[D-G] Nota Bene on Becoming Plants--

Mark Crosby Crosby_M at rocketmail.com
Wed Feb 16 09:19:22 PST 2005

--- Lucy LeGentilSinge
<lucy100millionyearsold at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>  Nota Bene:
> I actually could see my parents not missing a branch
when i was jumping in their arms from a tree to

Such a beautiful Bambino image! But, Lucy, I am
sceptical of this animal faith..

At http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/archives/2004_12.html
Steve Shaviro blogged Francis Halle's book _In Praise
of Plants_: "Halle emphasizes ... Plant's immobility,
and their ability to photosynthesize has led to their
astonishing biochemistry". Steve adds that "One
consequence, for me, of _In Praise of Plants_ is that
Deleuze and Guattari's distinction between 
'rhizomatic' and 'arborescent' modes or organization
need to be rethought... D&G are really describing both
the rhizome and the tree in largely zoocentric
terms... Deleuze does show a somewhat better
understanding of botany in his treatment of the
sexuality of flowers in his book on Proust".

But, Steve suggests that Halle "belittles fungi in
precisely the same way that he (rightly) accuses
mainstream biologists of sidelining and belittling
plants". As we all might wish to know, and
http://www.lichen.com explains, "Lichens are
composite, symbiotic organism made up from members of
as many as three kingdoms... [BUT] Reproduction can be
tricky for a compound organism".. 

And, speaking of "culturated subjected fools", so many
poor animals now seem to have been taken in by the
oppressive "apparatus of capture"! Read about
"Non-Human Farmers: Animal agriculture" at
http://www.itotd.com/index.alt?ArticleID=451 where
"the insect farmers ... have built complex societal
structures with task specialization that would put a
Henry Ford or a Frederick Taylor to shame... The
insect farmers use specialized chemical called
pheromones to communicate amongst themselves". Maybe
their schizophrenia began with these "ideas poopping
which tried to formalize the tree in a language".
(They need to get back to nature where they can swing
through the trees with one hand even while their
babies are jumping on the other !)

That's why I keep falling back into the theme of
gravity - like a 041018 space.com article "The Problem
with Gravity" suggesting that "Something was holding
the probes back ... [This] leaves open staggering
possibilities that would force wholesale reprinting of
all physics books: * invisible dark matter is tugging
at the probes * Other dimensions create small forces
we don't understand * Gravity works differently than
we think" - Galileo and Ulysses are lost in a space
that warps beyond time - and yet remains tied to the
Oedipal Sun!

So we find http://www.bookforum.com/funcke.html and
"Against Gravity: Bettina Funcke talks with Peter
Sloterdijk" about his 3-armed trilogy of intercallated
spheres: BUBBLES, GLOBES, and FOAM. Sloterdijk erects
a master stroke -- "my aim is to give a new account of
the history of atmospheres ... They play a central
role in the development of abundance, which defines
the open secret of the modern... the heavy turned into
appearance - and the 'essential' now dwells in
lightness" -- and blows this bubble: "Thus I suggest
examining the capitalist interiors on their own
relevant terms, which leads, consequently, to a theory
of foam. What we need today is an 'air-conditioning
project' for large social entities or a generalized
'greenhouse project'". In this ideal hothouse, the
apes can unlearn their sign language and skip
groundlessly across the foam (with the Edenic EEK of
one arm brachiating !)

Finally, on the Edge, Benoit Mandelbrot talks about "A
Theory of Roughness", his fascination with the
boundaries of Brownian motion, the discovery of the
fractal dimension of 4/3, and his insistence that
mathematics must have an empirical basis: "And even if
it had been reached by pure thought, how could anyone
have proceeded to the dimension 4/3? To bring this
topic to life it was necessary for the Antaeus of
Mathematics to be compelled to touch his Mother Earth,
if only for one fleeting moment... I did not and don't
plan any general theory of roughness, because I prefer
to work from the bottom up and not from the top to

These are my leaves of grass. BUTT, humping along,
probably I misunderstand your prOject, or am trying to
transmute it into something else, and later I will try
and see if I can still get out and climb a tree!
  Mark  or splat!

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list