[ 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: 45 KB, 600x735, pppppp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20542504 No.20542504 [Reply] [Original]

hey /lit/bros, does anyone have any books that can help me understand deleuze (esp ATP) a lil better? i've read a lil of a thousand plateaus and i get some of the tenets of his philosophy but the weird way it was written threw me off a lil bit.

>> No.20542512

>>20542504
Fraud charlatan

>> No.20542515

>>20542512
if you don't want to help, don't post :/

>> No.20542570

>>20542504
bump

>> No.20542721
File: 661 KB, 958x775, 00000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20542721

>>20542504
Most ardent gentile cheerleader for global capitalism who ever lived. Created an entire school of existential poetics to cheer for it.

Despite his impotent criticisms of Zionism, he was truly the goodest of goys.

>> No.20542965

>>20542721
>if you don't want to help, don't post :/

>> No.20542978

>>20542504
Commie alert fuck off back to...


nah I'm just kidding. Dunno about books, but PlasticPills' vids have really helped me to be able to grasp the basic concepts before reading.

>> No.20543062

>>20542504
>deleuze
Who?

>> No.20543077

>>20543062
Guattaris gay lover

>> No.20543152

>>20542512
You know he didn’t only write C&S?

>> No.20543241

>>20542504
Desert Islands is a nice collection, his short book on Spinoza is his easiest but all of those monographs are great, and many of his seminars are online.
ATP, as with most French philosophy of that time, is intended as an experience/exercise to read. You either get it or you don't. If you are always trying to reduce it into some argument or set of beliefs (if you 'trace'/'reterritorialise'), you won't make headway. Hope this helps

>> No.20543357

>>20542504
Watch L'Abécédaire several times

>> No.20543428

>>20543241
On second thought, his Nietzsche book would be best for ATP

>> No.20544423

Get Brent Adkins reader.

>> No.20544859

Deleuze is the best

>> No.20545070

you've never read deleuze until you've read it in the original klingon. Seriously though it's completely pointless reading this shit in translation. Might as well read Joyce in Chinese.

>> No.20545820

I can recommend Eugene W. Hollands: books on Anti Ödipus and Thousand plateaus.
It's a very good guide to get into the texts by yourself.
Cambride guide to Deleuze is also ok but it gives more of a broad overview given by different philosophers who studied Deleuze.

Go with Hollands books if you want to engage with the texts yourself.

>> No.20546663

>>20542504
You have to get into the trans mindset to understand Deleuze

>> No.20546878

>>20546663
FUCKING GENDERSHITTERS RUINED FUCKING EVERYTHING

>> No.20546915

>>20542504
Why do French people look so weird? You can just tell when someone is French just by their face.

>> No.20546917

>>20546878
Deleuze was always already a gendershitter. He was instrumental in the development of contemporary gender and queer theory

>> No.20546924

>>20546917
All sexual perversions come from either the French or Jews.

>> No.20547160

>>20546917
I wish he never met Guattari.

>> No.20547757

>>20547160
Cope. The guy was studying at the Sorbonne in the 40s under Hyppolite et al. He was just as pozzed as Guattari and it was only natural that they linked up

>> No.20548355

>>20542504
Since his work with Guatarri can be seen as the socio-political consequences of his metaphysics, I think it's best to understand his groundworks first.

This book is decidedly NOT about AOe and AtP but rather good in explaining his metaphysics:
https://nupress.northwestern.edu/9780810124523/difference-and-givenness/

>> No.20548790
File: 8 KB, 739x415, 3E67DF3B-7DD5-4A64-B6D1-AD0C56FD8C60.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20548790

Why are these guys so fashionable now?

>> No.20549324

>>20548790
They're not fashionable (unless something can be "fashionable" for half a century), they're simply representative of the spirit of the age—chaos, incoherence and degeneracy

>> No.20549341

The rightoids who think they can appropriate these chucklefucks make me laugh. No: these two soixante-huitards who delivered an acidic critique of authority, order and truth itself are not "based" lmao

>> No.20549530
File: 65 KB, 660x330, 1616369327697.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20549530

>>20549341
I'll beat the gay out of them and make them mine, make them proper instead. Easy as.

>> No.20549595

>>20549530
You'll blindly follow the flavour of month and confuse yourself. Easy as.

>> No.20549611

>>20549530
This dude gets it.

>>20549341
>>20549324
>>20546917
These trannies don't.

>> No.20549633

>>20549341
>who delivered an acidic critique of authority, order and truth itself
you have never read anything by either of these men lmfao

>> No.20549654

>>20549633
You are a retard.

>> No.20549682

>>20549341
It's really bizzare. There are are so many great critics of Deleuze et al. who are far more conducive with right-wing thought, yet these supposed right-wingers still go for them. It reminds of conservatives who try to out-flank the left on the left--"the left are the *real* fascists!" Except here it's "the left are the *real* image of dogmatic thought!" These rightoids just want a seat at the table too.

>> No.20549689

>>20549682
'Treatise on Nomadology' from ATP is probably one of the 10 most right wing texts of the 20th century

>> No.20549693

>>20549633
You're still in that midwit phase of philosophical knowledge where you believe there's anything more to these thinkers than what anon described (there isn't)

>> No.20549701

>>20549689
You're not right-wing and you've never read anything right-wing

>> No.20549733

>>20549701
Yes I am and I have read some of the most right wing men in history: Evola, Schmitt, de Maistre, Dumezil, Maurras, Weininger, Spengler and de Benoist

>> No.20549806 [DELETED] 

>>20542512
Freud was a charlatan according to Deleuze, yes

>> No.20550081

>>20549530
>"Felix could be compared to a sea outwardly in constant movement, with continuous flashes of light. He jumps from one activity to another, he sleeps little, he travels, and he never stops. He never pauses. He moves at extraordinary speeds. As to me, I would be rather like a hill: I move very little, am unable to carry out two projects at once, my ideas are ideesfixes and the few movements which I do have are internal . . . Together, Felix and I would have made a good Sumo wrestler."
???

>> No.20550114

Eugene W. Holland's books on Deleuze and Guattari are said to be pretty good. Otherwise, check out the "Deleuze & Guattari Quarantine Collective Discord"

>> No.20550744

>>20542504
Fraud charlatan

>> No.20550859

>>20543152
>Deleuze wrote Crime and Punishment
I know lit doesn't read but his is too much, please refrain from posting until you read our top 100 books newfren

>> No.20550890

>>20550859
I kek’d

>> No.20551866

>>20549693
>>20549654
>getting upset when people call you out for not knowing what you are talking about
Why not just not say anything? D&G themselves say that you are wrong in A Thousand Plateaus.

>> No.20551877

>>20549595
Based

>> No.20551878

>>20549733
>Spergler
Did you read him during your daily dilation session?

>> No.20552349

>>20551866
>D&G themselves say that you are wrong in A Thousand Plateaus
This would only matter to me if I believed D&G were right, which I don't. They are wrong, and thus their appraisal of my appraisal of them is also wrong.

>> No.20553564

>>20542512
How and why?

>> No.20553810

>In the beginning of the book, it would seem that the Oedipus complex is only a false problem: there is no Gordian knot. But this knot is, on the contrary, a reality. Deleuze and Guattari cannot return to the scene of the Oedipus complex, which they promised never to visit without rediscovering this same knot intact and always in place, where it has never relinquished control.
>Thus, we witness an underhanded reaffirmation of the Oedipus complex. The concessions multiply as the real problems become more evident. The reader remembers the triumphant negations of the beginning, he expects them to be fully confirmed and demonstrated. Let us judge his disappointment: " We do not deny that there is an Oedipal sexuality, an Oedipal heterosexuality, an Oedipal homosexuality, an Oedipal castration complex - whole objects, global images, and specific egos."4 Therefore, what remains to be denied? The essential, affirm Deleuze and Guattari, is that these are not "productions of the unconscious."
>The Oedipus complex has nothing to do with the order of a "desiring production" always crushed by repressive and suppressive forces. On the contrary, it is everywhere in the project of domesticating the unconscious. Since this enterprise has completely succeeded, it suffices to say that the Oedipus complex is everywhere, and that's that. It does not matter if desiring production is theoretically independent of the social formations integrating it, since it is always dependent in fact. We are happy to learn that there is another and better unconscious behind the pseudounconscious of Freud and that it remains uncorruptible, but this myth resembles the superior god of certain religions, so superior and distant that we need not consider him. It cannot do anything for us.
>Deleuze and Guattari ferociously hunt down any kind of piety, but their unconscious production sharply resembles a new form of piety that is particularly ethereal despite appearances. Finally, do they not limit themselves to placing beneath the shaken but intact Freudian edifice, at either its bottom or top, a new layer of the unconscious, whose repercussions on our little affairs would be just about as concrete as the discovery of a new layer of gas in Venus's atmosphere?

>> No.20553815

>>20553810
>>At times Deleuze and Guattari move even farther toward Oedipal reconversion. After vigorously supporting the anti-Freudians in the ethnological debate on the universality of the Oedipus complex, they seem more or less to reverse their own position by an inexorable evolution. The universal Oedipus complex could indeed haunt all societies, "but exactly like capitalism haunts them, that is, like the nightmare or anguished foreboding of what would be the decoding of fluxes."5 Since the decoding of fluxes triggered by capitalism is one and the same with the absolute truth of history - given some oratorical precautions made necessary by intellectual circumstances - we certainly cannot permit ourselves to treat these "nightmares" and "forebodings" lightly.
>We might ask if Deleuze .and Guattari are not like the man who, when forced to witness his wife's rape, congratulates himself because he has transgressed once or twice the chalk circle that the rapist traced around him and ordered him not to cross. It is even possible to ask whether L'Anti-Oedipe retains this meager consolation to the end. There are solemn vows to protect "desiring production" from all Oedipal contamination, but there are also other passages that appear to plunge the Oedipus complex once more into a sort of unconscious, or at least to remove it from the conscious: "The Oedipal usages of synthesis or of oedipalization - triangulation, castration - reflect forces a little more powerful, a little more subterranean than psychoanalysis, family, and ideology, even when combined."

>> No.20553871

>>20553810
>>20553815
Literally what are these people even arguing over?
Is it just a debate over whether men want to fuck their mothers or not?

>> No.20554155

>>20553871
Basically Deleuze wants you to hate your parents and become trans