[D-G] Jeepers, more Violence

NZ pretzelworld at gmail.com
Tue Sep 26 13:51:50 PDT 2006

 I have followed this same conversation with hwenk for nearly a year
and neither one of us has budged. yes, spinoza vs blyenbergh is the
doorway, so to speak, but there is a door-stopper silently sitting on
the floor and all the pushing and pulling is for naught. We can all
plainly see it, yet it does not move, and the door does not open. I
have thought psychically, with telekinesis, that I could move the
door-stopper but moving text with my mind is like moving rocks (re:
animating nomos).
Personally, I can agree with every precept which Deleuze encounters
inside Spinoza, yet I still  disagree with his conclusions (at least
as hwenk has articulated them) and I read closer still and I begin to
agree with why hwenk would articulate them as such...  its confusing
and it certainly makes sense to read Deleuze very literally w/o any
interpretation. I am reluctance to join in with the dogma and although
I am not keen on pointing out Deleuze's logical errors, I cant help
but see a major disconnect here, so I am reserving myself, hoping to
find a more penetrating reading for this unfortunate dialog.

isn't it interesting how this little slip-up hinges upon a sexualized
moment of truth for deleuze? Isn't it interesting that this problem of
ethical judgement specifically allows for that same consciousness that
judges nero at the same level which adultery is judged. I mean the
roman theology which surrounds is specifically about the creation of a
population born from that sabine moment. "Us" - as romans - have a
consciousness that is limited by this Sabine ethics, right here.

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list