[D-G] mona has

[Chapman]

Sid,

I'm asking you the identity of 'LoS#8', I think you see it as a good place
to begin to compare and suss out Deleuze ( '....structuralism?' ) in
conjunction with Lacan?

Chris.

-----Original Message-----
From: deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-bounces at lists.driftline.org
[mailto:deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-bounces at lists.driftline.org]On
Behalf Of sid littlefield
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 10:54 AM
To: deleuze-guattari-driftline.org at lists.driftline.org
Subject: RE: [D-G] mona has


Chris,

Since I am writing my dissertation on Deleuze I see no reason not to read
the texts.  Which seminar is Lacan's #8? I will re-read the opening and
closing of Anti-Oedipus. I look forward to your responses.


It might be nice if others join in. No pressure. If you prefer sticking to
silly poetic ramblings, or certain un-silly ones, please do.

sid
>
> Sid,
>
> I'm certainly up for this reading. Niggling abt. is the idea that Capital
is
> the Symbolic. Not a deep insight but a place to begin --
>
> I have not read much Lacan, only in literary theory class-- Poe's
'Purloined
> Letter' in conjunction w/ Derrida's reading of his reading.
>
> Could we work out a cogible reading list? I'm interested in following Gary
> Genosko's work on Guattari's semiotic but think we might start with
reading
> the first and last chapters of AntiO again. I'm going to anyways.
>
> You think Lacan's Seminar #8?
>
> Chris.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-bounces at lists.driftline.org
> [mailto:deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-bounces at lists.driftline.org]On
> Behalf Of sid littlefield
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 9:24 AM
> To: deleuze-guattari-driftline.org at lists.driftline.org
> Subject: Re: [D-G] mona has
>
>
> To these four we should add the fifth (5) Truth
>
> 1) The event
> 2) Ontology
> 3) Ontological role/importance of temporality
> 4) Majoritarian/minoritarian militant/ethico-aesthetic practice
>
> I think this would be a very fruitful project. To begin I will suggest a
> reading: Daniel Smith has a wonderful essay on Deleuze v. Badiou in
> relationship to mathematics. I know that it was in the Southern Journal of
> Philosophy and I imagine that it is floating around in other places (Sorry
> to participate in the "capitalist desire to read texts but...)
>
> These are just starting points...
>
> (1) It strikes me that one difference in the way that D & B look at the
> event is in the question of the question of language.  It seems that
Deleuze
> places the event at times into a linguistic enterprise. Of course, Badiou
> would be forced to reject this being the new non-linguistic philosopher.
>
> (2) I am in the minority but believe that Deleuze was "to be done with
> ontology." The insistence that being is univocal seems to be great strike
> against ontology.  If ontological difference is located in the individual
> and not the species (if you all me to use the biological concept) then
> ontology is moved to becoming (mutation). This is the continuation of the
> Nietzsche project from Twilight. Badiou strikes me as almost equally
> skeptical of the ontology, not the concept, but being itself.  As with
most
> disagreements between Deleuze and Badiou, it comes down to their
> understanding of multiplicity and difference.
>
> (3) Nothing now.
>
> (4) There seems to be some aggreement that D & G's politics would be
> different from Badiou's, hence not militant.  I am not sure if this true.
I
> do not see that D&G are not setting up a radical militant politics
although
> it does take on a group dynamic that is absent from Badiou.  Although
Badiou
> is highly involved with non-party politics, it still seems that processes
> that bring about the militant have a party look to them. If we think about
> is continually example Paul I think we see the party lurking in the
> background, or at least the shadow of party lurking in the background. I
> think this is what Zizek means when he says that Badiou is afraid to
ex-cize
> Stalin.
>
> (5) Deleuze was famous for his dis-taste for TRUTH, but Badiou's reworking
> of the term renders most of Deleuze's objections mute. Perhaps like not
> wanting to be surround by "scarecrows and suken faces" (Nietzsche "the Gay
> Science), deleuze's rejection of truth is just a matter of taste.
>
> sid
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
>
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp
> ?SRC=lycos10
>
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Admin interface:
> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Admin interface:
> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org

--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp
?SRC=lycos10

_______________________________________________
List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
Admin interface:
http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org