/lit/ - Literature

>>14760094
by reading his works

>>14760098
Sounds boring lol

>>14760094
Buy him a drink

>>14760094
With intros and secondary materials. Why read him when others have done it for you? They even extract the meaning for you too.

>>14760094
two ways:
>by reading his early monographs about other authors
or
>by reading atp rhizome, bwo, geology of morals (in that order)

>>14760094
watch gay porno

>>14760094
become a pedophile

>>14760797
>>14760808
>low iq posting
>>/pol/

>>14760094
Flying anus; speeding vagina; carrots; couch grass; eggs; wolf; wolves; wolves in a tree; sun; anus; flying; lines;

>>14760094
just start reading
rhizome gang

>>14760094
read hume and spinoza first

Watch this entire series first. Helped me a lot.
https://youtu.be/GS35vUMhww4

>>14760094
Eat his ass

>>14762608
suspicious about this, can anglos ever understand deleuze?

>>14762697
>i can only communicate in memes
Sad!

>>14762697
Show me one that is better.
The man provides extensive sources and elaborates further with more related reads in the transcripts of his vids. It is peak youtube content but feel free to prove me otherwise.

Deleuze says the meaning of life is to never turn off your lights and or your sink.

A decent short summary / intro to D&G:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EHnrE3j9kg

A longer introduction, but possibly my favorite:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lajsoQJ0V6A

A lot of the stuff here:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4CtHPqv6eKr8pYqe8qEoEA/videos?disable_polymer=1

Everything by Manuel DeLanda:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=manuel+delanda

A bit more on the Nietzsche-Deleuze relation through Klossowski (who dedicated his book about Nietzsche to Deleuze):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7l7ZAKZZZU

More on the Deleuze-Nietzsche relation (the entire series is fascinating if you're into Nietzsche):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFFxnf92XqY


The Deleuze for the Desperate series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS35vUMhww4

Derrida's lecture about Deleuze (mistitled, it's about Stupidity not Forgiveness):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_r-gr3ccik

There's probably a lot more, there are Vimeo videos as well which don't feature on Youtube.

Pirate Deleuze's Abecedaire (it should have English subtitles) as I can't find it streamed in full online anywhere.

As for the books, you could start with the essay and interview collections (in no particular order): Dialogues, Negotiations, Desert Islands, Two Regimes of Madness, Essays Critical and Clinical. "Letter to a Harsh Critic" in Negotiations is short (about 7 pages) and tells you how to read his texts. Better yet, jump straight into Nietzsche and Philosophy (read the intro as well) since it sets up the entire framework that Deleuze will operate in. Deleuze's courses are also pretty accessible and translated in several languages: https://www.webdeleuze.com/


A decent bibliography:
https://immanentterrain.wordpress.com/biblio/

>>14760098
>>14760821
>>14763019
Filtered.

>>14762970
He never said that. He explicitly said that it's all about fisting wolves at midnight.

>>14760094
L’abecedaire Is a good starting point, difference and repetition is good too if you feel confident enough

>>14762608
>>14760627
>>14760108
Filtered.

>>14763041
Filtered, dare I say?

>>14763023
>>14763044
>>14763045
kek, imagine not being underage

>>14763027
My bad I was confusing him with what Bataille said (life is about wasting energy).

>>14762933
I always found DeLanda to be better even if he has a more specific reading of Deleuze.

Brothers, here we have a collection of infra-intellectuals posters, that had the audacity to actually recommend one of our novices the reading of Dele*ze's works. Because of it, we must suppose that they have actually read the man and, through their own lack of intellect, approved of his work, and therefore should be all filtered.

>>14762608
>>14760627
>>14760108
>>14760098
>>14760821
>>14763019
>>14763041

>>14763065
Don't you just sometimes wish that we had a Chinese identity model for the Internet instead of anonimity so that you could find a poster, follow him as he returns home from school and make him a body without organs literally, haha?

>>14763086
Anon... you scare me.

>>14763027
sounds very derivative of Foucault

>>14763027
>Stalled Anti-Oedipus reading group
keked, has an online reading group ever worked out in the history of the world?

>>14763052
Lacan literally cucked Bataille, and Deleuze intellectually cucked Lacan, so i guess it all works out in the end

>>14763054
yea but Delanda is an academic nigger

>>14763065
Anathema.

>>14760094
Well I got into land then it really sparked my interest with deleuze. Then I read deleuze and realized some of the works he referenced such as carlos castaneda really showed me maybe I was looking at philosophy all wrong and I was missing a important element. Spinoza was a theological reactionary.

>>14760627
Yes

>>14763195
You do realize that Castaneda was a literal cult leader no different than any other, right? As in he had a harem that he isolated from their families. I get why Deleuze liked his writings, but the man was insane.

>Wallace, suitably skeptical, came down to L.A. and the seduction began in earnest. She recounts how she soon found herself in bed with Castaneda. He told her he hadn't had sex for 20 years. When Wallace later worried she might have gotten pregnant (they'd used no birth control), Castaneda leapt from the bed, shouting, "Me make you pregnant? Impossible! The nagual's sperm isn't human ... Don't let any of the nagual's sperm out, nena. It will burn away your humanness." He didn't mention the vasectomy he'd had years before

Since we are here already, do you guys have any good takes on what a workable metaphor for the BwO is?
I almost think I understand it, but I'm falling short of describing it with my own words.
And don't give me the egg.

>>14763316
One of their "slogans" is literally "it's not a metaphor, there are no metaphors" so why would you want one to begin with?

Have you read the BwO chapter in ATP? Many people just read Anti-Oedipus, a book in which D&G disagreed about what the BwO even is.

D&G state that it's best described as a practice. A BwO is something like a mode of the body (to semi-borrow from Spinoza). It's when you touch a loved one as opposed to an ordinary object. It's when working out feels good despite pain being involved or when a masochist/sadist abstains from all sexual gratification in order to increase the intensity of all sensation. It's when a thought is felt throughout your entire body, as Nietzsche felt the thought of the Eternal Return. It's when troubadours engage in courtly love through poems and letters without ever acting upon it, merely basking in that plateau of energy.

Remember that in his book on Masoch, Deleuze invokes Nietzsche as someone who transfigurated pain by painting (no pun intended) it in a different light, as something that brings potential for growth or that's linked to actual redemption instead of perpetual guilt or even a kind of festival (albeit a barbaric one) rather than being merely an argument against life as such.

Of course BwOs are connected to assemblages because no thought or practice exists in isolation (it always brings with it concepts, affects and past experiences) so once you put all of this together you get politics in its most fundamental sense and at its most immediate (rather than the political process itself which seeks mostly to block any development by reactivating, often through sheer repetition, the same old assemblages that it benefits from).

>>14763415
I did read the BwO chapter and I've heard and read numerous summaries and explanations before going into ATP and during my reading of AOe but so far I can't quite wrap my head around it.
When I start thinking I've got the gist of it, D&G come around the corner and catch me of guard with some example what is happening on the BwO which I would never have made the connection to.
I've started to locate it on some plane of immanence or in another word virtual plane where all the production and plugging and so on happens. But what exactly begets the creation of a BwO and how regularly that occurs and if it can even be narrowed down to a moment still eludes me.
But then again I'm still in the process of working through ATP and haven't found the time to reread parts of it yet.
Thanks for your explanation, I'll keep it in mind.

was his daughter hot

>>14764081
Not at all.

>>14764081
Literally "male lead singer of an 80s hair band that outstayed its welcome into the 90s" tier.

>>14763316
>>14763415
bwo is the body of the baby in the womb before the creation of any organs. on that point body can be shaped into countless positions, which isn't possible in a body with organs.

is this shit similar to the state of permanent revolution?

>>14763266
I enjoy d&g's references to Castaneda, Gregory Bateson, William Burroughs, the Beats, RD Laing and other apostles of 70s counterculture dubiousness, it really adds to the aesthetic.

>>14765567
i am also amused by the fact the psychiatrist Guattari was a good friend of president lula da silva from his syndicalist days.

>>14764074
>I've started to locate it on some plane of immanence or in another word virtual plane where all the production and plugging and so on happens.

The difficulty with Deleuze for most is in how the virtual and the actual relate to one another. Even if becoming takes place virtually, its effects (perhaps that isn't even the right word) take place in the actual (in empirical reality if we understand it as the entire phenomenal world of an "individual", including cognition).

>But what exactly begets the creation of a BwO and how regularly that occurs and if it can even be narrowed down to a moment still eludes me.

Well they say that you cannot desire without having a BwO and they understand desire at least in part in a Lacanian sense of underlying all experience (only closer to the empirical and the material, "the unconscious is a factory and not a theater" they say against psychoanalysis). For us it has to do with bodily flows of all kinds to the extent that they are understood as part of assemblages, that is to say having some contingency to their connections (so basically habits of all kinds connecting and disconnecting, including habits of thought). Now an assemblage can be activated from any of its points, albeit probably not in equal measure. So to take a psychological example, it is possible to induce depression from a material point (problems with flows, regulated through other flows caused by medicine or exercise), but it is also possible to induce it through repeated and persistent thinking patterns, usually as a result of stress, which eventually bring with them certain material flows that perpetuate or enhance the condition.

Of course some BwOs stand out more than others and extreme examples like the ones D&G use (masochism, catatonia, anorexia, erotic love, etc.) tend to be the most obvious, but they are not the only ones. BwOs differ from one another in their starting points, in their regularity, in their capacities (what kinds of sensations or thoughts they can bring about), in their requirements (such as abstinence, ironically enough, in the case of masochism or sadism). There is always chaos to them and unpredictability not only due to the contingency of their connections, but also because for D&G the world is a "chaosmos" at its most fundamental level so nothing is guaranteed in advance, especially because of the most well known idea of chaos theory, also promoted by D&G, which is that minor deviations can lead to some very disproportional effects. Some of this stuff is hinted at in plain terms in "Letter to a Harsh Critic", the 7 page letter at the start of Negotiations.

As for narrowing a BwO down to its very first moment, it's almost impossible since we tend to detect thresholds once we've crossed them (one realizes they feel in love once they already "fell", already on the plateau) and that starting point could've been anywhere in the assemblage (you can fall in love even when the other person is absent).

>>14765567
True. Many of those authors (I'd add Henry Miller as well) can be very inspiring and Deleuze makes good use of them for the most part, but wouldn't want to imitate them. Thankfully the point is to take from them what works rather than to be like them.

>>14765689
I didn't mean to imply that Miller was connected to the 70s counterculture (although he probably was through Kerouac), just that he was just as much a quotable weirdo.

>>14765582
I wonder what Lula thought of him, he seems quite down to earth (although just about everyone in the world seems that way compared to Guattari).

>>14763195
Foucault was a crypto-catholic reactionary and a supporter of the legitimist line of the house of capet. In discipline and punish he even admits the feudal age allowed for maximum individuation as compared to the classical and contemporary ages

>>14765689
the post war french intellectuals were huge americaboos for some reason, from the left bank crowd digging jazz pulp fiction and b series detective films to deleuze digging burroughs and talking heads, taking over from mallarme's 'un coup de des n'abolira jamais le hazard', see also: PKD's the man and the high castle and John Cage's use of the I-ching as a method of aleatory composition(1954, black mountain college, cage cunningham and Bucky Fuller). Warhol and Robert Morris vis a vis masochism and the carceral realm.Foucault followed McLuhan amongst downtown NYC artists. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwzaifhSw2c)) Bateson and Mead worked for the OSS and Wiener and Shanon for USAF. Bateson's double bind theory of schizophrenia adopted by Laing at Palo Alto. coincidentia oppositorum between the war machine and the counterculture.

By chronological order, starting from Plato

>>14765983
Were the world we dream of attained, members of that
new world would be so diff erent from ourselves that they
would no longer value it in the same terms in which we now
desire it. . . . We would no longer be at home in such a world.
. . . We who have dreamed it could not live in it.
Margaret Mead, 1942

>>14765983
The Palo Alto group were certainly interesting. I had a professor who was teaching them and some therapist affiliated with them called Milton Erickson, but at the time I hadn't made the connection to Deleuze (I knew very little about Laing at the time).

>>14765861
more like this?

>>14765999
What about the myths, Illiad and Odyssey?

Nietzsche and Philosophy should be your intro. I don't know why more people don't talk about it. It pretty much gives the basics of his concept of "Difference" and provides the groundwork for really all of Deleuze's own personal works. Additionally, the book itself is really good on its own. I would say that it is probably one of my favorite secondary books on philosophy I've ever read.

>>14766545
>I don't know why more people don't talk about it.

Because it's more fun to just go: rhizo, schizo, bwo fo' shizzo'! Grab 'em by the wolf anus!

>>14765668
Thanks for your insight anon. I'll reflect on that.

>>14762608
I watched this guys shit and it didnt make any sense at all.

>>14765668
Nice post, worth the read

>>14766510
Bateson in particular is quite an interesting and underrated thinker, bridging aesthetics, cybernetics, psychiatry, epistemology, biology and etc. not only the double bind theory of schizophrenia but also the plateau(this last deriving from Bateson's and Mead's anthropological and photographic study of the balinese)

>–3 But even more: plateaus do not climax only to then disappear. They work on consistency as change and subsist towards an open end. The anthropologist, psychologist and philosopher Gregory Bateson first introduced the term in his book ‘Steps to an Ecology of Mind’ when describing behavioral patterns in Balinese society. Bateson went to Bali in 1936 together with his then wife Margaret Mead – the two were actually married on the trip, in Singapore. Bateson and Mead documented Balinese culture in extensive field notes and by the use of photography and motion picture film – now a seminal early anthropological research. This research is part of Bateson’s endeavor to describe the tool of ethos, which he names as the “expression of a culturally standardized system of organization of the instincts and emotions of the individual”. Bateson is interested in describing basic theories of conflict, a field he later terms schismogenesis (Bateson, 1972: Steps to a Ecology of Mind, p. 116 ff.). Conflicts, to him, most often imply a form of cumulative action – the rising of a conflict, which he first and foremost finds in relation to erotic interactions. He concedes that complementary action between humans are all to often structured by “curves bounded by phenomena comparable to orgasm”, i.e. a built-up of intensity, a climax and a decreasing action. Now, within Balinese society, Bateson does not find these patterns at all. Rather he finds the opposite, a state of interaction he terms plateau. For this interactive state, his main example is erotic games between mother and child: The mother excites her child “pulling its penis or otherwise stimulating it to interpersonal activity” only to turn away as soon as the child is “approaching some small climax” (Bateson, 1972: Steps to a Ecology of Mind, p. 121) and urgently asks for further stimulation. But rather, the mother leaves the child alone and becomes a mere “spectator”, not reacting even to angry and physical claims of her child. Bateson concludes that thereby a basic human tendency toward “cumulative personal interaction” is muted and proposes his idea of plateau: “It is possible that some sort of continuing plateau of intensity is substituted for climax”

https://plateauhamburg.de/2014/11/07/what-is-a-plateau-on-immanence-and-ongoing-discussion/

>>14766929
Speaking of interesting, I actually just had to google a fact I knew about Bateson because it seemed too ridiculous to be anything other than a figment of my imagination. Namely, that he was involved in that NASA (although probably CIA) experiment involving injecting dolphins with LSD which resulted in some poor woman having to jerk off the captive dolphins so they wouldn't attack her when rutting.

>>14766681
Try Manuel DeLanda's stuff on Youtube, he really tries to be clear and precise, even if his focus differs from most deleuzians.

>>14766978
insane tankies are right about french theorists being (if indirectly) the product of CIA, but that's because our whole reality is CIA. the cybernetic organism is a cold war point by point byproduct of Marxism Leninism, just like Marxism itself was the mirror of 19th century capital.

>>14766541
Not mandatory imo, honestly even medieval philosophy is optional

>>14762608
that one is junk you want this

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD1szxop5A91gPCci-enrKnBfOBriemru

>>14765532
"male" `? Was she trans or what ?
Probably all the multiplicities and rhizomes got to her head

>>14769020
tfw no autistic deleuzian crossdresser gf obsessed with lain and the ccru

>>14769020
I was joking that she looks sort of male in that picture. She probably takes after her father concerning gender and identifies (or rather differentiates) as a thousand tiny sexes.

>>14769542
yeah he got really triggered by Wittgenstein

>>14760094
Rhizomatically

>>14760094
>STOP BEING A FASCIST
>BE OBSCURANTIST GNOSTIC INACCESSIBLE ELITIST

>>14769719
For context, I think the quote is from Zizek. Add the sniffs and the "and so on"s and it makes much more sense.

>>14766510
toxoplasmosis explains everything