless.In his view, the particularity of a
Deleuzestatesovertlythat he doesnotmeanby it'aggression'or'pressure' pcncil, hereand now,involvesnot simply one'gazingupon' an object,but
(rrltlrotrghNictzschcis not so clclr). Ir'orl)clcuzc, wc ctn only tr:ulylrer- l complcx sct of circumstantialinteractionsinvolving a whole 'plane' of
rrizrclirrccslty intuitilg thcrrr;thirtis, lly grrrspit'lg
thcm withoutrcf'crcncc cvcntslncl orgiurisingprinciplcsrtnging from thc biologyof sightto the
108 F o u c AU L r, M T c H EL (r gz6-8a) FoucAULr, MrcHnr- (r gz6-84) 109

circumstancesof the pencil's being positionedhere, and the physicsof love and passion.Love is a relationshipbetween individuals, whereas
carbonstructures.As such,the theory of forceschallengesthe traditional passionis a statein which the individualsdissolveinto an impersonalfield
philosophical dualism between essenceand appearance,and also draws of intensities.For thesereasons,Deleuzeregardshis own book on Foucault
attention to the contingent and infinitely complex nature of lived reality. as an act of 'doubling', a way of bringing out and working with minor
differencesbetweenhimselfand Foucault.Both Deleuzeand Foucaulthad
a similar conceptionof the art of 'surfaces',of making visiblerather than
Connectives interpreting,and this is what Deleuzeseeksto do with Foucault'swork.
Active/Reactive As with his other readingsof other writers,Deleuzeextractsa dynamic
Body logic- asopposedto a rational system- from Foucault's work. One of his
Event main aims in Foucaultis to clear up someof the misunderstandings sur-
Nietzsche rounding the transitionsin Foucault'swork. For example,Deleuzerejects
the notion that Foucault'slate work constitutessomesort of return to the
subject.Insteadhe seesthis later work asaddingthe dimensionof subject-
ification to the analysesof power and knowledgethat Foucault had previ-
FOUCAULT, MICHEL (1926-84\ ouslycarriedout. The subjectthat Foucaulttalksaboutin his final work is
not a retreator a shelter,but ratherone that is producedby a folding of the
John Marks outside.Deleuzealsorejectsthe simplisticnotion that Foucault'sformu-
Michel Foucaultand Deleuzeenjoyedan intensephilosophicalfriendship, lation of the 'deathof man' might precludepolitical action.The figure of
and much of Deleuze'swriting on Foucaultmight be locatedwithin the 'man'is simply one historicallydistinct form of the human.Human forces
tradition of the 'laudatory essay'that characteriseda certain strand of confront various other forcesat different times in history, and it is in this
intellectualactivityin post-warFrance.Suchan essayis not a work of criti- way that a compositehuman form is constructed.
cism, but rather a gestureof affectiveintensity.Talking abouthis writing In a doublesense,Deleuzeperceivesthat which is 'vital' in Foucault's
on Foucault,Deleuzeemphasises that it is not necessaryto demonstrate work. That is to say,he concentrateson what Foucault thought out of
a greatfidelity to the work of a thinker, nor is it necessaryto look for con- absolutenecessity, aswell asthe waysin which Foucault'swork expresses
tradictions and blind alleysin a thinker's \Mork:to saythat one part works, a commitment to life. Foucault may appearto be preoccupiedwith death,
but another part does not. Approaching a writer's work in the spirit of imprisonmentand torture, but this is becausehe is concernedwith the
'friendship'is the sameasa personalfriendship.It is aboutbeingwilling to waysin which life might be freed from imprisonment.That is not to say
be carriedalongby the entiretyof the work, accompanying the thinker on that Deleuzeand Foucaultdid not feel there were points of real tension
a journey.Sometimes, it is aboutfollowingthe work, asonemight a person, betweentheir approaches. Foucault,for his part, found Deleuze'suse of
to the point that the work becomesa little 'crazy',whereit breaksdown or the term 'desire' problematic,since for him desire would alwaysentail
comesup againstapparentlyinsurmountableproblems.Friendship in this some notion of 'lack' or repression.He preferred the term 'pleasure',
sensedoesnot meanthat one necessarily hasthe sameideasor opinionsas which wasequallyproblematicfor Deleuze,becausepleasureseemsto be
somebodyelse,but ratherthat one sharesa modeof perceptionwith them. a transcendent categorythat interrupts the immanenceof desire.However,
Deleuzeexplainsthat it is a matter of perceivingsomethingabout some- rather than thesedifferencesbeingthe basisfor a critical interpretationof
body and his wayof thinking almostbeforehis thoughtis formulatedat the Foucault'swork, they areactuallyconstitutiveof the 'tranv".rulfdiugorrol
level of signification.It is for this reasonthat Deleuzetalks of remember- line that Deleuze attempts to trace betweenhimself and Foucault. It is in
ing something'metallic', 'strident' and 'dry' in the gesturesof Foucault. this way that he hopesto bring out what Foucaultwasstriving to do in his
DeleuzeperceivesFoucaultasan individuation,a singularity,rather than work, and it is in this spirit that Deleuzeoccasionallyfocuseson one of
a subject.It is almostasif Deleuzerespondsto Foucault'sthinking at the Foucault'sapparentlyminor concepts,suchasthat of the 'infamousman'.
levelof his bodily materialityas much as a set of philosophicalpropos- Deleuze finds this concept particularly resonant and respondsto its
itions.Abovcall, DclcuzcsccsFoucaultasa writcr <lfgrcat'passion',and urgcncgsinccl,irucaultuscsit to attcmptto think throughdifficultprob-
hc is prrrticulrrrly struck lly thc distiltctionthnt I'irucrrultdrawsbctwccn lcmsrclatingto his own undcrstirncling of'powcr.
ll0 FoucAULr f n ' ol n FoUcAULT * r 'oln 111

Connectives term in his writings on theatre - a new relation with 'being' is born.
An insideand an outsideand a past(memory)and a present(subjectivity)
Transversality are two sidesof a singlesurface.A person'srelation with his or her body
becomesboth an archive anda diagram,a collection of subiectivationsand
a mental map charted on the basisof the past and drawn from eventsand
elementsin the ambientworld. Deleuzeassertsthat four folds, 'like the
FOUCAULT + FOLD four rivers of Hell' (D 1988b:104),affectthe subject'srelation to itself.
The first is the fold of the body,what is surroundedor takenwithin cor-
Tom Conley porealfolds;the secondis'the fold ofthe relationbetweenforces',or social
conflict;the third is the 'fold of knowledge,or the fold of truth in so far as
The most terseand telling formulation of the fold is found in 'Foldings, it constitutesa relation of truth to our being' (D 1988b:104),and vice-
or the Inside of Thought (Subfectivation)',the last chapterof Deleuze's versa;the fourth is the fold of 'the outsideitself, the ultimate' (D 1988b:
Foucauhthat examinesFoucault'sthree-volumestudy of the history of 104) fold of the limit of life and death. Each of these folds refers to
sexuality.Michel Foucualt,saysDeleuze,took sexualityto be a mirror of Aristoteliancauses(material,efficient,formal and final) of subjectivityand
subjectivityand subjectivation.Deleuzebroadensthe scopeby subsum- hasa variablerhythm of its own. We behooveourselves,Deleuzereminds
ing sexualityin a matrix of subjectivity.Every human being thinks as us, to inquire of the natureof the four foldsbeforewe reflecton how sub-
a result of an ongoingprocessof living in the world and by gainingcon- jectivityin our time is highly internalised,individualisedand isolated.The
sciousness and agencythrough a constantgive-and-takeof perception, struggle for subjectivity is a battle to win the right to have accessto
affect and cognition. Subjectivity becomesan ongoing negotiarionof difference,variationand metamorphosis.
things perceived,both consciouslyand unconsciously, within and outside The human subjectcan only be understoodunder the condition (the
the body.He builds a diagram, principally from TheHistory of Sexuality: formula, it will be shown, is a crucial one) of the fold and through the
VolumeOne (1976) and The Useof Pleasure(1984),on the foundation of filters of knowledge,power and affect. The fold, a form said to obsess
the earlier writings to sketch a taxonomy and a history of the project. Foucault, is shown as somethingcreasedbetweenthings stated or said,
In TheArchaeologyof Knowledge(1972),Foucault had contendedthat the and things visible or seen.The distinction openedbetweenvisible and
'self', the 'I', is alwaysdefinedby the waysit is doubledby another,not a discursive formations is put forward in order to be drawn away from
singleor commanding'other' or Doppelgringer, but simply any of a number intentionality (as understood in Martin Heidegger and Maurice
of possibleforces.'It is I who live my life as the double of the orher,' and Merleau-Ponty) that would ally subjectivity with phenomenology.
when I find the other in myself the discovery'resemblesexactly the Things spokendo not refer to an original or individual subjectbut to a
invaginationof a tissuein embryology,or the act of doubling in sewing: 'being-language',and things visiblepoint to a 'being-light'that illumin-
twist, fold, stop,and so on' (D 1988b:105).For Foucault,history wasthe ates'forms, proportions, perspectives'that would be free of any inten-
'doublingof an emergence'(D 1988b:98).By that he meanrthar what was tional gaze. Anticipating his work on Leibniz, Deleuze notes that
pastor in an archivewasalsopassed- asmight a speedingcar overtaken Foucault causesintentionality to be collapsedin the gap between 'the
or doubled by another on a highway - but alsomirrored or folded into a two monads' (D 1988b:109)of seeingand speaking.Thus, phenomen-
diagram.History wasshownto be what sumsup the pastbut that can be ology is convertedinto epistemology.To seeand to speakis to know,'but
marshalledfor the shapingof configurationsthat will determine how we don't seewhat we are speakingof and we don't speakof what we are
people live and act in the present and future. Whether forgotten or seeing'. Nothing can precede or antedate knowledge (saaoir), even
remembered,history is one of the formativedoublesor othersvital to the though knowledgeor knowing is 'irremediablydouble'- hencefolded -
processof subjectivation. as speakingand seeing,as languageand,light,which are independentof
Therein beginsDeleuze'srhapsodyof foldsandfoldings.When a doub- intending subjectswho would be speakersand seers.
ling producesan inner and an outer surface- a doublurein French, At this juncturethe fold becomesthe very fabricof ontology,the ateaof
meaningat once a lining stitchedinto a pieceof clothing,a stand-inin a philosophywith which Deleuze claims staunchaffiliation.The folds of
cincmaticprocluction, and cvena douhleasAntonin Artaud had uscdthc being (as a gcruncl)and of bcing (as a noun) are found in Foucault's
n2 F o U c AU L T * nolo FR EED OM ll3

Heideggerand that of an outside is twisted, folded and doubled by an Thinking makes seeingand speakingreach their own limits. In what
inside in the philosopher'sreading of Merleau-Ponty.Surely, Deleuze concerns power, thinking is equivalent to 'emitting singularities', to a
observes,Foucault finds theoreticalinspiration in the themesof the fold, gambler'sact of tossinga pair of dice onto a table,or to a personengaging
the doublethat hauntsthe archaeologist of knowledge.As a doublingor a relationsof forceor evenconflict in order to preparenew mutationsand sin-
lining the fold separates speechfrom sightandkeepseachregisterin a state gularities.In terms of subjectivationthinking means'to fold to doublethe
of isolationfrom the other. The gap finds an analoguein the hermetic Outsidewith a coextensive inside'(D 1988b:118).Createdis a topologyby
differenceof the soundand imagetrack of cinema.From such a division which inner and outerspacesarein contactwith eachother.
knowledgeis dividedinto piecesor 'tracks'and thus canneverbe recuper- History is takento be an archioeor seriesof stratafrom which thinking,
atedin anyintentionalform (D 1988b:111).The dividednatureof com- a diagramrepletewith strategies,drawsits force and virtue. To makethe
munication has as its common metaphor the creaseor fold between point clearDeleuzealludesindirectly to'A New Cartographer'(D 1988b:
visibility and orality. It is no wonder that in his studiesof differenceand 2347), an earlier chapter that anticipatesmuch of the spatialdynamicsof
resemblanceFoucault begins at the end of the sixteenth century, at the The Fold,.When we 'think' we cross all kinds of thresholds and strata.
moment when writing evacuatesits force of visual analogyfrom its printed Followinga fissurein order to reach,asthe poet Herman Melville callsit,
form. At that point, when print-culture becomesstandardisedand a 'centralroom' where we fear no one will be and where 'man's soul will
schematicreasoningreplacesmemory in manualsof rhetoric, or when reveal nothing but an immense and terrifying void' (D 1988b: l2l).
wordsareno longeranalogous to the thingsthey seemto embodyor resem- Ultimately,followinga line of 1,000aberrationsand moving at molecular
ble, signsbegin to stand,in for their referentsand to be autonomousdoubles speedleadslife into the folds and a centralroom wherethere is no longer
with respectto what they represent. any needto fearemptinessbecausethe self (a fold) is found inside.These
To demonstratehow the fold is a figure of subjectivationDeleuzecalls ideasarch back to how Deleuze once describedthe history of forms or an
history into the philosophicalarena.He asksin bold and simplelanguage: archiveas 'doubled' (passedor folded over) by a becomingof forceswhere
'What canI do?WhatdoI know?Vl/hatam1? (D 1988b:I l5). The eventsof any number of diagrams- or folded surfacesof thought - plied overeach
May 1968rehearsedthesequestionsby inquiring of the limits of visibility, other. He calls it the torsion of the 'line of the Outside' that Melville
of language,and of power.They brought forward thoughtsabouturopia, described,an oceanicline without beginningor end, an oceanicline that
and henceaboutmodesof beingthat would enableresistance in repressive turns and bumpsaboutdiagrams.The form of the line was 1968,the line
politicalconditionsand fosterthe birth of ideasvital for new subjectivities.
'with a thousandaberrations'(D1988b:44).
In a historicalconfiguration'being' is chartedalongan axis of knowing.
'Being' is determinedby what is deemedvisibleand utterable;by the exer-
cise of power,itself determined by relation of force and singularitiesat a
given moment in time; and by subjectivity,shown to be a processor the FREEDOM
placeswherethe fold of the self passesthrough.A grid or a new diagram
makesclearthe oppositionby settingforward variationsof power,know- Paul Patton
ledgeandsubjectivity(in Frenchassauoir,pouaoir,soi).The lastis conceived 'Freedom'is not a term that appearsoften in Deleuze'swritings,yet there
asa fold. Foucault,Deleuzeadvances, doesnot divide a history of institu- is a distinctiveconceptof freedomimplicit throughouthis ethico-political
tionsorof subjectivationsbutof theirconditionsandof theirprlcesseswithin texts written with Guattari. Thesedescribeindividual and collectivesub-
creases and foldingsthat operatein both ontologicaland socialfields. jectsin terms of differentkinds of assemblage, line or modesof occupying
There is openeda dramaticreflectionon rhe characrerof thinking which space.For example,they suggestthat we are composedof three kinds of
belongs as much to Deleuze as to Foucault. Historical formations are line: firstly, molar lines which correspondto the forms of rigid segmenta-
doubledand thus defineassuchthe epistemictraits of knowledge,powerand tion found in bureaucraticand hierarchicalinstitutions; secondly,mole-
subjectivity:in termsof knowledge,ro think is to seeand to speak;in other cular lines which correspondto the fluid or overlappingforms of division
words,thinking takesplacein the inrersticesof visibility and discoursc. characteristicof 'primitive' territoriality; and finally,lines of flight which
Whcn wc think wc causclightningboltsto flashanclflickcr'in the midstof arcthc pathsalongwhichthingschangcor bccomctransformcdinto somc-
words,or unlcisht.cry in thc nridstof'visiblcthings'(l) lgtlttb:ll(r). thing clsc.'l'hc primrrcyof' lincs of'flight in this ontol(,gysystcnrilticillly

privileges processesof creative transformation and metamorphosis senseis indifferentto the desires,preferencesand goalsof the subjectin
through which assemblages may be transformed. Freedom is manifest in that it may threatenasmuch asadvanceany of these.It is not clearby what
the critical points at which somestateor condition of things passesover standardssuch freedom could be evaluatedas good or bad. There is no
into a different stateor condition. In contrastto the traditional conceptsof telling in advancewhere such processesof mutation and change might
negative and positive freedom, freedom for Deleuze concerns those lead.Similar commentsmay alsobe madeaboutdeterritorialisation,Iines
momentsin a life after which one is no longer the samepersonasbefore. of flight or smoothspace.In the absenceof productiveconnectionswith
This is an impersonaland non-voluntaristicconceptof freedom which other forces,lines of flight may turn destructiveor simply lead to new
refers to the capacityfor changeor transformationwithin or between forms of capture.In the conclusionof the discussionof smoothasopposed
assemblages. In the texts written with Guattari, this concept of freedom to striated spaceat the end of A ThousandPlateaus,Deleuze and Guattari
appearsonly in the guiseof other conceptssuchas 'line of flight', 'deter- reaffirm the normative ambiguity of freedom: 'smooth spacesare not in
ritorialisation'or'smooth space'. themselvesliberatory.But the struggleis changedor displacedin them,
ln A Thousand, Plateaus,the authorsuseE ScottFitzgerald's novella,The and life reconstitutesits stakes,confrontsnewobstacles, inventsnewpaces'
Cracb-Up,to showhow this kind of transformationin a personmight be switchesadversaries. Never believe that a smooth spacewill sufficeto save
definedin terms of the differentkinds of 'line' which characterise an indi- us'(D&G 1987:500).The presuppositionhereis that, prima facie,smooth
vidual life (D&G 1987:198-200).Fitzgerald distinguishesthree different spaceis the spaceof freedom. It is the spacein which movements or
kinds oftransition from one stateor stagein life to another:firstly, the large processesof liberation are possible,evenif thesedo not alwayssucceedor
breakssuch as those betweenyouth and adulthood, betweenpoverty and evenif they are condemnedto the reappearanceof new forms of capture.
wealth, betweenillness and good health, betweensuccessor failure in a
chosen profession; secondly,the almost imperceptible cracks or subtle
shiftsof feelingor attitudewhich involvemolecularchangesin the affective
constitutionofa person;and finally the abrupt and irreversibletransitions Deterritorialisation
through which the individual becomesa different personand eventually, Lines of flight
Fitzgeraldwrites, 'the new personfinds new things to care about.' The Molar
subjectof the novellaundergoesa particularly severebreakdowninvolving Molecular
lossof faith in his former valuesand the dissipationof all his convictions. Space
He seeksto effectwhat he calls'a cleanbreak'with his pastself (F 1956:
69-84).Sucha breakamountsto a redistributionof desiresuchthat 'when
somethingoccurs,the Self that awaitedit is alreadydead,or the one that FREUD, SIGMUND - refer to the entry on 'psycho-
would awaitit hasnot yet arrived'(D&G 1987:198-9). analysis'.
This kind of suddenshift towardsanotherquality of life or towardsa life
which is livedat anotherdegreeof intensityis onepossibleoutcomeof what
Deleuzeand Guattaricall 'a line of flight', and it is on this kind of line that
freedomis manifest.The type of freedomthat is manifestin a breakof this
kind cannotbe capturedin liberalor humanistconceptsof negativeor posi-
tive freedom,sincethesedefinefreedomin terms,ofa subject'scapacityto
act without hindrancein the pursuit of its endsor in terms of its capacity
to satisfy its most significant desires.Fitzgerald's characterno longer has GENEALOGY
the sameinterestsnor the samedesiresand preferences. In the relevant
senseof the term, he is no longer the samesubject:his goalsare not the Bruce Baugh
same,nor arethe valueswhich wouldunderpinhis strongevaluations.
Whcrclsthc normativcstiltusof libcralfrccdomis unambiguously posi- 'Genealogy'refersto tracing linesof descentor ancestry.Deleuze'suseof
tivc.'ficcdonr'in this | )clcuzirrnscnscis morcitnrbivirlcnt. Frccdonrirr this thc tcrm dcrivcsfrom Fricdrich Nictzschc's On the Genculog.yol'Morals,
ll6 G ENEALO G Y prERRn-r'f,t-rx ( r g 3o-92) tL7

which traces the descentof our moral concepts and key phenomenain the forcesthey express(symptomology),interpreting forces
precept of the genealogicalmethod is that effecrsneed not resembletheir
as active or reactiye (typology), and evaluating the origin of forces in a
causes,asthe forcesthat producea phenomenonmay disguisethemselves quality of will that is either affirmativeor negative.For example,reason,
(for example,a religion of love canariseout of resentment);anotheris that
rather than beingmerelya givenfaculty of the mind, expresses a nihilistic
and negative will which negates the sensesand the sensory world to
producea'True world'beyondappearances (D 1983:91,125,1+5).
Deleuzecontinuesusinghis genealogicalmethodin laterworks.ln Anti-
Oedipus,he traces memory and morality to the debtor-creditor relation
'slaves',for whom 'good' is merely the negationof 'evil'). In Deleuze's and the primitive practice of inflicting physical pain for unpaid debts.
hands,Nietzscheangenealogyis allied with the philosophiesof imma- Originally justiceis the assertionof an equivalencebetweenthe creditor's
nence (Henri Bergsonand Baruch spinoza), such that the 'past' from pleasurein paininflictedon the debtorand the injury causedby the unpaid
which a phenomenonis descendedis a set of forces immanent in the debt; memoryis the product of marksinscribedon the body for a debt not
phenomenon that expressesthose forces, and thus coexistent with the paid, living reminders that produce the capacity to remember the future
momentat which the promisemust be kept. The sovereignindividualwho
can makeand keeppromisesand defineshimself by powerover himself is
thus the product of punishment: how culture trains and selectsits
members(D 1983:l34J; D&G 1983:144-5,190-2). Deleuzealsouses
genealogyto show that the reactiveforcesand negativewill expressedby
the priest type are also expressedin the figure of the psychoanalyst;both
activeor reactive,is nothingbut the differencein quantitybetweena super- createguilt out of an infinite and unpayabledebt, whetherthat be to a God
ior and an inferior force(D 1983:43), an inferior forcecan defeata super- who sacrificeshimself for us, or to the analyst as cure for the condition
ior one by 'decomposing'it and making it reactive,so that the genealogist the analystproduces(D&G 1983:108-12,269, 332-3; D&G 1987:154).
must evaluatewhether the forcesthat prevailedwere inferior or superior, Even at the basicontologicallevel, aswhen he finds 'the being of the sens-
activeor reactive(D 1983:59-60).Poweror the will is eitheraffirmativeor ible' in 'differencein intensity as the reasonbehind qualitativediversity'
negative,and designatesthe differentialrelation of forceswhich either (D 1994: 57), Deleuze remains a genealogist,interpreting phenomena
dominate(active)or aredominated(reactive)accordingto whether the will through the hidden relations of forcesimmanent in them.
affirms its difference from that difference it dominates and enjoys, or
whether it negateswhat differs from it and suffers from that difference
(often in the form of resentmen$.The affirmativewill, in affirming itsel{, Connectives
wills that it be obeyed;only a subordinate will can obey by converting Active/Reactive
'actions' into reactionsto an external forcg and this becoming-reactiveis Immanence
the expressionof a negativewill. Nietzsche
Genealogythus interprets and evaluatesthe hierarchicaldifference
betweenactiveand reactiveforcesby referring theseto the hierarchical
'geneticelbment' of a 'will to Power' that is either affirmativeor negative.
will to Powerdifferentiatesforcesasactiveand reactive,asthrough it one GUATTARI, PIERRE-FELIX ( 1930-92)
forcedominatesor commandsanorherthat obeysor is dominated(D l9g3:
49-51). However,will to Poweris not externalto the forcesit qualifiesor Garjt Genosko
conditions,but is an immancnt principle of forcesand the relationsof Pierre-F6lixGuattari was fifteen when he met psychoanalyst
forces,their 'internal gcncsis'by conditionsimmanentto the condi- founderof Cliniquede la Borde,throughJean'sbrotherFernand,developer
tioncd(D 1983:9l). Gcncakrgythusconncctsconscqucnccs to premisses, of institutionalpcdagogyin France.By the time he reachedtwentyyears
;rroducts fo thc principlc of' thcir llroduction,by scckingthc scnscof GurrttrriwastnkcnundcrJcrn'swing.JcanconvinccdGuttttri to abtndon
l 18 cuArrARr, pTERRE-FfLrx ( r g3o_ gz) cuArrARI, pTERRE-r'6ltx (r93o-92) l19

his study of commercialpharmacyand, in the early 1950s,he visited Micropolitical schizoanalysiswill map, in a way specific to each
at clinique saumery,a precursorof La Borde.saumerywasGuattari'sini- passage,delinguistifiedand mixed semiotic lines flush with matters of
tiation into the psychiatricmilieu. while a teenagerGuattari had met expression, rhizomes released from arborescent structures, molecular
Fernandoury through the youth hostellingmovement(Fidiration (Jniedes schizzeson the run from molar bureaucracies,faciality traits loosened
Auberges d.eJeunesse).
Fernandoury wasinstrumentalin gettingGuattari from dominant overcodings,and new machinic connectionsand breaks,
involvedin the summercaravanshe organisedin the paris suburb of La regardlessof their level of formation, elaboratingtheir becomingsand
Garenne-colombes for working-class suburban youth like Guattari new terms of referenceacrossthe socialfield. This emphasison molecu-
himself,who grew up in the samedepartmenrin nearbyVilleneuve. larity entailsa sociopoliticalanalysisthat privilegescreative,oppositional
Guattari assistedin the foundationalwork at La Borde where he flight and eschewsso-calledprofessionalneutrality.Guattari introduced
helpedwrite its constitutiond,elAn 1 the yearit openedin 1953.Guatari,s the machineasa productiveconnectivityirreducibleboth to technologies
next task was to organiseintra-hospitalrherapeutic clubs for patients. and to foundationalsubstances; machinesform assemblages of compon-
Guattari'sinvolvementincreasedafter 1955. ent parts.
Guattari's career was also shapedby the friendly tutelage of another The two editionsof La riaolutionmoliculaire(1977and 1980)contained
master,whom he had met when he wasjust twenty-three,JacquesLacan. advancedsemiotic methods, modified from Hjelmslevian and Peircean
It wasnot until 1962that Guattari graduatedto a didactictraining ar\aly- roots,adequateto the 'semioticpolycentrism'necessary for engagingin a
siswith Lacan,joiningthe Ecolefreudiennede parisasan analyst genuinetransversalanalysisof the expandedfields of the unconscious,
in 1969.Guartari'sformativeintellectualmilieu wasLacanian. -"-u!, with a less woodenlydichotomoussenseof super ego on one side and
By the mid-1960s Guattari had developeda formidable battery of sociuson the other. Guattari's writings on developmentsin Italy in the
conceptsorganisedaround the problem of deliveringtherapyin institu- 1970sunderlined their potential for new molecular forms of collective
tional settings.Psychanalyse et tra,nsaersalitiexposedthe limits of the psy- action,what he called'generalizedrevolution'.
choanalyticunconsciousby arguingthat it wasnot a concernof specialists Cartographies schizoanolytiques and Chaosmose elaboratednonrepresen-
treating individualsbut rather perfusedthe socialfield and history.For tationalmapsof the self-engendering processesof subjectification,prag-
Guattarithe subjectwasa group or collectiveassemblage of heterogeneous matically attending to the specific ways in which singularitiescome
componentswhose formation, delinked from monadic individuals and together,through four ontological functions of the unconscious,their
abstract, universal determinationslike the oedipus myth, structural interfaces,and the characterof their components:material fluxes and
matheme and part object, could be seenthrough critical analysesof the machinicphylums; existentialterritoriesand incorporealuniverses.The
actual vicissitudesof collectivelife in which patientsfound themselves. former are actual and discursiveon the plane of expression;the latter
A Sartrean-inflectedtheory of groups emerged distinguishing non- virtual and non-discursiveon the planeof content.Emergentassemblages
absolutelybetweensubject-groups(activelyexploring self-definedpro- of enunciationare ontologicallycomplex becausein a given situation a
jects) and subjugated groups (passively receiving directions), each schizoanalyst triesto bridgethe virtual and actualby discerningthe former
affectingthe relationsof their membersto socialprocesses and shapingthe and attending to how they actually work themselvesout relationally
potentialfor subjectformation. betwixt manifestationandpossibility,processually andexpressively assub-
The foundation of what Guattari called schizoanalysiswas laid jcctivity everemerges.
in L'inconscient machinique. schizoanalysisrequiresa practical,detailed Guattari is internationallyrecognisedfor his collaborationswith Gilles
semioticsaswell asa politicallyprogressive and provisionaltransformation l)cleuze on Anti-Oedipus,Kafha, A Thousand' Plateau.s,and What is
of situationalpowerrelations.The analyst'smicropoliticaltaskis to discern l'hilosoph.y?,yet his key theoreticalstatementsremainvirtually unknown.
in a particularassemblage the mutationalpotentialof a given component
and explorethe effectsof its passages in and betweenassemblages, produc-
ing and extracting singularitiesby undoing impasses,arienatingand
dcadcningrcdundancies: 'Ratherthan indcfinitclytracingthe samccom- l,itcitn
plcxcs<lrthc samcunivcrsirl "milthcmcs",a schizoirnllytic cirrt<lgraphy will l)sychornirlysis
cxpkrrclnd cxpcrinrcnt wirhan unc.nsci'usin luuality'(G l97t):190). 'l i'ansvcrsrlity
120 HAECCEI TY HUM E, DAVI o ( r 7r t - 76) t21

did the focusof Anglo-AmericanHume studiesmoveawayfrom such stri-

dent epistemological assertionstowardshis analysisof the passions,prin-
ciplesof association, and suchfeaturesof the mind asinstinct,propensity,
belief, imagination, feeling and sympathy.Deleuze had adopted this
emphasisin 1952and 1953,focusingmainly upon the naturalismevident
HAECCEITY - refer to the entries on 'experience',,individuation', in Hume's principlesof human nature.
'percept+ literature','phenomenology
* Husserl'and,post-structuralism Deleuze'sshift in emphasisextendedfurther. Whereasit is commonly
* politics'. held that Hume, finding himself unableto counter his scepticalepistemo-
logical conclusions,turned to history,sociology,religion and economics
out of frustration,DeleuzeconsidersHume's entire corpus to comprise
variousstagesin the developmentof a 'scienceof human nature'.Just as
HARDY, THOMAS (1840-1928)- refer to the entries on ,art, and
human life involvesethical,epistemological and aestheticdimensions,so
'percept * literature'.
too it involveseconomic,religiousand historicalones.For Deleuze,one
cannotproperly understandHume's philosophywithout referring to his
work in other disciplines.
- referto In his publishedworks and interviews,Deleuzereturns time and again
the entries on tarborescent schema', tBergson', tcapitalism * universal to Hume's empiricism.His most detailedand sustainedaccountof it is
history', tcapture', 'cinema * Werner Herzog', tdifference', ,immanencet, Empiricismand,Subjectitsity,hisfirst full book. Deleuze focuseson three
'phenomenology'and'Spinoza'. aspectsof Hume's philosophyin particular.The first is Hume's commit-
ment to a philosophy founded upon direct experience,a position that
reappearsas a key tenet of Deleuze's'transcendentalempiricism'. On
Deleuze'sreading, Hume begins his philosophicalinvestigationswith
HEIDEGGER, MARTIN (1889-1976)- refer ro the entries on
straightforwardobservationsabout the world: humansseeobiects,posit
'Foucault+ foldt, tnonbeingt,tontology',tphenomenology,,.socius,,.sub- the existenceof gods,make ethical judgements,plan work to meet eco-
stance'and 'thought'. in somesense.Deleuze
nomicimperatives,and remainawareof themselves
arguesthat, becauseHume is unable initially to find in thought any element
of or universality'to which he might refer a psychologyper se'
he developsinsteada 'psychologyof the mind's affections',a theoryabout
HUME, DAVID (l7tt-76\ socialandpas-
the regular'movement'of the mind accordingto observable
sional circumstances.Rather than building some philosophical edifice,
however,Hume readsthe conceptsneededto explainsuchdynamicsfrom
David Hume was a Scottish philosopher,historian,economistand reli- out of the reality of experience,treating them as contingentexplanatory
gious theorist,and perhapsthe best known of the philosopherscom- toolsthat canalwaysbe replacedor supplemented.
monly designated'empiricisrs'.Although Hume's grouping with such The secondof Deleuze'semphasesis upon Hume's 'atomism'.Hume
thinkers as John Locke'and George Berkeleyis questionable,mid- to conceivesof the mind asa set of singularideas,eachwith a distinct origin
late-twentieth-centuryhistoriesof philosophyplacedthem togetherrou- or setof originsin experience. Ratherthan arguingthat the mind precedes
tinely.In a chapteron Hume, typically one either encountersa naturalist ideasso that experienceis given ro the mind, Hume holds that the mind
extendingand radicalisingthe work of Locke and/or Berkeley(or Ren6 just ls theseradicallydisparateideas.On this reading,nothing transcends
Descartesand NicolasMalebranche),or a scepticwhosecontributionsto the ideasof the mind, and sothe connectionsbetweenthem arein no sense
philosophyare largelyor wholly critical. Perhapshis best-knownphilo- 'pre-programmed'.
sophicaltheoryis that ideasnot clearlyoriginatingfrom senseimpressions Deleuze'sthird emphasisis upon Hume's'associationism'. Sinceideas
ought to bc'committcdto flames'.only in thc latc 1960sand early 1970s lrc not inherently structured, there are any number of waysthat they can

be brought together to generatenew patterns of understanding,new the term 'hysteria',derivedfrom nineteenth-centurypsychiatricthought,

behavioursand so on. For Deleuze,Hume discountsthe possibility of and appliesit to the art of the Irish painterFrancisBacon.For Deleuzeand
any universalprinciple or capacityto govern such connections.Ratheq Guattari, hysteriadescribes- in this generalphilosophicalsense- the
such creativepotentialis realisedunder the influenceof the life of prac- attempt to escapefrom one's own body which is experiencedas a trap.
tice (that is, pressuresarisingfrom economicand legalstructures,family, However,it is not that the hystericis trying to liberatehis soul from the
languagepatterns, physical requirementsand so on). The tendencies body - that would be a very traditional philosophicalnotion - but rather
evident in human responsesto such influencesmight be called 'general that the organisationof the body itself is oppressive.Hysteria is a namefor
rules', but rather than trulestin the usualsense,theseare contingentand the friction betweenthe body itself and the organisationsthat it undergoes
impermanent. sociallyand politically.
The epiphenomenonarising from such complex, contingent and So, in this context,the body is two things at once.On the one hand, it
changingrelationshipsand tendenciesis the human subject,that we call is the set of politically acceptable, socialand habitualactswhich makeup
'I'. This Humean subject is understood by Deleuze as a fiction, a person.On the other, the body is malleableand transient,without any
sufficiently stable to have identity posited of it and ro exist in a social fixed organisation.It is in a certain sensethe reality of living life other-
realm, but 'containing' elementsof dynamism with the capacityto tran- wise, of being-otherwise.Drawing on the writings of Antonin Artaud,
scend hierarchicalthinking of a human being in favour of rhizomatic Deleuzeand Guattariin A Thousand, Plateauscall this malleablebody the
thinking of non-humanbecoming.Whilst porrionsof the model become 'Body without Organs' (BwO). In contrast is the social and politically
targetsfor Deleuze'ssubsequentattackson the ontology of identity and organ-isedbody.
being,othersprovide him with meansof escapeto a radicalmetaphysics Baconcan be seenasa painter of hystericsbecausehis figuresexpress
of becoming. both the senseof strain that bodies are under (the pressureand struc-
Although Deleuzeis usually faithful ro Hume's writings, his readings ture of organisation),and the attempt of these bodies to escapetheir
are idiosyncraticand go well beyond the original texts. His focus upon organisation.For example,Deleuzethinks that Bacon'sfamouspainting
generalrules, artifice, habit and stabilisingfictions carry an inordinate Stud,yAfter Wldzquez'sPortrait of PopeInnocentX (1953) - otherwise
weight in Deleuze's early theorisation of the human individual. referredto asthe ScreamingPope- showsa body trying to leavethrough
Nonetheless,whilst his interpretationof Hume is unusual,it is far less the mouth of the figure. Likewise, the link betweenbodies and meat or
radicalthan his versionsof Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz and Friedrich fleshshowshow life doesnot take placebeyondthe body,in the mind or
Nietzsche. soul, but in the body itself. Rather than seeing Bacon as a painter of
horror and existential meaninglessness,Deleuze proposes that we see
him asa painterof life, depicting the struggleof bodily or fleshlylife with
the shapesthat it is forced to assume.This is the hystericalaspectof
empiricism Bacontsart.
Finally,Deieuzearguesthat the term 'hysteria'can be usedto describe
paintingitself.While all art, he insists,mustbe understoodin termsof how
it expressesthe imperceptibleforce of life, painting hasa certain privileged
relation to the body.Pictorial art, Deleuzeclaims,addresses itself to the
cye.However,rather than placingthe eye on the side of the disembodied
Jonathan Roffe mind of the spectator,the encounterwith the forceof painting- which in
A frequent method to be found in Deleuze'sphilosophyis the use of thc caseof Baconis particularlymanifestin his useof colour- returns the
non-philosophicalterms and perspectivesin a philosophicalmanner. cyc to the fleshlybody.In other words,the forceof painting dissolvesthe
Particularly good examplesof this are availablein Anti-Oediltusand rnind/body hierarchy of the organisedbody, offering the spectatoran
A ThousandPlateaus,where Deleuzeand Guattari generaliscand altcr opportunity to frcc up the BwQ and therebyto becomeconcretelyfreerin
cortrrinpsychoanalytic conccpts(particularlyschizophrcnia and parrrnoia) :r gcncrirlscnsc.'l'his proviclcsthc link bctwcenptlliticsand irrt that occa-
in ordcr to r.rsc
tlrcnrin srrcialirrrrlysis.
lt is in thisscnscthlt l)clcuzctrkcs siorrally cnrcrgcs in l)clcuzc'swork.

Connectives In termsof identity,Deleuze'sphilosophycanbe seenasa critical attempt

Bacon to cure us of the self-destructivedependence on identity.
Body without Organs But what is identity accordingto Deleuzel ln Dffirence and.Repetition
Schizoanalysis he gives an account of it in terms of concepts (though in lMhat is
Philosophy? he and Guattari usethe term in a different sense).Identity is
opposedto multiplicity, in that multiplicity is both uncountableand not
open to a reductive logical or mathematicalanalysis.Thus, if any concept
is definedasa seriesofidentifiable predicatesor properties,then to saythat
all things must be representedthrough conceptsis to further a falseimage
of reality.An identifiablepredicatewould itself be simple,limited and well-
determined, something that could be checkedempirically or through
IDENTITY reasonwith certainty.
Accordingto Deleuzenothing canbe checkedin this way.Conceptsand
representations do not correspondto anythingin reality.This is because
James Williams
all things are connectedto multiplicities, that is, to uncountableand
In Deleuze'swork, identity is perhapsthe most heavilycriticisedconcept unidentifiableprocesses of becoming,rather than existingasfixed beings
from the philosophicaltradition. That criticism takesmany forms and with identifiableand limited predicatesor essences.
dependson many different argumentsand aestheticexpressions.However, But this showsthe extremedifficulty of Deleuze'sposition,not only in
these can be simplified through the claim that Deleuze's opposition to terms of communicability,but alsoin terms of how it can be understood.
identity is directed at the falsifying power of identity in representation. Do we not needto be ableto representsomethingin order to be ableto talk
Identity works against and covers deeper pure differences.It does so aboutit in an open and effectivemanner?Do we not needto be ableto iden-
because of the dominanceof the demandto representin the historyof phil- tify somethingin order to be ableto understandit truthfully?
osophy.Objects,subjects,faculties,feelings,ideasand thoughtsmust be His answeris that communicationis expressive aswell asidentifying.So
representedfor them to becomea legitimatepart of philosophicaldebate. though we representwhat we think and talk about,a seriesof unidentifi-
For this representationto takeplacethey must be identified. ableprocesses arealwaysat work behindthat representation. There canbe
There is a strong descriptionof this historicaldominancein Dffirence no identity without pure differencesstandingin the backgroundasa con-
and,Repetition,where Deleuzecharacterises it accordingto a seriesof 'pos- dition for the illusory appearanceof a pure, well-determinedidentity.
tulates' presupposedby a certain 'image of thought'. When thought is
associatedby right with truth and with the good, certain unexamined
premissesare at work. Most notably,that truths and goodscan be repre- Connectives
sentedin thought and most properly by thought. Difference
So what concernsDeleuze is not only the claim that truths and goods Multiplicity
must be represented, but alsothe belief that thought is dependenton rep- Representation
resentationand on identity for its path to the good and the true. His cri- Thoueht
tiquesof other philosophers.often dependon showinghow this imageof
thought is operatingunconsciouslyand damaginglyin their works. The
damageis causedbecausereality is a processof becoming,which involves
pure differencesthat cannotbe represented. IMMANENCE
By turning us awayfrom reality,the commitmentto identity in repre-
sentationfurthers an illusion that leadsus to repressprocesses of becom- James Williams
ing at work in our own existence. The effects<lfthcseprocesses becomeall 'Ihe distinction drawn between immanenceand transcendenceis all-
thc morc clillicult to work with, oncc that rcprcssionhas takcn placc. importantto I)clcuzc'sphikrsophy. his oppositionto mony
It charactcriscs

metaphysical positions- criticisedasphilosophiesof transcendence. It also In his Nietzscheand,Philosophy,Deleuze turns on one of the main
aligns his philosophy with philosophiesof immanence,most notably targetsof his philosophyof immanencethrough a critique of Hegelian
Baruch Spinoza. dialectics,where a principle of negationitself becomesthat which tran-
Immanenceand transcendence are terms about the relationsthat hold scends.In contrast, Nietzsche's idea of affirmation emergesout of
at the heart of different metaphysics.Are the privileged relationsin a processesof negationbut frees itself from them. A creativerelation of
philosophyof the form of a relation 'to' something,or of a relation 'in' affirmationdoesnot dependon negatingthings,though it may emergeout
somethinglIf it is 'to' then it is philosophyof transcendence. If it is 'in' of pastnegations.
then it is immanence.Deleuzeis radical about immanence,that is, his In Dffirence and Repetitioz,the philosophyof immanenceis set out in
philosophyis to be thought strictly in terms of relations'in'. ontologicalterms through a succession of argumentsfrom Duns Scotus,
In thehistoryof philosophy, relationsof transcendence canbe tracedback through Spinoza, to Nietzsche.In these arguments,the difficulties in
to theologicalroots, where a lower realm is related to a higher one: developinga philosophyof pure immanencebecomeapparent,as Scotus
('Everythingdownhereis relatedto andacquiresvaluesthroughits relation then Spinozaare shownstill to dependon someforms of transcendence.
to God.'). For example,in Ren6Descartes, relationsof transcendence hold Only Nietzsche'sdoctrineof the eternalreturn of pure differencesallows
from bodyto mind andfrom createdsubstance to God. Mind is independent for a full immanentontology,becauseall things, whether identifiableor
of body and yet body is secondaryto mind and in its grasp.God is independ- not, are positedas completeonly through their relation to an immanent
ent of his creation,yet the creationmust be referred to God, for example, (virtual').
transcendental field of pure differences(Deleuze's
wherehe actsa guarantorfor the validity of clearand distinct perception. It is important to note that theseclaims on immanenceand the distinc-
The objectionto relationsof transcendence is that they involve founding tion betweenactual and virtual are a key place for criticisms of Deleuze,
negations(for example,that mind is completelyseparatefrom body).Such notablyby Alain Badiou. His critical claim restson the idea that the virtual
negationsare the groundsfor negativevaluations,both in the senseof a itself is a transcendentrealm.But this is to missthe necessaryinter-relation
'lower'realm finding its valueor redemptionin a'higher'one, and in the of virtual and actual through a reciprocal determination. Neither is inde-
senseof the lowerrealmdependingon the higherone for its definition. pendentofthe other and cannotthereforebe said to enter into a relation of
For example,if the human realm is seenas transcendedby God, then transcendence.
definitionsof humanessence may be turned towardsthat higherrealmand
awayfrom a purely humanone.The humanbody and mind will be turned
awayfrom itself and devaluedin the light, for instance,of a transcendent
soul.This leadsto an interestingconcernin Deleuzewith notionsof eter- Nietzsche
nity that resistdefinitionsin termsof transcendence. We arenot immortal Spinoza
in the way we can rise to a differentrealm (of God or of PlatonicIdeas), Virtual/Virtuality
but in the way we participatein eternalprocesses.
This explainsDeleuze'sappealsto, anddeepinterpretationof, Friedrich
Nietzsche'sdoctrine of eternal return (in Nietzscheand Philosophyand
Dffirence and,Repetition)amongothers). Eternal return is an immanent
processthat brings differentiatingand identifying processes together.In
eternalreturn, differenceretufns to transformidentities(the same).This
is why Deleuzealwaysinsiststhat only differencereturnsandnot the sarne. In The Logic of Sense,Deleuze characterisesthe distinction made by
Deleuze's philosophy of immanence emphasisesconnectionsover the Stoicsbetweenmixtures of bodiesor statesof affairsand incorpor-
forms of separation.But this connectionmust itself be a connectivity cal entities that 'frolic' on the surface of occurrences(D 1990: 5).
betweenrelationsand not betweendifferentidentities.This is becausean According to Deleuze, this distinction refers to two planes of being,
external principle would be neededto ground those identitics (for onc of which concernsthe tensions,physicalqualities,actionsand pas-
cxample,identitydcpcndedon the humtn mind - thcrebysettingit up irs sionsof bodics;and thc othcr of which concerns'incorporeal'cntiticsor
trrnsccnclcnt). cvcntsthrt do not cxist.lrut rrthcr 'subsistor inlrcrc'in stirtcsof'rrllirirs.

Although incorporealentitiescan neverbe actuallypresent,they are the portrayed.If one wills to be just in the mannerof a Stoic sage,one wills
effectof mixtures of bodiesand canenter into quasi-causal relationswith not the repetitionof pastactsof justice,but a justicethat hasalwaysbeen
other incorporeals. and hasyet to be - the incorporealeffectof justicethat is nevermadefully
The clearestexampleof the incorporealis an eventof sense.A prop- manifestin any concretesituation.When the incorporealeffectsof sense
osition like 'The sun is shining' expressesa sensethat 'inheres' in the arereducedto order-words,we ignore the pure becomingsof senseand ter-
proposition, but is neverreducible to the stateofaffairs ofeither one spe- ritorialise the infinite variability of meaning into stale repetitions of the
cific or even an endless series of specific instances of a shining sun past. When we allow the variablesof corporealbodiesand eventsof sense
(D 1990:cf. l9). Deleuze claims that while sraresof affairs have rhe rem- to be placedinto constantvariation, evenorder-wordsbecomea passageto
porality of the living present, the incorporeal eventsof senseare infini- the limit. The movementof new connectionsamongthesevariablespushes
tives (to shine, to be the sun) that constitute pure becomingswith the languageto its limits and bodiesto a metamorphicbecoming-other(D&G
temporality of aion - a form of time independentof matter that always 1987:108).
eludesthe present.Thus, no matter how manytimesthe stateof affairsof
a shining sun is actualised,the senseof 'The sun is shining' is not
exhausted.It is this 'frontier of sense'betweenwhat words expressand Connective
the attributes of bodies that allows languageto be distinguishedfrom Becoming
physicalbodies.If the actionsand passionsof bodiesmake sense,it is
becausethat senseis not itself either an action or a passion,but is rather
an incorporealeffectof a stateof affairs that entersinto relations of quasi-
causality with other incorporeal eventsof sense.The virtual relations of
the events of senseconstitute the condition of any given speech-act.
Deleuze refers to the work of Lewis carroll asa revealingexampleof how Constantin V Bound,as
these quasi-causalrelations can form a 'nonsense' that subsists in Deleuze'sconceptof individuation' is a geneticaccountof individuals.
The conceptemergesfrom a critique of hylomorphismthat exposesthe
rn A Thousand, Plateaus,Deleuzeand Guattari characterisea socialfield error in thinking of an individual asthe end point of a progressivespecifi-
in terms of a 'machinicassemblage' and a 'collectiveassemblage of enun- cationof the species.Substitutingthe imageof 'the mould' for a process-
ciation'(D&G 1987:88).In additionto bodiesandtheactionsandpassions friendly idea of modulation,this critique alsorepudiatesthe idea that an
affectingthosebodies(the'machinicassemblage', for example,the body of individual is mouldedin a specificway.As he developshis theory of indi-
the accusedor the body of the prison),thereis a set of incorporealtrans- viduation, Deleuzeborrows and transformsanalysesmade by Gottfried
formationscurrent in a given societythat are attributed to the bodiesof Wilhelm von Leibniz and Gilbert Simondon.
that society(for example,the transformationof the accusedinto a convict Deleuze'stheory of individuation addresses - in the processof virtual,
by the judge'ssentence)(D&G 1987:cf. 8l). We can view the incorporeal continuous(intensive)multiplicities becoming(extended)discrete- the
effectsof statesof affairs in terms of either the 'order-words' that desig- apparentlycontradictory co-existenceof the continuum and the discrete.
nate fixed relations between statementsand the incorporeal transform- The processof individuation is called 'differentiation' with respectto the
ations they express,or the deterritorialisingplay of carroll's Alice in continuum, and 'differenciation' with respectto the discrete. Given that
Wond,erland, (1865).ln TheLogic of Sense,Deleuze describesthe actor or Deleuze'sconcept of becoming is basedon the co-imbrication of the
stoic sageassomeoneableto evokean instantwith a taut intensityexpres- virtual real and the actualreal,the conceptionof the virtual is in terms of
siveof an unlimited future and past,and therebyembodythe incorporeal a differentiatedflow of events,singularitiesand intensities.Meanwhile,the
effectsof a stateof affairsratherthan merelyits spatio-temporalactualisa- actualis understoodasthe differenciatedrealm of bodies,their mixtures,
tion (D 1990:147).Suchactorsdo more than merelyportray a character's and statesof affairs.Actualisationdoesnot meanthe deathof the virtual.
hopesor regrets;they attemptto 'represent'a pure instantat thc point at Hence,Deleuze'sontologygenerates a robusttheoryof individuationthat
whichit dividesinto futurcandpast,thuscmbodyingin thcir performirncc sustainsa crcativccvolution dcvelopcd aroundnot iust the non-fixityof
an intintittiontlf'virtual rclationsbcyondthoscirctunliscd in thc situirtion aswcll.
spccicsbut tlrrttof inclividuirls

For the elaborationof his theory,Deleuzeappealsto Leibniz - first, to Leibniz

Leibniz'sconcepts,eachof which correspondsto an individual;second,to Virtual/Virtuality
the Leibnizian method of vice-dictionthat understandsan individual as
the product of the law of a seriesand the internal differencethat distin-
guishesone moment of its becoming from another. Ultimately, though,
Deleuze movesbeyond Leibniz's theory of individuation becauseof the INTENSITY
latter's relianceon a priori harmony the compossibilityof the series,and
the bestpossibleworld. Corustantin V Boundas
Finding fresh inspiration in Simondon's theory of individuation 'Intensity' is a key notion in Deleuze'sphilosophicalproject: it manifests
Deleuzeconsiders'modulation'(insteadof the mould of the old imageof itself asthe intensivevirtual of his ontology;asthe affirmativeand creative
thought) as the processby which metastable(virtual/real) systemsexpli- desireof his ethicsand politics;asthe affectof his aesthetictheory;as the
catethe potentialenergyimplicatedwithin them. Populatedby singular- motivationfor his methodological decisionto opt for transcendental empiri-
ities and eventsthesesystemsbring about new (acual/real) metastable cism;and asthe guarantorof a theoryof difference(different/ciation).
systemsin the processof their explication.Their metastabilityis due to Deleuze's ontology of becoming denouncesthe error we commit
the fact that the virtual does not consist only of elementsand flows when we think exclusivelyin terms of things and their qualities,because
differentiatedfrom one another.Rather the differentiatedvirtual is differ- by privileging extensionand extendedmagnitudeswe bypassthe inten-
enceitself - differencedifferenciatingitself. The modulatingprocessof sive genesisof the extended(transcendentalillusion). In an ontology of
individuationis the transduction(Simondon'sterm) of the virtual contin- forces like Deleuze's. force refers to the relation between forces. Forces
uum of intensitiesto the discreteextendedactual,all the while remember- are experiencedonly through the results they render; and the results of
ing that the actual is never totally devoid of the dynamism of the forcefields are extensive and qualitative. Transcendental empiricism,
pre-individual virtual. Thus, the actual is capableof being reabsorbedby therefore,demandsthat the intensitiesthat constitutean extensivebeing
the virtual. Intensity is what makes the passagefrom the virtual to the be sensed- the famousDeleuzian'sentiend,um'. It needsto be noted that
actual possible.Themodulation is in a stateof permanentvariation- a this sensingcannot be achievedthrough the ordinary exerciseof our
promiseof becomings- disallowingpredictionsof what an individuation sensibility.Intensity can be remembered,imagined, thought and said.
is capableof Intensitiesarenot entities,they are virtual yet real eventswhosemode of
Individuals are not subjects.Deleuze understands'haecceities'as existenceis to actualisethemselvesin statesof affairs.
degreesof intensity (a degreeof heat,a certaintime of the day) that, in The following caveatsthat punctuate Deleuze's writings must be
combinationwith other degreesof intensity,bring aboutindividuals.The heeded.First, a virtual intensity existsnowhereelsebut in the extended
individuals they bring about retain the anonymityof the pre-individual that it constitutes.Despitethe fact that it is not identicalwith the extended,
realm.First, haecceities consistentirelyof movementand rest (longitude) a virtual intensity does not entail ontological separation.Second,the
betweennon-formedmoleculesand particles.Second,they havethe cap- imperativesthat help us grasp intensity no longer circumscribe the
acity to affect and be affected(latitude). As in Baruch Spinoza'sessences, deontologyof pure reasonalone;they enlargethe scopeof this deontology
haecceitiesco-exist on a plane of consistency,eachone of which is com- so that it encompassesall faculties: from sensibility, to memory, and to
possiblewith, and responsiblefor, the generationof the others.In otder to thought. Nevertheless,the encounterof intensity - being the taskof sens-
accentuatetheir impersonality,Deleuze arguesthat we need a new lan- ibility - is the first necessary
link in the interactionof all facultiesstriving
guageby which to refer to them, one that consistsof proper names,verbs to generatethe differentiatedvirtual within thought.Third, intensityis not
in the infinitive,and indefinitearticlesand pronouns. l anldea/paradigm for particular instantiationsor for screeningout false
pretenders.Intensity is a singularity capableof generatingactual cases,
Connectives none of which will evercometo resembleit.
Dcleuze'sontologyis built arounda notion of differencethat is not con-
Actuality trincclin thc 'from' of thc 'x is differentfrom y', bnt rather he aimsat
y'| )iff'crcnciltion
I )if}'crcntiatiorr ditl'crcnccin itsclf. (,onscrlucntly,l)clcuzc givcs wcight to intcnsity

becauseunlike extendedmagnitudeswhosepartesextra,pertespermit their

division without any correspondingchangein their nature, intensities
cannot be subdividedwithout a correspondingchangein their nature.
(distance' CliffStagoll
Therefore,intensitiesare incommensurable and their from one
another makeseachone of them a veritable differencein itself. Intensive Deleuzeusesthe conceptof intuition' in two distinct ways.In someof his
magnitudesdo not add up; insteadthey average.Placedin the context of later works (for example,What is Philosophy?,which he co-authoredwith
the two sidesof the Deleuzianontology- the virtual and the actual- inten- Guattari), it refers to one of the elementsof a plane of immanence.
sitiescatalysethe actualisationofthe virtual, generatingextension,linear, Whereasconceptsdefinethe pointsof intensityon a plane,intuition refers
successivetime, extendedbodies and their qualities. The relation of to movementsupon it. As such, intuitions can be consideredas ideasor
reversibilitythat obtainsbetweenthe virtual and actualguarantees inten- even 'lines of thinking' in a general sense,immanent to a particular
sitieswill not suffer the fate of negentropicdeath. problemand the circumstances of its consideration.
The role of intensity in Deleuze'sethics, politics and aestheticsis also More frequently, though, Deleuze usesintuition to refer to a kind of
pivotal. Deleuze'sethics revolvesaround two axes.The first is the Stoic/ philosophical method borrowed from Henri Bergson. This is not to
Nietzscheanimperativethat we becomeworthy of the virtual event.The suggestthat Deleuzechampionsany particular philosophicaltechnique.
secondis the Spinozistadmonitionto live a life of joy andto multiply power- He would opposeconsistentadoptionof a methodbecauseof the tendency
enhancing'goodencounters'.The ethicsofjoy and the preferencefor good for anysingleapproachto limit perspectives on a problemand soto hinder
encounters increasingour powercouldbelongto a'feel good',self-helptype creativethinking. However,when Deleuzed,oes refer to method, he often
of psychologyif it werenot for the intensityof the virtual.Becomingworthy meansa modified version of Bergson'sphilosophicalintuition (intuition
ofthe event,however,requiresthe ascesisofthe counter-actualisation ofthe philosophique).
accidentsthat fill our lives,and asa result, our participationin the intensive, According to Bergson, evolution has resulted in the human mind
virtual event.Similarly,Deleuze'spoliticswould be a banalcelebrationof becomingable to conduct rational investigationsand make consequent
multitudes,if it werenot for the fact that the multipleis not the sameas'the decisionspertainingto the worldsof scienceand practice.The mind is not
many'. In the counter-actualisation of the revolutionthat befallsus, the so well adaptedto conductingmetaphysicalinquiriesinto the dynamicsof
revolution that never comesand yet never ceasesto passis graspedas the one's life. Indeed, for Bergson,efforts to turn our analyticalintellect to
untimely, virtual, intensive event; the affirmation of which renders us philosophicalproblemsresult inevitablyin our consideringlived reality in
worthy of our fate. Finally, when in his aestheticsDeleuzesubstitutessen- terms of somestatic,materialimageupon which we'gazd and which we
sation for form, intensity is what is given priority. What the artist aims then theoriseabstractly.
towardsis indeedsensation. Sensationis intimatelyrelatedto the intensity For Bergson,our lived reality comprisesa flow of consciousstates.
of the forcesthat it doesnot represent.Sensationis the affect,which is Consciousness is essentiallytemporal:ongoingmental activity constitut-
neithersubjectivenor objective;ratherit is both at once:we becomein sen- ing the kind of time internal to one'sself.The continuity and persistence
sationand at the sametime somethinghappensbecause of it. of this flow makesup our personhood,and its particularity definesour
individuality.Oncewe turn our analyticalmind to lived, consciousexperi-
ence,however,we tend to think insteadin terms of successiveinstantsand
Connectives imagessituatedin space.As such, philosophicalprecisionis lost because
Differentiation/Differenciation reality is no longertheorisedon its own terms.
Nietzsche Intuition is the philosophical methodthat Bergsonchampionsto avoidthe
Spinoza analyticalmind's tendencyto abstraction.He arguesthat one must enter
Transcendental empiricism into an experience directly,so asto'coincide' and'sympathise'withit. The
rranner in which one achievesthis, though, is notoriously difficult to
clcscribe, with as manycharacterisations as scholarlycommentaries. Some-
timcs llcrgsondigns intuition with artisticsensibilityand awareness, or a
INTERIORITY : rcf'crto thc cntryon 'cxrcrioritv/intcrioritv'. dctlchmcntlrom rcrrlity.At othcr tinrcshc lssociatcs it with purcinstinct.
134 I NTUI TI O N KAFKA, FRANz ( r 88: - r 924) r35

On Deleuze'sinterpretation,intuition is somewhatlessmysteriousbut
no less problematic.He conceivesof intuition as a deliberatereflective
awareness or willed selfconsciousness) a concentratedand direct attention
to the operationsof consciousness (in contrastwith mediated'observa-
tions of'consciousnessby consciousness in a quest for transparencyof
KAFKA, FRANZ (1883-1924)
thoughtto itself).This depictionalignswith Bergson'saccountof the intu-
ition of consciousness asthe attentionthat mind givesitself,continuingits
normal functionsyet somehowdiscerningsimultaneously John Marks
the natureof its
workings.If our naturaltendencyis to graspthingsin terms of spaceand In KaJba: Towarda Minor Literature, Deleuze and Guattari seekto over-
quantity,such an effort must be extremelydifficult to achieve.(Deleuze turn much of the receivedcritical wisdomon Franz Kafka'swork by pre-
and Bergsonboth suggestat varioustimesthat intuition hasno limits, and sentinghim asa joyful and comic writer, who is positivelyengagedin the
can take us beyond the human condition to 'sympathise'and 'coincide' world. Kafka was,Deleuzeand Guattari claim, irritated when peoplesaw
with animalsandeveninanimateobjects,but the meansof doing soremain him asa writer of intimacy'.In Deleuzeand Guattari'shandshe becomes
mysterious.) a politicalauthor,and the prophetof a future world. It would, they claim,
Deleuzeis particularlyattractedto intuition becausehis desireto move be grotesqueto opposelife and writing in Kafka. Kafka seeksto graspthe
from experienceto the contingentconditions of experiencein order to world rather than extract impressionsfrom it, and if he is fixated on an
rediscoverdifferencedemandsa meansfor accessingthe particularityof essentialproblem,it is that of escaperatherthan abstractnotionsof liberty.
consciousness without metaphysical illusions.If he wereto considerreality The tendencytowardsdeterritorialisationin Kafka'swork, for example,is
in termsof conceptssupposedto makeit (or experienceof it) possible,then evidentin his useof animalsin his short stories.
he would substituteone kind of abstractionfor another.Deleuzeinstead Ratherthan interpretation- sayingthat this meansthat - Deleuzeand
needsto dissociateaspectsof the whole that is called 'I' accordingto Guattaripreferto look at what they call 'Kafka politics','Kafka machines'
natural articulations,and to graspconsciousand materialaspectsof life and 'Kafka experimentation'. Many interpretationsof Kafka haveconcen-
without recourseto abstract or general concepts.Bergson'sintuition tratedon themesrelatingto religionand psychoanalysis, whilst othershave
enableshim to achievethis by creating conceptsaccordingto natural seenin Kafka'swork the expressionof his own acutehuman suffering:his
articulationsof experience.From the lived reality of a flow of conscious- work becomesa tragiccri d,ecuur.In contrastto this, Deleuzeand Guattari
ness,Deleuze'sintuition revealssuch articulationsas memory,faculties, show how the Kafka machinegenerates three passionsor intensities:fear,
dreams,wishes,jokes, perceptionsand calculations.As such, Deleuze flight and dismantling.ln TheTrial (1925)it is lessa questionof presenting
maintainsthat there is a resemblance betweenintuition as a method for an imageof a transcendental and unknowablelaw,andmorea questionof an
division and asa meansfor transcendental analysis. investigationof the functioning of a machine.In contrastto the psycho-
Interestingly,Bergsonsometimesseemsto hold morereservations about analyticalapproach,which reducesKafka's particularly intenseattachment
the precision and generalapplicability of intuition than Deleuze. He to the world to a neuroticsymptomof his relationshipwith his own father,
remindshis readersthat to expressin languagethe resultsof an intuitive they showhow Kafka'sinaptitudefor marriageand obsession with writing
study of consciousness is to conceptualiseand symbolise,'andthus to havepositivelibidinal motiyations.Kafka'sapparentlysolitarynature- his
abstract.Yethe meansintuition to be freefrom formalconceptualandsym- existenceas an unmarriedwriter - should not be viewedas evidenceof a
bolic constraints.Accordingly,to communicateaboutintuition, he argues withdrawalinto an ivory tower - but rather one componentof a 'bachelor
that we shouldusemetaphorand suggestiveness to point towardswhat is machine'.This machinehasmultiple connectionswith the socialfield, and
otherwiseinexpressible. Deleuzeexpresses few such reservationsovertly, allowsthe bachelorto existin a stateof desirethat is muchmoreintensethan
althoughhis languageusehints at his havingfollowedBergson'ssuggestion. the psychoanalytic categoriesof incestuousor homosexualdesire.Kafka's
strategyin 'Letter to his Father'is to inflatethe fatherfigureto absurdand
comicproportions,so that he coversthe map of the world. The effectis to
providcr wily out of thc psychoanalytical impasse,a linc of flight awayfrom
Ilcrgson thc fhthcrirnclinto thc wrlrkl:iI llcw sct o1'conncctitlns,
136 KAFKA, FRANZ ( r 88: - t g z 4 ) KANr, IMMANUEL (rZz4-r8o4) 137

The book on Kafka constitutesDeleuzeand Guattari's most detailed Connectives

readingof literatureasmachine. They claim that Kafka'swork is a rhizome
or a burrow,in which no entranceis more privilegedthan another.They Desire
alsoclaim that the Kafka-machine,composedasit is of letters,storiesand Deterritorialisation/Reterritorialisation
novels,movesin the direction of the unlimited rather than the fragmen- Intensity
tary.Kafka'sceuvreis completeyet heterogeneous: it is constructedfrom Lines of flight
componentsthat do not connectbut are alwaysin communicationwith Minoritarian
each other. The Kafka machine is, paradoxically one of continuous Psychoanalysis
contiguity. Such a machinic reading of Kafka is called for by Kafka's own Rhizome
approach, which goes against representation, allegory, symbolism and
metaphor. Instead, Deleuze and Guattari show how he works with the
componentsof reality: objects,charactersand events.The evolution of
Kafka's work is towards a sober 'hyper-realism'that dispenseswith KANT, TMMANUEL (1724-1804)
impressionsand imaginings.Ratherthan metaphor,Kafka'shyper-reality
constructsan immanentassemblage of metamorphosis,a continuum of Alison Ross
reversibleintensities. Immanuel Kant's critical philosophymarks a turning point in modern
For Deleuzeand Guattari,Kafka'swork is a'minor'literature par excel- thought. Kant distinguishesthe 'critical' inquiry he conductsinto reason
lence.A minor literature'deterritorialises'language andprovidesan intim- from the 'fanaticism'that afflicts the 'dogmatic' philosophyof his competi-
ate and immediateconnectionbetweenthe individual and the political.It tors.Againstboth the excesses of rationalism- which confuseswhat it is pos-
is also a form of literature in which everyrhing is expressedin collective sibleto think with what it is possibleto know- and empiricism,which scuttle
terms and everything takes on a collective value. In short, there is no the possibility of systematicknowledgealtogether,Kant's self-described
subjectin a minor literature,only collectiveassemblages of enunciation.In Copernicanrevolutionin philosophyfollowsa languageof 'moderation'.
a 'major' literature there are forms of individuated enunciation' that Deleuze rejects the self-conceptionof Kantian philosophy on two
belongto literary masters,and individual concernsabound.Minor litera- fronts: first, as his own pantheonof selectedinfluencesin the history of
ture can afford no such luxuries, since it is born out of necessityin philosophyindicates,his practiceof philosophyunderminesKant's claim
restricted conditions. Since major literature is essentiallyrepresenta- to haveconsignedrationalismand empiricismto history; second,he dis-
tional in orientation,it movesfrom contentto expression, whereasa minor putes the style of Kant's philosophyin which thinking is guided by the
literatureexpresses itself out of absolutenecessityand only later concep- moderatinginfluenceof 'commonsense'.The centraltaskof Kantian phi-
tualises itself. Expression breaks establishedforms and encourages losophy is the 'critique' of the faculties of the subject. For Deleuze,
new directions.This commitment to expressionis evidentin Kafka's inter- Kantian 'critique' does not extend to the orientating moral valuesof the
est in 'musical' soundsthat escapeany form of signification,composition Kantian philosophy,and it is Friedrich Nietzsche'spursuit of the critique
or song. againstmoral idealsthat makeshim, in Deleuze'seyes,the truly critical
Deleuzeand Guattari repeatedlyemphasisethe fact that Kafka's soli- philosopher.At the same time that Deleuze rejects the false limits
tude giveshim an acutelypolitical,and evenprophetic,vision. Kafka the that Kant placeson 'critique' he alsoadaptsthe Kantian project of a cri-
bachelor-machineperceivesthe 'diabolical powers of the future' - tique of the facultiesof the subjectfor his own proiectof 'transcendental
Americancapitalism,Sovietbureaucracyand EuropeanFascism- that are empiricism'.
knockingon the door of his study.The literary machineenablesthis vision Kant's importancefor Deleuzecanbe describedin terms of the way he
becauseit functionsnot like a mirror of the world, but rather like a watch altersKant's languageof the 'faculties'to caterfor the primacy of affect.
that is running fast. The tendencyof Kafka's work towardsproliferation Deleuze'srevisionof the languageof the 'faculties'callsinto questionthe
opensup a field of immanencethat takeshis socialand politicalanalysisout dualiststructureof Kant's thought accordingto which a iuridical concep-
of thc domainof the actualand into the virrual. tion of rcasonrcgulatcsthc ficld ofexperience.
138 KA N T , T M M AN U E L ( r7 24- r 8o4) KANr , I M M ANUEL ( t lz+- r 8o4) 139

In Kantian philosophythe subjectoccupiesthe positionof an interface Whether it is reason'stendencyto fanaticism- an error that follows the
betweennatureand experience. The subiect'scategories of understanding hubris of limitlessness- or the claim circumstancesmake upon it and
constitutethe organisingstructurefor sensationand form the conditionof constrainit under a falselimitation, critical restraintin either casefollows
possibilityfor experience.Accordingto Kant, the coherenceand form of a juridical model.
experienceare the work of the mind rather than the 'givens'of sensible Kant's textsreinforcethe senseof renunciation- of desiresor of errant
experience. Further,the conditionof possibilityfor thecognitionof objects speculation- in the recurrent referencesto 'the court of reason'which
is the mind's own activity.Hence Kant's famousdictum that'the condi- legislatesthe proper use and safeextensionof reason'sideas.Hence the
tions of the possibilityof experiencein generalare alsothe conditionsof 'revolution' that proceedsby pleasfor moderation is fought on two fronts:
the possibilityof the objectsof experience.'But if Kant viewsexperience againstthe illusionsof a reason'independentof all experience',aswell as
as a compoundof the dataof impressionsand what our faculty of know- againstthe claim of circumstanceon action.The final work of the critical
ledgesuppliesitself, he alsoconceivesof the task of philosophyas a cri- trilogy, the CritiqueofJudgement,tries to mediatethis split betweenexperi-
tique of the categoriesthat redeem experiencefrom the irreducible enceand freedomthrough the faculty of judgement.It is in this work that
particularity of sensibleperceptions.The adjunct of this critique is the Kant's positive influence over Deleuze is strongest.In Deleuze and
revivalof the pursuit of knowledgeoutsideof sensibilityand the field of Guattari'sWhatis Philosophy? they arguethat Kant's final Critique marks
possibleexperience,critical philosophyaimsto securethe ground of this a significantdeparturefrom the termsof the first and secondCritiques:the
extensionby its investigationinto the faculty of reason.In stark contrasr, CritiqueofJudgement is'. . . an unrestrainedwork of old agewhich [Kant's]
Deleuzeusesthe languageof the facultiesto demolishthe positionof the successors havestill not caughtup with: all the mind's facultiesovercome
subjectas the pivot betweennatureand experienceand to overturn phil- their limits, the very limits that Kant had so carefully laid down in the
osophy'srole as a court that adjudicateson the proper limits of reason. worksof his prime' (D&G 1994:2).
Instead of a subject with predeterminedfacultiesordering the field of The juridical conceptionof the facultiesand the legislativerole it gives
experience,Deleuzeusesthe languageof the facultiesto describea regis- philosophyto establishthe limits of reasonunravels,accordingto Deleuze,
ter of affect. The Deleuzian force of affect drives the facultiesconstantly in Kant's conceptionof the sublime.It is important to point out that
to surpasstheir acceptedlimits. This is a transcendental projectbecause, Deleuze'sreadingof Kant's appendixon the sublimeis an idiosyncratic
like Kant, Deleuzethinks that philosophyshouldcreateconceptsthat do account. Within Kant's thought the sublime is used to confirm the
not merely trace the 'givens' of sensibleexperience. subject'sfacultyof reasonasthat which surpasses any naturalform, and is
Although Deleuze's transcendentalempiricism adapts elementsof arguablythe jewelof Kant's metaphysics. Arguing againstKant's attempt
Kant's thought, specificallyhis conceptionof the faculties,it doesso in to confine the faculties to their proper limits - to their nth power -
order to critique the implacable dualism of Kantian philosophy. Kant's Deleuze'saccountof this appendixarguesthat in the caseof the sublime
first two critiques establisha division berweenfreedomand the sensible the facultiesenter into unregulatedrelationsand this is what drives the
world. In the critique of PureReason,the taskof critical philosophyis to faculties(seeD 1983,D 1984,and D 1994).
restrainreasonfrom the illusory usethat consistsin confusingwhat it is Aside from these points of direct influence over Deleuze's project,
possibleto think with what may be known accordingto the sensiblecon- Kant's position within Deleuze'stopography of philosophersis highly
ditions of thought (K 1996:8). The risk of sucha confusionof ideasand unusual. Deleuze describeshis Kant book as an attempt to know his
objectsof possibleexperienceis that a fabrication of reasonmay be con- 'enemy'and this book is the only book that Deleuzedevotesto a thinker
fusedfor somethingthat existsin the domainof experience.The critique who is not part of his pantheon of selectedinfluences.Kant's peculiar
of PracticalRea'son)onthe other hand,locatesa dangerin the influenceon position needsto be seenas a consequenceof Deleuze'sdescription of
moral action of circumstance.Here the sensibleworld and the subject's his own proiect as 'transcendentalempiricism'. Deleuze returns to the
feelingsdo not provide a necessaryorientation for ideas of reason,so very rationalist and empiricist thinkers that Kant believedhis critical
much asthreatento leadit astray.Accordingly,the formalismof the moral philosophyhad consignedto the past.Deleuze'sreturn, however,is con-
law guardsthe possibility of a moral acrion in the world of sensibility, cluctcdthrough thc Kantian languageof 'faculties' and 'transcendental'
clcliningsuch irction:rs r strict adhcrcnccto thc principlcsof rcas<ln. thinking.
140 KLEE, eAUL (t8lg-rg+o) LAcAN, JACeuEs (r9or-8t) l+l

Connectives For Lacan desireis the product of the split betweendemandand need.
Demandis the alienationof 'need'in language.It is the failureof language
(demand)adequatelyto represent'need'that producesan impotentdesire
figuredaround'lack'.Although Deleuzeand Guattaricriticise'lack'asone
of the errors of desire they applaud the fact that desire is continuous in
Lacan, despitecontestingthe way it earnsthis statusonly on accountof its
KLEE, PAUL (1879-1940)- refer ro the entrieson .art, and ,utopia'. definitionasa 'lack' regulatedby the law of the symbolic.
The complexityof Lacan'splacein the thoughtof Deleuzeand Guattari
can be describedin relation to the genesisand explanatoryscopeof their
conceptof the Body without Organs (BwO). In psychoanalyticdoctrine
the developmentof the individual is describedin the normativeterms of a
gradual shift awayfrom the polymorphous perversity of the infant's body
to the hierarchicalorderingor codingof the body'serogenouszonesin an
ascendingscalefrom pathwaysof fore-pleasure(such as kissing)to end-
pleasure(genital).Accordingto this model,the subjectand its sexualiden-
LACAN, JACqUES (1901-81)
tity arenot given,but theseemergeby orderingthe drivesthat arein turn
regulatedby Oedipal relations.In the paper Lacan wrote on the 'mirror
Alison Ross
stage',this processis describedas the movementfrom organswithout
JacquesLacan wasa French psychoanalystmost famousfor his structural- a clearly defined senseof a body, to the (tenuous and fictional) hold of
ist interpretationof Freudian psychoanalysis. Despite his ,structuralist' socio-sexual identity.
famehis work canbedividedinto manydifferentphases, includingan early In contrastto the without a body' that precedesthe processof
fascinationwith surrealismand the avant-garde,an interestin the 1950s acquisitionof socio-sexual identity in Lacan,the BwQ a trm that Deleuze
and 1960swith saussurianlinguisticsand srructuralism,aswell ashis late and Guattari take from Antonin Artaud, is deployedto denaturalisethe
preoccupationwith Borromeanknots and his attemptto mathematisehis processof developmentdefinedby psychoanalysis. Against the coding of
ideas.It is only in this final 'phase'that Lacanposesfor the first time the the body'spartsaccordingto 'natural' functionsand the conceptionof the
questionof what the hitherto distinct elementsof the system,reallimagin- organismas a functioning hierarchyof parts on which it depends,this
arylsymbolic (RSI) havein common. conceptaims to explain and to maximisepossibleconnectionsbetweenthe
Deleuze's relationshipwith Lacan is complex. There are placesin differentparts of the body and its 'outside'.In particular,the authorsuse
Deleuze'soeuvre,suchashis essayon Leopoldvon sacher-Masoch, which this conceptto de-Oedipalisethe descriptionof such connectionsin clas-
demonstrateexperr familiarity with the labyrinthinedetail of Lacanian sical psychoanalysis. Instead of framing breast-feedingin terms of a
psychoanalysis. Despite rhis essay'scritique of the Freudiancategoryof primary anacliticrelationshipbetweenmother and infant that will needto
'sado-masochism', Deleuzeuseselementsof Lacanianpsychoanalysis as be brokenby the secondaryidentificationwith the authority of the father,
an operative framework for his own analysisof 'masochism'.similarly, in this connectionis describedas an assemblage of desirein which 'mouth'
the two volumes of capitalisrn and,schizophrenia,Lacan is occasionally and 'breast'replacethe terms'infant' and 'mother'. Despitethe genesisof
a target of the authors' anti-psychiatric polemics,but he can alsobe cited this concept in Anti-Oedipusin a polemic against psychoanalysis,a stra-
as an influenceon their own attempt to liberatedesirefrom its oedipal tegicalliancewith aspectsof Lacaniantheorycanbe discernedin their use
ordering in classical,Freudianpsychoanalysis. In this respectthe impor- of this concept.
tant features of Lacan's thought include his uneven verdicts on the Accordingto Lacanthe infant'sstateof physiologicalfragmentation(the
differentlayersof the subject(RSI) and his interestin psychoticspeech. real)is sealedinto an illusory formation of unity in the mirror stage.Here
on the other hand,Lacanianpsychoanalysis givesa superbillustration thc child foundsits senseof integratedidentity through a visual percep-
of thc gcncralcomplaintirgainstpsychoanaly sisin Anti-oerlipus,conccrn- tion of unity thrrtdividesit from its 'real'stateof physiological fragmenta-
ing rhc crrorsrrf'clcsirc. Lacirncxcnrplificsthc 'crror' thrt clcsircis ,lirck'. tion. 'l'his pcrccption of unity, dcsignrrtcd by Lacrrn irs thc 'imlginary',
t+2 LA M A R C K, J EA N -B Ap rrs rE (r744-t8zg) LErBNrz) corrFRIED wILHELM voN (r7 44-t8zg) 143

the basisof socio-sexual identity asa unity. This unity is para- Existencefor Leibniz and Deleuzebursts forth in its variousforms from
doxicalhowever,giventhat the agencyof its unity is external.For Lacan, one plane of singularities.This plane can be understoodas the inex-
unity only becomesfunctionalwhen the subjectrelinquishesits relation haustibleand unknowabletotality of monadsthat provide the substance
with the (M)Other in order ro occupya placein the symbolicorder as a from which subjectsand objectsin their multifariousmannersemerge'It
speakingsubject.The primary senseof unity developedby the subjectin would not be remiss,however,to saythat Deleuzeseeksto rescueLeibniz
the mirror stage,is dividedin the subjecr'ssecondary identificationwith the from idealism.Leibniz ultimatelyconsideredsubstance asimmaterial.For
Law of the Father.Deleuzeand Guattari disengage the oedipal narrative Deleuzethe 'pure emissionof singularities'is an organicfield of life forces.
that regulatesthe organisationof socio-sexual unity in psychoanalysis. Yet His interestis in what he callsan'animal monadology'(D 1993a:109),in
in many respectsLacanis an ambiguousresourcefor the hold of the organ- which the 'animal in me' is lessopposedto the alter ego (as in Edmund
isedBwo is describedby him asrenuous.It is alsointeresringto norethar Husserlt1859-1938])and rather,an aggregateof vital forces,monads,that
Lacan occasionally sideswith the imaginaryfield of connectionsprior to areorganisedor folded in variousways.
symboliclaw and sometimesemphasises the unsurpassable forceof the real The conceptof the fold, expoundedasit is via Leibniz'sinsistenceupon
in psychiclife. Thus, despitethe limitationsof his framework,the work of one substance,enablesDeleuzeto think the order of things in waysnot
Lacan differs from his precursorsin classicalpsychoanalysis in that he pro- determinedby dualism.The distinction betweenthe mind and the body,
posesa porousrelationbetweenthe body and its 'outside'. for instance,is producedby a kind of matter that hasthe capacityto fold
in upon itself in order to perceive.Matter outsidethe mind doesnot per-
ceive.Enfoldingbringsthe relationof an inner and outer world into being.
Unlike the body, the mind is enclosedmatter, an interior that doesnot
Desire responddirectlyto the outsideworld. This enclosurecanbe understoodas
Freud a form of theatre,one in which thinking, imaginingand reflectingoccur.
Deleuzelinks the form of this theatre to baroquearchitecture,art and
music,which he admiresas'Fold afterfold'(D 1993a:33).
The subject emergesin Deleuze's work upon Leibniz not as an
LAMARCK, JEAN-BAPTISTE (1744-1829)- refer to the enrry on but as a point upon which seriescon-
attribute of substance,an essence,
'creativetransformationt. (pure
verge.At one level, the universe as emissionof singularities'is thus
reflectedin everyindividual asa virtual predicate,but with a limited point
of view (D 1993a:53). An identity emergesin and through the conver-
LEIBNIZ, GOTTFRIED WILHELM genceof a seriesof singularities.This meansthat the subject is deter-
VON (1646_1716\
mined rather than determining, and for Leibniz, writing within a
Brett Nicholls Christiancosmology,the stabilityof the determinedsubiectis guaranteed
by God. This position is outlined in Leibniz's Theodicy(1890).He held
Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz is drawn into Deleuze'sengagementwith that the subjectis determinedin the convergence of what he callsa 'com-
the history of philosophy with a book length study,TheFrjld: Leibniz and, possibleworld'. Any seriesthat is bound by the samelaw,governedby the
the Baroque,and he is presentat strategicmomentsin Deleuze,swider principle of non-contradiction,belongsto the sameworld. It is not pos-
thinking. ln The Fold Deleuze reinvigoratesLeibniz's concept of the sible,in this view, for Adam to be both a sinner and not a sinner in the
monad with the notion that the world is 'a pure emissionof singularities' sameworld. And while we can imagine other realities' say a world in
(D 1993a:60).Leibniz insistedin Monad,ology (written 1714,published which Adam is not a sinner,the principle of sufficientreasoneffectively
1867)that the universeconsistsof discreteentities:monads.Monads are guaranteesthat this and not that is the best possibleworld. Leibniz thus
simple substances,indivisible and indestructible. with no windows claimedto havearrived at a solution to the problem of evil; other worlds
through which anythingcanpass.The world that we inhabitis constituted would simply be incompossible.
by monadsthat convcrgcin serics.And, for I_,eibniz,varying scricscon- Incompossibility signalsthe impossibilityof thc co-existence of worlds
vcrgciu ir hrrrnoniousunity thrrtis prccstirblishcd
by G<td. thrrtdivcrgcfrom thc hw of'non-contrrdiction. I )clcuzc,htlwcvcr,in all of
r4+ L 6 v rN A S, E M M AN U E L (rgo6-95) LIN E S OF FLIGH T t+5
his engagements with Leibniz, goesto work upon this solutionand alters not as substances, but asassemblages or multiplicities,focusingon things
the trajectoryof Leibniz'sthought.He proposesthat incompossibilityis a in terms of unfolding forces- bodiesand their powersto affectand be
conditionof compossibility. Ratherthan governedby the metaphysical law affected- ratherthan staticessences. A 'line of flight' is a path of mutation
of non-contradiction,the world is multiple and the subjectcanbe defined precipitatedthrough the actualisationof connectionsamong bodiesthat
in relation to foldable, polychronic temporalities, where incompossibles werepreviouslyonly implicit (or'virtual') that releases new powersin the
and compossiblesco-exist.we might think, therefore,of the divergenceof capacitiesof thosebodiesto aq and respond.
seriesnot asnegationor oppositionbut aspossibility. Every assemblage is territorial in that it sustainsconnectionsthat define
This emphasisupon divergenceas possibility is sustainedin Dffirence it, but everyassemblage is also composedof lines of deterritorialisation
andRepetition(D 1994:123)whereDeleuzereadsagainstLeibniz'sinsist- that run through it and carry it awayfrom its current form (D&G 1987:
enceupon compossibilitywith the notion that'basic seriesare divergent' 503+). Deleuze and Guattari characteriseassemblages in terms of three
sincethey are (constanrlydisplacedwithin . . . chaos'.rn TheLogicofsense kinds of lines that inform their interactionswith the world. There is the
(D 1990:109-17),incompossibilitybecomesthe ground for the overlap-
'molar line' that forms a binary, arborescentsystem of segments,the
ping of senseand non-sense.And in Cinema2: The TimeImage(D 1989: and the line of
'molecularline'that is morefluid althoughstill segmentary,
130-l), Leibniz figuresas a thinker who has unwittingly openedup the flight that rupturesthe other two lines(D&G 1987:205).While the supple
problemof time and truth. In eachof theseworks,DeleuzedrawsLeibniz segmentarityof the molecularline operatesby deterritorialisationsthat
into his rejectionof dualismand his critique of the order of things.He is may permit reterritorialisationsthat turn backinto rigid lines,the line of
concernedwith pushing Leibniz beyond the limits of the principle of flight can evolveinto creativemetamorphoses of the assemblage and the
sufficientreasonto affirm that incompossibles belongto the sameworld. assemblages it affects.In what they admit is a 'summary' example(since
Living involves,after Deleuze'sLeibniz, not the relation of truth and the threelinesco-existand canchangeinto oneanother),they suggestthat
falsity but the affirmarion of possibilities,the work of unfoldins and the Roman Empire could be said to exemplify rigid segmentarity;the
folding compossible and incompossible series. migrant barbarianswho come and go acrossfrontiers pillaging, but also
reterritorialisingby integratingthemselvesinto indigenouscommunities,
Connectives supplesegmentarity;and the nomadsof the steppeswho escapeall such
territorialisationand sow deterritorialisationeverywherethey go,a line of
Fold flight (D&G 1987: 222-3).
Force On the one hand an assemblage (for example,an assemblage of the book,
Substance A Thousand, Plateous,and a reader)is a 'machinic assemblage' of actions,
passionsand bodiesreactingto one another(paper,print, binding, words,
feelingsand the turning of pages).On the other hand it is a 'collective
assemblage of enunciation',of statementsand incorporealtransformations
LEVINAS, EMMANUEL (1906-95)- referto rheentrieson ,ontology'
attributed to bodies(the meaningof the book'swords emergesin a reading
and 'phenomenology'.
assemblage in terms of the implicit presuppositionsextant in the social
field concerningpragmaticvariablesin the useof language)(D&G 1987:
88). Both aspectsofthe book-readerassemblage producevariouseffectsin
LINES OF FLIGHT their engagementwith other assemblages (for example, the assemblage of
bookand handripping out pagesto feeda fire or the assemblage of a reader
Tamsin Lorraine pluggedinto aestheticassemblages inspired by the notion of 'becoming-
imperceptible'to createa work of art). Deleuzeand Guattari deliberately
ThroughoutA Thousand Plateaus,Deleuze and Guattaridevelopa vocabu- designedA Thousand. Plateausto foster lines of flight in thinking -
lary that emphasises how things connectrather than how they ,are',and thought-movementsthat would creativelyevolvein connectionwith the
tendencics that could evolvein creativemutationsratherthan a 'rcality' producingnew waysof think-
lincsof flightof othcr thought-movcmcnts,
thlt is an invcrsion.of'thcpllst.IJc lncl(iuattrriprcf'cr to consiclcrthirrgs ing rathcr thnn tcrritorirrlisinginto thc rccognisitblc[4r(x)vcs of what
146 L rN E s oF FLTcHT * anr + pol rrrcs LIN E S OF FLIGH T + ART + P OLITIC S 147

'passes'for philosophicalthought. Interpretations,accordingto Deleuze but on the basisof what the occupyingculture believesis relevantand
and Guattari,tracealreadyestablished patternsof meaning;mapspursue important.So what might Deleuzecontributeto this longstandingdiscus-
connectionsor lines of flight not readily perceptibleto the majoritarian sion concerningthe connectionbetweenpoliticsand art?
subjectsof dominant reality.Deleuzeand Guattari wrote their book as To begin with, art at its most creativemutatesas it experiments,pro-
sucha map,hoping to elicit further maps,rather than interpretations,from ducing new paradigmsof subjectivity.What this meansis that art has the
their readers. potentialto createthe conditionswhereinnew connectionsand combin-
Although Deleuzeand Guattari clearly value lines of flight that can ations can be drawn - socially,linguistically,perceptually,economically,
connectwith other linesin creativelyproductivewaysthat leadto enliven- conceptuallyand historically.For example,Antonin Artaud, a favouriteof
ing transformationsof the social field, they also caution againsttheir both Deleuzeand Guattari,whoseanimateddrawingsexecutedduring his
dangers.A line of flight can becomeineffectual,lead to regressivetrans- confinement in a mental institution, captures a senseof physical and
formations,and evenreconstructhighly rigid segments(D&G 1987:205). psychicexhaustion,an exhaustionthat is intensifiedby the anarchiclan-
And evenif it managesto crossthe wall and getout of the blackhole,it can guagehe developsthrough the combinationof colours,words,soundsand
presentthe dangerof becomingno more than a line of destruction(D&G forms. Artaud's drawings both document and constitute a processof
1987:229).Deleuzeand Guattari advocateextending lines of flight to rhe sensoryoverload,the linesof which strip awaysystemsof signification.In
point where they bring variablesof machinic assemblages into continuity this way we could useDeleuzeand Guattari'sconceptof a 'line of flight'
with assemblages of enunciation,transformingsociallife in the process; to considerhow Artaud's work prompts us to think,differently,to sense
but they neverminimisethe risks the pursuit of suchlinesentails. anew and be exposedto affectsin unpredictableways.Hence, by gdnerat-
ing new perceptsand affects,art could be describedasan 'affectivesystem'
of change.
Connectives When consideringthe political potential of art, we often look to the way
/Reterritorialisation in which certainpracticesareimmanentto the socialfield and the changes
Majoritarian theseinvoke.A practice that dismantlesconventionalways of thinking
Molar and acting,or one that stimulatesupheavalby looseningup someof the
rules and ordersthat organiseindividualsand socialbodiesis inherently
political. This prompts two key questionsto bubble to the surface.First,
how can politics condition art? Second,and more pertinently,how do we
LINES OF FLIGHT + ART + POLITICS gaugethe politicalforceof art?
Art at its most socialexposesthe desiring production that organises
Ad,rian Parr space,using desirein its most productive senseto bring to life the affective
understandingthe politicalpotentialof art hasbeena concernthat goesas dimensionof art. To this extent,the linesof flight emanatingout of certain
far backasthe Middle Agesand Renaissance, wherepoliticaland religious practices,suchasArtaud's,resultnot so much from what an audiencecan
influenceoften definedthe content of art commissionsinscribingpublic seebut more from what they cannotsee.That is to say,the movementof
space,this beingthe key concernshapingRichardC. Trexler'sPublicLife linesbetweenprimary points of subjectivity- curator,critic, client, artist,
in RenaissanceFlorence(1980).During the early twentieth century,Bertolt madmanand spectator- and signification- exotica,erotica, insanity,con-
Brecht,GeorgLuk6s,and Ernst Bloch examinedGermanExpressionism, sumerism,history and value - can locatethe majoritarianlines striating
boldly denouncingthe aestheticisation of politics;this was a debatethat spacein order to extractthe minoritarianforcesimmanentto a particular
carried enormous influence for both Theodor Adorno and Walter space.The reality of such art work is qualitativelydifferent from art that
Benjamin'sexaminationof the industriesof culture and their subsequent 'representsthe real' or eventhe real of 'reality TV', as this kind of art is
critique of bourgeoisculture. In the latter part of the twentieth century determinedneitherdialecticallynor purely assymbolicgesture.This is an
Edward Said, and postcolonialtheory in general,insistedin Oriantalism art practicethat simply makesthe coherencyand rigidity of socialspace
(1978)that the representation of colonisedpeoplcby thcir coloniscrsis lcak.In thc spirit of l)clcuzc and Guattarithc politicsof art cxposcsthe
rcprcscnting an-<lthcr'sculturcnoton thcirowntcrms vcry propositionput firrwitrtlin tI 'l'housurul of tlight arc
r48 L INES OF F L IGHT + S U IC ID E Lr NES oF FLTcHT * sur cr DE t49

realities;they are very dangerousfor societies,althoughthey can get by rejectsindividualismand the nihilism of self-destruction.In an ecosophi-
without them, and sometimesmanageto keepthem to a minimum'(D&G cal sense,Deleuzethinks of the subjectin terms of a connection,one that
1987:.204).From this viewpoint, art functions asa line of flight, traversing takes place between self and others, pushing the subject beyond self-
individual and collectivesubjectivitiesand pushingcentralisedorganisa- centredindividualismalsoto includenon-humansor the earth itself.
tions to the limit; it combinesa varietyof affectsand perceptsin waysthat On the issueof suicide,Deleuze is as clear as Baruch Spinoza:the
conjugateone another. choice for self-destructionis not positive,nor can it be said to be free,
In many respectsthe connective,expansiveand deterritorialisingchar- becausedeathis the destructionof the conatus- definedas the desireto
acter of lines of flight, when consideredin terms of art, draws our atten- actualiseone's power of becoming. Self-preservation,in the senseof a
tion to the ethical dimensionof art. Here the questionof ethics in relation desirefor self-expression, constitutesthe subject.A conatuscannotfreely
to art is primarily takento be a problemof organisation.Art makespos- wish its own self-destruction;if it does,this is becausesomephysicalor
sible,it enablesus to broadenour horizonsand understanding,sensitising psychicalcompulsionnegatesthe subject'sfreedom.As connectivityand
us to our own affectivedimensionin relationto the world asa whole.It is, mutual implicationare the distinguishingfeaturesof an intensiveunder-
therefore, no accident that art often becomesthe primary target once standingof the subject,dying assuchmeansceasingto partakein this vital
repressionsinksin, usually setting off alarm bells,and warning us that the flow of life. Hence. the inter-connectednessof entities means that self-
socialsphereis on the vergeof becomingfascistic. preservationis a commonlysharedconcern.
As Deleuzeand Guattari insist in A Thousand, Plateaus,when desire Joining forceswith others so as to enhanceone's enjoymentof life is
turns repressiveit finds investmentin fascisticsocialorganisations; at this the key to Deleuzianethics;it is alsothe definition of a joyouslylived life.
point the activelines of flight indicativeof the political undercurrentsof The greatestethical flaw is to succumbto externalforcesthat diminish
art aresusceptibleto blockage.This is not to suggestthat art is immune to one's capacityto endure. From this viewpoint, suicide is an unproductive
fascisticinvestment.It, too,canbe turned againstitself;that is whenart is 'blackhole'.
consumedby the blackholethat annihilatesthe innovativeradicalityof art. Deleuze'sview of deathis far removedfrom the metaphysics of finitude.
For example,althoughmanyof the GermanExpressionists wereexempli- Death is neithera matter of absoluteclosure,nor a borderthat definesthe
fied asproducersof degenerate art by the GermanNazisin the 1937exhib- differencebetweenexistingor not existing.Instead,the Deleuziansubjectis
ition, Reflectionsof Decad,ence (in DresdenTown Hall), Luk6s insistedthat producedthrougha multiplicity of connectionsthat unfold in a processof
the artists in question in fact participated in the selfsame irrational becoming.This affirmativeview of life situatesphilosophicalnomadicismin
impulsesmotivating Nazism. In other words, when positive lines of flight the logic of positivity,rather than in the redemptiveeconomycommonto
arewithdrawnor usedto prop up the regulativenatureof negativelinesof classicalmetaphysics. What is more is that this vision of death-as-process,
flight, what we are left with is an ethicaldistinctionformed between'the or a Nietzscheanvision of the 'eternalreturn', emergesout of Deleuze's
politics of art' or 'the art of politics'. In effect,then, the politics of art philosophyof time: enduranceand sustainability.
comesfrom how art engages politicalsubjectivitysustainingan impersonal Life is the affirmation of radical immanence.What gets affirmed is the
reality that allowspre-individual singularitiesto structure and collectively intensityandacceleration ofexistentialspeedcharacteristic ofdesireor the
to orient subjectivity.The politics of art survivesalong the mutative expressionof potentia.The ethicsof nomadicsubjectsassertsthe positiv-
dimensionspositive and creative'lines of flight' expose;it is not fully ity of potentiaitself. That is to say,the singularity of the forces that
apparentand still it existsasa to come'. composethe specificspatio-temporalgrid of immanencecomposesone's
life. Life is an assemblage, a montage,not a given;it is a set of points in
spaceand time; a quilt of retrievedmaterial. Put simply, for Deleuzewhat
makesone'slife unique is the life project,not a deep-seated essence.
Commentingon the suicidesof Primo Levi andVirginia Woolf,Deleuze
- who alsochoseto end his own life - stressedthat life can be affirmedby
supprcssingyour own life. This he felt wasespeciallytrue in the caseof
Thc Dcleuziansubjectis a singularcomplexity, onc that enactsirndrrctu- failinghcalthor whcn lif'cis spcntin dcgradingsocialconditions,both of
'l'his 'subjcct'simultrncously
rrliscsa radicrrlcthics of transf<rrmltion. which scriouslycripplc orrc'spowcr to itflirnr lnd cnclurclil'c with ioy.

We do needto exercisesomecautionhere,though,becauseDeleuzeis not a givensituation.What countsasa recognisable subject(to oneselfaswell

proposinga Christian affirmation of life gearedtoward a transcendent as others) is dictated by systemsof subjectificationthat determine a
enterprise; rather he is suggestinglife is not marked by any signifier or subject'sposition vis-i-vis others.
proper noun: Deleuze'svision is of a radicallyimmanentfleshedexistence Deleuzeand Guattari insist it is the 'axioms'of capitalistsocietythat
intensivelylived. constitute majorities (D&G 1987: 469). The axioms of capitalismare
Deleuze introduces a fundamental distinction between personal and primary statementsthat arenot derivablefrom other statementsand which
impersonaldeath.Death is the empty form of time, the perpetualbecom- enterinto assemblages of production,circulationand consumption(D&G
ing that canbe actualisedin the presentbut flowsbackto the pastandseeps 1987:461).The functional elementsand relationsof capitalismare less
into the future. The eternalreturn of death is 'virtual' in that it has the specifiedthanin otherforms of society,allowingthem to be simultaneously
generativecapacity to engender the actual. Consequently,death is the realisedin a wide variety of domains(D&G 1987:454).Whether you are
ultimate manifestationof the activeprinciple that drivesall living matter, the workeror businessman or consumerdependsmoreon the function you
namely the power to expressthe pre-individualor impersonalpower of are performingand the relationsinto which you enter,than who or what
potentia,.Death is the becoming-imperceptibleof the nomadic subjectand you are. This gives capitalism a peculiar fluidity. Deterritorialising flows
assuchit is part of the cycleof becoming.Yet,deathis still interconnected canbe masteredthroughthe multiplicationor withdrawalof axioms(in the
with the 'outside'and alwayson the frontiersof incorporeality. latter case,very few axiomsregulatethe dominantflows,givingotherflows
only a derivativestatus)(D&G 1987:462).The operativestatementsof
various regionsof the socialfield (statementsconcerning,for example,
schooland the student,the prison and the convict,or the political system
and the citizen)constitutethe majoritarianelementsof a denumerableset.
The majoritarian standardconstituted through thesestatementsspecifies
recognisablepositionson points of the arborescent,mnemonic, molar,
structural systemsof territorialisation and reterritorialisationthrough
which subjectsare sorted and significationsmake sense(cf. D&G 1987:
295). Systemsof signifianceand subjectificationsort socialmeaningand
Tamsin Lorraine
individual subjectsinto binary categoriesthat remainrelativelystableand
Deleuzeand Guattaridescribea majority asa standardlike 'white-man'or render 'minor' fluctuations invisible or derivative.Minorities are defined
'adult-male' in comparison to which other quantities can be said to be by the gaps that separatethem from the axiomsconstituting majorities
minoritarian(D&G 1987:291).Human life in a capitalistsocietyoperates (D&G 1987:469).These gapsfluctuatein keepingwith shifting lines of
on the strataof the organism(variouscorporealsystemsorganisedinto the flight andthe metamorphoses of the assemblages
involved.Minorities thus
functioning wholesof biological organisms),'signifiance'(systemsof sig- constitute 'fuzzy' sets that are nondenumerable and nonaxiomisable.
nifiers and signifieds that interpreters interpret), and subjectification Deleuzeand Guattaricharacterise suchsetsas'multiplicitiesof escapeand
(systemsthat distributesubjectsof enunciationand subjectsof the state- flux'(D&G 1987:470).
ment - that is, subjectswho are speakers, and subjectsof what is spoken From the polyvocalsemioticsof the body and its corporealcoordinates,
about). Rather than assumethat the subject is somehowprior to the a single substanceof expressionis produced through the subjectionof
societyof which it becomesa member,Deleuzeand Guattari take the bodiesto disciplineby the abstractmachineof faciality(a'blackhole/white
Foucaultianstancethat collectivesystemsof enunciation(thesecould be wall system');the fluxesof the organicstrataare supersededby the strata
comparedto Michel Foucault'sdiscursivesystems,for examplelegal dis- of signifianceand subjectification(D&G 1987: 18l). The 'white, male,
course)and machinicassemblages (thesecould be comparedto Foucault's adult, ttrational,ttetc.,in short the averageEuropeantis the tcentral'point
nondiscursivesystems,for examplethe bodies,lay-out and behaviours by referenceto which binary distributions are organised.All the lines
relatedto the court room) are the condition of the subjectsthey produce. definedby pointsreproducingor resonatingwith the centralpoint arepart
What countsasmcaningfulspeechis dictatednot by an individualsubjcct, of thc arbrlrcsccnt systcmthat constitutes'Man' as ir 'giganticmcmory'
but by tlrc svstcmsof 'signifiancc'thtt clctcrnrincwhat nrlkcs scnscin (l)&G lt)li7: 293). 'l'hc nrnjoritlrirn strndrrcl is thus this 'irvcnrgc'
152 MA R X ) K AR I- (r8 r8-83) M ARx, KARI - ( r 8 r 8- 83) 153

European constituted throughout the social field in its myriad forms Marx, but the analysisof which had fallen somewhatinto abeyanceas a
through the systemsof signifianceand subjectification
of variousdomains. result of the emphasison the commodity promoted by the Frankfurt
Schooland cultural studiesin recentdecades.But Deleuzeand Guattari
give this notion a novel twist. First, they eschewdialectics,asa matter of
Connectives philosophicalexigency.As they seeit, dialecticsis a speciesof the logic of
Arborescentschema identity which collapses'difference' into the rational 'same', and so
Black hole inevitablyensuesin a disavowalof multiplicity. Secondly,production is
Deterritorialisation not simply understoodby them in terms of such items as investment,
Foucault manufacturing,businessstrategies,and so on. Instead, Deleuze and
Guattari accordprimacy to 'machinic processes',that is, the modes of
organisationthat link attractions,repulsions,expressions,and so on,
which affectthe humanbody.For Deleuzeand Guattari the modesof pro-
MARX, KARL (1818-83)
duction are thereforeexpressionsof desire,so that it is desirewhich is
truly productive;and the modesof production aremerelythe outcomeof
Kenneth Surin generativedesire. Desire has this generativeprimacy
this ceaselessly
Karl Marx doesnot receive dealof explicit attention in the writings becauseit is desire, which is alwayssocial and collective, that makesthe
of Deleuze and Guattari, though it is clear that the Marxist paradigm is gun (say)into an instrument of war, or of hunting, or sport, and so forth
a crucial if tacit framework for many of the conceptionsdevelopedin the (asthe casemay be).
two volumes of Capitalismand,Schizophrenia.Especially significant is The mode of production is on the samelevel asany other expressionsof
Marx's dictum in The Germanld,eology(1932)that 'the nature of individ- the modesof desire,and so for Deleuze and Guattari there is neither base
uals dependson the materialconditions determiningtheir production'. nor superstructure in society but only stratifications, that is, accumula-
Deleuze,of course,interprets this dictum in a distinctive and even 'post- tions or concatenationsof ordered functions which are expressionsof
Marxist' fashion.The necessityfor this (Deleuzian)reconsrirutionof the desire.What enableseach mode of production to be createdis a specific
Marxist project stemsfrom the crisis of utopia representedby the demise amalgam of desires,forces and powers, and the mode (of production)
of 'actuallyexistingsocialism',markedin particularby the eventsthat led emergesfrom this amalgam.In the process,traditional Marxist concep-
to the collapseof the SovietUnion in 1989(it should,however,be noted tions are reversed:it is not the mode that enablesproduction to take place
that for Deleuze and Guattari this crisis had its beginningsin 1968). (the gist of these accounts);rather, it is desiring-production itself that
Marxism is depictedby them asa set of axiomsthat governsthe field that makesthe mode what it is. Capitalismand,Schizophreniais this ontology of
is capitalism,and so the crisisof utopia poses,asa matter of urgency,the desiring-production.
questionof the complianceof this field with the axiomsthat constitute Marx maintainedthat it is necessaryfor societyand the State to exist
Marxism. To know that capitalismin its current manifestationis congru- beforesurplus value is realisedand capitalcan be accumulated.Deleuze
ent with the Marxist axiomaticresort has to be made to a higher-order and Guattari alsosaythat it is the Statewhich givescapitalits 'modelsof
principle that, necessarily,is not'Marxist': this metatheoretical specifica- realisation'.Before anything can be generatedby capital,politics has to
tion tells us in virtue of what conditionsand principlesthisfield (capital- exist.The linkagebetweencapitaland politicsis achievedby an apparatus
ism) is governedby this axioma,tic(Marxism). Deleuze and Guattari that transcodesa particularspaceof accumulation.This transcodingpro-
provide this metatheoreticalelaborationby resorting to a constitutive videsa prior realisationor regulatedexpenditureof labourpowerand it is
ontology of power and political practice.This ontology is influencedby the function of the Stateto organiseits membersinto a particularkind of
Baruch Spinoza, Friedrich Nietzsche,and Henri Bergson more than productiveforce.Today capitalhas reacheda stagebeyond the one pre-
Marx, which perhapsaccountsfor the chargethat the authorsof Capitalism vailingat Marx's time. Capitalis now omnipresent,and links the mosthet-
and,Schizophrenia are'post-Marxist'. crogeneouselements(commerce,religion, art, and so forth). Productive
Ccntral for the authors of Caltitalismand Schizophrenia is thc dclin- labour is inscrtcclinto cvery componentof society.But preciselybecause
cirti<lnof thc moclcof procluction,which is of'courscr crucialnotion filr capitrrlis ubiquitous,and hirsa prior socialc<xtpcrrtionas its cnrrbling
154 M ARX * eNToNr o NEGR r M AR X + AN TON IO N EGR I 155

condition, it hasits unavoidablelimits. capital needsthis prior organisa- sophicaland politicalthought.Among the questionsthey sharearethe fol-
tion of cooperationin order to succeed,and it followsfrom this that col- lowing:How canwe be faithful to the legacyof Baruch Spinoza?What are
lectivesubjectshavea potential powerthat capitalismitself cannotcapture. the stakesof contemporarymaterialism?How can the thought of Marx be
The questionof revolutionis thus the questionof finding a politics that rescuedfrom both structuralismand humanism?In what sensecan con-
will usethis collectivesubjectivitysothat the productiveforceof societyis temporarycapitalismbe consideredas both immanentand transcendentl
subjectedto nothing but the desireof its members. How canwe articulatenewmodelsof subjectivationin light of the critiques
of Cartesianand Kantian imagesof the subject?
Connectives Deleuzeand Negri repeatedlysituatetheir work in terms of a continu-
ation of Spinoza'sontology.Both locatein Spinozaa singularbreakwith
Capitalism the philosophiesof transcendence and legitimation,driven by the consti-
Stratification tution of a thoroughgoingimmanentphilosophy.WhereasDeleuze'swrit-
ingson Spinozahighlight the mannerin which Spinoza'sthoughtprovides
us with a practicaland affirmativeextensionof Duns Scotus'thesisof uni-
MARX + ANTONIO NEGRI vocity, Negri's The Sazsage Anomaly (1981), taking into account the
Spinoziststudiesof Deleuze,Pierre Machereyand AlexandreMatheron,
Alberto Toscano pointsinsteadto the tensionsopenedup at the heartof Spinoza'sontology
by the emergenceof capitalismin seventeenth-century Holland and the
Deleuzeencountered the work of Antonio Negri andthe traditionof Italian formulationof a notion of absolutedemocracy.Though their methodolo-
workeristMarxism (operaismo) via Guattari,who waspersonallyinvolved giesdiverge,Deleuzepreferring a far more internalistreadingto Negri's
with the free radio movemenrand other politicalinitiativesin the Italy of historical materialist approach,both concur on the need to think the flat-
the late 1970s,and who met Negri when rhe latter was invited by Louis tening of substanceonto its modes,understoodas centresof force and
Althusser to lecture on Karl Marx's Grundrisseat the Ecole Normale compositionlaid out on a planeof immanence.It is on the basisof a directly
Sup6rieure,in a seriesof lectureslater publishedasMarx Beyond, Marx. politicalunderstandingof ontologyasinextricablefrom practice(whether
During Negri'simprisonmentfor his politicalactivitiesin Italy in rhe'years as communist revolution or ethology) that Negri and Deleuze wish to
of lead'(1970s), Deleuzecameto his defencewith a publicletter.It hasbeen extracta materialistlineagein the history of philosophy,one that can be
Negri's greatmerit to emphasise the persistence
of Marxist themesin the seento combat the attemptsto legislateover the contingencyof being
writings of Deleuzeand Guattari,and to appropriateand recasta number through variousforms of representational thought.
of their concepts in his own attempt to transform the vocabulary of In this respect,Negri and Deleuzeconsiderthe critique of transcend-
Marxism in light of new modesof political subjectivity,new regimesof ence as an eminently political matter, linked to the liberation of forces
capitalaccumulationand new strategiesof commandand control. whilst capableof entering into compositionwithout the aid of supplementary
Deleuzeand Guattari'sinfluencecanalreadybe felt in Negri's textsof the dimensions(for examplesovereignty).Their concurrentattemptsto move
1980s,it is most evidentin Empire(with MichaelHardt), wherenotionsof with andbeyondMarx in an analysisof contemporarycapitalismandpolit-
virtuality, deterritorialisationand smooth spacefeatureprominently in the ical subjectivity can thus be graspedas passaBes from a transcendentalor
attemptto schematise the changesin the structuresof sovereigntyand the dialecticalmode of thought to an immanentor constructivistone. Their
dynamicsof resistance. The influqnceis by no meansunilateral:alreadyin rcsearchprogrammesconvergeon the notion of contemporarycapitalasa
A Thousond' Plateaus,the work of Mario Tronti and Negri's uptakeof it is vcry particularadmixtureof immanenceand transcendence, oneno longer
identified asan important precursorfor an understandingof contemporary thinkablein terms of a dialecticaltotality.This is encapsulated in Deleuze
capitalismthat acknowledges the paradoxicalcentralityof 'marginal'forms by the conceptof the axiomaticand in Negri by that of Empire. In both
of subjectivity(students,women,domesticwork, unemployment,and so cirscsdialecticalantagonismis transformedinto a figure of conflict that
on). Ratherthan speakingof influences,it might be preferableto consider sccsfirrms of subjcctivityirreducibleto the figuresof peopleor citizenry
therelationship of Dcleuze(andGuattari)to Negri in termsof a significant (thrrtis collcctivcirsscmblagcs of cnunciirtion,thc multitude)confronted
ovcrhpin whrt thc.yrcgardrrsthc kcy problcmsfircingcontcmprlrrrry phikr- with it pitritsiticllilgcncytlut scckst() cilpturc,controlrrrclcxpklit thcm.

It should be noted that Negri's abiding preoccupationwith the Marxian abstractphenomenonthat does not depend entirely upon physicaland
concept of real subsumption and his refashioningof class struggle mechanicalmodificationsof matter.The machineis insteada function of
differentiatehis approachfrom the definitionof capitalismasan axiomatic what might be thought of as the 'vital' principle of this planeof consist-
(which still demandsmodelsof realisation)and of resistancein terms of ency,which is that of makingnew connections,and in this way construct-
minority (which seemshostileto norionsof classcomposition). ing what Deleuze calls 'machines'. Nor should Deleuze's machinic
materialismbe seen as a form of cybernetics,accordingto which the
organic and the mechanical share a common informational language.
MATERIALISM The fact that cinemaand painting are capableof actingdirectly upon the
nervoussystemmeansthat they function as analogicallanguagesrather
than digital codes.In common with the sort of materialismfavouredby
John Marks
cyberneticsand theories of artificial intelligence,Deleuze rejects the
Deleuze'swork is undoubtedlymaterialistin orientation,but this material- notion that there is brain behind the brain: an organisingconsciousness
ism must be consideredin the light of the vitalismand empiricismthat also that harnessesand directs the power of the brain. He conceivesof the
characterises this work. Deleuzedrawsinspirationfor his materialismfrom a humanbrain asmerelyone cerebralcrystallisationamongstothers:a cere-
varietyof sources, but BaruchSpinoza,FriedrichNiezsche,Henri Bergson bral fold in matter. Deleuze's particular formulation of materialism
and Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz are all extremely important in this depends upon the counterintuitive Bergsoniannotion that matter is
respect.Spinozaand Nietzschechallengethe devaluationof the body in already'image':beforeit is perceivedit is 'luminous' in itself; the brain is
favourof consciousness, and in this way proposea materialistreadingof itself an image.However,he alsoeschewsthe reductivemolecularmateri-
thought.They showthatthoughtshouldno longerbeconstrained by thecon- alism upon which artificial intelligenceis based.According to such a
sciousness wehaveof it. BergsonandLeibniz- Deleuzeis alsoinfluencedby reductive materialism,all processesand realities can be explainedby
challengeto the matter-formmodel pur forwardby Gilbert Simondon- reducing them down to the most basic components - atoms and
influenceDeleuzein the way he developsa challengeto the hylomorphic molecules- from which they areconstructed.Again,the fact that he insists
model: the metaphysicaldoctrine that distinguishesbetweenmatter and that painting and film can act directly upon the nervoussystemto create
form. In contrastto this, Deleuzeclaimsthat matteris in continuousvaria- new neuralpathwaysindicatesthat he is not a reductivematerialist.
tion, so that we shouldnot think in termsof formsasmoulds,but ratherin Ultimately,Deleuzeis unwilling to reduceall matter to a singlestratum
terms of modulationsthat produce singularities.In A ThousandPlatenus, of syntax. Computer technologymay well transform the world of the
Deleuze and Guattari talk of destratified and deterritorialised 'marrer- future, but it will not be by meansof the developmentof a computational
movement'and (matter-energy'. FollowingSpinoza,theychallenge the hier- languagethat is common to the brain and the computer.It will insteadbe
archyof form andmatterby conceiving of animmanent'plane of consistency' the resultof computersexpandingthe possibilitiesfor thought in new and
on which eyerythingis laid out. The elementsof this planearedistinguish- perhapsunpredictableways.In this manner,the brain and the computer
ableonly in termsof movementand velocity.Deleuzeand Guattarialsotalk will take part in the constructionof an abstractmachine.In his work on
of the planebeingpopulatedby inifinite 'bits' of impalpableandanonymous cinema,Deleuzedevelopsthe notion of the brain as a fold of the outside
matterthat enterinto varyingconnections. Deleuze'slater work on Leibniz or a'screen'.He considers,for example,MichelangeloAntonioni'sfilms to
develops this theme,againemphasising thatmatteris not organised asa series be an explorationof the way in which the brain is connectedto the world,
of solidand discreteforms,but ratherinfinitelyfolded. and the necessity of exploring the potential of these connections.
In order to graspthe originalityof Deleuze'smaterialismit is necessary Antonioni drawsa contrastbetweenthe worn-out body,weigheddown by
to understandwhat he meanswhen he usesthe terms 'machine' and the pastandmodernneuroses, and a tcreative'brain,strivingto createcon-
'machinic'.In his bookon Michel Foucaulr,he speculates on rhe possibil- ncctions with the new world around it, and experiencingthe potential
ities for new human forms openedup by the combinationof the forcesof rrmplificationof its powersby 'artificial'brains.For Deleuze,thinking takes
carbonand silicon.However,this statementshouldnot necessarily be read pl:rccwhcn thc brain asa stratum comesinto contactwith other strata.In
in termsof the humanbody beingsupplemented or alteredby meansof sunrmary,| )clcuzc thinks in tcrms <>fan expressiae 'andintensiacmaterial-
rnrrtcrillprosthcscs, 'l'hc sort of nrlchinc thirt I)clcuzcconccivcs<lfis ln isnrirsrrlrlroscdl<t',rrtil.uc'liztr nriltcriillisnr.
:tnd n'/cflsiz,c
158 MATERTALTsM+ pHrr-osopHy M EM O R Y 159

Connectives philosophy is the task of arranging theseinto assemblages that constitute

Foucault multiplicities.Deleuzeoncesaidthat eachplateauof A Thousand, Plateaus
wasan exampleof suchan assemblage. Philosophyis not so much a form of
reflectionasa kind of constructionism institutedon the planeof immanence.
At the sametime, philosophyis not just a kind of physicalism,insisting
on the substantialityof Being,that is setentirelyapartfrom noology,which
MATERIALISM + PHILOSOPHY asan immaterialisminsistson the primacyof thought,and in particularthe
image of thought. For Deleuze,the image of thought is a kind of pre-
Kenneth Surin philosophy,and thus is inextricablybound up with philosophy.The image
of thought operateson the plane of immanence,and constitutesa pre-
For Deleuzeand Guattari,traditionalphilosophyhasalwaysfunctionedon philosophicalpresuppositionthat philosophyhasto satisfy.The imageof
the basisof codesthat haveeffectivelyturned it into a bureaucracyof the thought,evenif it is an immaterialism,is not antitheticalto a strict materi-
consciousness. Traditional philosophyhasneverbeenableto abandonits alism.The planeof immanencerevealsthe 'unthought' in thought,and its
originsin the codificationsof the despoticimperialState.The taskof phi- absoluteincompatibilitywith materialismonly comesaboutwhen philoso-
losophynow is to controvertthis traditionalphilosophyin a waythat canbe phers forget that thought and the constitutionof matter havethe funda-
revolutionary only if the new or next philosophyseeksto 'transmit some- mentalontologicalcharacterof events,and insteadidentify 'matter' with
thing that doesnot and will not allowitself to be codified'.This 'transmis- Body,and 'thought' with Mind, in this way saddlingthemselveswith an
sion' will eschewthe drama of interiority that traditional philosophy had impassethat cannotbe resolvedbecauseMind and Body are saidto possess
perforce to invest in as a condition of being what it is, and will instead mutuallyincompatibleproperties('inert'vs'active','material'vs'spiritual',
involve the creation of conceptsthat can registerand delineatethe trans- and so forth). The ontology of events,by contrast,allowsthe material and
missionof forcesto bodies,that is, it will be a physicsof thought, the think- immaterialto be interrelatedand integratedin a ceaseless dynamism.Thus,
ing of a pure exteriority,in the mannerof Deleuze'stwo greatprecursors, the eventof 'a housebeingbuilt' requiresmanymaterialthingsto be given
Baruch Spinozaand Friedrich Nietzsche,and as such will be irreducibly functions (windows let in light, doors protect privacy stairs enableaccess,
materialist.For Deleuzeand Guattari,philosophythat hasleft behindthe and so on), and these functions in turn involve (immaterial)concepts
codificationsof the Statewill be aboutbodiesand forces,and the concepts (unlessone has the conceptof stairsbeing able to provide accessin this
designedto bring theseto thought.It will thereforehavean essentialrela- rather than that way,a ladder,lift or hoist could servejust effectivelyas
tion to nonphilosophyaswell, sinceit will be rootedin perceptsand affects. stairsin enablingaccessto an upper floor). So conceptsare returned to
This materialismthat is philosophywill bring somerhingto life, it will materialthings via functions,and things are integratedwith conceptsvia
extricatelife from theplaceswhereit hasbeentrapped,andit will createlines functions,while functions are immaterialbut can only be embodiedin
of flight from thesestases. The creationof theselinesof flight constitutes thingsevenasthey canonly be expressed in concepts.All the time a radical
eventsand,asevents,they arequite distantfrom the abstractions that con- immanenceis preserved.For Deleuze the materialismof philosophyis
stitute the staplediet of traditionalphilosophy.Deleuzeis emphaticthat compromisedonly when the immaterialis harnessedto the transcendent:
abstractions explainnothing,but rather are themselves in needof explan- without resortto the transcendent,immaterialismand materialismcan be
ation.So the newphilosophythat will experimentwith the real,will eschew kept on the sameplane- immanence- and madeto interactproductively.
suchabStractions asuniversals, unities,subjects,objects,multiples,and put
in their placethe processes that culminatein the productionof the abstrac-
tionsin question.Soin placeof universals we haveprocesses of universalisa-
tion; in place of subjects and objects we have subjectificationand MEMORY
objectification; in placeof unitieswehaveunification;in placeof themultiplc
we havemultiplication;andsoon. Theseprocesses CliffStagoll
takeplaceon the plancof
immanence,sincecxpcrimentationcan only takeplaceimmancntly.In thc l)clcuzchnslittlc time f<rrmemoryconceivedasa meansfor summoning
cnd ir conccptis only rrsingulrrrity ('rrchild', 'a thinkcr','a musiciirn'),
irnd Suchir modcl hcks crcltivc p<ttcntillrrndimplicsthat an
160 M EM O RY M ER L EAU - Po N TY, M AU R IcE (rgo8-6r) l6l

object,say,can be re-presentedand re-cognisedas the se,lneone as that might be realisedwill be determinedby the precisecircumstancesof its
experiencedin the past.But such a view ignoresthe fact that today'srec- actualisation.
ollectionis quite a differentexperiencetemporallyand contextuallyfrom As a collectionof purely airtual images,memory hasno psychological
either the original experienceor previousrecollections.To theoriseaway existence,being insteada purely ontological'past in general'that is pre-
such differencesis to discount the productive potential that Deleuze servedneitherin time nor space.(As such,lossof memoryought not to be
considersinherentin the operationof memory in favourof tying oneself conceivedas a lossof 'contents'from pure memory,but merely a break-
to the past. down of recall mechanisms.)The virtual imagesare arrangedin various
Despite proclaiming his lack of enthusiasm for memory as a topic, patternsthat might be conceivedas 'planes'or'sheets', with everyplane
Deleuzenonetheless reworkedhis conceptionof it severaltimes.In early containing the totality of the experiencedpast distributed relative to some
work on David Hume, Deleuzedealt with how the reproductiveand rep- particularvirtual image,the one from which all otherson the planederive
resentationaleffectsof memoryarecritical to the fiction of personaliden- their meaningand history.
tity becauseof their role in establishingrelations of resemblanceand Purememorywill be revealedto consciousness whenthe relevantvirtual
causation.In his writings on Henri Bergson,though, and in his own imagesare actualised,a matter rarely mentionedin Bergson'stexts but
philosophiesof difference,Deleuzemoved beyond such 'habit memory' central to Deleuze.Such actualisationis the processof recollectionin
to theorisehow 'blocksof history' might be brought into productiveasso- which the virtual differentiatesitself by becoming somethingnew - a
ciations with the present,such that the past might be lived anew and recalledmemoryimagerelevantto someactionor circumstance- and thus
differently. assumingpsychologicalsignificance.Deleuze'senigmatic descriptionof
Deleuze'sBergsoniantheoriesof consciousness outline two kinds of the processhas two parts.First, memory is accessed by meansof a 'leap
operation.One is the 'line of materiality',upon which he theorisesrela- into the past', enabling the most relevant plane to be located. Second,
tionshipsbetweenthe mind and the materialworld (including the body). memory is brought to presenceand givena new'life'or contextin terms
Such activity alwaysoccursin the present,understoodas a purely theor- of current circumstances.In this moment, psychology interacts with
eticaldemarcationbetweenpastand future. On this line, our relationship ontologyin the constitutionof the lived present,a specialkind of synthe-
with matteris wholly materialandunmediated:the world of consciousness sisthat Deleuzeconsidersto be essentialto the flow of lived time.
is reconciledwith the world of matterby meansof differentkindsof move- Two aspectsof Deleuze'sBergsoniantheory of memory are critical to
ment. Such activity is alwaysorientedrowardsthe practicallife of action his anti-foundationalism.First, it showsthat one need not conceiveof a
rather than pure knowledge.As such, the form of memory at work is transcendentsubject'owning' memory in order for recollectionto occur.
'habit memory', reflex determination of appropriatebodily responses Indeed, Deleuze arguesthe opposite:memory helps to give rise to the
conditionedby whateverhasprovedusefulin the past,but without'pure impressionof a consistentand unifying self.Second,it showsthat memory,
recollection'. ratherthan merelyredrawingthe past,constitutesthe pastasa new present
Being distinct from consciousness,the line of materiality cannot relative to presentinterestsand circumstances.Thus conceived,memory
account for the temporality of lived experience.Consequently,Deleuze is a creative power for producing the new rather than a mechanismfor
invokesBergson'stheory of pure memory on a 'line of pure subjectivity'. reproducingthe same.
Bergsonbelievesthat pure memorystoreseveryconsciouseventin its par-
ticularity and detail.The perceptionsof acrualexistenceareduplicatedin
a virtual existenceas imageswith the potentialfor becomingconscious, Connectives
actualones.Thus everylived moment is both actualand virtual, with per- Bergson
ception on one side and memory on the other; an ever-growingmassof Virtual/Virtuality
Taking his lead from Bergson,Deleuze contendsthat the virtual is
definedby its potentialfor becomingconscious.Ratherthan merelysimu-
lating the real (as in 'virtual reality' media), the virtual might bc MERLEAU-PONTY, MAURICE (l90tt-61)- rcficrto the cntricson
mlclc tctual irnds()hirvcsomcconscqucntncw cffcct.How this potcntirrl * fillcl'rnd'phcnomcnology'.

MICROPOLITICS of affectanddesirehasnow becomemuchmoresignificantfor determining

linesof affiliationin contemporarypolitics.
Kenneth Surin The orchestrationof desire in micropolitics will have an oscillating
logic,asthe desireconstrainedby the ordersofcapital is deterritorialised,
Deleuze and Guattari opposemicropolitics to rhe politics of molarisa- so that it becomesa desire exterior to capital, and is then reterritorialised
tion. Where the molar (or'arborescent', to use their equivalentterm) or foldedbackinto the socialfield. When this happensthe liberateddesire
designatesstructuresand principlesthat arebasedon rigid stratifications integratesinto itself the flows and componentsof the Socius or social
or codingswhich leaveno room for all that is flexibleand contingent,the field to form a 'desiringmachine'.The heart of micropoliticsis the con-
molecular which is the basis of micropolitics allows for connections struction of thesenew desiring machinesas well as the creationof new
that are local and singular.A molecular logic of production is basically linkagesbetweendesiring machines:without a politics to facilitatethis
self-organisingor auto-poetic,whereasits molar counterpart finds its constructionthere can be no productivedesire,only the endlessrepeti-
generating principle in some feature or entity that is external to what is tion of the non-different, as what is repeated is regulated by logics of
being produced. The necessityof micropolitics for Deleuze and Guattari identity, equivalenceand intersubstitutability(this being the underlying
stemsfrom the current conjuncture of capitalistproduction and accu- logic of the commodity principle as analysedby Karl Marx). In microp-
mulation. In this conjuncture,capitalhasbecomethe ever-presentcon- olitics the fateof repeatinga differencethat is only an apparentdifference
dition that ensuresthe harmonisationof eventhe most disparateforms is avoided,and capitalism'snegative,wasteful and ultimately nonpro-
(businessand finance,the arts,leisure,and so forth). This is the agethat ductive repetition, a repetition of nonbeing,is supplantedby the poly-
Deleuzetitles 'the societiesof control' and it contrastswith the disciplin- topia of a micropolitics that brings together the strata of minorities,
ary societiesof the nineteenthand early twentieth centuries.[n this con- becomings,incorporealities,concepts,'peoples',in this way launchinga
iuncture, the scopeof labour hasbeen amplified exponentially,ascapital thought and practice capableof expressingand instantiating a desire to
permeatesevery interstice of society:the ubiquity of capital coincides undo the prevailingworld order.
with the expansionof everything capableof creating surplus-value,as Micropolitics, therefore,createsan 'ethos of permanent becoming-
human consciousness and all that was hitherto considered(private' is revolutionary',an ethosnot constrainedby a politicspredicatedon the now
relentlesslyincorporated into the latest structures of accumulation. defunct forms of Soviet bureaucraticsocialismand a liberal or social
Capitalism has always had as its 'utopia' the capacity to function democracy.In this ethos, our criteria of belonging and affiliation will
without the State and in the current coniuncture this disposition has alwaysbe subject to a kind of chaotic motion, and a new political know-
become more profoundly entrenched. On the other hand, for Deleuze ledgeis createdwhich dissipatesthe enablinglie told us by thosewho now
and Guattari this is not becauseState apparatuseshave disappeared havepoliticalpower,with their lovefor nation-states, tribes,clans,political
(clearly they havenot); rather the rigid demarcationbetweenState and parties,churches,and perhapseverythingdone up to now in the nameof
society is no longer tenable.Society and State now constitute one all- community.At the sametime, this ethoswill createnew collectivesolidar-
encompassingreality, and all capital has becomesocial capital. Hence, ities not basedon theseold 'loves'.
the generationof socialcooperation,undertakenprimarily by the service
and informational industries in the advanced economies, has become
a crucial one for capitalism. Connectives
In a situationof this kind, a molar politics with its emphasison stand- Affect
ardisationand homogeneitybecomesincreasinglyirrelevant,as the trad- Becoming
itional dividing line between'right' and 'left' in politicsbecomesblurred, Control society
and such notions as 'the radical centre' gain credencedespite being Desire
patentlyoxymoronic;and as traditional classaffiliationsdissolveand the lioucault
socialdivisionof labouris radicallyrransformedby theemergencc of infor- Molar
mation and serviceindustrics.Thc cnablingconditionsof micrupolitics Molccuhr
clcrivcfrom this sctilf'dcvclopnlcnts. 'l'hc upslrotis thrrtthc orchcstrttion S<rcius

MINORITARIAN remarksthat the axiomaticworld of the majority manipulatesonly denu-

merablesets.Minorities,by contrast,constitutenon-axiomatic(or axiomis-
VerenaConley able)sets,that is, massesor multiplicitiesof escapeand flux. The majority
assumesa standardmeasure,representedby the integral integer,say,an
'Minoritarian' is often used in relation to postcolonial theory and the armedwhite maleor thoseactinglike one.Domination alwaystranslatesinto
conceptof minor literature. The term is developedin connectionwith lan- hegemony.A determination that differs from the constant is considered
guageand the 'order-word',that is, a pass-wordthat both compelsobedi- minoritarian.Majority is an abstractstandardthat canbe saidto includeno
ence and opens passages. In this senseDeleuze arguesthat language, oneandthusspeakin the nameof nobody.A minority is a deviationfrom the
because it dealswith the art of the possible,is fundamentallypolitical.The modelor a becomingof everybody(toutle monde). The majoritarianmodeis
scientific undertaking of extracting constantsis alwayscoupled with the a constantwhile its minoritariancounterpartis a subsystem.Minoritarian is
politicalenterpriseof socialcontrol that worksby imposingthem on speak- seenaspotential(puissance), creativeand in becoming.Blacks,Jews,Arabsor
ers and transmitting order-words.In order to cope with this condition womencan only createby making possiblea becoming,but neverthrough
Deleuzestatesthat we needto distinguishbetweena major and minor lan- ownership.Deleuzestatesclearlythat a majorityis nevera becoming.
guage,that is, betweena power (pouaoir)of constants and,a power Deleuzeobserves thatour ageis becomingtheageof minorities.Minorities
sance)of variables.In the political spherewhere a 'maior' languageis seen aredefinednot by numberbut by becomingand by their lines of fluctuation.
and heard,there alsoinheresin its form a 'minor' elementthat doesnot Minorities areobjectivelydefinablestates.One canalsothink of them asseeds
exist independentlyor outsideof its expressionand statements. of becomingwhosevalueis to trigger uncontrollablefluctuationsand deter-
The morea languagehasor acquiresthe characteristics of a major form, ritorialisations.A minor languageis a major languagein the processof
the more likely it is to be affectedby continuousvariationsthat can trans- becoming minoq and a minority a majority in the processof change.
poseit into a minor language.A languagealwayshas internal minorities. Becoming asDeleuzestatestime and againin his work on politics,literature
No homogeneoussystemremainsunaffectedby immanent processes of and the arts, is creation.It is the becomingof everybody.In the processof
variation.constantsdo not existsideby sidewith variables;theyaredrawn becomingminor,the figureof death(nobody)giveswayto life (everybody).
from the variablesthemselves.Major and minor aretwo different usagesof
the samelanguage.A minor languageopensa passagein the order-word
that constitutesany of the operativeredundanciesof the major language. Connectives
The problemis not the distinctionbetweenmajor and minor languagebut Becoming
one of becoming.A person(a subject,but alsoa creativeand activeindi- Deterritorialisation
vidual) has to deterritorialise the major languagerather than reterritori- Maioritarian
aliseherself within an inherited dialect.Recourseto a minor languageputs Order-word
the maior languageinto flight. Minoritarian authorsarethosewho arefor- Power
eignersin their own tongue.
A minority is not definedby the paucityof its numbersbut by its capacity
to becomeor, in its subjectivegeography,to draw for itself lines of fluctu-
ation that openup a gapand separateit from the axiomconstitutinga redun- MINORITARIAN + CINEMA
dantmajority.A majorityis linkedto a stateof poweranddomination.what
definesmajoritiesandminoritiesarethe relationsinternal to number.For the Constantine Verezsis
majority,this relationconstitutesa setthat is denumerable. The minority is ln Cinerna2: Thetirne-image, Deleuzeinvokeshis writing (with Guattari)
nodenumerable,but it may havemany elements.The non-denumerableis on Franz Kafka and minor literatures to describea 'minor cinema'-
characterised by the presenceof connections, that is, the additiveconjunc- firundedin the Third World and its minorities - that connectsimmedi-
tion 'and' or the mathematical sign' * ': a minoritarianlanguage is ,x t y and irtclyto the qucstionof politics.Sucha (modern)politicalcinemais char-
b f traitsa * a and. . .'. It is producedbetween setsandbclongsto ncithcr. rctcriscd(rnd oppuscdto clirssicirlcincma)in thrcc wirys.First, a min<lr
It cludcsthcmrnclcunsritutcs rrlincof flight.In mrthcmatical tcrmsl)clcuzc cincnu docs not rcplcscnt (or lcldrcss)ln olrprcsscdiurcl subjcctccl

people,but rather anticipatesa peopleyet to be created,a consciousness connectionsestablished betweenlocaland internationalforcesand condi-
to be brought into existence.Second,a minor cinemadoesnot maintain tions. A film such as Tran Anh Hung's Cyclo (France-Vietnam,1995)
a boundary betweenthe private and the public, but rather crossesborders, understandsthis type of approach.On the one hand, the local (or intra-
merging the personalwith the social to make it immediately political. national)multi-layeredness of Cyclais evidentin its useof variousregional
And third, recognisingthat the people exist only in the condition of a dialects: for instance,the cyclo-driver of the film's title and his sisterspeak
minority, political cinemadoesnot identify a new union (a singularity), in the vernacularof the North and of the South of Vietnam.On the other
but rather creates(and recreates)a multiplicity of conditions.Deleuze hand,the hybridisationof global(or international)forcesis evidentin the
describesthis minor cinemaasone that setsout, not to representthe con- film's useof music(Tranh Lam, Radiohead,RollinsBand) and its expres-
ditions of an oppressedminority, but rather to invent new valuesand sive vocabulary,one that drawsupon influencesas diverseas TheBicycle
facilitatethe creationof a peoplewho havehitherto been missing.Like Thid(Yittorio De Sica, 1948), Taxi Drizser(Martin Scorsese,1976), and
Kafka's minor literature,a minor cinemais interestedneither in repre- Himatsuri(Mitsuo Yanagimatchi,1985).
sentationor interpretation,but in experimentation:it is a creativeact of As in the minor useof language,minoritariancinemaceasesto be rep-
becoming. resentationaland moves instead towards its limits. This is evident in
Deleuzerelateshis accountof minoritariancinemato the work of Third Cyclo,where the beginning of the film, situated in the streetsof neo-
World filmmakers (Lino Brocka, Glauber Rocha, Chahine Nasserism) realism,and in the daily toil and routine of a cyclo driver, soon takesthe
and in doing so implicitly recallsthe notion of 'Third Cinema',advanced viewer- through its wayward and itinerant movements- in unpredictable
by Latin Americanfilmmakersin the late 1960s.In their founding mani- and evendangerousdirections.The focusof this movementis on becom-
festo - Towardsa Third Cinema- Fernando Solanasand Octavio Getino ing, on relations,on what happensbetween:betweenactions,between
calledfor a cinemathat wasmilitant in its politicsand experimentalin its affections,betweenperceptions.For Deleuze,a minor cinemais situated
approach.The manifestodescribed'First Cinema'- the so-calledimperial in a logic and an aestheticsof the 'and'. It is a creativestammering(and
cinema of big capital - as an objective and representationalcinema. . . . and . . . and), a minoritarian use of languagethat the French-
'SecondCinema' - the authorialcinemaof the petty bourgeoisie- was VietnameseTran would sharewith Deleuze'sfavouredexamples(Kafta,
describedas a subjectiveand symbolic cinema. By contrasr, 'Third SamuelBeckett,Jean-LucGodard). Cyclocanbeapproachedasa kind of
Cinema'- a politicalor minoritariancinema- wasan attitude,one con- living reality,a type of creativeunderstandingbetweencolours,between
cerned neither with representation(a being-whole)nor subjectification people,betweencinemas- betweenthe red (of the poet) end.the blue (of
(a being-one),but with life-experimentation - the creationand exhibition the cyclo) ond,the yellow (of the fish-boy); betweenthe First, and the
of localdifference.In later writing, Solanasexplainedthat Third Cinema, Second.and the Third.
though initially adaptedto conditionsprevailingin Latin America,could
not be limited to that continent;nor evento the Third World, nor evento
a particularcategoryof cultural objects,but rather constituteda kind of
virtual geographyand conditionalobiecthood.For Solanas,Third Cinema
(as opposedto Third World cinema) was broadly concernedwith the
expressionof new culturesand of socialchange:Third Cinemais ,anopen
category,unfinished,and incomplete'. In a l9l2 diary entry, Kafta reflectson the advantagesCzech and Yiddish
Third Cinema- minor cinema- is a researchcategoryone that recog- writers enioy as contributorsto minor literatures,in which no towering
nisesthe contingencyand multiplicity - the hybridity - of all cultural figuresdominateand the life of lettersis consumedwith collectivesocialand
objects.Paul Willemen, in 'The Third Cinema Q3restion',explainsthat politicalconcerns.Deleuzeand Guattariarguethat Kafka'scharacterisation
practitionersof rhird cinema refusedro opposeessentialistnotions of of minor literaturesactuallymapsKafka's own conceptionof literature's
'national identity and cultural authenticity' to the values of imperial properfunctionand guideshis practiceasa PragueJew writing in German.
powers,but rather recognisedthe multiplicity or 'many-layeredness of 'l'hc csscnccof Kafka'sminor literatureDeleuzeand Guattarifind in three
their own cultural-historicalfrrrmarions'.That is, a minor cincma f'caturcs: of langulgc,thc conncctionof thc individ-
'thc clctcrritorillizittion
(a nrrtionalcincml) is not singulirr,but shtpcclby complcxrrnclnrultiplc tull to ir p<llitical
inrnrcdilcy,rnd thc collcctivcitsscmblitgcol'ctttnciation'

(D&G 1986:l8). Kafka discoversin PragueGerman the instabilitiesof interaction be created.Such a processof becomingother is central to
a deracinatedgovernmentlanguagesubtlydeformedthroughCzechusage, minor literatureand its minor usageof languageand this minor becoming
and in his writings he further destabilisesthat alreadydeterritorialised otheris that which turns a dominatedminority into an activeforceof trans-
German in an asceticimpoverishmentof diction and syntax.Throughout formation. Hence, minor literature is less a product than a processof
his storiesand novelsKafta directly links psychologicaland family conflicts becomingminor, through which languageis deterritorialisedimmediately
to extendedsocialand political relations.And though he necessarilywrites socialand political issuesareengaged,and a collectiveassemblage of enun-
asa solitaryindividual,he treatslanguageasa collectiveassemblage of enun- ciationmakespossiblethe inventionof a peopleto come.
ciationandtherebyattemptsto articulatethe voiceof a peopleto come(since
a positive,functioningcollectivityis preciselywhat Kafka findslacking).
In the conceptof minor literature Deleuzeand Guattari connectthe
political strugglesof minoritiesto the formal experimentations typical of
the modernist avant-garde.What makespossiblethis rapprochementof
Marcel Spibod.a
politics and formal innovation is Deleuzeand Guattari's view of language
asa modeof actionin continuousvariation.Everylanguageimposespower African-Americanand Afro-Caribbeancultures, under certain circum-
relationsthrough its grammaticaland syntacticregularities,its lexicaland tminort culture, and in both casesthere
semanticcodes,yet thoserelationsare inherently unstable,for linguistic have been a substantialnumber of cultural formations that one could
constantsand invariantsare merely enforcedrestrictionsof speech-acts describeasbeing'minoritarian'.Among theseone might number the fol-
that in fact are in perpetualvariation.A major usageof a languagelimits, lowing:bhes, jazz(traditional,be-bop,electric,free,avant-garde), P-funk,
organises, controlsand regulateslinguisticmaterialsin supportof a dom- techno,hiphop, all largely developedaspart of African-American culture;
inant socialorder,whereasa minor usageof a languageinducesdisequilib- and ska, roots, reggae and dub, all largely developed as part of Afro-
rium in its components,taking advantageof the potentialfor diverseand Caribbeanculture. They constitute instancesof minor culture 'under
divergentdiscursivepracticesalreadypresentwithin the language. certaincircumstances'because their historicaldevelopmentis complexand
A minor literature,then, is not necessarilyone written in the language one cannot locate every developmentexclusivelywithin minoritarian
of an oppressedminority,andit is not exclusivelythe literatureof a minor- instances.Sometimesthe creativeand transformativepotential of these
ity engagedin the deformationof the languageof a majority.Every lan- formationsgivesway to the pressuresof capitalismor of appropriationas
guage,whetherdominant or marginalised,is open to a major or a minor part of the dominant(usuallywhite) cultural formations,pressureswhich
usage,and whateverits linguistic medium, minor literature is defined by often collectivelyconspireto exploit or limit this potential.To the extent
a minor treatment of the variablesof language.Nor is minor literature that any of thesecultural developmentscan be said to constitute instances
simply literaturewritten by minorities.What constitutesminoritiesis not of the 'minor', it is largelyowing to the followingreasons.
their statisticalnumber,which may in actualitybe greaterthan that of the Where it is a questionof language,the variousmusicaldevelopments
majority,but their positionwithin asymmetricalpower relationshipsthat listed aboveare subjectto linguistic mediationas part of a languagethat
are reinforcedby and implementedthrough linguistic codesand binary reinforcesdominant culture. In each and every case,this languageis
oppositions.Western white male adult humans may be outnumbered English.In order to developa minor useof this language,minor cultural
worldwide, but they remain the majority through their position of privil- formations, such as those of Black America, the Caribbean or South
ege, and that privilege informs the linguistic oppositionsthat define, London, haveall had to find waysof altering or recombiningelementsfrom
situateand help control non-westernand non-whitepopulations,women, the dominant languagein order to render them sonorous,as a meansto
childrenandnon-humanlife forms.Minorities merelyreinforcedominant foregroundingtheir transformativepotential.That is to saythat minor cul-
powerrelationswhen they acceptthe categories that definethem. Only by tural formationshavehad to deterritorialisethe English language.This
undoing such oppositions as western/non-western,white/non-white, indeed is the first characteristicof a minor cultural formation. For
male/female,adult/child, or human/animalcanminoritieschangcpower cxamplc,considerthe work of the African-Americanwriter-activistAmiri
relations. Only by becoming'other', by passingbetweenthc polcsof binary l']arakaand his nsc of thc English language.His writing distorts and
oppositionsanclhlurring clcirrcirtcgorics crrnncw possibiliticsfilr social cxposcstlrc nrlrnrntivc,cxpklitirtivcopcrltionsot'thc donrinitntlangttitgc

throughthe wayin which he recombinesits elements,structuredaccording

to an aestheticderivedfrom jazzmusic.Alternatively,considerthe work of
the Jamaican-Britishdub poet, Linton Kwesi Johnson,combining ele-
Tom Conley
ments from JamaicanCreoleand British English in the productionof an
oral poetry performedover dub music.When written, his poetry deploys The adjective'molar' belongsto a chemicalidiolect that Deleuzeusesto
portmanteaucombinationsof wordsor partsof wordsin order to politicise inform his work on aestheticsand politics.In a strict sensethings molar
the language. In both theseinstances, the majoritarian,dominantuseof the relateto aggregates of matter and not to either their molecularor atomic
Englishlanguageis renderedminor in relationto the musicsof the writers' properties,or their motion. In a geologicalsense,'molar' is understoodto
respectiveculturalmilieus,and in eachcasethe languagebecomesmusical, be what pertainsto mass,ground, continenceor telluric substance. It also
or sonorous in its expressions.Consider the title of Linton Kwesi pertainsto the generalpatternsofbehaviourtakenby an organor anorgan-
Johnson's poem Mi Reztalueshanary Fren (Linton Kwesi Johirson, Mi ism, and thus the term can describea trait of personalityor the character
Repalueshanary Fren: Selected, Poems),written as it is performed with the of the ego.Deleuzetendsto jettisonthe psychologicalinflectionsin order
word 'revolutionary'phoneticallyrenderedin Creole-Englishas'revalue- to correlatemolarity with his differentwaysof describingthe world; this
shanary'and therebyconnotingnot only revolution,but alsore-evaluation. is especiallythe casein his treatmentof 'wholes' (Tout and touts)thathe
The manipulation of the relation between the sound,of the word and its describesas being composedof a compact and firm terrestrial oceanic
written inscription is purposely developedto challengethe alienation of mass.A molar form caneitherriseup and commanda greatdealof earthly
ethnic groupsasembodiedin a dominant language,and to addressthe spe- spaceor be seeneither afloat or drifting in great bodies of water (a point
cific concerns of these groups in ways that provoke or challenge the developedin a very early pieceof writing called'Causesand Reasonsof the
oppressionexpressedin the language'sdominating operations.This is DesertIsland').
minor culture'spoliticalfunction. Broadeningthe biologicaldefinitions to include philosophy,geologyand
The third and final criterion for assessinghow thesemusically-derived aesthetics,Deleuze conceiveslandscapesas massesof greater or lesser
or orientedcultural formationsbecomeminor is the extent to which they molarity. He draws Lucretian and pre-Socratic philosophy through the
movebeyondthe positionsof individual subjectsor personstowardscol- human sciencesand into an aesthetic domain such that he can detect
lectiveutteranceor enunciation.In order to examinethis aspect,it is nec- difference,vibration, disaggregation,deterritorialisationand metamor-
essaryto recall that - for Deleuzeand Guattari - enunciationfunctions phosisin terms of molecularactivitiestaking place in and about molar
collectivelyin relationto a machinicassemblage of bodies,both humanand masses.The term assistshim in studying Perceqtion in its range from
non-human,for examplegeologicalor technologicalbodies.What all these 'macro' or totalisingprocessto 'micro' or keendetectionof infinitesimal
differentbodieshavein commonis that they operatethrough the inscrip- differencesin the physicaland biologicalworld.
tion of surfaces:the layersof rock beneaththe surfaceof the earth, the In his work on cinema,the dyad of molar/molecularis usedto discern
skin and its markings,the striation of the muscles,or the groovesof a effectsof convectionand atmosphere.When contrastingthe four great
record. . . Considerearlyhiphop culture or 'wildstyle',and its character- schoolsof montage- American,French, German, Soviet- that grew in
istics such as 'bombing' (graffiti) or the isolation of a musical passage the first thirty yearsof cinema,he notesthat the signatureof poeticrealism
('break'or 'breakdown')by scratchingvinyl records,or eventhe bodiesof in directors ranging from Ren6 Clair to Jean Vigo and Jean Renoir is
breakdancers whosemovesare only legiblein relation to the surfaceson markedby emphasisingthe 'molar' (and not moral) aspectof the physical
which they dance.Theseinscriptionsand their interactingsurfacesat least world: social contradiction is conveyedthrough imposing and massive
partiallyconstitutethe machinicassemblage of earlyhiphop.To the extent monumentsof Paristhat humblethe lost citizensin TheCrazyRay Q924);
that thesebodiesproduceutterancesor enunciationsit is via the MC whose in Vigo's L'Atalante (1934)the cobblestonestreetson the edgesof the
rappin' skillsostensiblymark her out asan individual,and yet their func- Scine makeobdurateand unyielding stonethe antithesisof fluidity; the
tion remainscompletelytied into the hiphop collectiae, comprisingall thc incrt piles of old editions and lithographs cluttering the walls in the
other aspectsof the hiphop assemblage. Furthermore, rappin' providcs b<xrkscllcr's apartmentin BouduSuaed.fiomDrortning(1932)attestto a
anotherinstanccof r stratcgicor minor dcploymcnt<lf thc (Anrcricln) nrolirrityrtgitinstarrclwith whiclr irtrnosphcrc- firg,clrizzlc,mist - clcfincs
ils plrrtof an r.rrbirn
culturirlfirrnrltiorr. r gcrrcritl tttrxxlor stiltcot thingsirr thc tintcof'thc(ircat l)cprcssion.

ln A Thousand, PlateausDeleuzeand Guattari apply the 'molar' and behaviour.Henceanyperceivedobject,organicor inorganic,hasa life of its
'molecular'to political bodies.Molar entiriesbelong to the State or the own and is felt through the tensionof its moral massand molecularparts
civic world. They are well defined,often massive,and are affiliatedwith and pieces.Deleuze uses molecularity to counter the orthogonal and
a governingapparatus.Their molecularcounterpartsare micro-entities, massivepensive- seeminglyheavyand unwieldy - systemof Cartesian
politicsthat transpirein areaswherethey arerarelyperceived:in the per- philosophyto arrive, by way of Leibniz, at a sensibilitytouching on the
ceptionof affectivity,wherebeingsshareineffablesensations; in the twists chemicalanimismof all things,'the actionof fire,thoseof watersand winds
and turns of conversationhavingnothing to do with the stateof the world on the earth,'in varioussystems'of complexinteractions'(D 1993a:9).
atlarge; in the manner,too, that a pedestrianin a city park seeshow the Molecular action becomesa vital element in what Deleuze uses to
leavesof a linden tree might flicker in the afternoon light. The shifting to describethe processes of things and of creation.At a decisivemoment in
and from molar and molecularforms canbe associatednot only with deter- his presentationof Bergson'stheseson movementin relation to cinema,
ritorialisationbut alsothe very substance andeffectof eoentsthatbeginand Deleuze uses molecularity to illustrate how wholes (worlds or spatial
end with swarmsand massesof micro-perceptions. aggregates) arerelatedto duration.When a teaspoonof sugaris dissolved
Moleculesoften aggregate and swarminto activemasses of molar aspect in a glassof waterthe 'whole' is not the containerand its contentsbut the
and viceversa.In TheFoldDeleuzesuggeststhateaents) the very productof actionof creationtaking placein the ionisationof the moleculesof sugar,
philosophyand determiningfeaturesof perception,dependon the prehen- a sort of 'pure ceaseless becomingwhich passesthrough states'(D 1986:
sion of the texturesof elementsin termsof their wholesand the partsthat 10). Molecularity goes with the perception of wholes (such as molar
swirl and toss within them or on their very surfaces.The processentails masses) that areopenand dispersethemselvesin a continuumof duration.
graspinga 'chaosmos'that becomesdiscerniblethrough the categoriesof the Surelythe most compellingcorrelativeto the Bergsonianthesis,not men-
molar andmolecular.Deleuzeis in turn enabledto study matterasa function tioned in either of the books on cinema, is the sequencein Jean-Luc
of mass,hardness, andof 'coherence, cohesion'(D 1993a:6). He projectsthe Godard's2 or 3 ThingsI Knop AboutHer (1965),a film in which a man in
distinction onto the body in sofar asit canbe appreciatedin its elasticityand a Parisiancaf6,in the midst of the clatter of porcelainand glassesstriking
fluidity. Thus, with the 'molar' the philosophercorrelatessurfaceswith the zinc surfaceof the bar in the background,contemplatesa cup of coffee.
structures,masses with territories,and vibrationsor waveswith landscapes. He dropsa cubeof sugarinto the brown liquid, stirsit with a teaspoon,and
watches.In an extremeclose-upgalaxiesseemto grow from the swirl of
bubblesjust as Godard'sown voice-offspeaksin the name of the man's
thoughtsabout the end of the world and time. Beforea puff of cigarette
Body smokewaftsoverthe cup,an endlessmomentof pure duration is felt in the
Deterritorialisation/Reterritorialisation sight of a cosmosbecomingmolecular.
Event The molecularsensibilityis found in Deleuze'sappreciationof micro-
Molecular scopicthings,in the tiny perceptionsor inclinationsthat destabilisepercep-
tion asa whole.They function,he says,to'pulverize the world' and,in the
sameblow,'to spiritualizedust' (D 1993a:87).The microscopicperspective
hasa politicaldimensionaswell. All societies arerent throughby molarand
molecularsegmentarities. They areinterrelatedto the degreethat all action
is conceivablypolitical if politics are understoodto be of both molar and
Tom Conlejr
molecularorders.The former,a governmental superstructure, doesnot dis-
Deleuzepairsthe adjective'molecular' with'molar'. Informedby atomistic allow the presenceof the latter, 'a whole world of unconsciousmicroper-
philosophy and biology that runs from Lucretius to Gabriel Tarde, cepts,unconsciousaffects,rarefieddivisions'that operatedifferentlyfrom
Deleuzestudiesobjectsnot asthey seemto be beforethe nakedeyebut as civic and politicalarenas.Molecularityis tied to a 'micropolitics'of percep-
dynamic massesof molecules.The chemicaldefinition is broadenedto tion, affcct,and evenerrantconversation(D&G 1987:220).
include subjectivity.In a psychoanalytical sensemolecularityrclnrcsto 'l'hc molcculirrcnrblcsDelcuzeto movc from philosophyof relation(or
(rs opp<rsccl
indiviclurrl to collcctivc)rcsponscsto phcnomcnaor typcsof' difl'crcnccrnd rcpctition)to chcnristrics of bcing,anclthcn on to dclicittc

issuesof perceptionin cinema,music, literatureand painting.As in the space'(D 1986:7-8). The two componentsof the movement-imageare
dyad of the 'root' and the 'rhizome', that of molar and molecularforms found in what happensbetween partsor objects,and in what expresses the
bearsno privilegedterm. In Deleuze'sreadingof subjectivationand predi- duration of a wholeor a sum, that which might be indeedthe world in the
cation in Leibniz. both terms arein and of eachother. Each is usedheuris- field of the image.
tically to test and to determine sensarionbeyond and within the limits of The cinema most characteristicof the movement-imageis based on
perception and cognition. The molecular atteststo a creative processat action and its intervals.It is seenin the comediesof Charlie Chaplin and
work in Deleuze'sconcepts,and it alsoindicatesthe mannerin which he BusterKeaton,to be sure,but alsoin the molecularagitationof wind, dust
usesconceptsin the contextofphilosophy,scienceand aesthetics. or smokein the films of Louis Lumidre. Movement-imagestend to attach
to the sensori-motorreflexesof the viewer who is drawn to them. The
Connectives movement-imageis made of momentsin a given whole, such as a single
shotor aplan-siquence,and it canbe felt in the panoramicor trackingshots
Deterritorialisation/ Reterritorialisation that confer motion upon the field of the image.
Leibniz At a crucial point in his treatment Deleuze delineatesand redefines
Molar three kinds of movement-images that renew and energisethe traditional
Rhizome lexiconof cinema.The 'action-image',generallya medium shotor a plan
Sensation amiricain, organises and distributes movement in space and time.
Characterisedby a hold-up or a heist, it abounds in film noir. The
'perception-image', often a long shot and a long take,conveysa 'dramaof
MOVEMENT-IMAGE the visibleand invisible'within the stagingof action.The spectatorper-
ceivesthe origins and limits of visibility in imagesthat are common to the
Tom Conlejt classicalwestern.The'affection-image'isbest seenin close-upsin which
facestend to occupythe greaterareaof the screen.Eachof thesetypesof
The mooement-image is the title of the first panelof a historicaldiptych, movement-imageconstitutes'a point of view on the Whole of the film, a
CinemaI andCinema2,that classifies modesof perceptionand production way of graspingthis whole,which becomesaffectivein the close-up,active
of film from its beginningsin 1895up to 1985.In this work and irs com- in the medium shot, and perceptivein the long shot' (D 1986:70). Other
plement,The Timelrnage,Deleuzeusescinemato showhow philosophyis typesof imagesthat he takesup - the memory-image,the mental-image,
not constrainedto a canonor an academicworld but to life at large.Cinema the relation-image- derive from thesethree principal categories.
is a surface on which viewers reflect their thinking, and in itself it is a The movement-imagereachesthe end of its tenure at the time of World
mediumor a machinethat thinkswith autonomywith respectto its viewers War II, concludesDeleuze,for five reasons.It no longerrefersto a totalis-
and creators.The movement-imagedefinesand describesthe quality of ing or syntheticsituation,but a dispersiveone.Charactersbeginto multi-
cinematicimagesthat prevailin the mediumoverits first fifty years.From ply and becomeinterchangeable. It losesits definition as either action,
1895to 1945cinemabecamethe seventhart by embodyingimagesnot in affectionor perceptionwhen it cannotbe affiliatedwith a genre.An art of
movement but as movement.Motion was at that time the essenceof wandering- the cameraseemsto moveon its own - replacesthe storyline,
cinema. By way of Henri Bergson Deleuze shows that cinema does not and plots becomesaturatedwith clich6s.Finally, narrativesare driven by a
furnish the spectator with 'an image to which it adds movement', but needto denounceconspiracy.Realityitself becomes'lacunary and disper-
rather, 'it immediatelygivesus a movement-image'(D 1986:2). A cut sive'.At this point, generallyat the end of World War II, the time-image
betweentwo shotsis part of the image,and thus a temporalgapthat allows beginsto mark cinema.Yet, asin most of Deleuze'sdyads,the one term is
the eye to perceivean effectof movement.The latter is gainedby a suc- alwaysa function of the other that is tied to it. Movement-imagestend to
cessionnot of staticphotographicposesbut of instantsof any kind what- be the substanceof narrative cinema while time-imagesare especially
soever'(D1986:7-8), thatis,of instantsequidistant from oneanother. Thc cvidentin cxpcrimentalfilm. A studyof genresand stylescouldbe based
cvcnt of thc moving imagethus owcsto a 'distributionof thc pointsof' on thc rchtion of'movcmcnt:rncltimc and thc typesof imagcsthat define
il sl)ilccrlr 0f'thc nrr)t'ncnts
<lfirncvcnt,'il momcntsccnili a 'trtnslitti0nin thcir trrritsanclqualitics.

Connectives intensivemultiplicity cannotbe dividedup without changingin nature.In

other words,anyalterationto an intensivemultiplicity meansa total change
in its nature- a changein its intensivestate.This is important for Deleuze
becauseit meansthat thereis no essence of particularmultiplicitieswhich
can remain unaffectedby encounterswith others.
Deleuze also makes the important link betweenthe concept of the
virtual and that of multiplicity in the context of his readingof Bergson,
MULTIPLICITY and it is in connectionwith the themeof virtual intensivemultiplicity that
Deleuzemost palpablyremainsa Bergsonian.Frequentlywhen discussing
the virtual, DeleuzequotesMarcel Proust'sadagein relation to memory:
Jonathan Roffe
'Real without being actual,ideal without being abstract'.Virtual multi-
'Multiplicity' is arguablyDeleuze'smost important concept.It is found plicity,then, is realwithout beingnecessarily embodiedin the world. And,
throughouthis work, and is the basisfor other important conceptssuchas rather than expressingabstractalternativepossibilities,virtual multiplic-
rhizome,assemblage, and 'concept'itself. It is alsoone of Deleuze'smost ity forms somethinglike the real opennessto changethat inheresin every
difficult conceptsto graspbecauseof the many different waysand contexts particularsituation.
in which he puts it to work. Yet,therearesomeessentialtraits to be noted. This is perhapsthe most difficult point to graspin Deleuze'sdoctrineof
A multiplicity is, in the most basicsense,a complexstructurethat does virtual multiplicities.While virtual multiplicitiesareembodiedin particu-
not referencea prior unity. Multiplicities are not parts of a greaterwhole lar statesof affairs,they must not be consideredto be somehowtranscend-
that havebeenfragmented,andthey cannotbeconsideredmanifoldexpres- ent or essentiallyimmutable. As Deleuze shows in his discussionof
sionsof a singleconceptor transcendent unity.On thesegrounds,Deleuze Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz in Dffirence and,Repetitioa,the virtual and
opposesthe dyadOne/Many,in all of its forms,with multiplicity.Further, the actualare interrelated,and effectchangesin eachother. So, while the
he insiststhat the crucialpoint is to considermultiplicity in its substantive virtual is embodiedin actualsituations,the changesin actualsituationsalso
form - a multiplicity - ratherthan asan adjective- asmultipliciry of some- effectchangesin the virtual multiplicity. Existence,then, is a combination
thing. Everythingfor Deleuzeis a multiplicity in this fashion. of actual multiplicities - states of affairs - and virtual multiplicities -
The two peoplewhom Deleuzeregularlyassociates with the development particular intensivemovementsof change.
of the conceptof multiplicity arethe mathematicianGeorgRiemann,and the While these conceptsseemparticularly abstract,they offer Deleuze
French philosopherHenri Bergson.From Riemann,Deleuzetakesthe idea groundsupon which to developa very practicalpicture of the world. The
that any situationis composedof different multiplicities that form a kind of conceptof multiplicity makesno referenceto a transcendentrealmof the
patchworkor ensemblewithout becominga totality or whole.For example, world that contains the structures or laws of existence.Since we live
a houseis a patchworkofconcretestructuresand habits.Eventhoughwe can among actual multiplicities (and are ourselvesmultiplicities), we are
list thesethings, there is finally no way of determining what the essenceof alwayselementsand actorswithin the world. In this sense,both philoso-
a particular houseis, becausewe cannot point to anything outside of the phy and human existenceare eminently practical.The virtual counter-
houseitself to explainor to sumit up - it is simply a patchwork.This canalso parts of our actualmultiplicities alsomakepossiblecontinuedmovement
be takenasa gooddescriptionof multiplicities themselves. and change,even at the points where the world of actualityseemsmost
Deleuze'sdebt to Bergsonhere is more profound. It is in Bergson'ism rigid and oppressive.
(1966)that Deleuzefirst discussesmultiplicity, which receivesan exrended
elaborationin Bergson'sphilosophy.Deleuzenotesfirst of all that thereare
two kinds of multiplicity in Bergson:extensivenumericalmultiplicities Connectives
and continuousintensivemultiplicities.The first of thesecharacterises Bergson
spacefor Bergson;and the second,time. The differencebetweenextensive Concepts
and intensiveis perhapsthe most important point here. In contrast to Rhizome
spacc,whichcanbedividedup into pnrts(thisis why it is callednumerical), Virtual/Virtualitv
178 NIE T Z s c H E , F R T ED R T c H (r8 44-tgoo) Nr Er zscHE, FRI EDRI cH ( r 8 44- t goo) 179

the multiplicity of events.The apprehensionof immanent and univocal

being demandsthat we accountfor the eventsof existencefrom existence
itself without positinga transcendentalcondition(suchasGod, the subject
or being).Deleuze'sstresson Nietzscheasaphilosopher whosesignificance
lies in the tradition of univocity differs from the dominant Anglo-
Americaninterpretationof Nietzscheasa moreliterarywriter who avoided
argumentsand principles.
Lee Spinks , Alongsidethe developmentof the conceptof immanent and univocal
The importanceof Deleuze'sreadingof Friedrich Nietzschecannot be being,Nietzschealsopresenteda vision of life seenas a conflict between
over-estimated. Although Deleuzeengagescontinuallywith the work of singularand antagonisticforces.Deleuze'suseof the conceptof 'life' in his
Baruch Spinoza,Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, David Hume and Henri readingof Nietzscheis neither biologicalnor humanist. Life is neither
Bergson (and wrote books on all these philosophersand what they matter(asin biologism)nor the properform or end of matter(asin human-
enabled),his approachto the philosophicaltradition is markedfundamen- ism or vitalism). Life is a power of singularisation;a power to create
tally by the Nietzscheangoal of an affirmative philosophy.When Deleuze differences. For Nietzsche,phenomena,organisms,societiesand Statesare
readsa philosopher,he follows Nietzschein examiningwhat their work nothing other than the expressionof particular configurationsof forces.
enables,what conceptsthey create,the positiveeffectsof the questions One of his mostinfluentialcontributionsto the understandingof life, con-
they ask and how their philosophiesrespond to life. While Deleuze is sciousness and moral thought wasto conceiveof eachof them asthe effect
carefulto locatethe ideaof a practicalphilosophyin the work of Spinoza, of a primary distinction between actioe and reactiaeforces. Nietzsche's
he glimpsesthe radicalpotentialof this tradition for modern thought in diagnosis,in particular,of the connectionbetweenreactiveformations
Nietzsche'sdevelopmentof a numberof Spinozistideas. suchasressentiment, badconscience and the asceticidealon onehand,and
One way in which Nietzsche'swork becomescentral to Deleuze is modesof subjectivityand formsof life on the otherhad a profoundimpres-
through Nietzsche'sreworking of the Spinozist idea of expressivism. sion upon Deleuze'spoliticalthought. Similarly,Nietzsche'sidentification
Expressivismdemandsthat we no longerconceiveof an eventasa predi- of Will to Power as the basis for a positive vision of life influenced
cateattachedto a prior substance;there is not a matter or uniform sub- Deleuze'selaborationof an immanentand anti-humanistmodeof philoso-
stancewhich thenbecomesor takeson a form or quality. On the contrary, phy. The postulationof such an immanent principle - a principle that
expressivism suggests that thereis nothingotherthanthe becomingof spe- acceptsnothing other than life - enablesthought to focus upon the pro-
cific and singularqualities;and thesequalitiesor eventsdo not needto be duction and legitimationof divisionsbetweendifferentforms of life. Life,
related back to someneutral ground or substance.Deleuzearguesthat in Nietzsche'sview,is constitutedby a commonand inexhaustiblestriving
Nietzscheis the first philosopheractuallyto considera world composedof for power; human life (with its regulativenorms, moral judgementsand
these'pre-personalsingularities'.As Nietzscheargues,we do not needto socialtruths) is merely a form through which life passes.
This Nietzschean
relateactionsback to a subjector tdoer', nor do we needto seeeventsas philosophy,which envisageda plurality of forcesacting upon and being
effectsor as having a pre-existingcause.These ideasprovided Deleuze affectedby eachother,and in which the quantityof powerconstitutedthe
with a way of developinga philosophyof immanenceand an understand- differential element between forces, remained of lasting importance to
ing of beingasunivocity.If thereis not a substance which thenbecomes, or Deleuze'sown philosophyof life.
a substance which thentakeson qualities,it followsthat thereis no dualist Following Nietzsche, Deleuze sought to move beyond the human
distinctionbetweenbeingand becoming,or identity and difference.There investmentin transcendence: the ascriptionof ideasbeyondlife that deter-
is no prior ground, unity or substancewhich then differentiatesitself and mine the goalandvalueof life. His work is markedby the attemptto engage
becomes;insteadthere is only a univocalfield of differences.Difference with the broadermovementsof becomingfrom which our idea of life is
conceivedin this way is not d,ffirencefrom someoriginal unity; if there is constituted.This led him to concentrateupon a numberof d,ffirentforms
only one univocalbeing,then differencesthemselves becomeprimary and of difference(suchaslanguage,geneticdevelopments andmutations,social
constitutiveforces.There is not a hierarchyin which an original unity or firrms,historicalcvcntsand so on) that bring the imageof the human into
bcingthcnbccomes; thcrcis an originalbccomingwhichexpresscs itsclfin fircus.Dclcuzc alsoclcvclopsNictzschc'sgcncalogicrrl rcintcrprctationof

moral ideaswhile taking it in a wholly new direction. Where Nietzsche of goodand commonsense.Reasonhasa properdomain,just asthe power
exposedthe originsof morality in the manipulationof affectby regimesof to feel has a proper domain (art) which should not be carried over into
cruelty and force, Deleuze developedthe concept of affect to rethink the morality. Deleuze,by contrast, rejectsthe idea that a principle, or a power
meaningand functionof ideologyand politics.Workingagainsta visionof or tendencyto think, should be limited by somenotion of common sense
the 'political' that conferred privilege upon the ideologicaldetermination and sound distribution. Nomadicism allows the maximum extensionof
of social codes,Deleuze explored the production of 'politics' and 'ideo- principlesand powers;if somethingcan be thought, then no law outside
logy' througha seriesof pre-subiectiveor 'inhuman' stylesand intensities. thinking, no containmentof thought within the mind of man shouldlimit
Beforethere is a political or ideologicaldecision,Deleuzeclaimed,there thinking'spower(D 1994:37).
is first an unconsciousand affectiveinvestmentin an imageof life and a In Dffirenceand,Repetition,Deleuze beginsa definitionof nomadicdis-
style of morality that is subsequentlyreconceivedasthe moral ground of tribution from the oppositionbetweennomosandlogos.If,asDeleuzeinsists,
life itself. we cannothavea hierarchyof beings- such asthe dominanceof mind over
matter, or actualityover potentiality,or the presentover the future - this is
becausebeingis univocal,which doesnot meanthat it is alwaysthe same,
but that eachof its differenceshasas much being as any other. You do not
Active/Reactive havesomeideal'whiteness'oressence, which is primary and then varying
Becoming derivativet"gt."r of white; for degrees,differencesand intensitiesare all
Difference real, are all differencesof one being.Nevertheless, there are still individ-
Eternalreturn uationsand hierarchies, but thesecanbe regardedin two ways.
Plato The first, the point of view of logos,worksby analogy:somebeingsare
Will to Power truly real(the actual,what is present,what remainsthe same),while others
are only real in relation, or by analogy.And this subordinationof some
differencesto othersis, evenin this earlywork of Deleuze's,relatedto ter-
ritoriesand the agrarianquestion;a spaceis divided,distributedand hier-
archisedby somelaw,logic or voice (logos)that is outside or abovewhat is
Claire Colebrook
The secondpoint of view of noTnos or nomadiclaw hasits principle of
The conceptsof 'nomad','nomadology'and 'nomadicism'arespelledout distribution within itself. That is. there are still hierarchiesbut theseare
most explicitly inA ThousandPlateaus,butthe conceptdoeshavea signifi- not determinedby a separateprinciple; rather by the power of the prin-
cant philosophicalheritage.In 1781,in the prefaceto the Critiqueof Pure ciple itself.This is extremelyimportant for Deleuze'sphilosophy.Deleuze
Reason,Immanuel Kant lamented that whereasdogmatistshad main- wantsto getrid of transcendentandexternalcriteria- say,judgingphiloso-
taineda certaindespotismof reason- givingreasonfixed but unjustifiable phy accordingto whetherit will help us to acquiretransferablelife skills,
rules - a certainbarbarismhad allowedfor 'a kind of nomadswho abhor or judging art accordingto whether it will makeus more moral - but he
all permanentcultivationof the soil'(K 1998:99).Deleuzeis anythingbut doesnot want to get rid of distribution and hierarchyaltogether.
a Kantian philosopher,for Kant's aim of limiting the principlesof reason Nomadic distribution judgesimmanently(D 1994:37). A philosophy
to a legitimateand harmonioususeis counteredby Deleuze'snomadicaim would be a great philosophy,not if it could be placedpithin a specificand
of allowingprinciplesto be pushedto their maximumpower(D 1984). delimitedterritory of reason(suchasa correctand consistentlogic)but if
Kant's dismissalof the nomadicismthat would be precipitatedby a loss it maximisedwhat philosophycould dq and createda territory: creating
of dogmaticlaw - a law that is fixed and determinesspacein advance- is conceptsand stylesof thought that openednew differencesand pathsfor
wardedoffin the Critiqueof PureReasonbyan appealto the properdomain thinking. An artwork would be greatnot if it fulfilled alreadyexistingcri-
of anyprinciple;while reason,for example,hasa tendencyto think beyond tcria for what counts as beautiful, but if it took the power for creating
its own domain(trying to know the unknowable) it oughtto bc contnincd bcauty- thc powcr to prompt us to bathein the sensible- and produced
within its prirtciplC
- it shouldonly actaccordingto whatit canckrin rcrms ncw nnclrliffcrcntwaysof confiontingscnsibility.

Even as early as Dffirence and RepetitionDeleuze's referenceto the sense,the war machineis not somethingexercisedby the State,for the
'agrarianquestion'marksa politicsof nomadicism:the differencebetween State's sovereigntyand law, or the power to distribute space,has to be
immanentand transcendentcriteria. If we subjectdifferenceto a logical carved out from a radical exteriority of war, of forces and dominations
distribution then we havea principle that determineslife in advance,just which the Statemay or may not harnessasits own.
asland would be distributedaccordingto someexternallaw (say,its most
efficienteconomicuse,or its history of ownershipaccordingto a general
law of property).This is sedentaryspace;the spaceremainswhat it is and
is then divided and distributed. Nomadic space,howeveqis produced Desire
through its distribution. Kant
So we canconsidernomadicspace,not asa spacewith intrinsic proper- Nomos
ties that then determinerelations(in the way chesspiecesdeterminehow Smoothspace
movementsmight be enacted),but asa spacewith extrinsicproperties;the Space
spaceis producedfrom the movementsthat then givethat spaceits pecu-
liar quality (just asin the gameof Go the piecesare not codedaskings or
queens but enter into relations that produce a field of hierarchies).
Nomadicspaceis, in this sense,smooth- not because it is undifferentiated,
but because its differencesarenot thoseofa chessboard (cut up in advance,
with prescribedmoves);the differencescreatepositionsand linesthrough
movement.A tribe dreamsabout,crossesand dancesupon a spaceand in The conceptof 'nomadicism'that Deleuzeand Guattarideveloprefersless
so doing fills the spacefrom within; the actualspace- the materialexten- to placeless,itinerant tribes-peoplethan to groups whoseorganisationis
sion ownedby this tribe that might then be measuredand quantifiedby a immanent to the relations composingthem. Put differently, the organiza-
Statestructure- would be different from (and dependentupon) virtual, tion of a nomadic group is not imposedfrom aboveby a transcendent
nomadic space,for if the tribe moved on, dancedand dreamedelsewhere, command.An improvisationaljazzbandforms a n6madicgroup, in con-
then the original spacewould alreadyhave been transformed,given a trast with a symphonyorchestra:in the former, group coherencearises
different depth and extension,now part of a whole new seriesof desires, immanentlyfrom the activity of improvisingitself, whereasin the sym-
movementsand relations.And if other tribes crossedthat first space,the phony orchestra,it is imposedfrom aboveby a conductorperforming a
spacewould be traversedby differentmaps.On nomadicdistributionthere composer'spre-established score.
is not one law that standsoutsideand determinesspace;law is producedin Until recently,citizenshiphas been thought and practisedmostly in
the traversalof space. relationto the nation-state.SocialBroupsconsideredon this scalehaveof
With Guattari, in A Thousand, Plateaus,Deleuze writes a manifesto coursealwaysincludeda rich entanglementof heterogeneous groupingsof
for 'nomadology',which is here tied far more explicitly to the 'war varioussizesand kinds,involvingvaryingdegreesof allegianceto families;
machine'. The idea of the war machine does have a clear relation to neighbourhoods;professionalorganisations;ethnic, sexual, and other
Deleuze'searlierreiectionof logos.Itis not that there are proper beings, affinity groups;religiousdenominations,and so on. But Statecitizenship
eachwith their identity,that must then be distributedaccordingto their commandsallegianceof a qualitativelydifferent and homogenisingkind,
essenceand definition, and that.then enter into relation. It is not, for largelybecause it candeclarewar and therebylegitimatekilling in its name
example,that there are masterswho then dominateand govern the slaves and demandthe sacrificeof citizens'lives for its own sake(asformulated
or slavish;rather,one becomesa masterthrough an exerciseof force and in Carl Schmitt's rna,gnum opus,TheConceptof thePolitical). This 'vertical'
in so doing the master-slaverelation is effected,a certain distribution master-allegiance to the Statetranscendsall other'horizontal'allegiances
occursin and through the act. Everythingbeginswith forcesor'the war within the State,making State citizenshipliterally a matter of life and
machine;Statesdo not havean existenceor power outsidetheir warring death.
power.The distribution of land or territory - its use,seizure,occupation Nomad citizenship is a utopian concept createdto re-articulateand
and measurcrnenf - producesdistinct hierarchiesand identitics,In this suggestsolutionsto the problem posedby the lethal nature of modcrn
184 NOM OS N OM OS r85

nation-statecitizenship.Terrorisedcitizens- citizensterrorisedin large work, that it is derivedfrom the root word nem,which means'to distrib-
part by their own Stategovernmentsby the hypedspectreof someenemy ute'. He givesthe exampleof the related word,nem6,which in ancient
or other- areall too easilymobilisedto givetheir livesand takeothers'lives Greekmeantto livestock'- in otherwords,to sendout the animals
in war; in fact, little elseStatesdo inspire in citizensthe kind of devotion to an unboundedpastureaccordingto no particularpattern or structure.
that war does.At the sametime, war wagedin the nameof the Stategives Deleuzeopposesn0/n0sasdistribution to anotherGreek work, logos.While
capitalisma longer and longer leaseon life by forestallingits perennial difficult to translate well, it means 'word' or treasont.However, for
crisesofoverproduction:nothingaddresses over-productionandkeepsthe Deleuze,it canalsobe understoodas'law'. This is becausethe picture of
wheelsof industry turning like a good war - especiallytoday'shigh-tech the world indicatedby logosis one in which everythinghasits right place:
wars in which eachguided missile strike or smart bomb explosionmeans it is a structured and ordered conception of existence.Logosalso implies,
instantmillionsof dollarsin replacementcosts.In this context,the concept then, a conception of distribution, but one that is founded on a previous
of nomadcitizenshipis createdin order to breakthe monopolyexercised structureand is well-organised.To this well-organisedlegal distribution
by the Stateover conceptionsand practicesof citizenship,and to add or of the logos,Deleuzewill opposethe anarchicdistribution of the nomos.
substitutealternativeforms of belongingand allegiance. The senseof nomosasanarchicdistribution canbe understoodin refer-
Of course,all kindsof heterogeneous groupsandallegiances alreadyexist, enceto the nomad.Ratherthan existingwithin a hierarchicalstructurelike
someof whichwerelistedabove;to the degreethatthesegroupsself-organise a city, nomadic life takesplace in a non-structuredenvironmentwhere
moreor lessspontaneously or immanentlyratherthanundercommandfrom movementis primary.In this context,Deleuzemakesa link betweenlogos
above,they could imply nomadicforms of citizenship.Yer mosr of these andpolis,wherethe political orderingof statesdrawsits main coordinates
groupsinvolveor require somedegreeof face-to-facecontactand are hence from a prior structuredidea of existence(this is Plato'sprocedurein the
understoodto take placeamongfriendsin a sharedspace.But thereis another, Republic,for example).Fixed points like dwellingsare subordinatedto this
properlyplaceless dimensionto nomadcitizenshipwhich is linked to the bur- fundamental and lawlessmovement. In other words, while there may be
geoningworld marketandexemplifiedin the fair trademovement.Wemighr points of significancein nomadic life, they do not form fixed references
call this the economicor market componentof nomad citizenship,for it which divide up the movement of life into discreteelements(inside/
dependson the capacityof marketexchange to link far-flunggroupsor indi- outside,the citylthe wilds). As Deleuzegoeson to suggestwith Guattari
viduals togetherin a socialbond that definesthem neitherasfriendsnor as in A Thousand, Plateaus,lifeitself is nomadic.
enemies, but simply as temporarypartnersin exchange.In this way, the Deleuze first employsthe figure of nomosin Dffirence and,Repetition.
marketis ableto capitaliseon differenceswithout turning them into enmi- Here, it is a matter of consideringthe nature of Being itself in terms of
ties.For the virtue ofmarket exchange - providedofcoursethat it is volun- non-ordereddistribution rather than the fixed coordinatesof a logically
tary and fair; that it is apost-capitalistmarket- is that it enrichesthe livesof and hierarchicallystructured universe,such as we find in Plato and
nomad citizens by making regional, ethnic, religious, cultural (and many Aristotle.
other) differencesavailableto everyone,regardlessof who or wherethey are. The most elaboratedevelopmentsof nomos,in contrast to logos,take
placeinA Thousand, Plateaus-Here,Deleuzeand Guattari usethe distinc-
tion to discussopposingmodels of science,mathematicsand space.In
termsof science,Iogosasthe structuredand'good'distributionof elements
leadsto what they call'royal' science,one basedupon universalvalues.It
is alsoa scientificmethodthat naturallyleadsto truth, and is at oncebased
Jonathan Roffe on the valuesof the State and supposedto be unrelatedto the concrete
'Nomos' is the namethat Deleuzegivesto the wayof arrangingelements- practicesof life. Scienceundertakenin the nameof nomos,on the other
whetherthey arepeople,thoughtsor spaceitself- that doesnot rely upon hand,is an ambulantor minor science.It doesnot proceedfrom universals,
an organisationor permanentstructure. It indicatesa free distribution, but rather keepscloseto the movementof eventsthemselves- it 'follows'
rather than structuredorganisation,of certainelements. rirther than 'copies'.Only the practiceof scienceas nomoscan be said to
Thc Greck w<trdnomosis normally translatedas law. Dclcuzc notcs, havc nttaincda truc cxpcrimcntal method, sincc thc /ogo.s presumesthe
howcvcr,in onc of' thc fbw instanccsof'ctymol<lgicrrl
considcrttionin his rcsultsin ldvlncc in thc firrmof'glollrrlplcsuppositions. Anrbuhntscicncc

is thus profoundly engagedwith life rather than examiningit from a in speakingwe attributebeingto nonbeing,but also- asMartin Heidegger
supposedneutraloutside. insistedin his readingsof Parmenidesand Plato- we passover nonbeing
The two conceptionsof mathematicsare closelyrelatedto this. On the becausewe havealwaysbegunthinking from the simplebeingsbeforeus,
onehand,thereis the geometricconceptionthat presumesuniversalstruc- thosethings which arepresentand remainthe same.The challengewhich
tures: straightline, uniform field and parallellines.This mathematicsis Heideggerput to this tradition, and one which is continuedin different
underwrittenby the ordereddistribution of the logos.On the other hand, ways by JacquesDerrida and JacquesLacan, is that before we can have
nltvtzssupportsmathematicsin the form of arithmeticsproceedingby local beings- things that are or are not - and beforewe seenonbeingas the
operations,without presupposinggeneral structures.In this context, simpleabsence of being,thereis a nonbeingat the heartof being.First, any
Deleuze also privileges differential calculus in so far as it takes the local experienceof somethingthat rs must come into presenceor be revealed
operationof numericalvaluesand determinestheir movement,one that is through time; being is never fully and finally revealedfor there are always
unboundedby any one point and cannot be understoodin terms of the further experiences. Second,we experiencesomethingassomething only by
absolutefixity presumedby geometricmathematics. bringing it into the open, and therebydisclosingit; it was,therefore,not
In keepingwith the two polesof distribution indicatedby nomosandlogos, alwaysfully present,but must come to presenceor come into being.This
DeleuzeandGuattarialsodistinguishtwo typesof space.Logos,theordered emphasison the nonbeingin being or presenceis intensifiedby Derrida,
conceptionof existence, offersa pictureof spacethat is primordiallycut up who arguesthat presence,or the possibilityfor experience,dependson a
in variousways,onethat includesintrinsicboundaries. This spaceis termed processof tracingwhich is not. And for Lacan,while we live and desirein
'striated'.On the contrary,not only doesnomos indicatethat spacedoesnot a world of structuredand meaningfulbeings,we arenevertheless oriented
haveanyintrinsicorganisation, and mustbe consideredto be open,or what towardsthat which is otherthan or beyondbeing,that inarticulabledesired
Deleuzeand Guattaricall 'smoothspace',but this spaceitself is something fullness,Tbelrssa,nce or plenitude that is not a being, not a thing, nothing.
that must be created.The politicalradicalityof nomos, and of nomadicdis- Now Deleuzewill havenone of this death,nonbeing,or negativityin
tribution, is that it proposesthe dissolutionof the imposedstructuresof life; in effectthis is the main affirmativethrust of his work and the inspir-
logosaslawful structure, and a creationof smooth spacein which encoun- ation for all his philosophy.There may be effectsof nonbeing,but theseare
ters outsideof the orderedconceptionof existence canbecomepossible. productionsfrom the fullness of life. If I experiencemy life as governed
by 'lack' - that I am forced to decide among things but never arrive at the
thing - then this is only becauseof a structure of desire (such as the
Oedipalfantasy)which hasproducedthis negativebeyond.And Deleuze
Event and Guattari spend much time in showing how this nonbeing beyond
Plato desiredthingsis produced;from all the beingsof life we imaginesomeulti-
Space matenonbeingor beyond,but this is only becausewe havea far too miser-
ableand limited conceptionof being.From the ordersof speech,structure
andculture,we assumethat what cannotbe namedor givenextendedexist-
enceis nothing,or nonbeing.Againstthis paltry oppositionbetweenbeing
and nonbeingDeleuze,in Dffirence and,Repeition,refersto '?being'.That
is, being cannotbe reducedto the world of presentbeingsor things, or
Claire Colebrook
what we can sayai,but this doesnot meanwe shouldposit somenegative
Perhapsthe most profound challengeof Deleuze'swork today is its beyondbeing or nonbeing.Rather,being (as?being)is life understoodas
rejectionof nonbeing.The questionof nonbeinggoesback to the very the potentialfor creation,variationand production in excessof what we
originsof westernphilosophy- in Parmenides- andthe twentieth-century alreadyknow to haveexistence(or beingin its traditionalsense).
critique of westernmetaphysics.Traditionally,and this is the problem Deleuzetendsto readthe historyof philosophyasthoughit is alwaysthe
openedby Parmenides,if we try to speakof nonbeing,or say what is not, productionandaffirmationof life,but he drawsparticularlyupon Friedrich
then we havealreadysaidthat nonbeingri. Negativit$ negationand non- Nictzscheand Henri Bergsonin his criticism of nonbeing.For Nietzsche,
bcing havebeensubordinatcdto the thought of what is, not only bccausc all philosophgcvcn the most morirland flricetic,nccclsto trc undcrstoodas

flowing from life. Those philosopherswho attendto nonbeingaresuffering a studyor sciencenot ofappearances (phenomenology) nor ideas(ideology)
from reactivenihilism; they posit someultimategood or being,and when but noology.If therearepure noema- or 'thinkables'- we canalsoimagine
this cannot be found their piety merely directs itself to nonbeing,the approachinglife, not as grounded in personalconsciousness, but as a
absence,lack or negationof values.For Bergson,similarly,nonbeingis history of variousimagesof thought,or what counts asthinking. Ideology,
formed from a failure to think life in due order.We may perceivean absence for example,is the imageof a mind that canthink only throughan imposed
or 'lack'andassumethat somethinglike nonbeinghastorn a holein life; but or externalstructure;phenomenology is the imageof a mind that forms its
we arereallyperceivingmore ratherthanlesslife.If I go into an untidy room world and whose ideas and experiencesarestructuredby a subjectoriented
I do not seeanabsenceof order.I seethe room, and thenadd,toitmy expect- towardstruth.
ation of how it ought to be.Following Bergson,who insistedon the fullness In general,noologycanbe opposedto ideology.Insteadofarguing that we,
and positivity of life (and who arguedthat negationwassecondaryand illu- as proper subjects,are subiectedto ideasthat are false and that might be
sory),Deleuzerejectsthe negativeideaof nonbeingwhich hasbeenat the demystified,Deleuzearguesthat it is the ideaof a proper'we' and assump-
heart of westernmetaphysics. Deleuzewantsto rejectthe strong idea of tion of the good self or 'mind' which precludesus from actualisingour
negativityor nonbeing,so he doesnot attributea lacb ofbeing or realityto potential.Noology,as it is definedinA Thousand Plateaus,is not only the
error, destruction,the assertionthat somethingis not, or evenchangeand study of imagesof thought,but alsoclaimsa 'historicity' for images.The
development.But Deleuzealsowantsto affirm a positivenonbeing,which modern subjectwho is subjectedto a systemof signifiersis thereforepro-
he alsowritesas?being.On this understanding, nonbeingis not the lackof ducedand hasits genesisin previousrelationsof subjection.In additionto
presence, suchaswhen we saythat somethingis missingor lackingor not its criticalfunction,noologythereforeassumes that if imagesof thoughthave
the case.Nonbeing(as?being)is the positivepowerof life to poseproblems, beencreatedthey can alwaysbe recreated,with the ideal of liberation from
to say 'no' to the commonsensical, self-evidentor universallyaccepted. some proper image of thought being the ultimate aim. In Dffirence and,
This nonbeingis fully realand positive. Repetition,Deleuze arguesthat we havefailedto think truly preciselybecause
we assumeor presuppose an 'imageof thought'. Not only philosophy,but
Connective everydaynotionsof commonsenseand goodsensefail to questionjust what
it is to think. In this regard,the conceptof mind (or,in Greek,nous)hasbeen
Bergson an unargued,implicit andrestrictivepostulateof our thinking.Noologydoes
not only studywhat it might meanfor humansubjectsto think; it alsostrives
to imaginethoughtcarriedto its infinite power,beyondthe human.
Claire Colebrook
The conceptof 'noology' canbe setagainstphenomenology, or the ground-
ing of thought in what appearsto consciousness, and ideologyor the idea
that thereare systemsor structuresof ideasthat areimposedupon think-
ing. Deleuze's early work The Logic of Sense,while critical of pheno-
menology neverthelessdrew upon Edmund Husserl's 'noeisis/noema'
distinction: the noeisisis the act or subjectiveaspect- remembering,
imagining,desiring,perceiving- while the noemais the obiectivepole- the
remembered,imagined,desiredand perceived.Even in TheLogic of Sense OEDIPALISATION
DeleuzecriticisedHusserlfor restrictingthe noemato being an objectof
consciousness and argued that there were pure noematicpredicates- Tamsin Lorraine
colouritself,for example,which is still a relation- betweenlight and cyc - I)clcuzc nnd Guattrrridcscribchumirnbcingsasunfolding
ln Anti-Ocdip,rs,
but a relationlibcratcdfrom anyspccificobscrvcr. Nookrgywould,thcn,bc proccsscsof individurrtionin constflntintcrrctionwith thcir surrttltntlings,

and they characterisethree synthesesof the unconscious:connective painful statesthrough which he passesin terms of the attributes of a
syntheses that join elementsinto series('desiring-machines', for example, fundamentallyunchangingidentity.
mouth and breast),disjunctivesyntheses that resonateseriesin metastable Capitalism'sdrive for ever-newsourcesof profit fostersinnovatingflows
states('Bodieswithout Organs'(BwO), for example,mouth and breastor of desirethat, if left to themselves,could so altercapitalistformationsthat
head and arm or milk and stomachresonatingin a state of bliss), and the latter would evolveinto somethingelse.Oedipalisationis a form of
conjunctivesynthesesthat gather metastablestatesinto the continuous socialrepressionthat funnels the productive capacityof the unconscious
experienceof consciousawareness. They proposethat Oedipalsubjectiv- back into the constrictingchannelsof Oedipal desire.Following Oedipal
ity is but one form that human sentiencecan take. The synthesesthey subjectivityto its limits and beyond entailsliberating unconsciouspro-
describehaveanoedipalaswell asOedipalforms.'Oedipalisation, is a con- ductionsothat desirecancreatenew realities.WhereasOedipaldesirecon-
temporaryform of socialrepressionthat reducesthe forms desiretakes- stitutes the subjectas lacking the object desired,the goal of anoedipal
and thus the connectionsdesiremakes- to thosethat sustainthe social desireis immanentto its process:it seeksnot what it lacksbut what allows
formationof capitalism. it to continue to flow. In order to flow, anoedipaldesire must mutate and
Capitalism'semphasison the abstractquantificationof money and transformin a self-differentiating unfoldingimplicatedwith the socialfield
labour(what mattersis how capitaland labourcirculates- not the specific of forcesof which it is a part. Deleuzeand Guattari rejectthe psychoana-
form wealth takesor who in particular doeswhat) encouragesdesireto lytic contentionthat the only alternativeto Oedipal subjectivityis psy-
permute acrossthe social field in unpredictableways. Oedipalisation chosisand insteadexploreanoedipalflowsof desireand the schizowho is
reducesthe anarchicproductivity of unconsciousdesireto familial forms a functioningsubjectof suchdesire.Their notion of the unconscioussug-
of desire.Productivedesirethat flows accordingto immanentprinciples Bestswaysof approachingits 'symptoms' that point to possibilitiesfor cre-
becomesorganisedin terms of 'lack', thus reducingthe multiple forms ativetransformationinevitablylinked with socialchange.
desirecantaketo thoseforms that canbe referredto the personalidentities
of the Oedipaltriangle.On the BwQ desireis the only subject.It passes
from one body to another,producing partial objects,creating breaksand Connectives
flows, and making connectionsthat destroythe unity of a 'possessive or Body without Organs
proprietary' ego (D&G 1983:72). Oedipalisationmakesit appearthat Capitalism
partial objectsare possessed by a person and that it is the person who Desire
desires.Productivedesirethat would fragmentpersonalidentity is reduced Deterritorialisation/Reterritorialisation
to the desireof a personwho wants to fill in a lack. Oedipalisationthus Psychoanalysis
ensuresthat the innovationsof deterritorialisingcapitalareconstrainedby Subjectivity
the tightly bound parametersof personalidentity and familial life (or the
triangulatedauthority relationshipsrhar mimic Oedipus in the public
According to Deleuze and Guattari, Oedipalisationconstitutesan ONTOLOGY
illegitimate restriction on the productive synthesesof the unconscious
becauseit emphasisesglobal persons(thus excluding all parrial objectsof Constantin I1
desire),exclusivedisjunctions(thus relegatingthe subjectro a chrono- For Deleuze,philosophyis ontology.In this sense,he is one of only two
logicalseriesof momentsthat can be givena coherentnarrativeaccount), philosophers(the otherbeingEmmanuelL6vinas)of the generationwe call
and a segregativeand biunivocaluse of the conjunctivesyntheses(thus 'poststructuralists'not to demur in the faceof ontologyand metaphysics.
reducingthe identity of the subjectto a coherentor staticset of one side Deleuze'sontologyis a rigorousattemptto think of processand metamor-
of a set of oppositions).The subjectionof desireto a phallic paradigm phosis- becoming- not as a transitionor transformationfrom one sub-
resultsin a subjectwho experiences himselfas'having'an idcntitythat is stanccto anotheror a movementfrom onepoint to anothcr,but ratherasan
fixedon cithcr onc sidcor the othcr of variousoppositional dividcs(mrrlc attcmptt<lthink of'thcrcirlilsa proccss.It prcsupposcs,
thcrcforc,an initial
or fcmitlc,whitc or hlack),rrndwho dcsignltcsthc virriousplcnsurlblclncl lnd things,lnd ot'(trrrnsvcrsrl)
substitutiono1'firrccsfirr substirnccs lincs

for points.The real bifurcatesin two inextricablyinterlinkedprocesses - Connectives

the virtual and the actual- neitherone of which canbe without the other.
Presentstatesof affairs,or bodieswith their qualitiesand mixtures,make
up the actualreal.Meanwhile,incorporealeventsconstitutethe virtual real.
The natureof the latteris to actualiseitself without everbecomingdepleted
in actualstatesof affairs.This bifurcationof the realdoesnot enshrinetran-
scendence andunivocity:becomingis saidin oneandthe samesenseof both
the virtual andthe actual.It shouldbe notedherethat thereis no separation
or ontologicaldifferencebetweenthe virtual andactual.Deleuzeclaimsthe
virtual is in the actual;it is conservedin the pastin itself.Meditating on
temporality,Deleuzeretrievesthe Bergsoniand,urrle,working it into three
interrelatedsyntheses. First, the time of habit;second,the time of memory;
and third, the empty time of the future.
Substitutingforce for substance, and thinking of processes in terms of
series,requiresan ontology of multiplicities.This is becauseforce exists The 'order-word'is a function immanentto languagethat compelsobedi-
only in the plural - in the differential relation between forces. Series ence.The fundamentalform of speechis not the statement(6noncd)of
diverge,convergeandconjoinonly in the deterritorialisation of themselves a judgementor the expression(inonciation) of afeeling,but the command.
and other series.In the Deleuzian ontology multiplicities, unlike the Languagegiveslife-orders,and asa resulthumansonly transmit what has
'many' of traditionalmetaphysics, arenot opposedto the one becausethey been communicatedto them. All languageis expressedin indirect dis-
are not discrete (they are not multiplicitiesof discreteunits or elemenrs), course;thus the transmissionof order-wordsis not the communicationof
with divisionsand subdivisionsleavingtheir naturesunaffected.They are a sign in so far asit is understoodto containinformation.
intensivemultiplicitieswith subdivisionsaffectingrheir nature.As such, Order-wordsarenot restrictedto commands.They arealsothe relation
multiplicities have no need for a superimposedunity to be what they of every statementwith implicit presuppositionsand speech-actsthat
become.Forcesdeterminingtheir becomingoperatefrom within - they do are realisedin statementsthemselves.The relation between a statement
not needtranscendentforcesin order to function. It is in the virtual that and speech-actis internal. It is one of redundancy,not of identity.
intensivemultiplicities of singularities,seriesand time subsist.It is the Newspapersuse redundancyto order their statements;they tell people
virtual that is differentiatedin terms of its intensivemultiplicities.As the what to think. Seenthus,the redundancyof the order-wordis its mostper-
virtual actualises anddifferenciates itself the seriesit generates
becomedis- tinent trait. Information is only the minimal conditionfor the transmission
crete,without evererasingthe tracesofthe virtual insidethe actual. of order-words. An expression always contains collective assemblages;
Hence,the ontologyof Deleuzeis firmly anchoredby difference,rather statementsareindividuatedonly to the degreethat a collectiveassemblage
than being.This is differencein itsel{ not a differenceestablished postquo requiresthem to be transmittedasthey are.
betweentwo identities.The ontologicalprimacyDeleuzegivesdifference Order-wordstransformbodies.It is the judge'ssentencethat transforms
can no longerbe sublatedor eliminatedby either resemblance, analogyor the accusedinto a convict.What takesplacebeforehand(the allegedcrime
the labour of the negative.In the spaceinscribedby Martin Heidegger the accusedis saidto havecommitted),or afterwards(the enactmentof the
with his Being and,Time, Deleuze erects his ontology of Dffirence and, penalty)are actionsand passionsaffectingbodies(that of victim, convict
Repetition.Being is the d,ffirent/ ciation at work in the dynamic relation- or prison)in the largestsense.The instantaneous transformationfrom the
ship betweenthe virtual and the actual.Actualisationoccursin a presence suspectinto the convict is a pure incorporealattributethat takesthe form
that can neverbe sufficientunto itself for three reasons.First, the actual of content in a judge's sentence.Order-words are thus alwaysdated.
carriesthe trace of the virtual differencethat brought it about, Second, History recountsthe actionsand passionsof bodiesthat developin a social
actualisationdiffersfrom the 'originary' difference.Third, actualisationis field. Yet, history also transmits order-words from one generationto
pregnantwith all the differencesthat the never-before-actualised virtual is anothcr,Performativestatementsarenothingoutsideof the circumstances
capableof precipitatingat any (and all) time(s), that qunlifythcm to bc assuch,Transformations apply to boclicsbut arc,
194 O RDER- W O RD OR GA N IS M 195

themselves,incorporeal.In the political spherelanguagemobilisesthe

order-word, causingvocabularyand sentencesto vary and changeas also ORGANISM
do the order-words.
Order-words function as explicit commandsor implicit presuppos- tohn Proteoi
itions. They lead to immanent actsand the incorporealtransformations An 'organism' in the way that Deleuze and Guattari intend it is a
expressedin their form. They alsoleadto assemblages of expressions.At centralised,hierarchised,self-directedbody.It is akin to the'judgementof
a certain moment thesevariablescombine into a regime of signs.New God' (He who providesthe model of such self-sufficiency);it is also a
order-words ariseand modify the variableswithout being part of a known molarisedand stratifiedlife form. The organismis an emergenteffectof
r6gime. The scientific enterprise that claims to extract constants is organisingorgansin a particular way,a 'One' addedto the multiplicity of
coupledwith a politicalenterprisethat transmitsorder-words.Constants, organsin a'supplementarydimension'(D&G 1987: 21,265).Also import-
however,are alwaysdrawn from variablesso that certain linguistic cat- ant to note is that an organis a 'desiring-machine',that is, an emitter and
egories- such as languageand speech,competenceand performance- breakerof flows, of which part is siphoned off to flow in the economyof
becomeinapplicable.Languageconsistsof a major and a minor mode. the body.Organsare a body'sway of negotiatingwith the exteriormilieu,
The former extractsconstantswhile the latter placesthem in continuous appropriatingand regulatinga bit of matter-energyflow.
variation. The order-word is the variable that defines the usageof lan- The organismis the unifying emergenteffectof interlocking homeostatic
guage according to one of these two treatments. As the only metalan- mechanismsthat quickly compensatefor anynon-averagefluctuationsbelow
guage,it is capableof accountingfor a doubledirection: it is a 'little' (or certainthresholdsto return a bodyto its 'normal'condition(asmeasured by
simulated)death,but it is alsoa warning cry or a messageto takeflight. species-wide norms; henceDeleuzeand Guattari'ssenseof 'molar'). The
Through death the body reachescompletion in time and space.As a organism as unifying emergent effect is a stratum on the Body without
warning cry or harbingerof deaththe order-wordproducesflight. All of Organs(BwO),it is hencea construction,a certainselectionfrom the virtual
a suddenvariablesfind themselvesin a new stateand in continuousmeta- multiplicity of what a body canbe,and thereforea constraintimposedon the
morphosis.Incorporealtransformationsare again attributed to bodies, BwO: 'The BwO howls:"They've mademe an organism!They've wrong-
but now in a passageto a limit-degree.The questionis lesshow to elude fully foldedme! They'vestolenmy bodyl"' (D&G 1987:159).
the order-word than how to avoid its impact as a death-sentenceand, in While all actualor intensivebodiesare 'ordered'.that is. containsome
turn, to developa powerof escapefrom within the scope(expressionand probabilitystructureto the passage of flowsamongtheir organs(only the
statement)of the order-word. virtual BwQ at 'intensity = 0', has removed all patterning among its
It is thus imperative that life answerthe order-word of death not by organs),the organismis 'organised',that is, its habitualconnectionsare
fleeing but by making flight, in order to accentuateactive and creative centralisedand hierarchical.The organsof an organismare patternedby
attributes.Beneathorder-words,Deleuze adds,there exist pass-words, 'exclusivedisjunctions',that is, seriesof virtual singularitiesactualisedin
what he otherwisedescribesas words that passand are componentsof sucha wayasto precludethe actualisation of other,alternative,patterns;in
passage.In strong contrast, order-words mark stoppages,they are complexitytheory terms, an organism is locked into a basinof attraction,
arrestive,and in massiveshapethey organisestratifiedcompositions.Yet, or stereotypedset of such basins.As such a fixed habitualpattern locked
every singlething or word has this twofold nature,a capacityto impose onto normalfunctioningasdeterminedby species-wide averagevalues,the
order and to inspirecreativepassage. For the benefitoflife and flight it is organismdeadensthe creativityof life;it is'that which life setsagainstitself
necessaryto extract the one from the other, that is, to transform the com- in order to limit itself' (D&G 1987:503).Like all stratification,however,
positionsof order into componentsof passage. the organismhasa certainvalue:'stayingstratified- organized,signified,
subjected- is not the worst that can happen'(D&G 1987:16l), although
Connectives this utility is primarily asa restingpoint for further experimentation.
Constructingan organismout of a body (centralisingor molarisingthe
Body body)is oneof the threeprinciplestrataseparatinghumansfrom the plane
Death of consistcncy(abng with signifianccand subicctivity),As a stratum,

we canusethe terminology of form-substanceand content-expressionwith

regard to organisms,though we must remember that on the organic
stratum,contentand expressionmust be specifiedat manydifferentscales:
genesand proteins,cells,tissues,organs,systems,organism,reproductive
community,species, biosphere.At the levelof genesand proteinsthe sub-
stanceof content consistsof amino acids.Meanwhile, the form of content
or codingof theseacidscanbe understoodasaminoacidsequences or pro- Kenneth Surin
teins.Expression,aswe recall,is the putting of contentto work, sothe form
of expressionat this scaleis composedof nucleotidebasesequences that SigmundFreud'smetapsychology wasin essence a theoryof drives,in that
specifyamino acids,while the substanceof expression,the emergentfunc- it invokedthe conceptsofenergy and structureto showthat everyhuman
tional unit, is the gene,which determinesprotein shapeand function. It is action has its basisin a fundamentaland irreducibleinstinctualground.
importantto notethat in this treatmentwe areoverlookingthe DNA/RNA Two drives were pre-eminent:the sexualdrive and the drive for self-
relation,the dependence of geneson cellularmetabolism,and the role of preservation.Connectedwith the conceptof drive was the notion of an
genesin interveningin the self-organisingprocesses of morphogenesis. object- the psychiceconomywaspopulatedby a plethoraof suchobjects,
Skipping over severalscales(cell, tissueand organ)for simplicity's sake,we with the objectsin questionbeingrelatedto the 'discharge'of an underly-
arrive at the levelof organicsystems(for examplethe nervous,endocrine ing drive. Interestingly,Freud himself was not alwaysclear or consistent
and digestivesystems),where the substanceof content is composedof on the relationbetweendrive and object,and changedhis positionin sub-
organsand the form of contentis codingor regulationof flowswithin the sequentwritings or sometimessaid incompatiblethings about objectsin
body andbetweenthe body and the outside.The form of expressionat this differentparts of the sametext. Yet, the fundamentalpoint remained:the
levelis homeostaticregulation(overcodingof the regulationof flowspro- psychic object is a result of the drive, and the relation to an object is the
vided by organs),while the substanceof expressionis the organism,con- function of a drive'sdischarge.Freud and his followersconstruedsuccess-
ceivedas a processbinding the functionsof a body into a whole through ful psychicdevelopment,then, asthe capacityan individual psychehasto
coordinationof multiple systemsof homeostaticregulation. form relationswith wholeobjects.Subsequentthinkersin the psychoana-
Contemporarytreatmentof Deleuze'sbiophilosophybeginswith Keith lytical tradition criticised this emphasison the individual psyche,and
Ansell Pearson's Germinal Life. Other treatments include Manuel chargedFreud with de-emphasising socialrelationsand group ties,despite
Delanda, A Thousand, Yearsof NonlinearHistory and,IntensizseScienceand his attemptsto dealwith suchissuesin, for example,Totemanrl Tabooand
Virtual Philosophy.While Delanda interprets Deleuzeand complexity Mosesand,Monotheism. Freud wassaidto havefailedto consideradequately
theorysideby side,Mark HansenseesDeleuzeand Guamari'sbiophiloso- the mechanismsthat link objectsto drivesand objectsto eachother.These
phy as incompatible with complexity theory. For Hansen, Deleuze and mechanisms- introjection and proiection - are highly flexible in their
Guattari's devalorisationof the organism, while resonatingwith the operation, and blend objects with each other, as well as decomposing
'molecularrevolution'in twentieth-centurybiology,is in markedcontrast objectsinto 'partial' or'part' objects.Objectcreationcanalsobe enhanced
to the treatmentof the organismasirreduciblein the autopoietictheoryof by the particulardealingsan individual haswith the externalworld.
Humberto Maturana and well as the valorisation of The positionstakenby DeleuzeandGuattarion psychoanalysis belongto
speciesas'naturalkinds' found in the complexitytheorybiologyof Stuart this deviantor post-Freudiantradition. Perhapsthe most significantfigure
Kauffmanand Brian Goodwin. in this post-FreudianmovementwasKlein. Klein differedfrom Freud in her
insistencethat the drivesare not merestreamsof energy,but possess from
the beginninga directionand structure,that is, they areobject-focused. For
Deleuzeand Guattari, though, Klein remainedwithin the psychoanalytic
Body without Organs tradition: while Klein acknowledgedthe centrality and power of partial
Molar objccts,with thcir changesof intensity,their variableflows,and havingthe
Stratification capacityto cbb or cxplodc,shc still locatcdthc tirskof intcrprctingthcsc
Virtull/Virtuulity' objcctsirr rt cotrtritctullrchtion bctwccnirnirlystanclgrllicnt.'l'hc rrrrrrlyst

providedan interpretationof thesepsychicobjectsin the contextof the con-

tract that existedbetweenher and the patient.EvenWinnicott,who moved
further from Freudianismthan Klein becausehe dispensedwith the con-
John Marks
tractualrelationbetweenanalystand patient,wassaidby Deleuzeto have
remainedwithin the psychoanalytic paradigm.For Deleuze,the analystand Deleuzeis particularlystruck by the way in which the great English and
patienthaveto sharesomethingbeyondlaw,contractor institution.But the Americannovelistswrite in percepts,claimingby comparisonthat authors
primary disagreementthat Deleuze and Guattari had with the psychoana- suchasHeinrich von Kleist andFranzKafka write in affects.The'percept'
lytic tradition arose from the latter's insistencethat psychic well-being is at the heart of Deleuze'simpersonal conceptionof literature,whereby
residesultimately in a relationshipwith a wholeobject, therebyconsigning conventional literary categorieslike character,milieu and landscapeare
partial objects(the mother'sbreast,the penis,a whisper,a pain, a pieceof read in new ways.In order to explore how the percept works in literature
cake,and soon) to a necessarily inferior or prolepticpositionin the psycho- it is necessaryto understandhow Deleuzeis preoccupiedwith all that leads
analyticschemeof things- partialobjectswerealwayssomethingthar one to the dissolutionof the ego in art. This might manifestitself in the cap-
movedon from, a stagethat onewentthough,in attainingpsychicmaturity. acity of Virginia Woolf's charactersto merge with the world, in T E.
For Deleuzeand Guattari,however,partialobjects(andevendrives)are Lawrence'sdevastation of his own ego,or evenBartleby'spersistentrefusal
not mere structural phenomenaor stageson a developmentaltrajectory, to be 'particular'.The perceptalsohassomethingof childhoodperception
but, asthey put itinA Thousand, Plateaus,'entrywaysand exits,impasses in it, given that small children are unableto distinguishbetweenthem-
the child livesout politically,in other words,with all the forceof his or her selvesand the outsideworld. By meansof the percept,literaturebecomes
desire'(D&G 1987:13).Psychoanalysis forcesthe desireof the patientinto a wayof exploringnot how we existin the world, but ratherhow webecome
a grid that can then be traced by the analyst,whereasthis desireneedsto with the world. It has the capacity to explore our existenceas haecceities
be kept awayfrom any pre-tracedidentity or destiny.Only in this way can on the planeof consistency;to remind us that we ourselvesarepart of these
the patient (and the analyst)experimentwith the real. But to underrake compoundsof sensation.The percept makesvisible the invisible forcesof
this experimentationit is necessaryto treat psychicobjectsas political the world, and it is the literary expressionof the things that the writer has
optionsand just as significantly,to refrain from relegatingpartial objects seenand heardthat overwhelmher or him. Consequentl$it hasa vision-
to a merelysecondaryor provisionalstatusin relationto wholeobjects. ary potential.The perceptchallengesconventionalnotions of forms and
Partialobjectsare invariablysomething'menacing,explosive,bursting, subjects.It alsohasa political significance, in that it enablesus to explore
toxic,or poisonous',and it is this flexibleand plasticquality which makes an impersonaland pre-individualcollectivitythat might be the basisfor
them inherentlypolitical.For parts follow a specificcoursewhen they are a particularsort of ethicalcommunity.
detachedfrom a whole or from other parts,or when they are collectedinto The authors that Deleuze initially refers to in order to illustrate the
other wholesalongwith one or more otherparts,and sothe questionof the function of the percept in literature are Herman Melville and Virgina
specific processesthat underlie this detachment or reattachment is Woolf. Moby Dicb is a particularly important referencepoint for Deleuze.
absolutelycrucial: is a particular attachment,detachmentor reattachment Through his perceptions of the whale, Ahab passesinto the landscape,
menacing,reassuring,painful, pleasurable,tranquillising, alluring and so which in turn becomesa planeof pure expressionthat escapes form. Ahab
on? What makesit any one (or more) of thesethings?For Deleuzeand enters into a relationshipof becoming with the whale, and the ocean
Guattariit is absolutelyessential that weseetheseprocesses andtheir mean- emergesasa pure percept,a compoundof sensations. Another important
ingsasinherentlypolitical,asphenomena that movepeopleon, or hold them referencepoint is Virginia Woolf, who talksof 'momentsof the world', in
back,in the coursestakenby their lives.As they seeit, psychoanalysis, by which a charactersuch asMrs Dalloway'passes into'the town. Similarly,
privilegingthe wholepsychicobject,canneverdo justiceto politics. Deleuze alludesto the way in which the moor functions as a percept
for Thomas Hardy, as doesthe steppefor Anton Chekhovand the desert
for T, E. Lawrence.It canbe seen,then, that the perceptimpliesa particu-
lar relationshipbetweencharacterand landscape.Essentially,the land-
Psychoanalysis scapcis no longcran cnvironmcntthat cithcr mirrors,mocksor firrmsthc
Rcrrl chirrirctcr. pcrccivcstlrc lrrndscitpc
Nrlr is it thc cirsctlut tlrc clritrirctcr by

directing a gazeat it. Rather,Deleuzefeelsthat the perceptin literature phenomenological descriptionsof experienceitself. Husserl took from
showsus how the mind is a sort of membranethat is both in contactwith, is intentional- that is, that
Franz Brentanothe notion that consciousness
and is actuallypart of, the externalworld. The selfis not a thing that is dis-
it is alwaysconsciouso/something.To investigatewhat liesoutsideof con-
tinct from the externalworld, but somethingmorelike a 'fold' of the exter-
sciousness is fruitless.Instead,we shouldinvestigatethe structureandcon-
nal world, a membranethat capturesother things. The intimate contact
tents of our consciousexperiences. By suspendingthe 'natural attitude'
between the outside and inside means that literature can explore the (that is, the assumptionthat our experienceis causedby something'out
'private desert' (T E. Lawrence),or the 'private ocean'(Melville) that there')with its reifyingprejudices,we candiscoveranddescribethe'eidetic
results from this contact. As Deleuze puts it, every bomb that T E.
essences' that structureconsciousness. This, in turn, will revealhow our
Lawrenceexplodesis a bomb that explodesin himself. He cannot stop
knowledgeis constitutedand will give us a new method for grounding
himself from projecting intenseimagesof himself and others into the
knowledgein our'pre-predicativeexperience'(that is, experiencethat has
desert,with the resultthat theseimagestakeon a life of their own.
not yet beenpositedfrom the perspectiveof the naturalattitude).
Given this emphasison impersonalityand the dissolutionof the egq it
Martin Heidegger,EmmanuelL6vinas,Jean-PaulSartre,and Maurice
is not surprisingthat the literary hero of the perceptis the 'man without
Merleau-Pontyweresomeof thoseinspiredby Husserlto developvarious
qualities'.This sort of character- closelyrelatedto what Deleuzecallsthe
responses to versionsof phenomenology. But whereasHusserlthought of
'seer' (le aoyeur)in his books on cinema- ultimately has the tendency,at phenomenology asa rigorousscienceof consciousness, thesephilosophers
once modest but also crazy, to'become' everyoneand everything.He
emphasisethe notion (createdby Heidegger)of 'being-in-the-world'and
might be a characterwho is literally 'on the road',and an obviousexample
direct their attentiontoward the lived experienceof an embodiedsubiect
from popular literature would be the opennessto experienceof Jack
always already immersed in a world from which she cannot separate
Kerouac'snarratorin On theRoad.ln 'taking to the road' and beingopen
herself. Phenomenology'sinsistenceon describingphenomenaas they
to all contacts,Deleuzetalks about how a particular,pragmaticnotion of
appearthus openedup to philosophicalreflectionthe realm of experience
democracyis expressedin the way the soul in Americanliterature seeks
asit is experienced by ordinaryindividualsin everydaylife prior to the the-
fulfilment, rather than salvation.The perceptis primarily a literary form
oreticalattitudeof 'objective'thought.It wasembracedby manyasa revit-
of experimentation,but it has somethingto contribute to politics. In
alising alternativeto forms of philosophicalthought such as positivism
simple terms, the percepthasthe effectof drawing us out of ourselvesand (anotherimportant philosophicalmovementprominentin the earlytwen-
into the world, and of challengingthe individualisingand infantilising
tieth century) that took the methodsof natural scienceas their paradigm.
tendencyof much contemporaryculture. It is not enough,Deleuzeand
On Deleuze'sview,phenomenology's emphasison lived experienceter-
Guattari argue,to turn our own perceptionsand affectionsinto a novel,to philosophy habitual forms of perceptionand conception
ritorialises onto
embarkupon a journey in searchof the father who ultimatelyturns out to (perceptionformed from the point of view of the selfor thoughtin keeping
be oneself.
with the form of the 'I'). Deleuzesoughtto determinean 'impersonaland
pre-individualtranscendental field' that is the conditionof anyactualcon-
scious experience (D 1990: 102). In Foucault,Deleuze lauds Michel
PHENOMENOLOGY Foucaultfor convertingphenomenologyinto epistemology. There is a gap
betweenwhat we perceiveand what we say'asthoughintentionalitydenied
Tamsin Lorraine itself' (D 1988b:109).There is no suchthing asa pure or'savage'experi-
enceprior to or underlyingknowledge.The gap betweenwhat we sayand
Phenomenologyas a philosophicalmovementwas founded by Edmund
what we feel and perceive(aswell asthe Bergsoniangap Deleuzecharac-
Husserl.Ren6Descartes,ImmanuelKant and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
terisesin his Cinemabooks that can open up betweenperceptionand
Hegelarbimportantprecursorsto this movementthat insistsupon return-
action)indicatesimplicit tendenciesor forcesthat insistin what we sayand
ing to 'the things themselves',or phenomenaas they appearto us, in
do. The consciousexperiences of an individual are the emergenteffectsof
order to ground knowledgein the apodictic certainty of self-evidcnt
virtual, as well asactuallyunfolding, forcesof which the individual is, for
truth. Husscrl institutcda methodof 'bracketing'that suspcndsmctir-
thc most part, unawarc.Thc singulariticsor cvcntsdcfiningtheseforccs
physicrrlqucstions.ab<lut whrrt is 'out thcrc', tnd instctd filcuscsolr constitutca trirnsccndcntrrl ficld of'thc virturrlthrrtmayncvcrbc rctuitlisccl

in individualbodies.Eventsof sense(for example,rhe conceptsof philos- is linked to the key Stoic insight, prolonged by mediaevalnominalism and
ophy), as well aseventsof physicalprocesses(for example,the capacityto by Meinong, regardingthe autonomyof sensewith regardboth to phys-
fall, to run, to sweat)and their virtual relations'insist' in concretestatesof ical causalityand to the logic of propositions.However,while Husserl is
affairs,whether or not they actually unfold in specificspeech-actsor phys- commendedfor having identified the paradoxicalcharacterof sense,its
ical states. statusas both impassiveand genetic,he is criticised for having shirked
Philosophyas 'genuine thinking' does not attempt to representor from drawing the ultimate conclusionsof his (re)discovery,and falling
describe,but ratherto makethingshappenby creatingconceptsin response back, via his notion of Urdoxa, on the requirementsof generalityand
to the problemsof life that actualisethe virrual relationsof rhe transcend- recognitionthat define the image of thought as a convergenceof good
ental field in novel ways.Phenomenology's invocationof the 'primordial senseand common sense.Deleuzearguesthat to be faithful to the inaug-
lived'rendersimmanence in termsof whatis immanentto a subject'sexperi- ural Stoic insight one must conceivethe nucleusof the noemaas verb-
encerather than processes unfolding at levelsbelow as well as abovethe like, asan eventand not an attribute or predicate,aswell asmaintain the
thresholdof consciousness, thus groundingits investigations in whatare,in paradoxof sense,rather than transcendentally neutralisingit in a Kantian
Deleuzeand Guattari'sview, opinions that are alreadyclich6sextracted recourseto an object = x. Otherwise sensebecomesa mere shadowor
from experience(D&G 1994:150).The notion of a world 'teaming'with doubleof the proposition and is subordinatedto the genericdemandof
anonymous, nomadic,impersonaland pre-individualsingularitiesopensup unificationprovidedby the concept,on the one hand,and the form ofthe
the field of the transcendental andallowsthinkingof individualsin termsof person,on the other.
the singularitiesthat are their condition,rather than in terms of the syn- Following the arguments put forward by Jean-Paul Sartre in the
thetic and analyticunitiesofconsciousexperience (D 1990:103). Transcendence of the Ego (1937), Deleuze demands a more radical -
becausemoreimpersonal- treatmentof the phenomenological reduction,
such that it would allow accessto the pre-individual singularitiesat the
heartof genesisand sense.This canstill be regardedasthe contextfor his
Bergson useof HusserlinA Thousand Plateaus,where the phenomenologist's work
Experience is mined for the notions of anexactitudeand morphologicalessences, in
Foucault order to distinguishorganismsfrom bodies (without, incidentally,resort-
Singularity ing to Husserl'sown Leib/ Korperdistinction),nomad from royal science
(via Husserl'sintimation of a protogeometry),and to delineateprocesses
of transformation,distortion, ablationand augmentationon the machinic
phylum. Onceagain,Husserlis criticisedfor a certainKantian inspiration
that doesnot allowhim to determineindependentlya dimensionof events
and becomingsthat would be neither objectivenor subjective.Husserl's
Alberto Toscano
commitment to transcendental philosophy forces him instead to
Deleuze's relationship to the philosophy of Edmund Husserl is split subordinatethe eventsof senseand the anexactbecomingsof matterto an
between a critical hostility toward the methodologicalprinciples and instanceof legislation(in this case,royal science).The situationis much
overall aims of his phenomenologyand the isolation, extraction and the samefor the notion of passivesynthesis,borrowed from Husserl and
transformationof certain moments in Husserl'soeuvreto sustaincon- translated into empiricist, biophilosophical terms in Dffirence and
ceptual developmentsof his own. The most significant among these Repetition.
Husserlianinsertionsoccur with regardto the elucidationof (the genesis Deleuzedevelopshis ontologyof multiplicity againstall dialectics,from
of) sensein The Logic of Sensaand in the discussionof the machinic the work of Henri Bergson.Husserl,like Bergson,tried to draw the phil-
phylum in A Thousand Plateausinspiredby Gilbert Simondon.Deleuze osophicaland methodologicalconsequences of the work of Bernhard
finds support for his discussionof sensein Husserl'sdelineationof thc Ricmannon topology.What distinguishes thesetwo standpoints, vitalist
nocm:rtaand his scparationof a logicof cxprcssion(scnsc)from thc logics lncl phcnomcnologicirl, towitrdmultiplicitics? Whilc llcrgsonandDclcuzc
ln this rcspcct[-Iusscrl proposcthnl rr distinctionltctwccntwo typcsof'nrultipliciticsclln ()pcn
20+ PL ANE P LA N E 205

onto an understandingof becomingthat would not be subjectedto extrin- On this plane,all possibleeventsare brought together,and new connec-
sic measurement,Husserl adopts the notion of multiplicity to formulate tionsbetweenthem madeandcontinuouslydissolved.To think of this field
a universalisticand homogeneoustheoreticalscienceof theory (or meta- of possibilitiesmeansarrangingit accordingto someconcept(in Deleuze's
science),for which the mathematicalconceptof multiplicity could serveas specificsenseof the word), thereby constructing a temporary and virtual
the commonformal term. Husserlexplicitly usesmultiplicitiesto distin- arrangementaccordingto causal,logical and temporal relations.Such
guish object-fieldsof theoriesand to ground the unity of explanationin thinking is alwaysa responseto some particular set of circumstances,
eachfield. In this regardhis interestonceagainis with thosequestionsof which might be as complex as a philosophicalinquiry or as seemingly
foundationand legitimationthat Deleuze'sformulation of an immanent simple as feeling hungry. In the former instance,one might constructa
and intensivelogic of multiplicitiesis designedto undermineor evade. complexmodel to which one returns time and again over the courseof
Theseencounterswith Husserl,aroundthe ideasof sense,the machinic one's life whereas,in the latter, it might involve no more than acting to
phylum and multiplicities,permir us to identify rhreealternativenotions satisfy hunger. In either case,though, one's world is organisedanew
of phenomenologypunctuatingDeleuze'sphilosophicalitinerary: a phe- aroundsomerelevantconceptor setof concepts,suchthat a new planeof
nomenologyof events(or rigorous scienceof surfaceeffects),a phenomen- immanenceis constructed,providingthe temporaryconsistencyof think-
ology of material fluxes, breaks and assemblages (or phenomenologyof ing upon which meaningdepends.
production),and a phenomenology of the concept.Respectively,
thesecan For Deleuze,philosophyis all aboutthe creationof new concepts.Each
be linked to the autonomyof sense,the autonomyof a nomad scienceof new conceptcreatesa new plane;that is, a new imageof thought provid-
haecceities (or of the practiceof the artisan)and the autonomyof philoso- ing theoreticalconsistencyfor how life is experiencedand understood.For
phy.Thesearelike the threemomentsof an-otherphenomenology, oneno example,the cogitoof Ren6Descarteswasthe essentialpreconditionupon
longertied to the teleologicalprogrammeof makingimmanenceimmanent which the Cartesianunderstandingof the world could be developedand
to consciousness or subjectivity. its conceptsusedas explanatorytools.Deleuzeholds that, by thinking in
new waysand proposingnew concepts,everygreatphilosophycreatesits
own planeof immanence.The planecan only be definedin terms of the
conceptsoperatingupon it, and the concept canonly havemeaningrela-
PLANE tive to the,forcesat work on the plane.The conceptsact like 'coordinates'
for thinking,providingpointsof focusfor realisingthe potentialof chance
CliffStagoll eventsoccurring upon the plane.
Deleuzeusesthe imageof the 'plane'in numerouscontexts.Typically,it is Deleuzeusesthe imageof the planequite variously.In his Bergsonian
employedto explaina type of thinking that mediatesberweenthe chaosof model of recollection,for instance,Deleuzerefersto 'planes'and 'sheets'
chancehappenings(and the complexityof their ever-shiftingorigins and of memories.His explorationsof art refer to a 'plane of percepts',and
outcomes)on the one hand,and structured,orderlythinking on the other. A Thousand. Plateausis structured around a range of planesthat seemto
Deleuzerevealsthe former in his theoriesof multiplicity, becomingand ground life and thinking. However,the key characteristicsascribedto a
difference.He proposesthat the lasttypifieshow we dealwith suchchaos: planeare alwaysconsistent.First, a planeis alwaysa virtual construction
by imposingstructures,creatinghierarchies,conceivingof things as (the ratherthan an actualone,unextendedin spaceand imperceptible.Second,
same'from one moment to the next, using definitionsto limit meanings, production upon a plane (that is, interconnectionof events)occursat a
and ignoring new and potentiallycreativeinquiries.The imageof a'plane 'speed'specificto the particular terms of the changesinvolved.Third, a
of consistency'or 'plane of immanence'both explainsthe relationship plane is not the theoreticalfield of some pre-existing subject or self.
between these two ways of thinking and revealsmore fully the creative Nothing is superior to the plane'smovement.Fourth, a plane doesnot
potentialevidentin thinking aboutthe world. precedethe connectionsand synthesesbrought aboutbetweeneventsby a
A plane of immanencecan be conceivedas a surfaceupon which all concept,but is constructedpreciselyas they are created.Taken together,
eventsoccur, where eventsare understoodas chance,productive inter- thcsccharactcristics comprisea plane's'immanence'.
actions betweenforcesof all kinds. As such, it representsthc field of Vcry latc in his carccr,Delcuzcraiscda rangcof new issueswhen he
wrotcitbout"l'l lli plrtncof immirncncc', 'l'hc implicrrtions
bccoming,a 'spircc'containingall of rhc possibilitics
inhcrcntin firrccs.

variantof the model are debatable.Deleuzeclearlydoesnot meansome affairsareput into play through the actualisationof connectionsthat defy
superiorplaneupon which particular planes(of conceptualconsistency, the impositionof externalconstraints(for example,tantric sexualpractices
art or memory,for example)are inscribed.Rather,he seemsto be pointing in which orgasmis not the goal or meditativestatesthat deliberatelyavoid
out that there is a planeof immanenceimmanentto all thinkableplanes, goal-orientedthinking).
such that eachplaneis merelyone centreof activity or perspective.THE Deleuzeand Guattari deliberatelyavoidedwriting I Thousand, Plateausin
planeis the field of all events.As such,the unity of rhe cosmosought not a stylethat movesthe readerfrom oneargumentto the next, until all the argu-
to be thought assometranscendentcontainingthe immanent, but only the mentscanbe gatheredtogetherinto the culminatingargumentof the bookas
immanentitself conceivedasthe transcendentally necessaryconditionfor a whole.Insteadthey presentfifteen plateausthat aremeantto instigatepro-
all life: everythingis unified in so far aseverythingis becomingand flux. ductive connectionswith a world they refuseto represent.Throughout
whilst this notion is certainlynor new in itself,the modelof the planedoes Deleuze'swork and his work with Guattari,he and Guattari createphil-
provide a new imagefor thinking about the universalityof immanent pro- osophicalconceptsthat they do not want to pin down to any one meaning.
duction and becoming. Insteadthey let their conceptsreverberate,expressingsomeofthe variations
in their sensethroughthe shiftingcontextsin which they areput to use.In
Connectives A Thousand, Plateaus,they characterisesuchconceptsasfragmentarywholes
that canresonate in a powerful,openWholethat includesall the conceptson
Art one and the sameplane.This planethey call a 'planeof consistency' or 'the
Becoming planeof immanence of concepts,the planomenon' (D&G 1987:35).
Concept Deleuze and Guattari advocateconstructinga Body without Organs
Event (BwO) and 'abstractmachines'(with a 'diagrammatic'function D&G
Immanence 1987:cf. 189-90)that put into play forcesthat are not constrainedby the
Memory habitual forms of a personalself or other 'molar' forms of existence.
A BwO is a plateauconstructedin terms of intensitiesthat reverberatein
keepingwith a logic immanentto their own unfoldingrather than conven-
PLATEAU tional boundariesof self and other. An abstractmachine 'placesvariables
of contentand expressionin continuity'(D&G 1987:5l l). It (for example,
Tamsin Lorraine the Galileoabstractmachine)emergeswhen variablesof actionsand pas-
sions (the telescope,the movementof a pendulum, the desireto under-
Rather than plotting points or fixing an order,Deleuzeand Guattari wrote stand) are put into continuous variation with incorporeal eventsof sense
their book, A ThousandPlateaus,as a rhizome composedof (plateaus'. (Aristotelianmechanicsand cosmology,Copernicanheliocentrism),creat-
They claim that the circular form they gave it was ,only for laughs' ing effectsthat reverberatethroughoutthe socialfield (D&G 1987:cf. 5l l).
(D&G 1987:22).The plateausaremeantto be readin any order and each There are variouswaysin which an assemblage's capacityto increaseits
plateau can be related to any other plateau. Deleuze and Guattari cite number of connectionsinto a plane of consistencycan be impeded; cre-
Gregory Bateson'suse of the word 'plateau' to designatea ,continuous, ative connectionscan be replacedwith blockages,strata, 'black holes', or
self-vibratingregion of intensities'that doesnot developin terms of a 'lines of death'.An assemblage that multipliesconnectionsapproaches the
point of culminationor an externalgoal.Plateausareconstitutedwhenthe 'living abstractmachine'(D&G 1987:513).
elementsof a region(for example,the microsensations of a sexualpractice
or the micreperceptionsof a mannerof attending)arenot subjectedto an
externalplan of organisation.An externalplan imposesthe selectionof Connectives
someconnectionsrather than othersfrom the virtual relationsamongthe Actuality
elementsthat could be actualised,actualisingvarying capacitiesto affcct lllack hole
and be affectedin thc process.A plateauemergcswhen the singulariticsof Rhizomc
an indiviclurrl
<lra phnc thrt prcvior,lslyonly 'insistcd'in ir concrctcstirtcof Wholc
208 PLAro (c. +28-c. 348 nc) POL ITIC S + EC OL OGY 209

PLATO (c. 428-c.348 nc) but harmlessactivity.Dramatic poetry,however,is dangerousbecauseit pro-

ducesa spectacle ableto suspenddisbelief.The spectators of dramaticpoetry
Alison Ross areinductedinto the world of the performancewherean actor playingthe
roleof a statesman or a philosopher'is' this role.For Platothis dissimulation
Plato's philosophy exerts a profound influenceover modern thought. of its statusasa copyrendersdramaticpoetry dangerousto the proper order
ImmanuelKant's 'Copernicanrevolution'in philosophywas styledas an of the Statebecause it trainsin the soulsof its citizensa disregardfor the dis-
invertedPlatonismin which the dependence of a finite consciousness on tinctionbetweenthe true and falsecopy.This distinctionin Platobetweena
sensibleforms to think ideasreversedthe Platonichierarchybetweenthe harmlesscopy and the malevolentcopy,that itself becomesa model, is the
intelligible and the sensible.Friedrich Nietzsche,who found Kanr's critical key to Deleuze'sproject of a 'reversalof Platonism'.
philosophy inadequatefor such a reversalon account of the primacy in According to Deleuze the pertinent distinction for the reversal of
Kant of the moral idea,definedthe task of the philosophyof the furure as Platonismis not model-copybut copy-simulacra. The simulacraare those
the'reversalof Platonism'inwhich the distinctionbetweenthe realandthe falsecopiesthat place'in questionthe verynotationsof copyandmodel'and
apparentworldswouldbe abolished.DeleuzefollowsNietzschein this task the'motivation'ofPlato'sphilosophyis transcribed by Deleuzeastherepres-
of a reversalof Platonism,but also refines the 'abstract' Nietzschean sionof the simulacrain favourof the copies(D 1990:256-7).Simulacraare
formula of this task by askingabout the motivationof Platonism.In his imageswithoutresemblance to theIdea.As suchtheyunderminethedualism
analysisof this motivationDeleuzefindsin Plato,unlikeNietzsche's(exter- betweenIdea and imagein Platonicthought, which regulatesand grades
nal' critique,the conditionsfor the reversalof Platonism.For this reason, termsaccordingto a presupposed relationof resemblance to the Ideas.It is
Deleuze'sreversalof Platonismis also better equippedto critique the becausethe simulacraare not modelled on the Idea that their pretension,
dualistontologyof Platonismthat continuesto operatein Kant. their merely externalresemblanceto the Idea, is without foundation.But it
The motive of Plato'stheory of the Ideasneedsto 'be soughtin a will to is alsobecauseof this merelyexternalresemblance that the simulacrasuggest
selectand to choose'lineagesand 'to distinguishpretenders'(D 1990: a conceptionof the world in which identity follows 'deep disparity', and
2534).In Plato,the hierarchythat distinguishesIdeasfrom modelsand contestthe conceptionof the world in which differenceis regulatedaccord-
copiesdescribes a degradationofuse andknowledge. Accordingto Plato,the ing to a prior similitude (D 1990: 261). Thus, Deleuze's'reversalof
sensibleworld is derivedfrom and modelledasa 'copy' on the realmof the Platonism'assertsthe rightsof the simulacraoverthe copy.He arguesfor a
Ideas.'Copies',that comprisethe sensibleworld, mark a gradeddescent pop art ableto 'be pushedto the point whereit changesits nature'asa copy
awayfrom therealmof theIdeasto themerely'apparent' world of the senses. of a copy(Platonism)to be 'reversedinto the simulacrum'(anti-Platonism)
The copyingof thesecopiesin art marksa further declinein ontology(use) (D 1990:265).In this way,the essence-appearance or model-copydistinc-
and epistemology(knowledge).In the Republic,the mimetic mechanismof tions usedby modern philosophersto tacklePlatoare shownby Deleuze's
art leadsto Plato'shostility to art as a 'copy of a copy' and to the dramatic genealogyof Plato to be ineffectivein reversingPlatonism.
arts in particularwhich dissimulatetheir statusasa copyof a copy.The Idea
of 'a bed' is a modeluntrammelledby sensibilityand containsonly thosefea- Connectives
turesthat are the necessary conditionsfor any bed (that it is a structureable
to supportthe weightof a person).A sensible'copy'of this ldeanecessarily Kant
placescertainlimitationson this form by makingit a certainheight and Nietzsche
colour.However,the painterwho paintsa copy of this bed copiesall the Thought
things about the bed that are inessentialto its use (that it is a particular
colour,a particularheight,in a particularsetting),but is unableto copyany
of thosefeaturesof the bed that relateto its function(that it hasa structure POLITICS + ECOLOGY
ableto supportthe weightof a person).The restrictionof paintingto the
copyingof the mereappearance of the objectshows,for Plato,that thc artist RosiBraidotti
producesthings whose internal mechanismsthey arc ignorant of. This Adlpting llaruch Spinoza'smonism to an ccosophyof transccndcnttl
dcgradltionofiltsclncl knowlcdgc in thc fabricrrtccl
objcctnrlkcsrrt I futilc, cmpiricism,l)clcuzcconstructsthc conccptof''inrnrlncncc':

strainsof vitalismand yet still bypassingessentialism. Choosingto move obsolete at the speed of light. These legal addictions titillate without
beyond the dualism of human/non-human,Deleuze'secosophyrejects release,inducing dependencywithout any senseof responsibility.This
liberal individualismas much as it does the holism of 'deep ecology'. mixture of dependencyand dissatisfactionconstitutespower as a nucleus
Primarily,the ecosophyof Deleuzeaspiresto expressthe rhizomaticstruc- of negativepassions, suchasresentment,frustration,envyand bitterness.
ture of subjectivity.The subject'smind is 'part of nature'- embeddedand Deleuze'secosophyof radical immanenceand intensivesubjectsres-
embodied- that is to sayimmanentand dynamic.As the structureof the ponds to the unsustainable logic and internal contradictionsof advanced
Deleuziansubjectis interactive,it is inherently ethical.In this manner, capitalism.This Deleuzianbody is in fact an ecologicalunit. Through a
when Deleuzeimbues ethical agencywith an anti-essenrialist vision of structureof mutual flowsand data-transfer,one that probablyis bestunder-
'commitment'he accordinglydisplacesthe anthropocentricbias of com- stoodin referenceto viral contaminationor intensiveinterconnection,this
munitarianism. body is environmentallyinterdependent.This environmentally-bound
The ecosophical ethicsof Deleuzeincorporaresthe physicsand biology intensivesubjectis a collectiveentity; it is an embodied,affectiveand intel-
of bodiesthat togetherproduceethologicalforces.Insteadof the essential- ligent entity that captures,processesand transforms energiesand forces.
ist question-'What is a body?'- Deleuzeprefersto inflect his questions Being environmentally-boundand territorially-basedit is immersed in
slightlydifferently.He asks:'What cana body candol'and'How much can fieldsthat constantlyflow and transform.
a body can take?'.We are thereforeinvited ro think about the problemof All in all, Deleuzeexpandsthe notion of universalismto be more inclu-
ecosophyin terms of affectivity:How is affectivityenhancedor impover- sive.He doesthis in two ways.First, by affirming biocentredand trans-
ished?In this way,ethicalvirtue,empowerment,joy andunderstandingare speciesegalitarianismasan ethicalprinciple,he opensup the possibilityof
implied. However,an act of understandingdoes not merely entail the conceptualising a post-humanity.Second,a new senseof globalintercon-
mental acquisitionof certain ideas, but it also coincideswith bodily nectionis established asthe ethicsfor non-unitarysubjects,emphasisinga
processes. It is thus an activity that actualises
what is goodfor the subject, commitmentto others(includingthe non-human,non-organicand 'earth'
for examplepotentia.Mind and body act in unisonand are synchronised others).By removingthe obstacleof self-centredindividualism,the polit-
by what Spinozacallsconatus,that is to saythe desireto becomeand to ics of Deleuzianecosophyimplies a new way of combininginterestswith
increasethe intensityof one'sbecoming. an enlargedsenseof community.Deleuze insists that it is the task of
The selectionof compositepositivepassions,that constituteprocesses philosophyto createforms of ethicaland politicalactivitiesthat respondto
of becoming,worksasa matterof affectiveandcorporealaffinity.An ethical the complex and multilayered nature of 'belonging'. In other words,
relation is conduciveto joyful and empoweringencountersthat express philosophyin the handsof Deleuzebecomesa nomadicecosophyof mul-
one'spotentiaand increasethe subject'scapacityto enter into further rela- tiple beings.
tions.This expansionis boundboth spatially(environmental)and rempor-
ally (endurance).By entering into ethical relations,nomadicbecomings
engenderpossiblefutures in that, as they produceconnections,they in
turn producethe affectivepossibilityof the world asa whole.
Vitalist ecosophyalso functionsto critique advancedcapitalism;more
specificallycapitalistconsumerismand the over-indulgentconsumptionof
resources. As a temporalsequence, capitalismengenders the schizophrenic Postcolonial theory is derived from terms such as 'minoritarian',
simultaneityof oppositeeffectsand thereforeit short-circuitsthe present. 'nomadism', 'becoming' and their variants. A worldwide becoming-
Thus, it immobilisesasit saturatesthe socialspacewith commodities.The minoritarian bearsa potential Qpuissance
or virtuality) that can affectbodies
temporal disjunction induced by the speedyrurnover of availablecom- and words.The contextis oneof sexual of underminingthe power
modities is not different from the jet-lag one suffers after flying from (pouaoiror givenforce)of the white malewho hasorder-wordsat his dis-
London to Sydney.Capitalisminducesa perverselogic of desirebasedon posal.Minorities havenothing to do with numbersbut with internalrela-
the deferral of pleasurefulfilment, deferring the gratificationonto thc tions. Of importancc are the connectionsbetween bodies and words,
'next generation' of tcchnological commoditics andgadgcts:thc picccmcal cspcciallyconjunctivcfrrrms(suchils'and' and 'plus')that irugmcntvaluc
instalmcnts of popillarculturcin thc filrm of''infirtirinmcnt'thirtbccomc to thc tcrmsbctwccnwhichtlrcylrc firund.l')vcrynujor hnguirgcis ridcllcd

with minor languagesthat transform order-wordsand deterritorialise or point they reach is a relay. Nomads and migrants can mix, yet their
dispersetheir mortifying effects.The more a languagehasthe characteris- conditions are not the same.The nomads' trajectory distributes people.
tics of a major language,the more,toq it is affectedby continuousvariations Sedentaryor dominant spaceis striated with walls and roads. Nomadic
that transform it into a 'minor' language.Insteadof criticising the world- spaceis markedonly by'traits'that areeffacedand displacedby the move-
wide imperialism of English in our time by denouncingthe corruption it ment of trajectories.The nomad doesnot want to leavethe smooth space
introducesinto other languages,one can say that the idiom is necessarily left by the receding forest where the desert advances.Nomadism is
workedupon by all the minorities of the world that imposediverseproced- inventedasa responseto this challenge.Nomadshaveabsolutemovement,
ures of variation:in the handsof minoritariansEnglish becomes-pidgin, that is, speedwhich is intensive.The migrants' movementsare extensive.
a form that mocksits lawsandstricturesandreterritorialises it for newends. Vorticalor swirlingmovementis an essentialfeatureof the war machineof
It is clearthat two languages neverexistadjacentto eachother,and that as the nomad. Contrary to the migrants who reterritorialisethemselves,
a resulttwo idiomsarereallyonly two treatmentsof the samelanguage. nomadsfind themselvesin ongoingdeterritorialisation.
Ratherthanoperatingbetweensomethingseenand somethingsaid,lan- In an era of global capitalismorder-wordsare the sameeverywhere.
guagegoesfrom sayingto saying,utteranceto utterance,and from aphor- Minoritarian massesare at the sametime engagedin a worldwideprocess
ism to aphorism.Postcolonialtheory does not deal with the 'look' of of becomingand in a creativetransformationof the order-wordsimposed
phenomenologybut with the transmissionof language.It dealsespecially in the nameof democraticcapitalism.Postcolonialtheory,arguesDeleuze,
with the order-word,or password,that it replaceswith passages. When, in is built from these processes.Its practice assumesdifferent forms and
a passage to the limit, languagelosesits fixed meaning,bodiesenter into a shapesaccordingto the natureofgeography,historyand the inheritedcon-
processof metamorphosis.They losetheir identities and becomecommon ditions of conflict.
and totalised,the idioms of everybody(tout le monde).
The becoming-minoritarianof bodiesand languageis linked to creativ-
ity. Literature is a privileged field for a becoming-minoritarian.A minor Connectives
literature works the maior languagefrom the inside. In a postcolonial Creativetransformation
context,minor literaturedealswith the undoingof the majorlanguage, not Deterritorialisation/Reterritorialisation
by reterritorialisingby mere usage of a dialect but by transforming Minoritarian
imposedor inheritedorder-wordsthat giveit meaningand direction.
The processof becoming-minoritariancan be acceleratedby what
Deleuzecallsthe'war machine'.That is, the axiomaticof the white,mono-
lingual,English-speaking POST.STRUCTURALISM + POLITICS
maleand the worldwideinstitutionof capitalism
needsto be challenged.It is only by leaving,and by neverceasingto leave,
Alberto Toscano
the plan(e)of capitalthat masses from the Third World and the ex-colonies
shift the forcesin the dominantequilibrium. If minoritiesdo not consti- The post-structuralist,or evenanti-structuralist,characterof Deleuzeand
tute viableStatesin a cultural,political,or economicsense,it is because the Guattari can be said to rest on four elements:a theory of subjectivation,
State-form,the axiomaticrule of capitaland their correspondingculture a critique of the notion of ideology,the ontologyof control and an analy-
may not be appropriatefor them. Capitalismmaintainsand organisesnon- sisof capitalism.Deleuze'spost-structuralismis bestgauged,not only by
viable States for the precise purpose of crushing minorities. Devolving his attack on structuralismin the 1970s,but by consideringhis earlier
upon minorities is the task of countering the worldwide war machine by appropriation of structuralist themes, especiallyhis formulation of the
meansothor than thoseits juggernaughtimposesupon them. fundamental criteria for structuralism in 'How do we Recognize
To becoming-minoritarianis tantamountto undoing closuresand trans- Structuralism?'(1967,seeStivale1998).This essaystandsout for its atten-
forming striatedspacesinto smoothand unimpededspaceswhere words tion to how structuralismarticulatesthe empty placeat the heart of the
and bodiesmoveat top speedin an ongoingprocssof deterritorialisation. symbolic,the accidentsof structure (or spatio-temporaldynamisms)and
Becoming-minoritarianis linked to physicaland mental nomrdism. I'br irn instirnccof subjcctivity. pcrhapsthc kcy issuc
Rlr Dclcuzc,it inclicatcs
nomtds,contrirryto migrirntswho g<lfr<tmonc point to irnothcr;cvcry of thc politiurl,undcrstoodrrsthc problcmof novclty(or bccoming),

By portraying the structuralist subject (or hero) as comprising On the one hand, Deleuzeand Guattari'sphilosophyis determinedby
impersonalindividuations and pre-individual singularities,affectedby an anti-dialecticalimpetus:to think the independenceof becoming,and
eventsimmanentto the structure,Deleuze,in 1967, formulatedone of the the possibilityof an ethicsoutsideany frameworkof legitimationor regu-
few,if not the only, consistentdefinition of post-structuralism.By empha- lation. Consider their separationof becoming and history, such that
sising the importanceof praxis in the mutation of structures,Deleuzelays becoming-revolutionaryis a trans-temporal event that can detach itself
the ground for a conceptionof politics that leavesstructuralismbehind. from the fateof an actualrevolution.In conjuncturalterms,Deleuze'sdef-
Treating the unconscious,with Guattari, as a factory driven by flows of inition of the society of control, following William S. Burroughs and
desire,rather than asa theatreof representation, Deleuzebreakswith the Michel Foucault,arguesthat we areno longerin a situationwhere,evenat
whole thematic of ideology (and its critique) that defined the Freudo- the formal level,we could speakof a correlation or transitivity betweenthe
Marxism of the 1960s(and thus continuedhis earlierempiricistconcern systemand its individual subjects.As mechanisms of disciplinecometo be
with institutionsand jurisprudence).The emphasison a sub-representa- superseded by technologiesof control, politicsis more and more a matter
tional, libidinal dimensionto socialand psychic(re)productionheraldeda of 'dividuality', such that the impersonaland the pre-individualbecome
movefrom a focuson structuresto what might be calleda constructivistor the very materialof control,but alsoof minoritariansubjectivationand the
ethologicalapproach,aimed at discerningthe modalitiesof synthesisat constructionof effectivealternatives.Whence Deleuze'spreferencefor
work in the collectiveproduction of subjectivity.Accompanyingthis shift notionsof combator guerrillawarfareover thoseof antagonismor (class)
wasone from an earlierconcernwith problemsof organisationand genesis struggle: for Delduze, the combat betweenand within individuals, as
(seethe discussionof the ideaof revolutionin DffirenceandRepetition) to becoming,is the preconditionof the combatagainstor resistance. This is
a focuson formsof individuation(haecceities) populatinga planeof imma- what differentiatescombat from war, which takesthe confrontationof
nencethat cannotbe capturedby any structureof placesand differences. subjectsasprimary.
By shifting the focusof an analysisof capitalismfrom value and labour to
codificationand desire,whilst retaining many elementsof the Marxian
problematic,Deleuzeand Guattarievadea dialecticalcorrelationof polit-
ical subjectivityand systemicchange.Insteadthey prefer an inventoryof
the typesof operations(or syntheses) wherebydesiringsubjectivityis pro-
Claire Colebrook
duced and an outline of how capitalismand its Statesare able to axioma-
tise and capture subjectivity,in order to bend it to the imperativesof Although the conceptof powerin Frenchphilosophyis usuallyassociated
surplusvalue. with Michel Foucault,and althoughDeleuzeand Guattari in A Thousand,
Now it is the materialeffectsof the axiomatic(or of capitalistsubjectiv- Plateausareexplicitlycriticalof Foucault'suseof the word 'power' (rather
ity) on subjects,and not their placementin a structurethrough ideological than their own 'desire' which they seeas creatingrelations through which
interpellation that areat stake.It is not only from the sideof commandthat powermight operate),it makesa greatdealof senseto locateDeleuzewithin
Deleuzeand the systemiccorrelation(whetherstructural or dialectical) a tradition of the philosophyof power.This is not power in the political
betweenpoweror dominationand subjectivationareundermined.In their sense- a powerexercisedby one body overanotherbody - but is closerto
formulations of the conceptsof 'minority' and of the 'war machine', the positiveidea of plver t0. Deleuze'santecedents in this tradition are
Deleuzeand Guattari alsodelineatethe constructiveautonomyor exter- BaruchSpinozaand FriedrichNietzsche.For Spinozaa beingis definedby
nality of certain forms of subiectivationto the mechanismsof control and its power,its striving or its potential to maintain itself. Rather than seeing
exploitation.Rather than identifying the subject with an instancethat human life ashavinga proper form which it then ought to realise,so that
accompanies the structureand appropriatesit heroically,the minoritarian potentialwouldbe properlyorientedtowardsactualisation, Spinozaregards
subject(or the subjectof the war machine)is definedby a line of flight, potentialityas creativeand expressive;if all life is the striving ro express
which signalsboth its capacityfor independentontologicalcreativityand substance in all its differentpotentialsthen the fulfilment or jo.yof human
the mannerin which it affectsthe societythat perpetuallyseeksto capture life is the cxpansionof power.Joy,as the realisationof power,is therefore
or idcntify it. This attackon symbolicand dialecticalundcrstandings <tf diffcrcntfrom thc moral oppositionof grxrdirnclcvil, an oppositirlrr that
llolitics is both ir milttcrof principlctnd of conittnctttrc. im;rcdcs powcrby constririning it withinsomcrlrcirdygivcnnrlrnr.
zl6 PO W ER P S Y C H OA N A LY S IS 217

Nietzsche, whose 'Will to Power' for Deleuze is also an affirmation of Connectives

life (and not the assertion or imposition of power), extended Spinoza's
expressivephilosophy. Instead of there being bodies or enrities that have
a certain power or potential, Nietzsche begins with powers or forces, from
which beings are effected. A master does not have power because he is
a master; rather, it is the exercise of a certain power which produces
masters and slaves.Deleuze's reading of Nietzsche is concerned primarily PROUST, MARCEL (1871-1922) - referto theentrieson 'art', 'faciality',
with Nietzsche as a philosopher of power and forces, where force has a and'thought'.
strict metaphysical function. There are powers (or quanta of force) that in
their encounter or connection with other powers produce relations, but
nothing in the power itself determines how it will be actualised, and any
power has the potential to be actualised differently. PSYCHOANALYSIS _ FAMILY, FREUD,
Deleuze's repeated insistence that relations are external to terms has AND UNCONSCIOUS
a twofold significance. First, in line with a philosophy of power, Deleuze
does not begin from beings that then enter into relations; rather, there are Alison Ross
powers to be, powers that are actualised only in their relation to other
powers. So what a power ej is secondaryto its potential; the virtual precedes
the actual. Second, if powers are, in this world, actualisedin a certain way,
through the particular relations that have been effected, it is also possible The 'family' hasa pivotalconceptualrole within psychoanalytic theory;its
for different relations to produce different worlds; powers might be actu- primacy in psychoanalysis is neither limited to the bourgeoisnuclear
alised through other relations. family nor the therapeuticpracticeof analysisthat dealswith it. Rather,
For Deleuze, power is positive; there are not beings who then have the through the organisingrole given by Sigmund Freud to the Oedipus
power to act, or who then suffer from power (where power would be the complex,the 'family' actsasan explanatorymodel for the organisationof
corruption of, or fall from, some passivestate). Rather, a being is its power desirein the individual- asseenin his therapeuticpractice- but extends
or what it can do. For Deleuze, then, power posesa problem: How is it that aswell to the historicalforcesinvolvedin the shapingof instinct described
beings can be separated from their power? Why does power appear to be in his meta-psychological writings on civilisation.
something from which we suffer; why does power seem to be repressive? The Oedipuscomplexintroducesthe senseof an externalprohibition
For Deleuze, this is becausewe rest too easily with the effects of power - under which infantilelibido is definitivelyshaped.The significanceof this
its manifestations, what we already are - without intuiting power's force - complex is that unlike the other forcesshapingthe libido, which Freud
how points of power emerge, what we might be, and what we can do. More describesasstandingin a relationof psychicaloppositionto unrestrained
importantly, and following Nietzsche, Deleuze makesan ethical distinction expenditureand which appearto be internally generated,the Oedipus
between active and reactive powers. An active power maximises its poten- complextakesthe form of an externalprohibition and presupposes the tri-
tial, pushes itself to its limit and affirms the life of which it is but one angularrelationbetweenthe child and its parents.The universalityof this
expression.A reactive power, by contrast, turns back upon itself. The usual complexis usedby Freud to explainthe agencyagainstincestthat setsup
concept of political power is reactive.We imagine - from the image of indi- the necessary division for civilisationbetweenwishesand the law Its uni-
viduals who exist together in a possible community - that we then need to versalityis alsoindicativeof the primacyof the family unit asan explana-
form some form of political relation or system (so power in this senseis tory categoryin psychoanalysis.
power between or among beings). But there can only be a polity or indi- The libidinal relationswithin the family havea crucialrole to play asthe
vidual beings ifthere has already been an active power that has crcirtcclsnch prototypcfor adult relations,in which an externalprohibitionorganises
a community or assemblagcof pcrsons;oncc wc rcaliscthis thcn wc nright rttcmptsirt instinctuals:rtisflaction. It is importirntto remember,however,
think of politics ts thc rccrcafion<lrrc:tctiv:rti<ln of' p<lwcr,n<ltirst hc rcclis- tlut lhcsclillidinrrltics rrrcnot clcpcnclcnt upon arrirctuirlnuclcurf'anrily
I lillr r t ion r lr nrrrn rrg trrrc o
rrll ' l )o w c t' . rrrrdllrrrsrrrr()ctlillrrscorrrlllcxt'rrrrbc lirrrttctlwilh it llitlct'ttitl

structureof authority,or, in the work of JacquesLacan, an institutional Freud, Sigmund ( I 856-1939)

force such as language,rather than an actualfather.Here, as in Freud's
writings on phylogenesis, the important themein the negotiationof libid- Sigmund Freud wrote conventionalmedicalcasehistories;studiesin the
inousrelationswithin the family is the credenceof the threatof the prohib- particularcategoriesof psychoanalyticresearch:the unconscious,narcis-
ition placed on incestuous relations. The writings on the topic of sism, dreamsand infantile sexuality;aswell asanalysesof cultural institu-
phylogenesisexamine a similar theme in the prohibitive force of the tions and practicessuch as art and religion. His postulate of a repressed
'primal father' over the'primal horde'. infantile sexualityat the core of the pathologiesof civilisedlife led to his
In Deleuze's writing on psychoanalysis,he attacks the use of the isolationfrom the medicalestablishment.This postulate,which formed
model of the Oedipal family becausehe seesit as justifying a particular the basisfor the interpretativeposturetakenby psychoanalysis towardcul-
conceptionof desire.In the Anti-Oed,ipu.s, for instance,he and Guattari tural and therapeutic material, also underpinned its counter-cultural
complainnot only aboutthe unhistoricalprojectionof the familial struc- status.Freud's approachto art and religion was,for instance,a radically
ture acrosscultures and history, so that some psychoanalystslocate the demystifying one, which held that religious belief was an infantile desire
figure of the 'primal father' in Neo- and Paleolithic times, but alsq that for an irreproachablefather figure and that the products of high culture
the psychoanalyticuse of a familial structure containsdesire to sexual were financed by, and legible as, displacedlibidinal drives. Deleuze,
relations within the family. These relations do not simply constitute however,is scepticalof the radical statusclaimed by Freudian psycho-
desirein relation to the shapingforce of an externalprohibition but also analysis.His criticismsof Freud relateto the way he insistson the Oedipal
mark out intellectual,political and cultural formationsassubstitutesthat orderingof desire,evendespitethe questionsraisedagainstit by clinical
compensatefor the prohibition placed on desire by the incest taboo. evidenceand the researches of other psychoanalysts.
Against the 'daddy-mummy-me' formation of desire described in Nonetheless, important pointsof departurefor someof Deleuze'sideas
Freud's case study of little Flans, or the explanation of Leonardo da can be found in Freud's thought. In the two volumes of Capitalismand
Vinci's curiosity in terms of his infantile memories, they propose a Schizophrenia,Deleuze and Guattari try to marry Freud's conceptionof
defamilialisationof desire and consecratethose writers, such as D. H. libidinal flowswith Karl Marx's conceptionof capital.This project,which
Lawrence, who write against the trap of familialism. In particular, refusesthe dualismbetweenpsychicand materialreality,involvesa recu-
Deleuze and Guattari are critical of the interpretativelicencegiven to perationof someof the elementsin Freudianthought. Hence they reject
psychoanalysisby its postulate of the familial organisationof desire: the way desire'sproductivity is confinedto a psychicalreality,but in so
through this postulate, psychoanalysisneither explains desire nor doing they developand radicalisethe Freudian insight that wrests desire
renders cultural formations legible but, on their view, justifies the mis- from pre-ordainedfunctions such asreproduction.
interpretation of desireas a libidinal force capturedwithin and shaped Asidefrom rejectingthe impotent,psychicalconfinementof desire,the
by familial dynamics. constantcomplaintof the authorsin this studyagainstFreud concernshis
This critique of the psychoanalyticaccountof the family derivesits willingnessto acceptEugeneBleuler'snegativeaccountof schizophrenics
force from Deleuzeand Guattari'sanalysisof the reterritorialisingfunc- asautisticfigureswho are cut off from reality.Even here,however,Freud
tion of capitalism in the two volumes of Capitalismand,Schizophrenia. alsoprovidesan important point of departurefor their defenceof schizo-
Capital operatesaccording to a logic of deterritorialisation in which the phrenia.They argueagainstconfusing,asFreud does,the'clinical'schizo-
flowsofcapital areno longerextractedfrom agricultural labour,but, rather phrenic who is rendered ill and autistic with the connective practice of
than being tied to the produceof the land, are transnationalor global. desire,which fusesconventionallysegregatedstatesand producesassem-
Although capitaltendstowarda deterritorialisation of geographical, famil- blagesthat they believearemodelledin schizophrenia. In this project,they
ial and sogialties,it defersthis limit by reiteratingartificialterritorialities. follow the practicein someof Freud's writing in which literary and cul-
In this contextpsychoanalysis, but particularlyits useof the family asan tural productionsbecomethe diagnosticsourceableto correctand develop
explanatoryunit for desire,is criticisedasone of the paradigmaticmove- 'clinical' terms. Hence,the evidenceof the schizopole of desireis found
mentsby which the family is reiteratedand the logic of deterritorialising in Antonin Artaud and Henry Miller, ratherthan the clinicalcontextthat
flowsis capturedby a function of reterritorialisation. pathokrgiscs rncl rcndersimpotcntconnectivcdcsircs.
This strategy,which formed the basisfor Deleuze'sunfinished'critique In Deleuze'sthought,heusesaspects of this psychoanalytic accountof the
and clinical' project, callsinto questionsomeof the central diagnosticcat- unconsciousto argueagainstboth the conceptionof desireasconfiguredin
egories of Freudian psychoanalysis.Freud's conception of 'sado- psychoanalysis in relationto a transcendent principleof'lack', andthe inter-
masochism'asa couplet,for instance,is refutedby Deleuze'sexamination pretativerelationto psychiclife that this relationlicenses.In Anti-Oedipus
of the writing of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch in which he showssadism the 'desiringmachine'is modelledon a conceptionof the unconscious,
and masochismto be completelydistinct, rather than inverseand comple- which is without the regulatingfunctionof a limit that containsit to an indi-
mentarydisorders. vidualsubject.The processes ascribedby Freud to the unconscious - that it
Finally,Deleuze'scriticalrelationto Freud canbe summarisedin terms operateswithoutconcedingto the demandsof socialacceptability dovetail -
of the Freudian drive to teleology.In his meta-psychologyand therapeutic with the features that Deleuze and Guattari ascribe to the desiring
practice,what was of interest to Freud was an accountof the 'origins' machines- thesemachinesform, for instance,conjunctivesynthesesthat
underpinningcurrent circumstances. For the psychoanalyst 'origins' play operateaccordingto an expansive senseof possibility.However,insteadof an
a role in two distinct senses:as an explanatorymodel that the analyst, impotent manifestationof unrealisablewishes, interpretable by psycho-
blockedfrom direct access,had to fathom - in this sensefinding the origin analysisin the form of their distorted manifestationin consciouslife, the
for the symptomsof neurosisalso has a curativefunction. But Freud's desiringmachinesaredefinedin termsof their capacityto forgelinks to an
mode of accessto theseorigins,the interpretativeframe he usedto locate outsideand thereforein terms of their capacityto surpassthe regulating
the eventsthat had becomepathogensin an individuals' life, ought not to force of a higher principle (such as the superego)or natural limit.
obscurethe fact that the interpretative force he gaveto theseoriginating Reinterpretedin theseterms,the unconscious is not an interior localeonly
eventscameto be usedasa predictorfor developmentand a theory,there- ableto be interpretedin its impotent and distortedformations,but is the
fore,of the differentcoursesit waspossiblefor psychiclife to follow.It is logicaccordingto which anarchicconnectionsareassembled or made.
this teleological orientation and its installation of a dualism between Although desiring machines give a positiveaccount of the psychoanalytic
'nature' and 'civilisation'that Deleuzerejectsand that underpinshis crit- categoryof the unconscious, the term 'unconscious'is not directly trans-
ical reworkingof key Freudianideas. posableto that of the 'desiringmachine',or the term 'assemblage' usedin
A ThousandPlateaus.This is becausethe unconsciousdesignateswhat gets
IJnconscious left overin the process of the constructionor shift from onemachine/assem-
blageto another.In suchuses,however,the unconscious is not reconcilable
The'unconscious'inpsychoanalytic terminologyrefersto the accretionof to the Freudianconceptionof a registerof submergedaffects,but refersto
instinctual drives that are repressedby the individual in the processof prior, fractal,materialcomponentsof desiringmachines/assemblages.
adaptationto social demands.Nonetheless,these drives remain active
forceson the psycheandbehaviourof individuals.Dreams,parapraxisand
somatic displacementsof instincts in casesof hysteria provide Freud Connectives
with the proof of the unconscious not as a sealedoff locality, but as Desire
processes and lawsbelongingto a system.In Freud'sfirst topographyof Lacan
the psychical apparatus(unconscious,pre-conscious,conscious),the PartialObjects
unconsciousdesignatesthosecontentsbanishedby repressionfrom the Schizoanalysis
pre-conscious--conscious system. In his second,dynamic conception of
the psyche(id, ego, superego)the unconsciousis replacedby the id or
instinctualpoleof the psyche.Here instinctshavethe statusof agenciesin
the psychicalapparatus.In both cases,the dynamicrole of the unconscious
or instincts takes psychoanalysis away from a descriptive,phenomeno-
logicalapproachto the 'facts'of psychiclife, and designatesthe activerole
of the analyst in the interpretation of the work of systematisation
pcrftrrmcdby thc unconscious. REA(;'tIVli - rcf'crto thc cntrv on 'itctivc/rcilctivc'.

Reality goeshand in hand with ideal and emotional effects,rather than

being free of them.
Does this mean that Deleuze is an idealist, denying the existenceof an
James Williams
independentexternal reality and bringing all things into the mind?
Deleuzesubyertsthe concept'real' throughhis distinctiondrawnbetween Deleuze'sphilosophyis beyondthe idealistand realistdistinction.There
the 'actual'andthe'virtual'. For him, the actualis morelike what we would are actualthings and we should pay attention to them. Without them it
ordinarilyunderstandasthe real,that is, a realmof thingsthat existinde- doesnot makesenseto speakof virtual ideasor intensities.But, recipro-
pendently of our ways of thinking about them and perceivingthem. cally,it makesno senseto speakof real or actualthings asif they could be
Whereasthe virtual is the realmof transcendental conditionsfor the actual, abstractedfrom the idealand emotionalfieldsthat makethem live for us.
that is, thingsthat we haveto presuppose for thereto be actualthingsat all.
More seriously,with respectto any discussionof his work in terms of
realism,Deleuzedeniesany priority accordedto human subjects,to their Connectives
minds, ideas,perceptualapparatuses or linguistic capacities.If we trad- Actuality
itionally frame the oppositionbetweenreal and unreal through the dis- Virtual/Virtuality
tinction drawn betweena thing that is dependenton us (the chair I dream
of, or imagine)and an independenrexistenr(the real chair),then we shall
havestartedwith a conceptualframework that doesnot fit Deleuze'sphil-
osophywell at all. REICH, WILHELM (1897-1957)- referto the entry on 'schizoanalysis'.
Rather, Deleuze provides us with critical angles against traditional
realismand a new metaphysicalframework for developinga conceptof the
real. Accordingto this conceprthe real is the virtual and the actual.It is
hencebetterto think of realthingsin termsmoreof completethingsrather
than independentones.Note that this commits Deleuze to degreesof
Ad,rian Parr
realityand unrealityor illusion.We shouldnot sayrealor unreal,bur more
or lessreal,meaninga more or lesscompleteexpressionof the thing. The conceptof 'repetition',asit appearsin the Deleuziancorpus,encom-
It is questionablewhetherwe can saythat a thing is completelyreal,in passesa variety of other conceptssuch as 'difference','differentiation',
Deleuze'swork, other than the metaphysicalstatementthat the real is all 'deterritorialisation',and 'becoming'.To begin with, it should be noted
of the actualand of the virtual. Wheneverwe givean expressionof a thing that for Deleuze,repetitionis not a matterof the samething occurringover
it will be under an individual form of expressionthat allowsfor further and over again. That is to say,repetition is connectedto the power of
completion.More importantly,that completionwill involve a synthetic differencein terms of a productiveprocessthat producesvariationin and
alterationof the componentsof any earlierreality,to the point whereno through every repetition. In this way, repetition is best understoodin
componentcanbe claimedto be finally realor complete. terms of discoveryand experimentation;it allowsnew experiences, affects
For example,for Deleuze,a mountainexistsasrealwith all the waysit has and expressionsto emerge.To repeatis to begin again;to affirm the power
beenpainted,sensed,written aboutand walkedover.It alsoexistswith all the of the new and the unforeseeable. In so far as life itself is describedas a
virtual conditionsfor them, such asideasand different intensitiesof sensa- dynamic and active force of repetition producing difference,the force of
tions. The real mountain changescompletelywhen it is paintedand sensed which Deleuze encouragesus to think of in terms of 'becoming', forces
anew:whenits namechanges,whenit is mined,or movedthroughdifferently. incorporate differenceas they repeatgiving rise to mutation.
This meansthat traditionalformsof realismarecomplerelyat oddswith The first question that arises is: How is repetition produced?For
Deleuze'sphilosophy,sincethe notion that the realstandsin oppositionto Deleuze, repetition is produced via difference, not mimesis. It is a
somethingunrealor imaginaryalreadysetsthe real as somethingincom- processof ungrounding that resiststurning into an inert systemof repli-
plete.So to speakof thc realchairasif it couldbe identifiedinclcpcndcntly cation.In fact,thc wholePlatonistideaof rcpcatingin ordcr to producc
of onr idcrslbout'it is rr mistarkc conccrningthc significirncc of'things, copicsis complctcly unclcrmincclby l)clcuzc. lior l)clcuzc maintirins

this approachis deeplyflawedbecauseit subsumesthe creativenature of that is to say,repetitiondissolvesidentitiesasit changesthem, giving rise
differenceunder an immobile systemof resemblance.Deleuze refusesto to somethingunrecognisableand productive. It is for this reasonthat he
seekan originary point out of which repetition can cyclically reproduce maintainsrepetitionis a positivepower(puissance) of transformation.
itself. He insists that the processdoes not depend upon a subject or
object that repeats, rather it is self-sustainable.Whilst repetition is
potentially infinite, consistingof new beginnings,it is crucial we do not Connectives
mistake this to be a linear sequence:the end of one cycle marking the Active/Reactive
beginningof the next. Becoming
In his innovativediscussionsof Friedrich Nietzsche'sconceptof the Difference
eternalreturn, Deleuzeturns his backon a teleologicalunderstandingof Eternalreturn
repetition condemning such interpretations to be flawed. Instead, he Psychoanalysis
insiststhat the processNietzscheoutlines is considerablymore compli-
cated than that: the return is an activeaffirmation that intensifiesas it
returns. Put differently, heterogeneityarisesout of intensity. In addition,
the return pointsto a wholethat emergesthroughdifferenceand variation: REPETITION + CINEMA
one and the multiple in combination.In his readingof Nietzsche,Deleuze
explainsin his 1968work Dffirenceand,Repetitionthatthis is the'power of Constantine Vereois
beginningand beginningagain'(D 1994:136).
This now leadsus on to the secondquestion:What is repeated? First, it Deleuze'sbookson cinema- CinemaI: Themooement-image and Cinema
is important to notethat repetitionis not unidirectional,thereis no object 2: Thetime-imoge- are about the possibility of 'repeating' a film (or films)
of repetition,no final goaltowardwhich everythingthat repeatscanbe said within the institution of cinemastudies.As in RolandBarthes'accountof
to direct itself. What repeats,then, is not models,stylesor identitiesbut re-reading, this repetition would not be the re-presentation of identity
the full force of differencein and of itself, thosepre-individualsingular- (a re-discoveryof the same),but the re-production- the creationand the
ities that radicallymaximisedifferenceon a plane of immanence.In an exhibition- of the differencethat lies at the heart of repetition (B 1974).
earlyessayfrom 1956on Henri Bergson,Deleuzeinsistsrepetitionis more For film studies,Deleuze'sCinemabookscanbe seenasan attempt to nego-
a matterof coexistence than succession, which is to say,repetitionis virtual tiate the tension between(film) theory and history via a non-totalising
more than it is actual.It is this innovativeunderstandingof the processof conceptofdifference,one which canattendto the heterogeneity - the local
difference and differentiation that mutates the context through which and specificrepetitions- of historicalmaterial.
repetitionoccurs. In Dffirence and,Repetition, Delettze puts forward two alternative
Thus, in a very real sense,repetitionis a creativeactivityof transforma- theoriesof repetition. The first, a 'Platonic' theory of repetition, posits
tion. When Deleuzespeaksof the 'new' that repetition invokes,he is like- a world of difference based upon some pre-established similitude or
wise pointing to creativity, whereby habit and convention are both identity; it definesa world of copies (representations).The second,a
destabilised. The'new', for Deleuze,is filled with innovationand actually 'Nietzschean'theory of repetition suggeststhat similitude and identity
preventsthe trap of routines and clich6s; the latter characterisehabitual is the product of some fundamental disparity or difference; it defines
waysof living. As a power of the new,repetition callsforth a terr&incognita a world of simulacra(phantasms).Taking theseformulations as distinct
filled with a senseof noveltyandunfamiliarity.For instance,this is a far cry interpretationsof the world, Deleuze describessimulacraas intensive
from Sigrqund Freud who posited that we compulsivelyrepeat the past, systems constituted by the placing together of disparate elements.
whereall the materialof our repressedunconsciouspushesus to reiterate Within these differential series,a third virtual object (dark precursor,
the pastin all its discomfortand pain.Actually,psychoanalysis limits repe- eternal return, abstract machine) plays the role of differenciator,the
tition to representation,and what therapyaims to do is stop the process in-itself of difference which relates different to different, and allows
entirelyalongwith the disordersit givesriseto. Deleuze,on the othcr hirnd, divergcntscricsto rcturn asdivcrsityand its rc-production.As systcms
cncourirgcs us to rcpcirthccausc hc sccsin it thc possibilityof rcinvcntion, thrrtincluclcwithin thcnrsclvcsthis diff'crcntialpoint of vicw,sinrultcrit
226 R EP ET T T T o N * c l Nrtre R EPR ESEN TATION 227

evadethe limit of representation(the model of recognition)to effectthe that eachand every film is remade- dispersedand transformed- in its
intensity of an encounter with difference and its repetition, a pure every new context or configuration.Gordon doesnot set out to imitate
becoming-in-the-world. Psychobut to repeatit - to changenothing, but at the sametime allow an
The idea of the intensivesystem,and its frustration of any attempt to absolutedifferenceto emerge.Understood in this way,Psycho-98is not a
establishan order of succession, a hierarchyof identity and resemblance perversionof an original identity,but the productionof a new event,one
betweenoriginaland copy is nowheremoreevidentthan in the serialrepe- that addsto (ratherthan corrupts)the serialityof the former version.
tition of new Hollywood cinema,especiallythe film remake.The majority
of critical accountsof cinematic remaking understand it as a one-way
process:a movementfrom authenticityto imitation,from the superiorself-
identity of the original to the debasedresemblance of the remake.For REPRESENTATION
instance,much of the discussionaroundthe 1998releaseof Gus Van Sant's
closeremake('replica') of Alfred Hitchcock'sPsycho(1960)wasan expres- lohn Marks
sion of outrage and confusion at the defilementof a revered classic. 'Representation',for Deleuze, entails an essentiallymoral view of the
Reviewers and 'Hitchcockians'agreed that VanSantmadetwo fundamental world, explicitly or implicitly drawingon what'everybodyknows',and he
mistakes:the first, to haveundertakento remakea landmark of cinematic conceivesofphilosophy asan antidoteto this view.Representation cannot
history; and the second,to have followed the Hitchcock original (almost) help us to encounterthe world asit appearsin the flow of time andbecom-
shotby shot,line by line.Evenfor thosewho notedthat the rpmakediffered ing. It constitutesa particularly restrictedform of thinking and acting,
in its detail from the Hitchcockfilm, the revisionsaddednothing to what working accordingto fixed norms, and which is unableto acknowledge
remainedan intact and undeniableclassic,a semanticfixity (identity) against difference 'in itself'. ln Dffirence and RepetitionDeleuze challengesthe
which the new versionwasevaluatedand dismissedasa degradedcopy. representational conceptionof philosophy.Here, he contraststhe 'poet' to
Rather than follow theseessentialisttrajectories,Deleuze'saccountof the 'politician'.The poet speaksin the nameof a creativepower,and seeks
repetitionsuggeststhat cinematicremakingin its most generalapplication to affirm differenceas a stateof permanentrevolution:he is willing to be
might - more productively- be regardedasa specificaspectof a broader destructive in the searchfor the 'new'. The new, in this sense,remains
and more open-endedintertextuality. A modern classic,Psychohas been forever new, since it has the power of beginning anew every time. It
retrospectivelycodedas the forerunnerto a cycleof slashermoviesiniti- enablesforcesin thought which are not the forcesof recognition,but the
atedby Hallopeen(1978)andcelebratedin the sequelsand seriesthat fol- powersof an unrecognisable terra incognita.The politician, on the other
lowed.More particularly,the 1970sinterestin the slashermovie sub-genre hand, seeksto deny that which differs in order to establishor maintain
sawthe characterof Norman Batesrevivedfor a number of Psychosequels a particularhistoricalorder.In philosophicalterms, Deleuzeproposesto
QI-I\, and the Hitchcock original quoted in a host of homages, notably 'overturn'Platonism,which distinguishesbetweenthe original- the thing
the films of Brian De Palma.Eachof theserepetitionscan be understood that most resemblesitself, characterised by exemplaryself-identity- and
as a limited form of remaking,suggestingthat the precursor text is never the copy,which is alwaysdeficient in relation to the original. Platonism is
singular, and that Van Sant's Psychoremake differs textually from these incapableof thinking differencein itself,preferringto conceiveof it in rela-
other examplesnot in bind,,but only in degree. tion to'the thing itself'. In order to go beyondrepresentation,it is neces-
While the aboveapproachestablishesa largecircuit betweenPsycho-60 sary,therefore,to underminethe primacyof the originaloverthe copyand
andPsycho-98,there is anotherposition: namely,that Van Sant'sPsychois to promote the simulacrum, the copy for which there is no original.
not close enough to the Hitchcock version.This suggestion- that an A key influenceon Deleuzeas far as the anti-representational orienta-
irreduciblgdifferenceplayssimultaneously betweenthe mostmechanicalof tion of his thought is concerned,is Friedrich Nietzsche.Nietzsche's
repetitions- is bestdemonstratedby an earlierremakeof Psycho,Douglas speculationson metaphorshowthat thereis no 'truth' behindthe maskof
Gordon's24 Hour Psycho(1993).So namedbecauseit takestwenty-four appearances, but rather only more masks,more metaphors.Deleuzeele-
hoursto run its course,Gordon'sversionis a videoinstallationthat re-runs vatesthis insight into somethinglike a generalmetaphysicalprinciple.For
Ps.ycho-60ntapproximately two framesper second,just fastenoughfor cach him, thc world is composecl of simulircra:it is a 'swarm'<lfirppcirranccs.
imagcto bc pullcclforwardinto thc ncxt. Gordon'sstrltcgy clcmonstratcs l)clcuzc'slicrgsonism,which cnrphirsiscs ir rirclicalirnrrlysis
of'linrc, is iur
R E P R E S S ION 229

art asa wayof challengingthe interpretativetendencyof representation

important elementof his challengeto representation.In his books on
tracebecomingsbackto origins.
cinem" in particular,Deleuzedraws on Henri Bergson'svery particular
materialismin order to claim that life is composedof images.Rather than
human consciousness illuminating the world like a searchlight,it is the case Connectives
that the world is 'luminous' in itself. Bergson'scritique of the problemat-
ics of perceptionand action, and matter and thought, springsfrom the
claim that we tend to think in terms of spacerather than time. This ten-
dency immobilisesintuition, and to counter this Bergson conceivesof
materialityin terms of imagesthat transmitmovement.This hasimport-
ant consequencesfor perception, which can no longer be conceivedof as
knowledgethat is rootedin consciousness. All life perceivesand is neces-
sarilyopen to the 'outside'and distinctionsbetweenautomatismand vol-
urrr"ry u"t, ,r. only differencesof degree,rather than differencesin kind. REPRESSION
This alternative,non-psychologicalmetaphysics,accordingto which the
world is 'luminous in itself', rather than being illuminatedby a beamof Claire Colebrooh at the heart of Deleuze's non-representationalproiect,
On the one hand,Deleuzemight appearto be a philosophersetagainstthe
and is exploredat length in his books on cinema.Following Bergson's
dominantimageof repression,that being repressionin its everydaysense
materialisi ontology,accordingto which our body is merely an image
and in its technicalpsychoanalyticsense.At its most generalthe concept
among images,Deleuze opens the self to the outside, the pure form of
of 'repression'would seemto imply a natural self or subjectwho precedes
time. The self comes into contact with a virtual, non-psychological
the operationof power of socialisation(so that all we would haveto do is
memory,a domain of diversity,dffirence, and with potentiallyanarchic
lift the stricturesof repressionto arriveat who we reallyare).The concept
associations, that ieopardisethe senseselfhood'
of repressionseems,then, to be associatedwith the ideaof a pre-socialself
Such forms of anti-representationalthought arethreateningand poten-
who must then undergosocialisationor structuration.Deleuzewants to
tially disorientaring.As Bergsonargues,human beingschooseon the basis
avoid this naivety, and so to a certain extent he acceptsthe productive
of what is the most useful. As such they tend to spa'tialisethe fluidity of
nature of repressionas it was put forward by Sigmund Freud and then
duration, reducingit to a staticand impersonalpublic form. we separate
JacquesLacan.It is only becauseof our existencewithin a symbolicorder,
duration into dissociatedelementsand reconfiguretheseelementsin a
or perceivedsystem,that we imaginethat theremust havebeena real .me'
homogeneousspatial form organisedaround the conventionsof 'public' prior to the net of repression.For psychoanalysis, then, it is not the self
language that conveys widely recognised notions' We like 'simple
who is repressed,for the self - the fantasyof that which exists before
thoughts" Bergsonremarks,and we prefer to rely on customand habit,
speech,relationsand sociality- is an effect of the idea of repression.
replacingdiversitywith simplicity,foregoingthe noveltyof new situations.
This Repressionis primary and producesits own' before'.Deleuzeacceptsthis
In-short, we prefer the comfortsand conventionsof representation.
such an Lacanirn/Freudian picture up ro a point. with Guattari he arguesthat
helps to explain why art - literature, painting and cinema- plays
thereareOedipalstructuresof repression.Living in a modern age,we are
important patt itt Deleuze'swork. For Deleuze,art is not a way of repre-
indeedsubmittedto a systemof signification.we then imaginethat there
ser,ting experiencesand memoriesthat we might 'recognise':it doesnot
must have been a moment of plenitude and,jouissanceprior to Oedipal
showus what the world ri, but rather imaginesa possibleworld. Similarly,
repression,and that we must thereforehavedesiredthe maternalincest
art is concernedwith 'sensation',with creating 'sensibleaggregates', prohibited by the structures of the family. But Deleuze and Guattari
rather than making the world intelligible and recognisable.In order to chal-
regardrepression- or the internalisationof subjection- asa modernphe-
lenge representationalviews of art, Deleuze talks of 'affects'and 'per-
nomenonthat nevcrtheless drawsupon archaicstructuresand imagcs.
cepts'.These are artistic forcesthat havebeenfreed from the organising
Instcad'thcy givcus Dclcuzc ancl Gurttirri's mnin rttack on whirt Michcl I,bucault (in
rcprcscntational framcwgrkof pcrceivingindividuals.
In this way,I)clcuzcsccs T'hc Ilistor.,yol' ,\t.t'uulit.y: l4tlumt Olr,) rcf'crrcd to rrs .tlrc rcPrcssivc
..."*, to I prc-indiiidualworlclof singularitics'

hypothesis'occurs in Anti-Oedipzs.WhereasFreud's Oedipus complex RETERRITORIALISATION - referto the entry on'deterritorialsa-

seeksto explainwhy and how we arerepressed- how it is that we submit tion./reterritorialisation'.
to law and renounceour enjoyment- Deleuze and Guattari arguethat we
sufferfrom the ideaof repressionitself, the ideathat thereis someultim-
ate object that we haveabandoned.Psychoanalysis supposedlyexplains RHIZOME
our repressionby arguing that we all desired our mothers but had to
abandonincestfor the sakeof socialand cultural development.Deleuze
Felicity J. Colman
and Guattari arguethat this repressiveidea of renunciationand submis-
sion is a historical and political development.Desire, they insist, is not 'Rhizome'describes the connectionsthat occurbetweenthe mostdisparate
the desirefor someforbidden object, a desirethat we must necessarily and the most similar of objects,placesand people;the strangechainsof
repress.Rather,all life is positive desire- expansion,connection,cre- eventsthat link people:the feelingof'six degreesof separation',the sense
ation. It is not that we must repressour desirefor incest.Rather,the idea of 'having been here before' and assemblages of bodies.Deleuze and
of incest- that we are inevitablyfamilial and desireonly the impossible Guattari'sconceptof the 'rhizome' drawsfrom its etymologicalmeaning,
maternalobject- is itself repressive.What it repressesis not a personal where 'rhizo'means combining form and the biologicalterm 'rhizome'
desire,but the impersonality of desire or the intense germinal influx. describesa form of plant that can extenditself through its underground
To imagine ourselvesas rational individuals, engagedin negotiation horizontaltuber-likeroot systemand developnew plants.In Deleuzeand
and the managementof our drives- this idea of ourselvesas bourgeois, Guattari'suseof the term, the rhizomeis a conceptthat 'maps' a process
selfgoverning, commonsensicalagents - represses the desire for of networked,relational and transversalthought, and a way of being
non-familial, impersonal,chaoticand singularconfigurationsof life. We without'tracing' the constructionof that map asa fixed entity (D&G 1987:
arerepressed,then, not by a socialorder that prohibits the natural desire 12). Ordered lineagesof bodiesand ideasthat trace their originary and
for incest,but by the imagethat our desires'naturally' take the form of individual basesare consideredasforms of 'aborescentthought', and this
Oedipal and familial images. metaphorof a tree-likestructurethat ordersepistemologies and forms his-
The latemodernunderstandingof the selfor subjectasnecessarily sub- torical frames and homogeneousschemata,is invoked by Deleuze and
jectedto law is the outcomeof a history of politicaldevelopmentthat has Guattari to describeeverythingthat rhizomaticthought is not.
coveredover the originally expansive,excessiveand constructive move- In addition,Deleuzeand Guattari describethe rhizomeasan actionof
ments of desire.A number of philosophicalmovements,including psy- many abstractentities in the world, including music, mathematics,eco-
choanalysis,have explainedlife from the point of view of the already nomics,politics, science,art, the ecologyand the cosmos.The rhizome
repressedsubject,the bourgeoisindividual who hassubmittedhis desires conceives how everything andeverybody- all aspectsofconcrete,abstract
to the systemof the polity and the market. Against this, Deleuze and and virtual entities and activities - can be seenas multiple in their inter-
Guattari aim to revealthe positivedesirebehindrepression.In the caseof, relationalmovementswith other things and bodies.The nature of the
Oedipal repression,it is the desire of the father - the desireof white, rhizomeis that of a moving matrix, composedof organicand non-organic
modern, bourgeoisman - that lies at the heartof the ideaof all selvesas partsforming symbioticand aparallelconnections,accordingto transitory
necessarily subjectedto repressivepower. and as yet undeterminedroutes(D & G 1987:10).Such a reconceptual-
isationconstitutesa revolutionaryphilosophyfor the reassessment of any
form of hierarchicalthought, history or activity.
In a world that builds structuresfrom economiccircuits of difference
Desire and desire, Deleuze responds by reconsideringhow bodies are con-
Foucault structed.He and Guattari arguethat such structuresconstraincreativity
Freud and position things and people into regulatory orders. In A Thousand
Oedipalisation Plateaus,Deleuzeand Guattari stagedthe entire book as a seriesof net-
Psychoanalysis workcd rhizomatic'plateaus'that operateto counter historicaland phil-
Woman osophicol positionspitchccltowardthc systcmof rcprcscntntion thatIix thc
232 RHI ZO M E R H IZOME 233

flow of thought. Instead,through a virtuoso demonstrationof the rela- through repetition, which Deleuzediscussedin his booksNietzscheand.
tional energiesable to be configured through often disparate forms and Philosophyand Dffirence and,Repetition.
systemsof knowledge,they offer the reader an open systemof thought. Deleuze acknowledgesFriedrich Nietzsche'sconcept of the eternal
Rhizomaticformations can serveto overcome,overturn and transform return as the constitution of things through repeatedelements(existing
structuresof rigid, fixed or binary thought and judgement- the rhizome bodies,modesof thought)that form a'synthesis'ofdifferencethrough the
is 'anti-genealogy'(D&G 1987:ll). A rhizomecontriburesro rhe forma- repetition of elements(D 1983: 46). 'Synthesis' is also describedby
tion of a plateauthroughits linesof becoming,which form aggregatecon- Deleuzeand Guattari as an assemblage of variablerelationsproducedby
nections.There are no singular positions on the networkedlines of a the movement,surfaces,elusionsand relations of rhizomes that form
rhizome,only connectedpoints which form connectionsbetweenthings. bodies (desiring machines) through composite chains of previously
A rhizomaticplateauof thought, Deleuzeand Guattari suggest,may be unattachedlinks (D&G 1983:39, 327).As a non-homogeneous sequence,
reachedthrough the considerationof the potentialof multiple and rela- then, the rhizome describesa seriesthat may be composedof causal,
tional ideasandbodies.The rhizomeis anynetworkof thingsbroughtinto chance,and/or randomlinks.Rhizomaticconnectionsbetweenbodiesand
contact with one another,functioning as an assemblagemachine for new forcesproducean affectiveenergyor entropy.As Deleuzedescribesin his
affects,new concepts,new bodies,new thoughts;the rhizomaticnetwork work on David Hume, the interaction of a socially,politically, or culturally
is a mapping of the forcesthat move and,/or immobilise bodies. determinedforceand any givenbody both producesand usesassociations
Deleuzeand Guattari insist bodiesand things ceaselessly takeon new of ideas(D l99l: ix, 103).The discontinuouschain is the medium for the
dimensions through their contact with different and divergent entities rhizome'sexpandingnetwork,just asit is alsothe contextualcircumstance
over time; in this way the conceptof the 'rhizome' marksa divergentway for the chain'sproduction.
of conceptualising the world that is indicativeof Deleuzianphilosophyas Rhizomaticwriting, being,andlor becomingis not simply a processthat
a whole. Rather than reality being thought of and wrimen as an ordered assimilatesthings, rather it is a milieu of perpetualtransformation.The
seriesof structuralwholes,wheresemioticconnectionsor taxonomiescan relationalmilieu that the rhizome createsgivesform to evolutionaryenvir-
be compiled from complete root to tree-like structure, the story of the onmentswhererelationsalter the courseof how flowsand collectivedesire
world and its components,Deleuzeand Guattari propose,can be com- develop.There is no stabilising function produced by the rhizomatic
municated through the rhizomatic operations of things - mevements, medium;thereis no creationof a wholeout of virtual and dispersedparts.
intensitiesand polymorphousformations.In opposition to descendent Rather,through the rhizome,points form assemblages, multiple journey
evolutionary modelsof classification,rhizomeshaveno hierarchicalorder systemsassociate into possiblydisconnectedor brokentopologies;in turn,
to their compoundingnetworks.Instead,Deleuzianrhizomaticthinking suchassemblages and typologieschange,divide,and multiply throughdis-
functions as an open-ended productive configuration, where random parateand complexencountersand gestures.The rhizome is a powerful
associationsand connectionspropel, sidetrack and abstract relations way of thinking without recourseto analogyor binary constructions.To
between components.Any part within a rhizome may be connected to think in termsof the rhizomeis to revealthe multiple waysthat you might
anotherpart, forming a milieu that is decentred,with no distinctiveend approachany thought, activity,or a concept- what you alwaysbring with
or entry point. you are the many and various ways of entering any body, of assembling
Deleuze'sapparatusfor describingaffectivechangeis the 'rhizome'. thought and actionthrough the world.
Deleuze viewed every operation in the world asthe affectiveexchangeof
rhizomatically-produced intensities that create bodies: systems,
economies,machinesand thoughts. Each and every body is propelled Connectives
and perpetuated by innumerable levels of the affective forces of desire Affect
and its resonatingmaterialisations.Variationsto any given systemcan Becoming
occur becauseof interventionswithin cyclical,systematicrepetition. As Desire
the rhizome may be constitutedwith an existingbody - including exist- Hume
ing thoughts one might bring to bear upon anotherbody - the rhizome Intensity
is nccessarilysubject to thc principlcs of divcrsity and cliffercncc Lincs of Flight
234 RHI ZO M E + TECHNOL O G Y sAUssuRE, FERDI NAND DE ( r 852- r gr 3) 235

fires electronsthat move along circuits. Through the transmissionof

differences,the person connects and reconnectswith other humans,
animalsand the world.
Deleuze and Guattari see the potential in Bateson'swork for rhi-
The'rhizome' replacesan arborescent structurethat hasbeendominating zomatic thinking. The nervous system is said to be a rhizome, web or
the west and the world for centuries.The rhizome carriesimagesof the network. The terminology is the sameas for computersthough it does
natural world, of pliable grasses,of weightlessness, and of landscapesof not pertain to them exclusively.Clearly, computers do offer possibilities.
the east. It is horizontal and flat, bearing what the mathematicianin Not only the brain, but humans and the world consist of circuits in
Deleuzecalls'n-l dimensions'.It is alwaysa multiplicity; it hasno geneal- which differencesare transmitted along pathways. Through computer-
ogy; it could be takenfrom different contexts(including Freudian psycho- assistedsubjectivity,humans can increasetheir valences.Deleuze and
analysis);and is neither genesisnor childhood.The rhizome doesaway Guattari write about a 'becoming-radio' or 'becoming-television'that
with hierarchies.It augmentsits valencesthroughhybrid connectionsthat can yield good or bad connections;productive or nefariousbecomings.
consistby virtue of addition, of one thing 'and' another.The rhizome Computers and the internet have great potential as rhizomatic war
operatesin a spacewithout boundariesand defiesestablishedcategories machines.The way they are being capturedby capitalism,that deploys
suchasbinariesor pointsthat would mark-offand be usedto fix positions order-words, consumer codes, and their multifarious redundancies
in extensivespace.It ceaselesslyconnectsand reconnectsoverfissuresand makesthem too often becomeendsin and for themselves,in a sphereof
gaps,deterritorialisingand reterritorialisingitself at once.It workstoward what Deleuze calls a generalised'techno-narcissism'.The scienceof
abstractmachinesand produceslinesof flight. technologytakesover with its order-words.Yet, in Deleuze'spractical
The rhizome doesnot imitate or represent,rather it connectsthrough utopia, iust as every major languageis worked through by minor lan-
the middle and inventshybrids with virusesthat becomepart of the cells guages,so the capitalist war machine is always being threatenedby
that scramblethe dominant lines of genealogicaltrees. The'rhizome mobile nomadic war machinesthat use technolosiesto form new rhi-
createsa web or a network; through capture of code, it increasesits zomesand open up to becoming.
valencesand is alwaysin a stateof becoming.It createsand recreatesthe
world through connections.A rhizome has no structure or centre, no
graph or regulation.Models are both in constructionand collapse.In a
rhizome, movement is more intensive than extensive. Unlike graphic
arts, the rhizome makes a map and not a tracing of lines (that would
belongto a representationof an obiect).It is a war machine:rhizomatic
or nomadic writing operatesas a mobile war machinethat movesat top
speed to form lines, making alliancesthat form a temporary plateau.
The rhizome is in a constantprocessof making active,but alwaystem- SACHER-MASOCH, LEOPOLD VON (1835-95)- refer to the
porary,selections.The selectionscan be goodor bad. Good or bad ideas, entrieson tart', 'Lacantand tpsychoanalysis'.
stat'esDeleuzein consortwith Gregory Bateson,can leadto good or bad
The proximity of the rhizometo digital technologyand the computeris
evident.The connectionwith Donna Haraway'scyborg has often been SARTRE, JEAN PAUL (1905-80)- refer to the entrieson 'Guattari',
made.YetDeleuzeandGuattarido not write muchaboutcomputers.They 'phenomenology'and'phenomenology* Husserl'.
derive someof their ideason rhizomesfrom Bateson'sS/epsto an Ecolog.y
of Mind,. They connect with the anthropologist'spronouncementsin
which biology and information theory are conjoined.Batesonarguesthat
a person is not limited to her or his visible body.Of importanceis the SAUSSURE, FERDINAND DE (18.57-1913) - referto theentrieson
pcrson'sbrainthattransmitsinfurmationasdiscrctediffcrcnces. The brain 'scmiotics'rrncl'significr,
236 s c H rz o A N A L YS Ts S C H IZOP H R E N IA 237

The critique of Oedipusis mounted on two fronts. Internally, schizo-

SCHIZOANALYSIS analysis models the psyche on schizophreniarather than neurosis,
thereby revealingthe immanent operationsof the unconsciousat work
EugeneHolland, beneaththe levelof representation.The Oedipuscomplexis shownto be
Schizoanalysisis the revolutionary 'materialist psychiatry' derived pri- a systematic betrayal of unconscious processes,an illegitimate meta-
marily from the critiqueof psychoanalysis. As the concept'schizoanalysis' physicsof the psyche.But it is a metaphysicsthat derivesdirectly from
indicates,SigmundFreud'stheoryof the Oedipuscomplexis the principle the realityof capitalistsociety.For in the externalcritique of the Oedipus,
object of critique: schizoanalysis, drawing substantiallyon Karl Marx, through a comparisonof the capitalistmodeof production with two other
transformspsychoanalysis so asto includethe full scopeof socialand his- libidinal modesof production, schizoanalysis showscapitalismto be the
torical factorsin its explanationsof cognitionand behaviour.Yet psycho- only social formation organisedby quantitativerather than qualitative
analysisis not rejectedwholesale:schizoanalysis alsodrawssubstantially relations. Capitalism organisesthe socialby the cashnexus of the market
on Freud and especiallyon JacquesLacan to transform historical materi- rather than by codes and representation. Furthermore, this is the only
alism so as to include the full scopeof libidinal and semiotic factors in its social formation where socialreproduction is isolated from socialpro-
explanationsof social structure and development.Ultimately, though duction at large,through the privatisationof reproductionin the nuclear
perhapsleast obviously,both structuralistpsychoanalysis and historical family: the nuclearfamily,but alsoOedipalpsychoanalysis itself,are thus
materialismaretransformedby Friedrich Nietzsche'scritique of nihilism revealedto be strictly capitalistinstitutions.Yet at the sametime that the
and asceticismand his transvaluationof difference,which inform both the nuclear family is capturing and programming desire in the Oedipus
libidinal and the socialeconomiesmappedby schizoanalysis. Ultimately, complex,the market is subvertingcodesand freeingdesirefrom capture
universalhistory for schizoanalysisoffers the hope and the chancethat the in representationthroughout society at large, thereby producing schizo-
developmentof productive forcesbeyond capitalismand the expansionof phrenia as the radically free form of semiosisand the potential hope of
Will to Powerbeyond nihilism will lead to greaterfreedomrather than universal history.
The basic question posed by schizoanalysis(following Baruch Connectives
Spinozaand Wilhelm Reich)is: Why do peoplefight for their own servi-
tude asstubbornly asif it weretheir salvation?The answeris that people Desire
have been trained since birth in asceticismby the Oedipus complex, Freud
which relayssocialoppressioninto the heart of the nuclear family. Social Marx
oppressionand psychicrepression,thus, arefor schizoanalysis two sides Oedipalisation
of the same coin, except that schizoanalysisreversesthe direction of
causality,making psychic repressiondepend on socialoppression.It is
not the child who is father to the man, asthe psychoanalyticsayinggoes, SCHIZOPHRENIA
rather it is the bosswho is father to the man, who is in turn father to the
child: the nuclearfamily imprints capitalistsocialrelationson the infant RosiBraidotti
psyche. Just as capital denies (through primitive accumulation) direct
accessto the means of production and the means of life, and mediates The touchstoneof Deleuze and,Guattari's conceptualcritique of psycho-
betweenthe worker, work, consumergoodsand eventualretirement,so analysisis their emphasison the positivity of schizophreniclanguage.
the father denies(through the threat of castrationenforcing the incest Refusingto interpret desireassymptomaticof 'lack' or to usea linguistic
taboo) direct accessto the mother (the means of life), and mediates paradigm that interprets desire through the system of metaphor and
betweenthe child, other family members and eventualmarriage with metonymy,they insistwe understanddesirein termsof affectivity,asa rhi-
a mother-substitute.By denyin"gthe child all the peopleclosestto her, zomicmodcof interconnection.
the nuclcar family programmespeople from birth for asceticismancl AlthoughSigmundFrcud rccogniscs thc structurcof affcctivityand thc
sclf'-clcnirrl. hctcrogcncorrs urcl conrplcxplcrstrrcsof' 'polyrnor'phouspcrvcrsity',hc

endsup policing desirewhen he capturesit in a normativetheory of the Genealogical ties createa discontinuoussenseof time, closerto Friedrich
drives. The Freudian theory of drives codesand concentratesdesiring Nietzsche'sDionysiacmode.Hence, spatially,a subjectmay seemfrag-
affectsinto erotogeneouszones.Thus, psychoanalysisimplementsa func- mented and disunited; temporally, however,a subject developsa certain
tional vision of the body that simply turns schizoidlanguageand expres- amountof consistencythat comesfrom the continuingpowerof recollec-
sion into a disorder.This is in stark contrastto the schizoanalyticvision tion. Here Deleuzeborrows the distinction betweenthe molar senseof
both Deleuzeand Guattarioffer us. linear,recordedtime (chronos) and the molecularsenseof cyclical,discon-
Building on GeorgesCanguilhemand Michel Foucault,Deleuzeand tinuoustime (aion)that the Greeksoncedescribed.Simply put, the former
Guattari blur the distinctiondrawn betweennormal/pathologicaland all the is relatedto being/the molar/the masculine;the latter to becoming/the
negativeconnotationsthat this model of desireimplies. Castingaffectivity, molecular/thefeminine.The co-occurrenceof past and future in a con-
the passions and sexualityalongthe axesof eithernormativeor pathological tinuouspresentmay appearschizophrenicto thosewho uphold a vision of
behaviour,they say,is complicit with thoseselfsamepolitical forcesof bio- the subjectasrationaland self-contained,however,we needto havesome
powerthat disciplineand control the expressivepotentialitiesof a body.The caution here as Deleuze'sphilosophyof immanencerestson the idea of
doubleburden that comesfrom medicalisingemotionsand affects,in con- a transformativeand dynamicsubjectwho inhabitsthe activepresenttense
junction with reducingsexualexpressionto genitalia,leavesbodily affectsand of continuous'becoming'.Using Henri Bergson'sconceptof 'duration' to
intensitiesin animpoverishedstate.Their theoryof the Bodywithout Organs guide him, Deleuze proposesa subjectas an enduring entity, one that
(BwO) not only critiquespsychoanalysis' complicityin repressionbut the changesas much as it is changedthrough the connectionsit forms with
functionalistapproachto human affectivityas well. Instead,Deleuzeand a collectivity.
Guattariassertthe positivenatureof unruly desirein termsof schizoidflows. Also important to note is that Deleuze disengagesthe notion of
For Deleuze,the distinctionbetweenproperand abjectobjectsof desire 'endurance'from the metaphysicaltradition that associatesit with an
is implementedasa normative index to police and civilise behaviour.The essenceor permanence.Hence, the potency of the Deleuzian subject
more unmanageable aspectsof affectivityhaveeither to come under the comesfrom how it displacesthe phallogocentricvision of consciousness,
disciplinary mechanism of representationor be swiftly discarded. one that hingeson the sovereigntyof the 'I'. It can no longer be safely
Deviance,insanityand transgression arecommonlyregardedasunaccept- assumedthat consciousness coincideswith subjectivity,or that either
ablefor they point to an uncontrollableforceof wild intensity.Thesetend consciousness or subjectivity chargesthe course of events.Thus, the
to be negativelyrepresented:impersonal,uncaringand dangerousforces. image of thought implied by liberal individualism and classicalhuman-
Concomitantly such forces are both criminalisedand renderedpatho- ism is disrupted in favour of a multi-layered dynamic subject.On this
logical.The schizophrenicbody is emblematicof this violent'outside',one level, schizophreniaactsas an alternativeto how the art of thinking can
that is beyondproprietyand normality. be practised.
Deleuze'seffortsto depathologise mentaland somaticdeviancy,uncon- Together with paranoia,schizoid loops and double-bindsmark the
ventional sexualbehaviourand clinical conditions - like anorexia,depres- political economy of affectivity in advancedcapitalism. These enact the
sion, suicide,and so forth - is not a celebrationof transgressionfor its own doubleimperativeof consumerconsumptionand its inherent deferralof
sake.Instead,it is integralto his intensivereadingofthe subjectasa struc- pleasure.With capitalismthe deferral of pleasureconcomitantlyturned
ture of affectivity.That is, Deleuzemapsout alternativemodesof experi- into a commodity.The saturationof socialspace,by fast-changingcom-
mentationon the levelof sensation,perceptionand affects.The intensity modities,short-circuitsthe presentinducing a disjunctionin time.
of thesestatesand their criminalisedand pathologicalsocialstatusoften Like the insatiableappetiteof the vampire,the capitalisttheft of 'the
makesthem implode into the black hole of ego-indexednegative forces. present' expressesa system that not only immobilises in the processof
Deleuzeis interestedin experimentingwith the positivepotentialof these commodity over-accumulation,but also suspends active desiring-
practices.What is at stakein this reappraisalof schizophrenia is how other production in favour of an addictive pursuit of commodity goods.In
modesof assemblage and variationsof intensityfor non-unitary subjects response,Deleuzeposits'becoming'as an antidote:flows of empowering
are gesturedto. dcsircthat introducemobility and thus destabilise the sedentarygravita-
A subjectis a gcnealogical entity,possessing a minoritaritn,or countcr- tionrrl pull of molar formations. 'l'his involvcscxpcrimcntingwith non-
mcnrory, which in turn is irn cxprcssion<lf clcgrccsof' rrll'ccrivity. unititryor sclrizoidnrodcsot'bcconring.

Connectives and societies are understood as being organised according to two

Becoming dominant and interwoven modes of segmentation:one molar, the other
Bergson molecular. These terms are alwaysclosely related becausethey co-exist
Black hole and crossover into eachother.
Body Exploring the dominant forms of segmentation,Deleuzeand Guattari
Body without Organs contrastthe ideaof a primitive or supplekind of segmentarityagainstthe
Duration notion of modern statehood,whereprimitive societiesexist without dedi-
Molar catedpolitical institutions.Considerablemanoeuvrabilityand communi-
Nietzsche cability aremaintainedbetweenthe differentiated,heterogeneous fieldsof
Representation thesesocieties, primarily becauseof the segmentedrelationshipthat each
of thesefieldsor units shareswith the other.Operatingaccordingto dis-
crete,localisedforms of management,Deleuzeand Guattari characterise
this primitive segmentarityas functioning through polyvocalcodesthat
SEGMENTARITY emergeasa resultof variousrelationshipsand lineages,and asan itinerant
territoriality that is basedon local divisionsthat overlaprather than exist
Kjtlie Message in any discretestate.Communication,codificationand territorialisation
occur in thesesocietiesvia a processof shifting relationshipsand inter-
'Segmentation' is a fundamental structuring principle that contributes sections,rather than any centrally organisingpower.
to organisingthe individual and sociallife of all humans.While Deleuze While these systems of organisation are perhaps more molecular
and Guattari explore the superficially dichotomous relationship of the (focusedon small-scaletrajectoriesand local environments)than thoseof
dominant segments- primitive, suppleor molecular,that aredifferentiated modern societies,it would not be true to claim that they are more organic
againstthe rigid or molar statesegment- they do so in order to contend or lesssystematic,and in accordwith their contentionthat the molar exists
that each of these dominant segments can themselves be sub- within the molecularand vice versa,Deleuze and Guattari explainthat it
compartmentalised into binary,circularand linearforms.More important is a mistakesimply to contrastthis primitive, suppleor molecularsegmen-
than the distinctionsexistingwithin eachof the terms of the dichotomy, tarity againstthe more rigid global organisationsthat characterisethe
however, is the idea that yet another - far less discernible and easily modern Statesociety.Acknowledgingthat the modern political systemis
defined- spaceexistsin betweenthesetwo segments.This liminal third a unified and unifying globalapparatus,they maintainthat it is organised
spaceis producedby one or severallines of flight that binds the binary in a formationof clearlyorderedsubsystems. However,despitethe reach-
terms into dialoguewith eachother at the sametime asit worksto enforce ing agendathat motivatesthis inclusive process,it cannot be entirely
a kind of decodingprocedurefor eachof the segmentedforms. In other differentiatedfrom the primitive system out of which it has evolved.
words,it both binds and separates the terms,but ensuresthat a continual Accordingly,the overarchingsystemis neverfreefrom gaps,displacements
mutability carrieson existingbetweenthe two. and partial processes that interconnectwith eachother and yet it never
Although Deleuze and Guattari acknowledgethat binary couplings attainsproper signification.
appearat the basisof their approachto the conceptof segmentation,this To ignore thesespacesof slippagethat exist in betweenthe privileged
mode of differentiation is consciouslyand cautiouslyinvoked in order to or State-sanctifiedunits is a mistake, Deleuze and Guattari counsel,
show that even the most formalised of dichotomous stateshave a rela- becausetheseoften indiscernible spacesmay contain either - or perhaps
tionship that is in fact more pliable or porous than would first appear. both in somecases- the rumblings of popular massdissatisfactionwith the
In this senseeverything is political: every politics is alwaysboth macrop- dominantand determining Statebody (asin the socialupheavalsof May
olitics and micropolitics.Illustrating the inter-relationshipof the binary 1968),or the quotidian embodiment of extreme State power whereby
term that is alwaystied into dialoguewith its contrastingfigure (via the cvcrydaycitizensadopta self-regulating attitudeor beliefthat is basedon
third, liminal spacethat tendsto be occupiedby deterritorialisinglincs of thcir inclividualintcrnalisationof a particularpoliticirlcodcor idcalpro-
flight) whilc rrt tho sirmctimc bcing dift'crcntiatcd agrrinstit, indiviclurrls motcdby thc Statc(irsin Nnzi (icrmany).In hothcilscs,tlrcscrupturcsilrc

micro-fascismsthat threaten to disorganiseor destabilisethe dominant transformationalpragmaticsconsistsof destratification,or openingup to

segmentswithin which they exist. a neq diagrammaticand creativefunction. Accordingto the logic of mul-
tiplicities,a diagramservesasa mediatoryin-betweensymbol,'a third'(D
Just as neither molecularnor molar segmentscan resistbeing entirely
differentiated from the other, Deleuze and Guattari explain that rather 1987: 131)that disturbs the fatal binarity of the signifier/signifieddis-
than beinga distinctcharacteristicof the rigid or Statesegment,fascismis tinction. It forms part of the cartographicapproach,which is Deleuzeand
dangerousbecauseof its molecularor micropoliticalpower; as a mass Guattari'ssemioticspar excellence,that replaceslogicalcopulaswith the
movementit is more threateningthan a totalitarianorganisation.As such, radicalconjunction'and'.
fascismattainsmolar (State)significancenot becauseof the public profile For Deleuze,the theory of signs is meaninglesswithout the relation
of its leader(evidencedby the larger-than-lifeposters),but becauseit is betweensignsand the correspondingapprenticeshipin practice.Reading
imbricated and interiorised throughout the molecular level of everyday MarcelProustfrom the perspective of triadicsemiotics,Deleuzenoticesthe
experience. dynamiccharacterof signs,that is, their havingan 'increasinglyintimate'
(D 2000:88) relation with their enfoldedand involutedmeaningsso that
truth becomescontingentand subordinateto interpretation.Meaningsare
Connectives not givenbut dependon signsentering'intothe surfaceorganizationwhich
Lines of flight ensuresthe resonance of two series'(D 1990:104),the latterconvergingon
Molar a paradoxicaldifferentiator,which becomes'both word and objectat once'
(D 1990:51).Yet,semioticscannotbe reducedto just linguisticsigns.There
are extra-linguisticsemioticcategoriestoo, such as memories,imagesor
immaterialartisticsigns,which areapprehended in termsof neitherobject-
ivenor subjective criteriabut learnedin practicein termsof immanentprob-
SEMIOTICS lematic instancesand their practicaleffects.Analogously,a formal abstract
machineexceedsits applicationto (Chomskian)philosophyof language;
Inna Semetsky insteadsemioticsis applied to psychological,biological,social,techno-
logical, aesthetic and incorporeal codings. Semiotically, discursive and
'semiotics' is, in general, the study of signs and their signification.
Deleuzeand Guattari'ssemioticspresenta conceptualmix of CharlesS. non-discursiveformationsareconnectedby virtue of transversalcommuni-
cation,'transversality' beinga conceptthat encompasses psychic,socialand
Peirce'slogic of relativesand Louis Hielmslev'slinguistics;both frame-
works are taken to opposeSaussureansemiology.ln A ThousandPlateaus, evenontologicaldimensions.As a semioticcategory,transversalityexceeds
Deleuze and Guattari assertthat content is not a signified, neither is verbalcommunicationand appliesto diverseregimesof signs;by the same
expressiona signifier:insteadboth are variablesin common assemblage. token, Deleuze and Guattari's schizoanalysis and cartographiesof the
An a-signifying rupture ensurestransfer from the form of expressionto unconsciouspresupposea different semiotictheory from the one appropri-
the form of content.Dyadic, or binary significationgivesway to triadic, atedin Lacanianpsychoanalysis. The semioticprocess, basedon the logicof
a-signifying semiotics,and the authors employ the Peirceannotion of includedmiddle,is the basisfor the productionof subjectivity.The line of
a'diagram'as a constructivepart of sign-dynamics. A diagramis a bridge, flight or becomingis a third betweensubjectand objectand is to be under-
a diagonalconnectionthat, by meansof double articulations,connects stood 'not so much . . . in their oppositionas in their complementarity'
planesof expressionand contentleadingto the emergenceof new forms. (D 1987:13l). The relationshipbetweensubjectand objectis of the nature
Fixed and rigid signifiedsgive way to the productionof new meaningsin of reciprocalpresupposition.
accordwith the logic of sense(D 1990).Conceptsthat exist in a triadic Brian Massumipoints out that Deleuzereinventsthe conceptof semi-
relationshipwith both perceptsand affectsexpresseventsrather than otics in his various books: in Proustand Signs,Deleuze refers to four
essencesand should be understood not in the traditional representa- differently organisedsemioticworlds (M 1992).In Cinema-1he presents
tional mannerof analyticphilosophy,which would submit a line to a point, sixtecn diffcrent types of cinematic signs. Rlr Deleuze, philosophers,
but as a pluralistic, a-signifying distribution of lincs and phncs. writcrs and artistsarc first and forcmostscmioticilnsrrndsymptomirt<tl-
(l) l9tltla; l9t)3t) dclicssigniticittion.
Ontokrgically,''bciirg-its-firkl' ogists:thcy rcitd,intcrprct itnd crcittcsigns,wltich itrc 'lhc synrplonrsot'

life . . . There is a profound link betweensigns,events,life and vitalism' through the body in wavesand rhythms that meld its perceptiblesitesor
(D 1995:143).The task of philosophyis the creationof concepts,and a organisationof partsinto vibrationsand spasms.Borrowingfrom Wilhelm
concept, in accord with a-signifying semiotics,has no reference;it is Wiirringer'swritings on the generativityof 'gothic' linearity,Deleuzeand
autoreferential, positingitself togetherwith its obiectat the momentof its Guattari'sconceptof BwO is in continuousand autonomousmovement,
own creation.A map,or a diagram,engendersthe territory to which it is endlesslyemanatingsensationlessin its designthan in its process.The line
supposedto refer;a staticrepresentationof the order of referencesgiving is continuallybecomingof itself,exudingforce;whatDeleuzecallsthe 'con-
way to a relationaldynamicsof the order of meanings. dition of sensation'.Of animaland vegetalcharacter,it hasthe capacityof
turning inward and outward, into the body and along different trajectories,
makingpalpablewhat otherwisecould be sensedin sensationitself. Deleuze
explainsthe point through C6zanne,whom he championsfor having made
Lacan visiblethe folding characterof the Mont-Saint-Victoire,the germinating
Schizoanalysis forceswithin seeds,or the convectionand heat transpiringin a landscape.
Signifier/Signified Theseelementsarewithin sensationprior to becomingfelt or visualised.
DeleuzeusesBacon'sdistinctionbetweentwo typesof violenceto refine
his 'logic' of sensation.A violenceof public spectacle, seenin athleticand
political arenasand in traditional 'theatresof torture' must be refusedin
orderto reacha kind of sensationthat the British paintercallsa'declaration
of faith in life'. Many of the paintingsplacedeformedbodiesin arenasso
that their abstractioncan embody invisible forces;forcesthat accordingly
Tom Conlejt
condition the uncannysensationthe spectatorfeelsin view of both familiar
Biology infusesmuch of Deleuze'sphilosophyespeciallyin the domainof and monstroushuman forms. When seenin series(many are diptychs and
sensation.It remainsat the basisof perception,perceptionin turn being triptychs),the paintingsexuderhythms thar are tied to what Baconcalls
what bringsaboutthe creationof events,the very mattercommonto phil- 'figures',which areneitherfigurativenor beyondfigurationbut accumula-
osophy,art, and science.Sensationopensat the thresholdofsense,at those tions and coagulations of sensation.In anothercontexthe links composite
momentsprior to when a subjectdiscoversthe meaningof somethingor units of perceptsand affectsto blocksof sensation,in themselvesbeings
entersinto a processof reasonedcognition.Sensationtakesplacebefore that existautonomously, asmuch in paintingsasin the spectatorswho look
cognitionand thus pertainsto signifiance. In film it is graspedin what takes at them. The artist finds in the areabetweenthe perceiverand the work a
placebeforewordsand imagesare grasped, asin Jean-LucGodard'stitle, field of sensation,one that is 'sculpting,composing,writing sensations. As
Prinorn: Carmen,in which the field of sensationinheres in what comes percepts,sensations arenot perceptionsreferringto an object'(D&G 1994:
prior to the name,beforethe naming of 'Carmen', in what is felt and experi- 166)but somethingthat inheresin its beingand its duration. The taskof
encedbefore the name is understoodin a common way (D 1989:154). the artist,ashe showswith Baconand C6zanne,is to extractfrom a'block
In aesthetics,which Deleuzetakesup through his study of FrancisBacon of sensations, a pure beingof sensation'(D&G 1994:167).
in TheLogic of Sensation,sensationis what strikesa viewer of a painting or In this respect,in his unique galleryof naturalhistory two of Deleuze's
the readerof a poem beforemeaningis discernedin figuration or a the- totemsof sensationarethe tick and the dog.The tick is a creaturethat feels
matic design.It has the productivelydeformativepower of defacingthe rhythmic sensationsthat inspire it to fall onro the skin of the animal it
representations that causeit to be felt. It is alsowhat vibratesat the thresh- covets.A melodyor 'block' of sensationcausesit to leap.The dog that is
old of a given form; in other words, what causesthe 'appleness'of the eatingat its food bowl sensesthe arrivalof the masterthat will flog it, prior
painter Paul C6zanne'sapplesto be felt as the geometricand painterly to the flogging,with thousandsof sensations that anticipatethe eventitself:
abstractionsthat they becomein the field of his still lifes. a hostileodour,the sound of footsteps,or the sight of a raisedstick, that
One of Deleuze'smostfamousfigures,the Body without Organs(BwO), 'subtendthe conversionof pleasureinto pain'.Sensations arc mixed with
is conceivedas a surfaceof sensations, of a textureand elasticityof cqual 'tiny pcrccptions'that are'thc passagc from onc perccptionto an<lthcr',
filrccand intcnsityovcr thc cntircty<tfits mass,Scnsati<tn passcstlvcrand rrnclthcyconstitutc'thclninrll conditionprrrcxccllcncc'(l)l993rr:87),

Readersof Deleuzenotethat sensationacquiresincreasingresonance in becoming-intense- that they bring about. Deleuze says: ,I becomein
the works written after 1980. It becomesa common term of speculationon sensation, andsomethinghappens throughsensation, onethroughthe other
aesthetics,biologyand philosophyat the sametime asit retrievesthe vital- and one in the other' (D 1993b:187).In rhe caseof cinema,narrarive-
ism and intuition of Henri Bergson'sformative work written from the early representational film canbe understoodasa machineassemblage - a poten-
1950s.Sensationbecomesa decisiveelementin the style and texture of tiality of intensitiesor sensations- that, on the one hand, is organised
Deleuze'swriting, for in its rhythms,its 'blocks'of reflectionand its own (represented) by an activityof figuration,and on the other,is reproduced-
conceptualfigures,conceivedin a manner akin to thoseof his favourite multiplied and intensified- as a creativefigure of sensation.The first
painters,the writing exudesthe forcesthat it describes. describesa habitualrecognitionwherethe film is familiar and banalbecause
it is representedin termsof its identity and sameness. The latter describes
a moment of attentiverecognition(of dis-figuration)in which the object
doesnot remainon the oneandthe sameplane,but passes throughdifferent
Art planes.This is the momentof the crystal,wherepastand future collide;the
Bacon momentwhererepetitionis the eternalreturn: differencerepeating.
Bergson Sensationcan be related to the concept of'cinephilia,, an obsessive
Body without Organs passionfor cinema- in particularthe Hollywood films of 1940sand 1950s
Faciality - that developedin the front rows of the Pariscinimathiques in the 1950s
and 1960s.Paul Willemen suggeststhat the phenomenonof cinephilia,
influencedby still activeresiduesof surrealismin post-warFrenchculture,
involvesa sublime moment of encounterwith the
unpresentable sublime.willemen links cinephiliatoJeanEpstein'snotion
of photoginie,a fleeting moment of experienceor emotionalintensity -
a sensation- that the viewercannotdescribeverballyor rationalisecogni-
Constantine Vereois
tively (W 1994).As in the caseof Deleuze'stime-image,photlginie is
ln Dffirence and Repetition,Deleuzestatesthat the modern work of art a direct representationof time, a 'crystal-image',or direct sensationof a
leavesthe domain of representationin order to becomepure experience: presentpresence.Focusingupon that aspectof cinephiliawhich escapes
'a transcendentalempiricism or scienceof the sensible'(D 1994: 56). existingnetworksof critical discourse,willemen describesan encounter-
Deleuze developsthis idea in FrancisBacon: TheLogic of Sensation,sug- a 'dangerousmoment' that points to a'beyond of cinema'(241).Ina brief
gestingthat modern paintingtranscendsthe representation of both illus- example,one can find this potential dislocationin the films of David
trative and narrativefiguration by moving either toward a pure form of Lynch: the anamorphicdeformity of the dream in The ElephantMan
abstraction(asexemplifiedby, say,Piet Mondrian or WassilyKandinsky) (1980),Ben'slip-syncingof 'In Dreams'in Blue ltelaet(1986),the lighting
or toward what Deleuzecalls(followingJean-FrangoisLyotard) the purely of a cigarettein Wild,at Heart (1990).
figural. For Deleuze (as for Bacon, who refusesboth straight abstraction Contemporarycinephilia - which embracesnot only the Hollywood
and figurative illustration), the preferred option is the latter, for the films of classicalcinephilia and the work of the nouoelle,)ague,but also
abstractpainting,like the figurativeartwork,is ultimatelydirectedtoward Hollywood's delayednouaelleaague(Francis Ford Coppola, Brian De
ordinary thought or to the brain, whereasthe figure is the sensibleform Palma,Martin Scorsese),the newFrench new waye([ean-Jacques Beineix,
relatedto sensation,to the neraoussystern or to 'vital movement'.Citing Luc Besson,Leos Carax),and internationalart cinema(PedroAlmodovar,
Paul C6zanne,Deleuze describesa 'logic of the senses'that is neither Takeshi Kitano, Abbas Kiarostami) - can be seenas one of the many
rational, nor cerebral,but a bodily sensation- an unequal difference diversereadingstrategiesencouragedby recentcultural technologies. The
betweenforces- that overflowsand traversesall domains. developmentsinclude not only new storageand information technolo-
Sensation(figure)shifts attentionfrom the form of the artwork, be it gies(television, video,internet)and agencies of pr<lmotion and commodi-
representationalor abstract,to the nature of its encounterwith othcr fication(rcvicws,advcrtiscmcnts, mcrchandisc)but irn irssociirtcclincrcasc
btdics, lncl thc'-bccomings- hccoming<lther,bccoming-unlimitcd, in film and nrcdialitcrrrcyrnd ir moclc<lf'vicwing imbricrrtcdwith nn
srMoNDoN, crLBERr (1926-87) 249

Understoodin this way, the effect of a languageor conceptualscheme,he also (with Guattari)
intertextualnetworkof masscultural discourses.
conducted an intensepolitical assaulton the ideology or despotismofthe
the reproduction of the cinephile is a type of infinite representation,an
signifier.How is it that we come to think of thought as reducible to a
extensivefunction of a standardised,serialproduct designedto be con-
systemof linguisticsigns?Not only do Deleuzeand Guattari insist, posi-
sumed within globalisedand/or specialisedniche markets.But equally,
tively, that there are r6gimes of signs beyond language,ranging from
the intensive experienceof cinephilia, the resonancecreated within the
musicand the visualartsto the signsof the inhuman world - smokebeing
proliferating,differentialseries,canbe describedasa momentof sensation,
a sign of fire, light being a sign for a heliotropeor a bird's refrain being
a glimpse over the edge of cinematic representation.Contemporary
the sign of its territory, they also conduct a critique of the modern
cinephiliathus becomesboth a generaleconomyof viewing' one which
of the cinematicinstitution, concept of signification, the idea that we are submitted to a system of
guaranteesthe endlesscirculation (sameness)
signsbeyondwhich we cannotthink. On the structuralistunderstanding
and also a point of resistanceto these forms of re-presentation- the
of the signifier, all thought takes place in a system of signs and all
moment at which the founding principle (Idea)breaksdown to become
differencesare mediatedthrough this systemsuch that nothing can be
a positive event, a universal un-founding. The serial repetition of the
(global Hollywood) film product, and the reproduction of the new consideredin itself. Structuralism is often, therefore, consideredto be a
cinephile,becomeboth the confirmationof identity and the affirmationof 'break' in this history of westernmetaphysics,for it concedesthat there
can be no knowledgeof pure presence,only knowledgeof the world as
multiple sensation,the return of the absolutelydifferent.
mediated through signs. According to Deleuze and Guattari, however,
the signifier is yet one more way in which we fail to think differencepos-
itively; one more way in which we mistakealreadystructuredexperience
SIGNIFIER/SIGNIFIED for the positivestructuring powerof life to differ. Signifiers,Deleuzeand
Guattari argue,are just examplesof the waysin which life is expressedor
Claire Colebrook differentiated.Deleuze'sargumentfor positivedifferenceis in direct con-
a language trast with the ideathat there is a systemof relationsthat determineslife
Accordingto the structuralistlinguist,Ferdinandde Saussure,
in advance.On the contrary, Deleuze saysthat while languagecan over-
is madeup of signifiersor differential marks,which then organiseor struc-
of our code other systemsof difference,for we can speakabout other systemsof
ture, not only our language,but also the very conceptualisation
The revolution of structuralistlinguistics lay in the insistence on signs,it is also possiblefor languageto be deterritorialisedthrough the
and on the highly contingent pro- positivepower of difference.If, for example,our r6gimeof visualsignsis
both the arbitrarynatureof the signifier
overturned by an event in cinema, then we might be forced to think
duction of the systemof signification.Whereaslinguistics prior to struc-
differently and createnew concepts.In sucha casethinking would not be
turalism might havestudieda word diachronicallyby looking at the way
governedby a precedingsystem,but would be violated by the shockor
the Latin wordratio comesto form a commonroot (andmeaningfulcause)
treason',trational','rationalise','irrational' and so encounterwith life, a life that emits signswell beyondthoseof the system
for the modern words,
of signification.
on, structuralistlinguisticsis synchronic.One shouldnot study the emer-
genceor genesisof signs,for this is vague,but only signsas they form
a system. So it would be significantthat one languagemight mark a Connectives
differencebetweengrey and blue, or like and love,while anotherlanguage
would not mark out sucha difference.The consequences of this supposed Deterritorialisation/Reterritorialisation
primacy of the signifierextendedwell beyondlinguistics.If it is the case Difference
that we think only within a systemof differences,then thought depends
upon a prior structureand that structurecanonly be studiedor criticised
asa whole.There canbe no intuition of anyterm or thing in itself,for we
SIMONDON, GILBERT (1926-87)- referto the entrieson'cinema*
only know and think within a systemof differenceswithout positivetcrms'
Wcrncr Hcrzog','individuati<ln','m:ltcrialism' *
Not only doesDeleuzefavour the linguisticsof Louis Hiclmslcv ovcr
thilt ilrc not I Iusscrl'.
Sirussurcso that ihcrc irrc irlrcndyf<rrmsor clift'crcntirrtions

that simulacracan produceidentitiesfrom within the world, and without

SIMULACRUM referenceto a model,by enteringinto concreterelations- in this case,the
philosopheris not the one searchingfor the Good, but the one who is able
Jonathan Roffe to createnew conceptsfrom the material availablein the world; concepts
In his 1990'Preface'toClet-Martin'sbookon his work, Deleuzestatesthat which will do something.We can seehere a hint of the understandingof
the conceptof 'simulacrum'wasneveran essentialpart of his philosophy. the world as a productive-machinethat will emergein Anti-Oedipusand
However,it doesoffer one of the strongestforms of his critique of identity, A Thousand, Plateaus.
and the affirmation of a world populated by differences-in-themselves Deleuze also connectsthe thought of the simulacrum to that of the
which arenot copiesof any prior model. eternal return. As Deleuze frequently argues,we must understandthe
Simply put, 'simulacrum'means'copy'. It is in Deleuze'sdiscussionof eternal return in terms of the return and affirmation of the different, and
Plato in TheLogic of Sensethat simulacraare most closelydiscussed.Plato not of the Same.Ratherthan distinguishingbetweengoodand bad copies,
offersa three-levelhierarchyof the model,the copy,andthe copyof the copy the eternal return rejects the whole model/copy picture - which is
which is the simulacrum.The real concern for Plato is that, being a step groundedon the valueof the Sameand infusesnegativityinto the world -
removed from the model, the simulacrum is inaccurateand betrays the in favourof the productivepowerof the simulacrathemselves.
model.He usesthis hierarchyin a numberof places,and in eachcaseit is a
matterof distinguishingthe 'falsepretender'or simulacrum.For example,
in the Sophisf,Socratesdiscussesthe meanswith which we might distin-
guishbetweenthe philosopher(thegoodcopy),who is in searchof the Good Difference
(the model), and the sophist(the simulacrumof the philosopher- the bad Eternal return
copy),who usesthe sameskillsasthe philosopherin searchof profit or fame. Plato
Deleuzenotesthat while the distinctionbetweenthe modelandthe copy Representation
seemsthe mostimportantone for Plato,it is ratherthe distinctionbetween
the true and the falsecopieswhich is at the heartof Platonism.The copy
of the copy,cut offfrom referenceto a model,puts into questionthe model-
copy systemasa whole,and confronts it with a world of pure simulacrum.
This reveals,for Deleuze,the moral natureof Plato'ssystem,which fun-
Tom Conley
damentallyvaluesidentity, order, and the stablereferenceto a model over
the groundlessmovementsof simulacra.This doesnot meanthat Deleuze In the historiesof cartographyand of the cognition of terrestrialspace,
considersthe world to be madeup of appearances, 'simulations'of a real 'singularity'is a term that replacesthat of the mirror. It is first seenin the
world that hasnow vanished.It is the senseof the word 'appearances' itself earlymodern period. In the Middle Agesthe 'mirror of human salvation'
that is in question.Simulacrado not refer to anythingbehind or beyond (speculum humanesalaationis)charteda typology of eventsin human and
the world - they make up the world. So what is being underminedby divine time that madeclearthe order of the world on the basisof eventsin
Deleuze here is a representationalunderstandingof existence,and the the Old Testamentthat alsohaveanaloguesin the New Testament.The
moralinterpretationof existencethat goesalongwith it. Furthermore,this mirror wasthat which assureda reflectionof a totality and the presenceof
understandingembodiesa certainnegativitythat is alsoproblematic.For God, a reflectivesurface,resemblingperhapsthe pupil of an eyeon which
a copy to be a copy of any kind it must havereferenceto somethingit is not were gatheredand assembledthe variety and wealth of divine creation,
- a copy standsin for somethingthat is not present.It requiresthis other When, in the later fifteenth century,oceanictravellersventured south and
thing (whatlinguisticswould call the'referent')to giveit senseand impor- eastfrom Europe to the Indies by way of Africa or west to the Caribbean
tance. o!easterncoastof SouthAmerica,mostrepresentations of the world could
The simulacrum,on the otherhand,breakingwith this picture,doesnot no long conform to the figure of the speculummund,i.Discovery and
rely upon somethingbeyondit for its force,but is itself forceor power;able encounterpromptedcosmographers,to registernew,often conflicting,and
to do thingsandnot merelyrepresent.It is asa resultof this positivepower sometimesunthinkablethings into works of opcn form. As singularitics

theseworks were subjectto changeand revision- indeedwhat Deleuze duration,identity and ideationin Dffirence and,Repetition.A singularityis
often calls'open totalities'.For a brief time, the world itself wastakento a unique point but it is alsoa point of perpetualrecommencement and of
be a massof islandsand continents,of insularshapesthat containeda pos- variation.Like other keywords in his personaldictionary, singularityshifts
sibly infinite measureof singularities.Thus are born works such as Les and bearsdifferent inflections in different contextsbut is alwaysrelated to
singularitisde la Franceantarctique(by Andr6 Thevet) or isolarii ('island- perception,subjectivity,affectivity and creation.
books', by BenedettoBordone, TomassoPorcacchiand others). They are
conceivedto accountfor, recordand copewith new shapesofalterity and
differencecomingfrom distantspaces. Connectives
WhereverDeleuzeinvokessingularityit can be understoodagainstthis Event
historicalbackground.As a philosopherhe embracesthe idea of virtual Leibniz
travel, along infinite trajectoriesor lines of flight that lead the thinker any- Lines of flight
where about the world, but first and foremostamongand betweenconcep-
tual islandsor points of singularity.As islands,they are alsopoints that can
be seenin series,asinflexionsor emissionsof events.A singularity,alsoinsu-
larity,is a decisivepoint anda placewhereperceptionis felt in movement.In SMOOTH SPACE
Leibniz'sconceptof the monad,Deleuzenoteshow a 'singularity'is fre-
quentlyassociated with condensed events.Singularities arethe'zoneof clear Tarnsin Lorraine
expression' of the monad.Lessabstractly, in termsof civic geographya sin- ln A Thousand, Plateaus,Deleuze and Guattari characteriseliving orBan-
gularity would be a county,a regionaldepartment,or evena topography. isms in terms of interior milieus' (cellularformation, organicfunctions)
The singularitiesof the monad are what assurethe presenceof a body in and 'exterior milieus' (food to eat, water to drink, ground to walk on).
or through which they vibrate.They arethe eventsthat makeit both unique Milieus are vibratory blocks of space-timeconstituted by the periodic
and common,both an entity of its own perceptualdataand a groundfor the repetition of the configurationsof forcesthat makesthem what they are
relationthat the monadholdswith its environs.They arethe placeswhere (D&G 1987:313).All the milieusof the organismhavetheir own patterns
the 'singularitiesbelongingto each. . . areextendedup to the singularities and thesepatternsinteract with the patternsof other milieus with which
of others'(D 1993a:86).The world asa wholeis perceivedinfinitesimally they communicate.The rhythm of the interactionsbetweenthesedifferent
in microperceptionsand gigantically,in macroperceptions. Singularity milieus operatesin terms of heterogeneous blocksrather than one homo-
allows the subject to perceivethe world in both ways,infinitesimally and geneousspace-time.Thus, an organismemergesfrom chaos('the milieu of
infinitely, in hearing the whir of a familiar watermill, in being awareof all milieus') as vibratory milieus or blocks of space-time that create
wavesof water striking the hull of a boat, or even in sensingmusic that rhythms within the organismas well as with the milieus exterior to the
accompanies a'danceof dust'(D 1993a:86).Theseformulationsaboutsin- organism.Territorial animals(includinghumanbeings)arenaturalartists
gularityinflectDeleuze'swork on styleand the creativeimagination.With who establishrelations to imperceptibleas well as perceptibleforces
the samevocabularyhe notesthat greatwriterspossess'singular conditions through the refrainsof song (birds)or movementsand markings(wolves,
of perception'(D 1997b:116).Indeed singularitiesallow greatwriters to rabbits)that createthe rhythms of life-sustainingregularitiesfrom cosmic
turn aestheticperceptsinto veritablevisions;in other words,to movefrom chaos.The variousrhythms of the human subject'scomponentsand their
a unique site of consciousness to an oceanicone. Such is what makesthe relations to interior and exterior blocks of space-timebecome territori-
writer changethe world at large through microperceptionsthat become alised into the sentient awarenessof one organism living in the 'striated'
translatedinto a style,a seriesof singularitiesand differencesthat estrange spaceof sociallife, cancellingout anomalousinteractionsamongmilieusin
common usagesof languageand make the world of both the writer and the process.The conventionalnotion of spaceas a homogeneouswhole
thosein which the readerlivesvibratein unforeseen and compellingways. within which movement unfolds is thus, for Deleuze and Guattari, a
Weresingularityassociated with the 'Causesand Reasonsof the Desert totalisedconstruct of spacethat emergesfrom heterogeneous blocksof
Island',(oneof Deleuze'sfirst piecesof philosophical writing)it wouldbc sprcc-timc.'I'hcy contrastthcir conccptof 'smrxlthspacc'to thc morc
conncctcdwith differcnccand rcpctition,onc of thc bascsof'his wurk on convcntionirl notion of spilcc;'snlrxrthspircc'hrunts itnd citn disru;rtthc

striationsof conventionalspace,and it unfoldsthrough 'an infinite succes- Space

sion of linkagesand changesin direction' that createsshifting mosaicsof Subjectivity
space-timesout of the heterogeneous blocksof different milieus (D&G
1987: 494).Deleuzeand Guattari are interestednot in substitutingone
conceptionofspacewith another,but ratherin how forcesstriatespaceand
how at the same time it developsother forces that emit smooth spaces
(D&G 1987:500).
Kenneth Surin
In a discussionof the conceptof the (movement-image'inspired by
Henri Bergson, Deleuze distinguishesmovement from space: 'space Traditional philosophyrelied overwhelminglyon the operationof tran-
coveredis past, movementis present,the act of covering' (D 1986: l). scendentalprincipleswhich wererequiredto makeclaimspossible,aswell
Spacescoveredby movementaredivisibleand belongto a single,homoge- as moral aestheticjudgements.There are also transcendentalprinciples,
neous space while movement changesqualitatively when it is divided. perhapslesswidely acknowledgedthan the onesthat underlie traditional
Movements, of what Deleuze and Guattari in A ThousandPlateauscall philosophy,which subtendthe constitutionof the socialorder.Theseprin-
'deterritorialization',areactsofcoveringthat arenot referredto spacecon- ciplesare embodiedin what Deleuzeand Guattari call the 'socius'.The
ceivedasa uniform areaof measurable units within which changesoccur. well-known philosophical counter-tradition inaugurated by Friedrich
A subjectwho orients himself with respectto movements,rather than Nietzsche,and continuedby Martin Heidegger,undertooka dismantling
a retrospectively createdconstructof space,experiences spacenot in terms of the transcendentalbasis of traditional philosophy,and the work of
of a totality to which it is connected(I walk acrossthe snowfive milesfrom Deleuzeis to be locatedin this tradition. For Deleuze,asfor Nietzsche,an
the centreof town), but rather in terms of pure relationsof speedand slow- entire tradition extendsfrom Plato to Kant. in which it is declaredthat the
ness(snowunder moving feet aswind lifts hair) that evokepowersto affect yardstick of knowledgeis verisimilitude.In Plato's caseverisimilitude
and be affected,both actualand potential (pushingfeet againstground, derivesfrom an ideal 'world of Forms' (the transcendent),whereasfor
could alsojump or run). A personon a trip to anothercity might orient ImmanuelKant this world of the transcendentwasbanishedto the realm
himself by followingthe roadmappedout through socialconventionfrom of the 'noumenalabsolute'.Kant, though,insistedthat the counterpartto
one point to another.A nomadof the desertin searchof food might orient the noumenalworld, for examplethe world of phenomena,wasconstituted
himselfdifferently,travellingnot from onepoint to a predesignated destin- by the activity of the transcendental (or non-empiricallygiven)subjectof
ation, but rather travelling from one indication of food to the next as the possibleexperience.In their reflection on the socius,conducted through-
need arises.In the former case,local movementsare charted with respect out the two volumes of Copitalism and, Schizophrenia,Deleuze and,
to alreadyspecifiedpoints(thusimposinga planeof organisationupon the Guattari seekwhat amountsto a comprehensive undoing of the transcen-
movementsthat unfold). In the latter case,spaceshifts with eachmove- dentalbasisofthe constitutionofthe socialorder.In sodoing,they adhere
ment in keepingwith shifts in meetingthe needfor food. Theseshifts do (transcendental
to the empiricism',in which the basisfor the constitution
not occur in space;rather they establishdifferent configurationsof nomad (as
of real opposed to possible) experienceis sought.This proiectis 'tran-
and vegetationand landscape that unfold asthe smoothspaceof the search scendental'in so far as the conditionsfor real experiencerequire a non-
for food. The smooth spacesharedwith othersemergesnot with reference empirical organisationof the objectsof experience,though the sourceof
to an 'immobile outside observer',but rather through the tactile relations this organisationis not a transcendentalsubjecti la Kant, but rather the
of any number of observers(D&G 1987: 493).It is thus a space- like that very form in which real objectsareexperiencedasactiveand dynamic.
of the steppes,the desertor polar landscapes - occupiedby intensities, ln Anti-Oed,ipus, the sociusis said to be necessarybecausedesiring-
forcesand tactilequalities,with no fixed referencepoint (D&G 1987:479). productionis coterminouswith socialproductionandreproduction,andfor
the latter to takeplacedesirehasto be codedand recoded,so that subiects
canbe preparedfor their socialrolesand functions.The sociusis the terrain
of this codingand recoding.Anotherrationalefor the sociusstemsfrom the
Deterritorialisation/ Rcterritorialisation