[Deleuze-Guattari] waffling, again...

Wouter Kusters C.W.Kusters at let.ru.nl
Sat Sep 8 00:38:21 PDT 2007

> I'm reviewing a book at the moment, a nice little volume by Ronald Bogue
> "Deleuze's Way, Essays in Transverse Ethics and Aesthetics.
> The last essay in the book opens as such:
> "There are two basic types of commentators on Deleuze and Guattari: those
> who seek to extend the experimental conceptual movement of D&G's thought.
> adopting the author's language and intensifying its tendencies; and those
> who try to frame D&G's thoughtin less esoteric terms, utilizing a more
> orthodox, academic terminology and testing the practical limits,
> implications and consequences of their thought ...."
> although it is fun to write prose that tries to make language stammer with
> the constant barrage things just get lost n the haze ...... so i think
> sometimes that given this list is dominated by people of the first type it
> is hard for those of the second type to feel like they can get a
> word in or
> even a response  ......

> Martin

Well, Martin, I think that you should not exaggerate, let alone
overestimate, the difference between these two kinds of people. I would like
to associate to those of the second type, and even as I am, I sense that the
dominance of the first class cannot be that hard or hostile not to be open
to questions, words or responses of others. In fact, it never was.

Hi James,

> > - this is, as far as I can tell, an English language mailing list;
> > now this isn't to say that other languages are not useful here, but my
> > feeeling is that the overall understanding should be provided in
> > English; so, if other languages are to be used, including the ever
> > more  frequent strains of gibberish, they should be accompanied by
> > some kind of translation

Yes, I think you're right. People should try to express themselves in the
language of the list, a common language, and since this is English, we
should stick to English. However, I would not like to prevent other persons
to express themselves the way they want to. And, if that is in a language I
do not know, I ask them for a translation.

> > - there is a sense, put forward by several list members, that they are
> > D&G experts; now, I have no idea what this might mean, but it comes
> > across as "D&G would sugggest...", or "D&G intended...", or "what D&G
> > mean by this is..."; for my part, I have been studying the writings of
> > Deleuze and Guattari for many years now, and in no way do I consider
> > myself capable of speaking as a "Deleuzoguatarrian" (or whatever), or
> > even elevating their writings to a level where a statement like
> > "according to D&G..." has any inherent weight at all; what I  am
> > saying here is: is this not a venue for discovery and elaboration,
> > rather than banter and point-proving?

Too many references to D&G can kill the open debate on what they exactly
meant, indeed. And, indeed, to give the work by D&G more inherent weight
people should preferably come with full quotes, when quoting from one of
Deleuze's books or work done by Deleuze and Guattari.
In that sense, I think Harald Wenk loses some tracks when delving into
Vedanta or other stuff, and not mentioning how it connects to - not only the
ideas within - but the actual lines of thought, even when speaking about
nomadism or sabotages from list members or programms in Budapest.

> > - finally, I know that there are (or, at least, were) some great minds
> > lurking in the shadows of this list, and while I am sure they are busy
> > (and quite frankly, bored by the list), it would be ever so helpful if
> > and when a question or statement (or...) arises that they have the
> > courage to step forward and put in two or three cents worth; hey,
> > maybe some of you might even want to try to stimulate some of the
> > other lurkers into some new discussions, just like the good ol' days
> > (I mean, the field can't be saturated yet can it?  or is there now a
> > fear of exposing research in a world that tends to promote only highly
> > competitive academic relations?)
> >
> > Anyway, sorry for jumping in again, but I would dearly love to see and
> > read a post on this list that would have me anticipating my next
> > logon...

No problem, you're welcome.


More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list