[D-G] to build by help, rhizome

Lucy LeGentilSinge lucy100millionyearsold at yahoo.co.uk
Sun May 1 19:21:36 PDT 2005


so the space is n+1 but the qualification "space" is
itself n+1 in your instance, ?or n+1 is n-1 according
to smooth space theory-practice?--- "Dr. Harald Wenk"
<hwenk at web.de> wrote: 
> Hello,
> 
> I thought everbody in this list knows, that one of
> the main features
> of Deleuze and Guattari the principle of immanence,
> to cut off the
> transcendental. This is done in  philosophy ba
> Spinoza, polemizing against
> Aristotle's cause  of purpose (or target) and to
> maintain only the  
> effective cause.
> 
> Deleuze and Guattari adopted in a certain way the
> material cause and the  
> formal cause in the
> double pince of expression (inspired by Hjelmsev) by
> form and material.
> 
> Now in differenetial geometry, in the conception of
> a manifiold, which  
> Deleuze and Guattari thought the rhizom to be one,
> is made in such way,  
> that the metric invariants are intrinsic. That means
> you need only
> the measurements within the manifold. You don't need
> a space to be imbeded.
> A surface is of dimesion two (n = 2), but it could
> only be imbeded in a  
> space with a dimension more, i.e. three (n+1).
> 
> Now in philosophy or everday discourse the
> supplementary dimension is the  
> metadiscourse.
> So an argument is not answered directly, but by
> locating its function in  
> the metadiscourse, at worst by name dropping.
> 
> This is no good for any discussion, which is a merit
> of Deleuze and  
> Guattari to
> have insisted on.
> 
> Therefore, as a rhizom is characterized by
> immanence, metadiscourses are  
> to avoid.
> 
> greetings
> 
> Harald
> 
> 
> 
> Am Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:29:09 +0100 (BST) schrieb
> Lucy LeGentilSinge  
> <lucy100millionyearsold at yahoo.co.uk>:
> 
> > less meta-discourse? need to rhizome? --- "Dr.
> Harald
> > Wenk" <hwenk at web.de> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> real good idea. But perhaps not to miuch
> >> metadiuscorse (n+1).
> >>
> >> greetings
> >>
> >> Harald
> >>
> >> Am Sun, 24 Apr 2005 03:50:15 +0100 (BST) schrieb
> >> Lucy LeGentilSinge
> >> <lucy100millionyearsold at yahoo.co.uk>:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > -
> >> > -
> >> >
> >> > Merci Liza pour ta lettre d'hier soir. Adline
> est
> >> > encore en voyage et elle n'aura probablement
> pas
> >> pu
> >> > répondre à ton courrier.
> >> >
> >> > Chèrs Ami,
> >> > Dear Friends
> >> > Cara Amigos
> >> > Chaverim Tovim Sheli
> >> >
> >> > Nous, We, Nachnou, Anachnaou
> >> >
> >> > --Somebody beep and confirms me the Republic
> wants
> >> me
> >> > to talk in English. I am sure the Afraicans,
> the
> >> > Eurasians, and the Micronesisans won't see this
> as
> >> a
> >> > capture of the Drift Line Politics --
> >> >
> >> > it's just so I'll do that more easily with my
> >> friends
> >> > and not yet seen people subscribed in this
> place.
> >> >
> >> > Yes, the motif the motivation for my talk, for
> >> today
> >> > is the one:
> >> >     Can there be more debate on the list. Can
> >> > subscriber talk about what they feel worthy of
> >> > interest, that they would connect or not from
> >> Deleuze
> >> > and Guattari . So first 1)
> >> > Can there be enough people who know of Deleuze
> and
> >> > Guattari capable of actively interact does this
> >> that
> >> > is there, really making a sense as a relation
> >> between
> >> > you and me (i am saying this when the group is
> not
> >> yet
> >> > recognised by anybody else than me), but that I
> >> can
> >> > trust we won't get lost out of the maximum of
> >> benefit
> >> > we have enjoyed in the past of the list, from
> the
> >> two
> >> > authours, while, as it risqus being diminishing
> >> now,
> >> > and the fashion is waning, while the
> accademician
> >> feel
> >> > less concerned about the polemic side of
> Deleuze
> >> and
> >> > Guattari's book, so this world is starting to
> >> vanish,
> >> > and I was wondering if we could extend more
> >> relations
> >> > between Deleuze and Guattari, and re-ACT to
> this
> >> > waning by infusing more relation of Deleuzian
> >> > Guattari, or that belong to Universes of Value
> >> with
> >> > which they share Hyperboreales zones (cad zones
> of
> >> > undisctinctions between first nature and second
> >> > nature) and thus, well, I say this
> particularily
> >> to my
> >> > firend who is a very good supporter to me on
> this
> >> > lists when I speak here, Stephano, and I say
> this
> >> to
> >> > you Stephano: I do not care about Ildegirsun
> >> @yahoo.no
> >> > being from the North, I am from the South, and
> we
> >> need
> >> > such type of Belongings of that sort if we want
> to
> >> > build the rhizome. What is important now the
> >> rhizome
> >> > that we want to build here as not yet existed.
> >> >
> >> > We want to build a rhizome. The connotation
> >> explicit,
> >> > Deleuze ATP Guattari, is less clear: all flyers
> of
> >> > popular TV Parties in European American Trendy
> >> Events
> >> > are misusing the word rhizome and make some of
> us
> >> > "malveillant" malevolent, do you want to be
> >> > malevolent? no! so we will use it with
> >> benevolition,
> >> > the word, rhizome, is there for us, natural,
> >> immanent.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > It's strange, I am not sure of the quality.
> Other
> >> > matter should be said, they can now find a
> place
> >> where
> >> > here they will be said, and that's what I want
> to
> >> do,
> >> > see if others are likely enthusiast about these
> >> > possibilities for new, non-deleuzian
> expression,
> >> done
> >> > with admiration for Deleuze. The project is not
> >> > original of course? And it is. But what is not
> >> > original is those people who claim a project
> needs
> 
=== message truncated === 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 



More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list