/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16284592]

I'm not really big on Marxism or psychoanalysis but his ideas sound kind of interesting from a surface level perspective
Is he actually worth a read or is delving deeper not all that rewarding?

[Anonymous No.16284605]

>>16284592
He’s absolutely worth reading, even if just to have a better grasp of philosophy which follows him. He will reconfigure the way you think about the world. A Deleuzian reading of a text can expose new ideas and new lines of flight which have previously lain nascent.

[Anonymous No.16284627]

>>16284605
I've read the ancients (east and west), Spinoza, Kierkegaard, Freddy and Heidegger
Is there anything else needed before going into Deleuze

[Anonymous No.16284637]

>>16284627
I think Marx might help, but you should be good. You can go into Deleuze cold and still get something out of it. Understanding Hegel will be useful too, as it gives some context to Deleuze’s whole arborescent vs rhizomatic distinction.

[Anonymous No.16284638]

>>16284627
Marx, Freud, Lacan

[Anonymous No.16284985]

Side-question
Are other continentals of the time like Lyotard, Deridda and Braudillard worth the effort or was D an exception to the rule

[Anonymous No.16285096]

>>16284592
>Spinoza but a hypocrite
So this is the power of french philosophy...

[Anonymous No.16285105]

>>16285096
unironically yes

[Anonymous No.16285118]

>>16284627
If you’ve read the ancients (both east and west), you should be fundamentally good to go—Deleuze in many ways is a philosophical reactionary, except instead of railing against industrial society he rails against Hegel.
>>16284638
DO NOT READ LACAN. Read Bergson and Hume; Anti-Oedipus is explicitly written as an antidote to being infected by Lacan, so if you can avoid it in the first place you will be better off

[Anonymous No.16285135]

>>16285118
>antidote to being infected by Lacan
That's why you have to read Lacan, being healed is half the fun.

[Anonymous No.16285200]

>>16285135
Honestly I feel Lacan ruined my life for the 5 years I was an acolyte between the end of high school and the end of college; he stole the best years of my life from me. I’m happy to have read Anti-Oedipus but spending 5 years laboring under all sorts of idiotic Lacanian premises like “desire is the desire of the other” made me a neurotic wreck with an absolutely fucked love life

[Anonymous No.16285211]

>>16285200
You sure that was Lacans fault?

[Anonymous No.16285217]

Read Lambert's short book on him first or something. Look at Deleuze for the Desperate on Youtube. He's okay but almost all people claiming to be followers of his are not only retarded, and not people you would want to be in the company of, they also have wrong and bad interpretations of the long fingernail man himself. If even his most desperate devotees have lazy and half-baked interpretations of him, something must be wrong. That said, you can have a correct interpretation of him and get plenty out of him if you can read him well yourself. Just be prepared to have to wade through the losers and feel disgust.

[Anonymous No.16286324]

>>16285217
What do you think of the Cambridge companion as an introduction to the D

[Anonymous No.16286660]

>>16284605
>lain nascent
Did you mean "dormant"? "Lain nascent" is meaningless

[Anonymous No.16286845]

>>16286660
Crossed wires, I meant to say ‘nascent’, without the ‘lain’.

[Anonymous No.16287213]

Am I hallucinating?

[Anonymous No.16287225]

he's literally just nietzsche repackaged for lefty intellectuals who are scared of words like "master" but can stomach words like "active"

[Anonymous No.16287243]

>>16287225
Post a passage