[D-G] Don't explain deleuze please

[Mr David Fussell]

Unfortunately, 1000 Plateau's for some, fills the position of Analyst (gone
rogue). The reader risks either a) racing to fill the position of analysand
and/or b) having their narcissism (which is often the case with the...
intellectually grandiose) split open like a pandora's box under the wedge of
the Unconscious that the book can present. One begins to love how well they
understand. But the original scholarship was more than just an epiphany
despite the wording of the authors. D&G are not Martin Luther.

It's funny, Deleuze writing on his own while powerfully lucid can be
painfully dry. D&G writing together while powerfully lucid is also painfully
vertiginous.

Create, yes, but make sure one uses a voice of one's own, in the open, in
the daylight, in a molar language. Appealing to the Unconscious is not a
persuasive argumentative ploy, for many. It is a stepping off the field of
play, an act of religion, neither artistic nor philosophical.

D

> 
> dg has been published and everybody can read it. copyes are circulating
> on Niger river, on Amour River.. schizoline wanderrer across continents,
> have read dg and it did some good to them or NOT. lot's of questions and
> all time i wrote on dg spoon older list, it was i said the books like
> what is philo has been published, and if even if the politic in this
> book is very international, very futuristic, maybe only litterally it's
> in an elite a becoming elite of ten singular (readers) who LOVE DESIRE
> from the book. who use the book, and do not want to speak for it, to
> explain away the written text. but what to act, produce something, to
> deterritorialise (absoluteively) from it. becoming philosophy is one of
> the objective set in this book.
> 
> to me in that sense i had already fully agreed with guattari talking
> about alternative subjectivity (alt.to for example occidental mainstream
> subjectivity )Universes Complexities will need ARTS more than
> Philosophy. no need of philosophy books, read dg for philosophy, read
> spinoza. the rest is disgusting. all the zyek badiou negri etc : no
> sense, good but non-sense. we don't need intellectuals, we need
> philosopher to become artists.
> 
> dismantling the usa can be a political idea, and surely lot's of people
> are already thinking about how to ashieve this. but only artist can
> dismantle the usa, and the rest of the world. it's not only usa which
> needs to be thought differently, it's the whole planet. only artists
> have the solitude required for thinking and constructing a new earth.
> it's a bifurcation from the intelletgentsia of what lies since
> rennaissance which has to take break from the past. it means terrible
> suffering, of which hunger is one of the slightest harm. (packs lines
> turning to line of death, etc)try not be populist if you are honnest
> about doing "good", or producing active affactios; because this is not
> thinking to be a stone or a car or a factory: they are thinking objects
> themselves.. what states man does not crave for this little thing: to be
> a thinker. what is needed is the virtual to come on the earth, and this,
> what is the virtual, and how can it become arrive on earth, is the task
> of the thinker/ARTIST, only. the rest is paranoia, clubs networks, squid
> life. unhook from life and become a self that exists in the infinite
> worlds, so you can start to think with desire (feelings). so go to your
> typewriter and right a model.
> -- 
> adline vanlindenbergh
> bisouxnoursfast at fastmail.fm
> 
>