/lit/ - Literature

>>17250467
There are quite a few authors that saw Deleuze as a Liberal, as well as plenty of accusations from the Left of being a Social Democrat of some kind (which in France at the time was almost worse than being a Fascist, at least for the Left). Also accusations of being a sell out that had dinner with the President or something like that (maybe it was the Prime Minister rather, I don't remember).

And I agree with you about Oedipus, it's also a part of vitalism/post-structuralism that any broad formula has its limits and that a radical contingency is the norm. But the thing is that even with Nietzsche the individual, to the extent that it's something to be aspired towards, involves going through a harsh exercise in depersonalization (to quote Deleuze). No thought or desire can be taken for granted as one's own. Which is why I said that there are opportunities to connect to collective levels (or the "dividual" as D&G called it). I don't believe that they actually had answers though, the War Machine and all that was more conceptual than anything and described fringe Leftist anarcho-whatever organizing (but also the army even if the War Machine itself is not the army, which is probably in part why the IDF liked them). In any case, I can see why the liberal reading has merits.

>>11690746
> this book is more about Nietzsche than his own philosophy, so having read Nietzsche would be a good start

Being familiar with Nietzsche certainly helps understand just about everyone after Nietzsche, but Deleuze's philosophy is mostly what he says about other philosophers. Even Michael Hardt's foreword states that Deleuze's take on Nietzsche determined the direction of all of Deleuze's work from the first book to the last.

>>8944947
No problem. I regret writing it from my phone due to the many typos. Hopefully it's intelligible and I don't seem like a complete schizo bashing his keyboard.

HOW DO I INTO DELEUZE? SUGGESTIONS?