[D-G] Redeleuzianisation not Archive or Publish

[adline vanlindenbergh]

We will be happy to see this list activating itself.
Mostly "we" will and why:
When a message is adressed to Deleuze, it is to show
a wish to resume to Deleuze discussion. Now don't come to explain me how
to state
that in a certain way that you alone will understand. I can explain it
here.

Multilateral use of resume to Deleuze, last mail was such .

In any case the I that complained last month is a product of the
therapeutic treatment, nothing else. So forget it, resolutively.

The last mail was based on an observation on media events.
I was thinking that there must come from somewhere. I was proposing that
we and I tried to ramble on the mysterious origin
of the media events. I had not you in mind as to whom this might matter.
I saw how the talk back boards where 
referring back in unilateral way to some media events, or media
essences. I propose to see this from outside, and see if we can help
others. Instead of the Deleuzians helping each others, they would be
a team of experts to be, hyperhelpers. I hope you don't take it bad and
fear I by so saying wish not anymore
that you helped me in the future, nor that other thoughts might sodden
you from
the task ahead of us now.

What better is to do than to hear Rita's idea on archiving publication,
what other idea: to focus on a re-Deleuzianalisation of the list, while
we keep our
outsider clothes.

Regards Harald

Adline.
-- 
  adline vanlindenbergh
  bisouxnoursfast at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users:
  http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html