/lit/ - Literature

>>12081243
that's the appropriate face all right

>>12081246
the foundational teleology that Deleuze wants to explode, if i understand him correctly - and i am sure that i do not - is the arboreal, that is to say, that every acorn is destined to become an oak tree. that is true, but it doesn't allow for the profound role that mutation or contingency plays in thought. it would be too idealistic for Deleuze. and even if we grant that acorns do become oak trees, the nature of human thought is way too open-ended to allow for anything like an a priori model for becoming. even selection of models itself is contingent on a blizzard of other selections, and so on.

so:
>becoming-bear could be attained without breaking down everything like a caterpillar turning into cocoon-mush
my guess is that Deleuze would probably say there is no final or idealized absolute Bearness to be achieved. there is no Platonic Bear-Ideal to shoot for. a bear itself is always in a state of becoming-bear, and so on. what makes a bear a bear? the number of bear significations it has, or represents, or expresses. there is no Absolute or Purest Bear. an Owlbear is both a bear and an owl. the owlbear is perhaps less Owl-y than an owl, and less Bear-y than a bear, but it is also more Bear-y than the owl.

i'm no expert tho. that's just sort of how i might understand a world of becomings without final destinations.

>>12081264
no