[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 85 KB, 480x700, anti-oedipus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15107395 No.15107395 [Reply] [Original]

Also, Deleuze thread.

>> No.15107397

not really, no

>> No.15107407

>>15107395
the first thing that I have asked myself while reading this is "wait a second, I can desire something?"

>> No.15107423

Yeah but it takes trying to figure out the context of what he is reacting against. You find of have to know a bit of what was going on in philosophy and psychoanalysis prior

>> No.15107439

no
if you're going to a tranny fashy be a well read one

>> No.15107492

>>15107395
please read Kant first (or at least Deleuze's Kant)

>> No.15107509

>>15107395
I mean, Deleuze himself claimed that artists and musicians would understand it better than the philosophers. So if you see yourself as more of a creative than an intellectual, then go for it. Don't listen to stifling academic bores telling you to slog through all the pre-requisite reading, just because they can only appreciate a work like this through a drab, institutional lens. It is meant to be something of a radical work, so don't let anyone tell you how to read it.

Just don't blame me if you come back complaining you didn't have a fucking clue what it was talking about

>> No.15107518

Doing ruin your mind by reading Freud, Lacan etc. This was unteaching the damage done by them.

>> No.15107520

It's pretty tough.

I would recommend Intersecting Lives beforehand if you wanna attempt it. Nice bio of the two. Covers both thinkers and their similarities and differences in work with entertaining bits from personal lives. Very helpful in decoding the corpus deleuzeoguattaria. IMO, AO is somewhat contradicted by ATP so you probably also wanna read that as well. Massumi has a "user guide" which is supposedly decent.


It's tough because it is experimental in form -- but maybe you can tough it out on your own.

Very rewarding.

If you wanna read precursors then Marx, Freud, Nietzsche, Spinoza, Kojeve, Bataille, Lacan, Klossowski, Bergson, Whitehead, Peirce, James, Jung, Laing, Reich, Klein, Durkheim, Mauss, Levi-Strauss, Saussure, Russell, Frege, and Wittgenstein should suffice.

>> No.15107538

just chop your dick off and get it over with

>> No.15107544

>>15107538
Rent-free

>> No.15107557

>>15107518
imo lacanians deserve the brain damage they get from reading Lacan

>> No.15107570

>>15107557
D&G are not incompatible with Lacan necessarily... There is construction using similar bits despite all the deconstruction.

>> No.15107571

>>15107423
>>15107492
>>15107509
>>15107520

Good, thanks a lot.

>> No.15107574

>>15107544
have sex incel

>> No.15107619

>>15107570
they are an overcoming of lacan, that still have to much of his mistakes, thats why the best deleuze is in his lectures and books on other philosophers (immanent reading is a good alternative to reading from a stupid standpoint)

>> No.15107620

>>15107574
Stop being a coping tradfag and dilate you ugly faggot agp incel twink -- maybe society will respect you slightly more

>> No.15107633

>>15107619
Agreed

>> No.15107720

>>15107571
HAHAHAHAHA

>> No.15107721

Foucault's preface to "anti-oedipus" sort of gives a clue as to the scope of the book: live counter to all forms of fascism, do not become enamored with power, free politics from totalizing thought and pyramidal heirarchization, bla bla.

>> No.15108111

>>15107518
What are their main objections?

>> No.15108131

>>15107620
yikesers seek help

>> No.15108491

>>15107619
redpill me on lacan

>> No.15108557

>>15107721
foucault and deleuze are actually reactionary far right thinkers.

>> No.15108571
File: 1011 KB, 2280x1018, 1554753383176.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15108571

>hurr durr you need to study! this is the hardest book durrr
they wrote the book for teenagers, it was supposed to be pop-philosophy

>> No.15108572

>>15108131
Why should I seek help because you're poisoning this board by constantly talking about traps because you are in the closet? Stop projecting and take your own advice

>> No.15108586

>>15108557
>twittwerbrainrot
>>15108571
It wasn't written well unfortjnately

>> No.15108597

>>15107407
Underrated poast

>> No.15108603

>>15108491
https://nosubject.com/Subject

>> No.15108685
File: 25 KB, 326x499, 51tAguXITmL._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15108685

Thoughts on this bad boy? I read it about a year ago and found it surprisingly readable, at least compared to his work with Guattari. Really good takes on Nietzsche and opens up a lot of doors in terms of understanding D&R imo.

>> No.15108700

>>15108572
>dilate
>no not the trannies leave them alone
ok schizo

>> No.15108837

>>15108700
No u

U started it

>> No.15108838

>>15108491
I don't know about redpill but this is extremely enjoyable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHNH2lkrG5w

>> No.15108929

>>15108685
That one's great. Expressionism in Philosophy is also quite good. Want to read him on Kant's Critical Philosophy next.

>> No.15109116

>>15108929
I've read some of Practical Philosophy, how is Expressionism in Philosophy in relation to that? Is he taking Spinoza in a whole different direction or just expanding on what he was doing in Practical Philosophy?

>> No.15109124

>>15109116
Just realized I flipped the chronological order of those two around but my question is the same.

>> No.15109176
File: 1.37 MB, 2102x3586, yeh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15109176

>look ma i'm deterritorializing

>> No.15109236

well you would first have to assume that there is something to get out of it, which there is not

>> No.15109259

>>15109236
What if i get something out of nothing? And by something i mean activation of my thought because i presuppose and submit to the author authority, therefore i accept him as having something to say

>> No.15109284

>>15109259
The absolute state of xenophysicists.

>> No.15110175

>>15107509
Yeah, saw an interview where Guattari was being called out for implying that the book was accessible to a general audience. Pretty funny.

>> No.15110454

>>15107407
That means I can desire beign with my mom?

>> No.15111100

>>15108603
Ok, its clear that im too much of a brainlet for Lacan. I'd have trouble understanding him in my native language but English complicates it even further.

>> No.15111127

>>15108557
yes but Foucault is a right-wing anarchist

>> No.15111150

>>15107518
It will worsen the damage. Delouse is a pseud.

>> No.15112618
File: 35 KB, 512x512, 1583772129559.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15112618

>>15107509
Was Deleuze a mystic?

>> No.15112698

>>15109116
>>15109124
Idk. Only read Expressionism. Quite helpful for understanding D though

>> No.15112710

>>15112618
Deleuze is a hermetic. The process of attempting to understand his ouevre is an initiation into philosophical rebirth and theophany.

>> No.15112736

>>15108557
I hear this meme all the time on /lit/, is it trolling or are you serious? If you're serious then what's your reasoning?

>> No.15112893

>>15107395
Yes, don't listen to anybody in this thread saying otherwise, they are retarded, underage americans

>b-but muh preknowledge of marx, kant, freud, lacan

You absolutely will get something out of reading it without a list of references, go ahead and read the first twenty pages and you'll realise i'm right. That's not to say you shouldn't go ahead and read up on freud and lacan and whoever else while reading anti-oedipus but still

>> No.15112904

>>15108557
Stop shilling your book, Justin

>> No.15113004

>>15107721
it's funny to read stuff like this when you consider how Foucaldian thought is itself deployed in the service of centralizing power

>> No.15113024

>>15112904
no

>> No.15113043

People are reading Based Deleuze

>> No.15113325

I didn't get much out of it. Overrated. Read and kept more for the aesthetic I think. Not to get all "EXPLAIN DELEUZE TO ME FUCKING NOW OR I'LL KILL YOU" but no one who I've talked to in phil departments or libraries, or even people who've claimed to "get" it, can ever draw the lines between the content and its intended effects / implications. There are very ambiguous notions on how we relate to power and desire, but they're more heavily dressed up than they are thought provoking about any micro or macro relation people or institutions have between one another.

Still bought a copy though. I regard it as an art piece. It collects dust, and I very rarely brush it off.

>> No.15113731

>>15112893
It's not well translated and I'm assuming well-written either as others have stated.

Hence why people are turned off by
>>15113325
>more heavily dressed up than thought-provoking


Hence the side reading enriches considerably

>> No.15113838

>>15113731
>side reading enriches considerably

Not really. Still fell very flat in light of its references. "Fell flat" as a philosophical work, that is (which Deleuze admitted himself, albeit for different reasons). I'll admit that the abundance of references and nods make it a more respectable cultural art piece, but barely more valuable because of them, since they don't do anything impressive with them.

>> No.15114042

>>15113838
Fair enough. Curious though, what do you make of Deleuze's early solo work?

>> No.15114050

>>15113838
>>15114042
And have you read Guattarri's solo work?

>> No.15114060

>>15107395
Deleuze explicitly rejected the idea that you need to read anything before reading Anti-Oedipus and encouraged people to just dive in it

>> No.15114068

>>15114060
He also later rejected AO so do what thou wilt

>> No.15114142

Not on amazon kindle for cheaper?

>> No.15114188

>>15114042
>Deleuze's work

Read the better part of his Nietzsche, which I enjoyed. Was turned on to it by the inclusion of a snippet in Kauffman's Basic Writings of Nietzsche (no Kauff h8 plz). Read intro and then conclusion of Diff & Rep (by his direction!), which let me experiment with the level of thought he aspired towards himself. Didnt bother with the stuff in the middle because honestly mereology and metaphysics isnt my great interest.

>>15114050
>Guattarri's work

I read one essay that was something along the lines of chaos theory in political revolution and instability, and I have to say, I was so turned off. He definitely came off more preoccupied with the issues I cared about than Deleuze (D is a philosphers philosopher, G can be seen more as a radical French phsychoanalyst who worked to draw social and political implications from his work), but for fucks sake the guy can not develop thought with near the rigor or precision (or, in my opinion, basic construction) of Deleuze. Stopped reading very quickly.

G's journal entries included in intersecting lives only back up my assumption that he was really more preoccupied with being "innovative" than substantial. D even admitted how hard it was to reign in G when it came time to work on Cap&Schiz.

Im open to explore G more if you have reccs. I have no interest in D, since his remaining works are either about philosophers Im indifferent towards or subjects I dont care for (metaphysics, film).

>> No.15114462

>>15114188
Some people prefer one or the other. I also have trouble with G. But I do like D. I'd suggest Chaosmosis by G. Him at his weirdest. But probably not worth it desu.


I like the weird metaphysics myself...

Though I try to reign it in like D despite interest in G type issues.

I quite liked C&S but maybe I'm weird.