/lit/ - Literature

Bump

>>14292525
Enjoy it while you can. The curse is coming for you too.

>>14292525
>tfw deleuzo-traditionalist

>>14292525
rendezvous avec anus

>>14292777
Anon those are the opposite of each other...

Im not sure i buy the whole identity=bad thing. Adorno’s position especially just feels vindictive.
Fascism and (on the other side) bataille show that it is not possible to boot-strap a god. I think it was kojeve that said “you can no more believe in a god youve created than a magician can believe in magic after doing a card trick.” That being said, i dont deleuze is right to deny any transcendence: i dont believe libidal investments are entirely immanent—there are forces at play (and that can be released and channeled) that far exceed the capabilities of a materialist social-machine. Discounting for a second that living as a BwO is as impossible as living as Stirner’s ego, the subjectification/identity deleuze sees as tantamount to slavery might not be nearly as bad as its made out to be. But at least i think deleueze’s heart is in the right place. Adorno just seems salty, which he had every right to be.

>>14292853
Wow that came out retarded. Phonepost

wonderful thread

>>14292905
Based

>>14292853
I think immanence and transcendence are kinda moebius strip like. Is that what Lacan says? I always thought objet petit a was like a rabbit pulled out of a hat. Smoke and mirrors producing desire which for d&g is generative. How is that not magic? Magic is pretty real, any sufficiently advanced materialism must account. Bwos are schizos. I agree fetishizing minoritarianism is dangerous. Is the answer to Foucault that prisons and factories and schools are all training and biopolitics and anthropotechnics and habitus?

>>14292777
You read Hermetic Deleuze yet?

Read more theory, OP.

>>14293318
quick rundown?

>>14293398
Philosophy is literally word magic and deleuze is an initiate of the highest caliber.

>>14292905
>it's not that simple

saved

Explain the BwO to me right now or I'll fucking end you.

>>14294493

rather than be the sort of idiot that says 'my dick says shag thots, but my mind says my wife is at home, but my heart is with god' the body without organs is one big desiring beast that goes everywhere

>>14294493
the body is a body without organs, it has no organs, the organs are a body with organs, but the body is not the organs but the body without organs

>>14294493
If you take a physiological view of the human: mind-body-soul all one thing. You need bodily movement to stimulate good psychology, you need good psychology to use your body well and maybe receive spiritual graitification.

The way we currently see such things are seperated, and organ-ised. You sit in a classroom, and you can't concentrate, you wonder whats wrong with your brain. Your feet are fidgiting and you can't sit still, soon enough you are taking medication for ADHD. All of this to resist the desire to escape the classroom. You go to a psychologist who treats your depression by examining your desires as related to the 'real you' your "ego", but you can't be that real you because of "superego" expectations, yet your "subconscious" is pulling you elsewhere for reasons you must further uncover.

the body without organs follows its desires, it manifests the movement and input and interaction it craves in a way whereby the organism functions as a whole, an organism that creates rather than restricts itself

>>14292777
>thelema
you are cursed, my friend

>>14292777
Ngl this is what I have been thinking of

>>14292789
How are they the opposite of eachother?

>>14296545
Process metaphysics versus being ontology

>>14293252
Get off my board Quentin

>>14296676
then make it to process ontology.

>>14292525
you're not SUPPOSED TO WANT TO BE a BWO
BWO is the death drive, extinction of difference desire and life
also you don't individually "BECOME" BWO, BWO is total extinction, BWO does not ask, BWO does not wait for answer

>>14297627
>It is important to emphasize first that Anti-Oedipus was not a triumphalist book. It was written after May 68, when everything that had got opened was closing down, when the masterword, “it was but a dream, let us go back to reality” was already encoding the event as a past memory. Anti-Oedipus gave voice to the trust, an ontological, enacted trust, that this so-called dream we were asked to forget was reality, and that nothing would stop it.
As such, yet, Anti Oedipus was denounced as responsible the catastrophic trajectories of many young people using drugs and self-mutilation as if they had wished to demonstrate the validity of Deleuze and Guattari’s trust and reach Antonin Artaud’s body without organs that Anti-Oedipus had made famous. In A Thousand Plateaus, Artaud and the body without organs are still there, but the important question is now : “How do you make yourself a body without organs ?”, how do you fabricate an escape line from the “Judgment of God” that steals your organs and submits them to the law of an organism ? Deleuze and Guattari do not recant, or admit responsibility. Why would they, since what happened was indeed not a result of their book, but, rather, a consequence of the suffocating closure that crushed all escape lines after 68 ? But they point instead to a technical problem they had not anticipated in Anti Oedipus, the confusion between experimentation and precipitation. “Why such a dreary parade of sucked-dry, catatonicized, vitrified, sewn-up bodies, when the Body without organs is also full of gaiety, ecstasy, and dance ? (…) Emptied bodies instead of full ones. What happened ? Were you not cautious enough ? Not wisdom, caution.” (TP, 150).

>>14294526
basically a schizophrenic entity with no sense of identity. Just a desire producing machine

>>14297700
whereas the neurotic/psycho boils everything down to unity - unified sense of self, authentic sense of identity

the schizo see's we are always many people, wear many masks, who you are on the bus is different from who you are as a teacher from who you are as an inmate. you are all of these in one body, not compartmentalised into a heart or a gut or a soul, or an ego and a sugerego and an id

holy shit this thread is retarded.

>>14296545
>How are they the opposite of eachother?
even i know how and i've never read him

>>14292905
What did he mean by this

>>14292853
Idk the way I took deleuze isn't really identity = bad, doesn't he speak of the BwO as a limit?

>>14297622
Even so. The emphasis on novelty and creativity and difference and the event is diametrically to traditionalism worship of identity and archetype and similarity and the past.

>>14297637
i only read anti oedipus but i dont know how it came to that. in the first section of the first chapter they outline the alternatives, acceleration beyond the limit of capitlaism or reduction of life to the body without organs which they call the lowest form of life, which they equate to nonexistence, and anti-production essentially what i took to be mass suicide

>>14292789
>>14292777
Deleuzo-traditionalism is easy. Just be Deleuzian but say no to gay stuff.

when does he stop using anuses and unrelated scientific terms and what the fuck does a plant root has to do with schizophrenia and capitalism?

>>14300384
1) this is a Rhizome

2) Social Darwinists still think a tree is the best invention ever

>>14300384
how people think the world works

>>14300384
how the world really works

>>14300384
how people think the world works

>>14300384
how the world really works

>>14300384
how people think the world works

how people think the world works

how the world really works

>>14300384
how the world really works

how people think the world works

how the world really works

>>14298249
Reference to Aristotle.

>>14292905
It may not be that simple but Deleuze clearly was

>>14292777
Sounds like you're deleuzional. Nice jackpot trips tho