[D-G] Jeepers, more Violence

.+oot7AM martini dr.crawboney at gmail.com
Tue Sep 26 09:00:19 PDT 2006

I hope you are reading spinoza's letters to blyenbergh. I fyou do not
have D's book handy you can certainly dig into the meat of it from his
conversations w/ pinhas...


the first one (13th) really covers this material very well, even
better then the book. the second takes off from the first and is
rather confusing if you cannot get passed the former. There is a lot
to get through, a lot of contradictions, a lot of messiness. I hope
you read it so I can ask questions, I made disagrable by Delueze's
terseness, he admits to all of the holes yet his patches are extremely
thin, I really wonder what is going on here. Take this example which
is used: "Nero vs Orestes", it is a terrible example (admittably so),
and yet he uses it to seal the wall against blyeynbergh's objections,
very rhetorical. How am I supposed to accept this sort of rigor, there
is nothing here that I can see. he seems to fancy a particular reading
of Nero's psychological motivation, as if he is capable of knowing
which "images" nero has in his mind, how is this possible? Who can
know what images Nero was acting upon? The distinction is thin don't
you agree? This is the level to which Spinoza's ethics can be
detentionalized pataphysically. And yet 2+2=4, not 3.
By the time they get to their 2nd conversation on adultery, you can
see they have breezed by this distinction and are jovially talking
about sex with married women. It is all very ridiculous.

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list