This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Deleuze and F li! Guattari"s #nti$%edipus &'()*+ and # Thousand Plateaus &'(,-+. The /olumes differ so markedly in tone, content, and composition that they seem a prime illustration of their subtitle"s second noun. 0t is hoped that the present book will be as much. The 1schizophrenia1 Deleuze and Guattari embrace is not a patholo2ical condition. For them, the clinical schizophrenic"s debilitatin2 detachment from the world is a 3uelled attempt to en2a2e it in unima2ined ways. Schizophrenia as a positi/e process is in/enti/e connection, e!pansion rather than withdrawal. 0ts twoness is a relay to a multiplicity. From one to another &and another . . . +. From one noun or book or author to another &and another . . . +. 4ot aimlessly. 5!perimentally. The relay in ideas is only effecti/ely e!pansi/e if at e/ery step it is also a relay away from ideas into action. Schizophrenia is the enlar2ement of life"s limits throu2h the pra2matic proliferation of concepts. Schizophrenia, like those 1sufferin21 from it, 2oes by many names. 1Philosophy1 is one. 4ot 6ust any philosophy. # bastard kind. 7e2itimate philosophy is the handiwork of 1bureaucrats1 of pure reason who speak in 1the shadow of the despot1 ' and are in historical complicity with the state. They in/ent ""a properly spiritual . . . absolute State that . . . effecti/ely functions in the mind.1 Theirs is the discourse of so/erei2n 6ud2ment, of stable sub6ecti/ity le2islated by 12ood1 sense, of rocklike identity, 1uni/ersal1 truth, and &white male+ 6ustice. 1Thus the e!ercise of their thou2ht is in conformity with the aims of the real State, with the dominant
si2nifications, and with the re3uirements of the established order.1* Gilles Deleuze was schooled in that philosophy. The titles of his earliest books read like a who"s who of philosophical 2iants. 18hat 2ot me throu2h that period was concei/in2 of the history of philosophy as a kind of ass$fuck, or, what amounts to the same thin2, an immaculate conception. 0 ima2ined myself approachin2 an author from behind and 2i/in2 him a child that would indeed be his but would nonetheless be monstrous.1 9 :e2el is absent, bein2 too despicable e/en to merit a mutant offsprin2. To ;ant he dedicated an affectionate study of 1an enemy.1< =et much of /alue came of Deleuze"s flirtation with the 2reats. :e disco/ered an orphan line of thinkers affiliated only in their opposition to the State philosophy that would ne/ertheless accord them minor positions in its canon. From 7ucretius, :ume, Spinoza, 4ietzsche, and >er2son there runs a ""secret link constituted by the criti3ue of ne2ati/ity, the culti/ation of 6oy, the hatred of interiority, the e!teriority of forces and relations, the denunciation of power.1? Deleuze"s first ma6or statements written in his own /oice, Diff rence et r p tition &'(@,+ and The 7o2ic of Sense &'(@(+, cross$fertilized that line of 1nomad1 thou2ht with contemporary theory. The ferment of the student A worker re/olt of Bay '(@, and the reassessment it prompted of the intellectual"s role in society@ led him to disclaim the 1ponderous academic apparatus1) still in e/idence in those works. :owe/er, many elements of the 1philosophy of difference1 he had elaborated in them were transfused into a continuin2 collaboration, of which # Thousand Plateaus is the most recent product. F li! Guattari is a practicin2 psychoanalyst and lifelon2 political acti/ist. :e has worked since the mid$fifties at 7a >orde, an e!perimental psychiatric clinic founded by 7acanian analyst Cean %ury. Guattari himself was amon2
7acan"s earliest trainees and, althou2h he ne/er formally se/ered his ties with 7acan"s 5cole Freudienne, the 2roup therapy practiced at 7a >orde took him in a /ery different direction. The aim at 7a >orde was to abolish the doctor$ patient hierarchy in fa/or of an interacti/e 2roup dynamic that would brin2 the e!periences of all to full e!pression in such a way as to produce a collecti/e criti3ue of the power relations in society as a whole. 1The central perspecti/e is . . . to promote human relations that do not automatically fall into roles or stereotypes but open onto fundamental relations of a metaphysical kind that brin2 out the most radical and basic alienations of madness or neurosis1, and channel them into re/olution$ ary practice. From '(@-, Guattari collaborated on 2roup pro6ects dedicated to de/elopin2 this radical 1institutional psychotherapy,1 ( and later he entered an uneasy alliance with the international antipsychiatry mo/ement spearheaded by D. D. 7ain2 in 5n2land and Franco >asa2lia in 0taly.'- #s 7acanian schools of psychoanalysis 2ained 2round a2ainst psychiatry, the contractual %edipal relationship between the analyst and the transference$bound analysand became as much Guattari"s tar2et as the le2al bonda2e of the institutionalized patient in con/entional state hospitals. :e adopted the same stance toward psychoanalysis as he had earlier toward the parties of the left: an ultraopposition within the opposition. :is anti$hierarchical attitudes anticipated the e/ents of Bay '(@, and made him an early partisan of the social mo/ements that 2rew from them, includin2 feminism and the 2ay$ri2hts mo/ement.'' #nti$ %edipus, his first book with Deleuze, 2a/e philosophical wei2ht to his con/ictions, and created one of the intellectual sensations of postwar France with its spirited polemics a2ainst State$happy or pro$party /ersions of Bar!ism and school$buildin2 strains of psychoanalysis, which separately
and in /arious combinations represented the dominant intellectual currents of the time &despite the fundamentally anarchist nature of the spontaneous popular uprisin2s that had shaken the world in '(@,+. 1The most tan2ible result of #nti$%edipus was that it shortcircuited the connection between psychoanalysis and the far$left parties,1 in which Deleuze and Guattari saw the potential for a powerful new bureaucracy of analytic reason.'* The book"s polemical tone and the marks it bears of the authors" in/ol/ement in the political e/ents of the period are often used as an e!cuse to dismiss it as an outdated, occasional work. The bulk of #nti$%edipus, howe/er, is 2i/en o/er to detailed analyses of the collecti/e 1syntheses1 constitutin2 a society and to the in/ention of a new typolo2y of cultural formations. 0t is these positi/e and endurin2 contributions of #nti$%edipus that the present work will attempt to fore2round by tyin2 its terminolo2y to that of precedin2 and subse3uent books by Deleuze and Guattari. For many French intellectuals, the hyperacti/ism of post$ Bay 2a/e way to a mid$se/enties slump, then a return to reli2ion &Tel Euel+ or political conser/atism &the 4ou/eau! Philosophes+. Deleuze and Guattari ne/er recanted. 4either did they simply re/i/e the old polemics. # Thousand Plateaus &'(,-+, written o/er a se/en$ year period, is less a criti3ue than a sustained, constructi/e e!periment in schizophrenic, or 1nomad,1 thou2ht. 1State philosophy1 is another name for the representational thinkin2 that has dominated 8estern metaphysics since Plato, but has suffered an at least momentary setback durin2 the last 3uarter century at the hands of Cac3ues Derrida, Bichel Foucault and poststructuralist theory 2enerally. #s described by Deleuze, '9 State philosophy is 2rounded in a double identity: of the thinkin2 sub6ect, and of the concepts
it creates and to which it lends its own presumed attributes of sameness and constancy. The sub6ect, its concepts, and the 1e!ternal1 ob6ects to which the concepts are applied ha/e a shared, internal essence: the self$resemblance at the basis of identity. Depresentational thou2ht is analo2icalF its concern is to establish a correspondence between these symmetrically structured domains. The faculty of 6ud2ment ser/es as the police force of analo2y, assurin2 that each of the three terms is honestly itself, and that the proper correspondences obtain. 0n thou2ht its end is truth, in action 6ustice. The weapons it wields in pursuit of these are limitati/e distribution &the determination of the e!clusi/e set of properties possessed by each term in contradistinction to the others: lo2os, law+ and hierarchical rankin2 &the measurement of the de2ree of perfection of a term"s self$ resemblance in relation to a supreme standard, Ban, God, or Gold: /alue, morality+. The modus operandi is ne2ation: ! G ! G not y. 0dentity, resemblance, truth, 6ustice, and ne2ation. The rational foundation for order. The established order, of course: philosophers ha/e traditionally been employees of the State. The collusion between philosophy and the State was most e!plicitly enacted in the first decade of the nineteenth century with the foundation of the Hni/ersity of >erlin, which was to become the model for hi2her learnin2 throu2hout 5urope and the H.S. The 2oal laid out for it by 8ilhelm /on :umboldt &based on proposals by Fichte and Schleiermacher+ was the 1spiritual and moral trainin2 of the nation,1 to be achie/ed by 1deri/in2 e/erythin2 from an ori2inal principle"" &truth+, by 1relatin2 e/erythin2 to an ideal1 &6ustice+, and by 1unifyin2 this principle and this ideal in a sin2le 0dea1 &the State+. The end product would be 1a fully le2itimated sub6ect of knowled2e and society1'< A each mind an analo2ously or2anized mini$State morally unified in the supermind of the State. Prussian mind$meld.'? 5/en
more insidious than today"s well$known practical cooperation between the uni/ersity and 2o/ernment &the bur2eonin2 military fundin2 of research+ was its philosophical role in propa2atin2 the form of representational thinkin2 itself, that 1properly spiritual absolute State1 endlessly reproduced and disseminated at e/ery le/el of the social fabric &nationalism and 2ood citizenship+. Bore insidious than its institution$based propa2ation is the State$form"s ability to propa2ate itself without centrally directed inculcation &liberalism and 2ood citizenship+. Still more insidious is the process presidin2 o/er our present pli2ht, in which the moral and philosophical foundations of national and personal identity ha/e crumbled, makin2 a mockery of the Stateform A but the world keeps ri2ht on 2oin2 as if they hadn"t &neo$conser/atism and cynical 2reed+. Deconstruction$influenced feminists such as : lIne Ci!ous and 7uce 0ri2aray ha/e attacked State philosophy under the name 1phallo2ocentrism1 &what the most pri/ile2ed model of rocklike identity is 2oes without sayin2+. 0n the introduction to # Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari describe it as the 1arborescent1 model of thou2ht &the proudly erect tree under whose spreadin2 bou2hs latter$day Platos dischar2e their functions+. 14omad thou2ht1 does not lod2e itself in the edifice of an ordered interiorityF it mo/es freely in an element of e!teriority. 0t does not repose on identityF it rides difference. 0t does not respect the artificial di/ision between the three domains of representation, sub6ect, concept, and bein2F it replaces restricti/e analo2y with a conducti/ity that knows no bounds. The concepts it creates do not merely reflect the eternal form of a le2islatin2 sub6ect, but are defined by a communicable force in relation to which their sub6ect, to the e!tent that they can be said to ha/e one, is only secondary. Dather than reflectin2 the world, they are immersed in a
.chan2in2 state of thin2s. The modus operandi of nomad thou2ht is affirmation. Force is not to be confused with power.1 or 2ridded. . Power builds walls. Dather than analyzin2 the world into discrete components. Force in its wild state arri/es from outside to break constraints and open new /istas. 4omad thou2ht replaces the closed e3uation of representation. e/en when its apparent ob6ect is ne2ati/e. at a /olatile 6uncture. Ky K z K a K . and orderin2 them by rank. . %r it can be thrown throu2h the window. # concept is a brick. . K arm K brick K window K . 0t synthesizes a multiplicity of elements without effacin2 their hetero2eneity or hinderin2 their potential for future rearran2in2. . #ir a2ainst earth. 0t can be used to build the courthouse of reason.1 '@ >ecause the concept in its Pa2e @ unrestrained usa2e is a set of circumstances. 8hat is the sub6ect of the brickJ The arm that throws itJ The body connected to the armJ The brain encased in the bodyJ The situation that brou2ht brain and body to such a 6unctureJ #ll and none of the abo/e. The concept has no sub6ect or ob6ect other than itself. . Power is the domestication of force. . . reducin2 their manyness to the %ne >wo+ of self$reflection. ! G ! G not y &0 G 0 G not you+ with an open e3uation: .+. and limited by the order of that plane to . Bo/ement in it is confined as by 2ra/ity to a horizontal plane. 0t is an act. & . it sums up a set of disparate circumstances in a shatterin2 blow. State space is 1striated. The space of nomad thou2ht is 3ualitati/ely different from State space. 8hat is its ob6ectJ The windowJ The edificeJ The laws the edifice sheltersJ The class and other power relations encrusted in the lawsJ #ll and none of the abo/e: 18hat interests us are the circumstances. 0t is a /ector: the point of application of a force mo/in2 throu2h a space at a 2i/en /elocity in a 2i/en direction.
1 #rtaud called it ""crowned anarchy. 0t is not the first such attempt. %ther cuts you may listen to o/er and o/er a2ain. Filmmakers and painters are philosophical thinkers to the e!tent that they e!plore the potentials of their respecti/e mediums and break away from beaten paths. %ne of the points of the book is that nomad thou2ht is not confined to philosophy. it is mathematics and music that create the smoothest of the smooth spaces.*.'.1 or open$ended. %ne can rise up at any point and mo/e to any other. that it is a kind of philosophy that comes in many forms.1 and in the introduction to # Thousand Plateaus describe a rhizome network stran2lin2 the roots of the infamous tree.1 ') Deleuze and Guattari also employ the terms 1pra2matics1 and 1schizoanalysis. 4omad space is 1smooth.preset paths between fi!ed and identifiable points. 1outside thou2ht.0t does not . %n a strictly formal le/el. it is the 1space of literature. '( =ou don"t approach a record as a closed book that you ha/e to take or lea/e. Spinoza called nomad thou2ht 1ethics.1 To Foucault.1 To Baurice >lanchot. So you skip them.1 4ietzsche called it 12ay science. as opposed to the lo2os of entrenchin2 oneself in a closed space &hold the fort+. =ou find yourself hummin2 them under your breath as you 2o about your daily business. 0n fact. 0ts mode of distribution is the nomos: arrayin2 oneself in an open space &hold the street+. >etter. They follow you. Deleuze and Guattari w Pa2e ) Deleuze recommends that you read Capitalism and Schizophrenia as you would listen to a record. Capitalism and Schizophrenia is concei/ed as an open system. Capitalism and Schizophrenia is an effort to construct a smooth space of thou2ht. There are always cuts that lea/e you cold.
The /ectors are meant to con/er2e at a /olatile 6uncture. but one that is sustained. wea/in2 new notes into the melodies of their e/eryday li/es. and musicians ha/e their styles. is that elements of it will stay with a certain number of its readers. 5ach section of # Thousand Plateaus carries a date because each . which 2i/e them a spin definin2 the arc of their /ector. and so do tools. is not somethin2 limited to writin2. e/en A especially A punctual e/ents. and technolo2ies. a plateau is reached when circumstances combine to brin2 an acti/ity to a pitch of intensity that is not automatically dissipated in a clima! leadin2 to a state of rest. or 1plateau1 in the /ocabulary of the second /olume of Capitalism and Schizophrenia. The way the combination is made is an e!ample of what they call 1consistency1 A not in the sense of a homo2eneity. but as a holdin2 to2ether of disparate elements &also known as a ""style1+. painters.*' For Deleuze and Guattari. as an open e3uilibrium of mo/in2 parts each with its own tra6ectory. 5ach se2ment of writin2. The authors" hope. They carry traces of their former emplacement. Filmmakers. is an orchestration of crashin2 bricks e!tracted from a /ariety of disciplinary edifices. 5ach se2ment of Deleuze and Guattari"s writin2 tries to combine conceptual bricks in such a way as to construct this kind of intensi/e state in thou2ht. creatin2 a fabric of intensi/e states between which any number of connectin2 routes could e!ist. The hei2htenin2 of ener2ies is sustained lon2 enou2h to lea/e a kind of afterima2e of its dynamism that can be reacti/ated or in6ected into other acti/ities.** # style in this sense. The word 1plateau1 comes from an essay by Gre2ory >ateson"s on >alinese culture. mathematicians ha/e theirs. as a dynamic holdin2 to2ether or mode of composition. and historical periods. howe/er.pretend to ha/e the final word. rocks ha/e style. in which he found a libidinal economy 3uite different from the 8est"s or2asmic orientation.
tries to reconstitute a dynamism that has e!isted in other mediums at other times. bein2 in lar2e measure an entropic trashbin of outworn modes that refuse to die. creatin2 a fabric of hei2htened states between which any number. of . the 2reatest number. the point at which it was freest from interference from other modes and rose to its hi2hest de2ree of intensity. Bost of all. Deleuze and Guattari call it a refrain. Deleuze and Guattari deli2ht in stealin2 from other disciplines. because the world rarely lea/es room for uncommon intensity. They tend to cycle back. whether paintin2 or politics. The date corresponds to the point at which that particular dynamism found its purest incarnation in matter. and they are more than happy to return the fa/or. but instead pack a potential in the way a crowbar in a willin2 hand en/elops an ener2y of pryin2. Deleuze own ima2e for a concept not as a brick but as a 1tool bo!. The reader is in/ited to follow each section to the plateau that rises from the smooth space of its composition. That ne/er lasts more than a flash. The best way of all to approach a book by Deleuze and Guattari is to read it as a challen2e: to pry open the /acant spaces the would enable you to build your life and those of the people around you into a plateau of intensity that would lea/e afterima2es of its dynamism that could be rein6ected into still other li/es. and to mo/e at pleasure from one plateau to the ne!t.1 *9 :e calls his kind of philosophy 1pra2matics1 because its 2oal is the in/ention of concepts that do not add up to a system of belief or an architecture of propositions that you either enter or you don"t. Some mi2ht call that repetitious. =ou can take a concept that is particularly of your likin2 and 6ump with it to its ne!t appearance. >ut it is 6ust as 2ood to i2nore the hei2hts. the reader is in/ited to lift a dynamism out of the book and incarnate it in a forei2n medium.
Bany passa2es are strai2htforward and e!planatory in tone. *< e/idence of o/erflow.connectin2 routes would e!ist. The idiosyncratic passa2es ou2ht to be enou2h to destroy any mis2uided trust the reader may place in the authority of the e!planatory passa2es. Deleuze and Guattari call it re/olution. Some key Deleuze$Guattarian terms do not appear at all. The itinerary here is hi2hly selecti/e. The 3uestion is not. thou2h: with /ariations. 4ot e!actly like a record. Bany di2ressions are also buried there. 8hat follows is an attempt to play Capitalism and Schizophrenia the way its authors su22est. 0t is not an introduction in the sense of a succinct but complete account or an authoritati/e criti3ue. . Some words they use in passin2 become key terms. Does it workJ 8hat new thou2hts does it make possible to thinkJ 8hat new emotions does it make possible to feelJ 8hat new sensations and perceptions does it open in the bodyJ This /olume is an introduction in the sense that an important part of its pro6ect is to relay readers back to Deleuze and Guattari"s own writin2s. of how hard it is to keep a te!t in departure from takin2 lea/e of itself. Perhaps &0 flatter myself+ it will ha/e created a monster. 0s it trueJ >ut. The de/iations from Deleuze and Guattari become more pronounced as the book plays on. Some mi2ht call that promiscuous. The 1scholarly apparatus1 has been concentrated as much as possible in the notes. The drift is as much away from the 1ori2inals1 as toward them. Deaders interested in how de/elopments in the body of the te!t relate to the 1ori2inal1 Deleuze and Guattari can turn to these notes for indications. many others are hi2hly idiosyncratic.
tentati/e le/el. 1# thin2 has as many meanin2s as there are forces capable of seizin2 it. or to submit to a force &the action of the planeF later. She is conscious of the 2rain and is directed by it. She chooses the ri2ht piece for the application. The presence of the si2n is a contraction of time. %n a first. durability. the pressure of salt shakers and discourteous elbows+.* # woodworker who sets out to make a table does not pick 6ust any piece of wood.Pa2e 'Beanin2 is Force Dound %ne 1# phenomenon is not an appearance.1 ' Take wood. 8hat she reads are si2ns. 8hen she works it. #nd 3ualities are much more than simply lo2ical properties or sense perceptions. and the capacity to affect. The wood"s indi/idual and phylo2enetic past e!ists as traces in the 2rain. and its future as 3ualities to be e!ploited. She reads it and interprets it. Si2ns are 3ualities9 &color. 0t is simultaneously an indicator of a future potential and a symptom of a past. or e/en an apparition. 5n/elopment is not a metaphor. They en/elop a potential A the capacity to be affected. te!ture. she does not indiscriminately plow into it with the plane. but a si2n. and so on+.1< The presence of the si2n is not an identity but an . meanin2 is precisely that: a network of en/eloped material processes. releasin2 heat when burned+. 0t en/elops material processes pointin2 forward &planin2F bein2 a table+ and backward &the e/olution of the tree"s speciesF the natural conditions 2o/ernin2 its indi/idual 2rowthF the cultural actions that brou2ht that particular wood to the workshop for that particular purpose+. a symptom which finds its meanin2 in an e!istin2 force. or to release a force &resistance to 2ra/ityF or in a nontable application.
0t is also all the forces that could ha/e seized the thin2 but did not. but a re2ion of . #lthou2h the acti/ity of the woodworker may seem to occur on a conscious le/el as a 1will1 or 1intention1 translated into action. a table for steak and potatoes. %nly a :oratio #l2er would say that it was by free choice alone that the woodworker$to$be became a manual laborer. 4o unity. it is no more sub6ecti/e than the si2n was merely ob6ecti/e. not 6ust of a physical ob6ect. materials. of a multiplicity of actions. This 2i/es us a second appro!imation of what meanin2 is: more a meetin2 between forces than simply the forces behind the si2ns. The processes takin2 place actually or potentially on all sides could be analyzed indefinitely in any direction. a cultural ob6ect. no unity in the sense of a totality that would tie it all to2ether in a lo2ical knot. the de/elopment of an en/elopment: meanin2 is the encounter of lines of force. and an application of force is the outcome of an endless interplay of processes natural and historical. 0t is an infinity of processes. The trainin2 he recei/ed is a particular institutionalization of craftsmanship formalizin2 knowled2e accumulated o/er centuries by countless people. There is no end. Force a2ainst force. meanin2 e/en includes the paths not taken. The woodworker brin2s the 3ualities of the wood to a certain e!pression. but of a use$/alue. 0nterpretation is force. each of which is actually a comple! of other forces. and le/els. :is interpretation is a creation.en/elopment of difference. 0nterpretation consists in de/elopin2 what is en/eloped in the si2n. 8hat product he makes from the wood is defined by the cultural needs and fashions of countless others. action upon action. 0n a Pa2e '' broader sense. indi/idual and institutional.
mindF raw material. Pa2e '* There is. this e!ample mi2ht seem to reinforce traditional philosophical dualities: nature on the side of the si2n. in this world out of all possible worlds. it is as much a raw material to be molded as is the wood from another perspecti/e. The meanin2 of an e/ent can be ri2orously analyzed. # human body is a natural ob6ect with its own phylo2enesisF from the point of /iew of the social forces that seize it. #t first 2lance. a duality in play. culture on the side of the interpreterF ob6ecti/e on one side. their force weaker. The forces of one are captured by the forces of the other and are subsumed by .clarity: tool meets wood. The forces that brou2ht the wood to the worker and the worker to the wood are a mi!ture of the cultural and the natural. and has more or less affinity with the force whose 2rasp it is currently in1+. The si2ns in the wood are not passi/e &1the thin2 itself is not neutral. howe/er. of all thin2s. 4one of these distinctions hold. ? >ut they are less acti/e than the tool. They ha/e an encounter with interpretation. as do the body and tools. The encounter is between two substanceLform comple!es. There is substance on both sides: woodF woodworkin2 body and tools. but ne/er e!hausti/ely. one of which o/erpowers the other. #nd there is form on both sides: both raw material and ob6ect produced ha/e determinate forms. production. This is not to say that they are an amorphous substance 2i/en form by e!pression. Their action is slower. because it is the effect of an infinitely lon2 process of selection determinin2 that these two thin2s. and are o/erpowered. meet in this way at this place and time. sub6ecti/e on the otherF matter. 5!pression has no more a monopoly on form than content does on substance.
Content is not the si2n. 0t is the an2le of application of an actual force. The craftsman with hand to tool is an a2ent of e!pression. it is relati/e and re/ersible. but the 1perspecti/e1 accordin2 to which one becomes the other is not fundamentally the point of /iew of an outside obser/er. sunli2ht. of the 2enetic potential it did or did not pass on. # power relation determines which is Pa2e '9 . and it is not a referent or si2nified. The distinction between content and e!pression is not only functional. the wood is a content. of the apprenticeship system or technical school that trained him. The same thin2 can be both at different times or simultaneously. and carbon dio!ide it captured and contains. contained by them. as the o/erpowered and the o/erpowerin2. it is an e!pression. dependin2 on which encounter is in 3uestion and from what an2le. # content in one situation is an e!pression in another. a whole world of forces. >ut from the perspecti/e of the forces that went into it. that we can ha/e it any way we like it. but from another an2le he is the content of an institution. of the water. >ut content and e!pression are distin2uished only functionally. Content and e!pression are re/ersible only in action. Seen from the perspecti/e of the dominatin2 tool. the other of an e!pression.them.1@ %ne side of the encounter has the /alue of a content. Content is formed substance considered as a dominated force$field. 0t is what the si2n en/elops. The fact that the distinction between content and e!pression is relati/e and re/ersible does not mean that it is merely sub6ecti/e. 1The /alue of somethin2 is the hierarchy of forces which are e!pressed in it as a comple! phenomenon. Content and e!pression are indeed re/ersible.
The fact that armies always come in twos at least and soldiers by the bri2ade does not mean that a battle is unanalyzable.1 Similarly. but unlike the distinction between e!pression and content as a whole. Since each power relation is in turn a comple! of power relations. The model is not one of utility but of stru22le A a 1hand$to$hand combat of ener2ies.which. #nd althou2h they are always mi!ed in fact. the distinction may seem untenable. 0t may not be possible to know at e/ery moment who has the upper hand. but not untenable. ) Characterizin2 this distinction as 1functional1 mi2ht be misleadin2. the 3ualities of the wood as raw material.1 %ne does not e!ist without the other. The procedures of the woodworker ha/e a method. since each thin2 is taken up in a web of forces. Content and e!pression are in a state of what Deleuze and Guattari call 1reciprocal presupposition. 8e can follow the tra6ectory of a force across its entan2lements with other forces &planin2 applied to a succession of woods.# form A an or2anization of functions or 3ualities A is not materially separate from its substance. but the dust will settle. The strands of the web can be unwound. the states they pass throu2h as they become a table. The distinction between /ictor and /an3uished is real.'.1( The form of an e!pression or a content can be separated from its substance.1. and we can follow the tra6ectory of a thin2 as it passes from one knot of forces to the ne!t &human body from technical school to workshop+. They are mutually determinin2. 0t is that substance. to different effect dependin2 on the woods" 3ualities+. they are distinct in nature. 0t is possible to make a further distinction by isolatin2 the formal aspects of content and e!pression from their substance. and their condition as end product ha/e an order and or2anization that could be called the 1form of content. seen from the point of /iew of . Complicated it is. This formal or2anization of functions could be called a 1form of e!pression. the separation is only possible in thou2ht.
0n fact. This time. That unity does not suppress the actual duality between content and e!pression. is a useful one. the perspecti/e is imposed from outside. on a different. Dominatin2 action &function+ and chan2e of state &chan2e in 3uality+ are two poles of the same process A the encounter between e!pression and content. Form of e!pression and form of content fuse into the form of the encounter itself. in which each recei/es a determination in its stru22le with the other. in thou2ht. 0f we take the abstraction one step further and look at the interface itself A what happens between the form of e!pression and the form of content A we 2et a set of abstract relations between abstract points. Thinkin2 in terms of Pa2e '< function and 3uality and bracketin2 the substances of e!pression and content is a way of e/acuatin2 the poles of dualistic processes. . le/el. we ha/e created a unity that did not e!ist in actuality. but e!ists alon2side it. 8e ha/e e!tracted a unity from a duality. . it replicates it. far from suppressin2 the duality. the 1dia2ram1 '' of a /ectorial field: point &tool+ bearin2 down at such and such an an2le with so much pressure on point &wood+ that yields to it to such and such a de2ree. . Bore precisely. Dather than two irreducible formations. we ha/e two ed2es of an interface. %ur unity$in$thou2ht is an e!pression en/elopin2 the &double$ed2ed+ encounter as its content: a new content$e!pression duality. . The distinction. this time conceptual. howe/er. Distin2uishin2 a form of e!pression from a form of content permits us to isolate that dynamic aspect of both formations at their determinin2 point of impact.the actions to which it submits and the chan2es of state throu2h which it passes.
Beanin2 for Deleuze and Guattari is this process of translation. words that e/aporate into the air. reactualized. 8hat occurred once as 2enesis &of a table+ comes back inert &the flash of a thou2ht. 0t is in the process leadin2 from one to the other.The form of the encounter we e!tract is not a 1form1 as we normally think of one. Thou2ht repeats the interrelation in its own substanceF it mimics the encounter. nor in the thou2ht of that 2enesis. by a further translation. The dynamism is lifted out of one substance and incarnated in another. an inte2ration of disparate elements. establishin2 a parallel network of /ectors. into written or oral lan2ua2e &phonemes or written characters in their syntactical interrelation+. an interrelation of relations. The dynamism can be rethin2ified. composed of a number of interactin2 /ectors. but between different points &concepts instead of tools and wood+. 0t is a dia2ram of a process of becomin2. >racketin2 substance is a heuristic de/ice that enables a real 1translation1 to take place &in the etymolo2ical sense of a ""carryin2 across1+: the interrelation of relations crosses from one substance &the thin2ness of tools and wood+ to another &the ideality of thou2ht+. The kind of 1unity1 it has in no way /itiates that multiplicity A it is precisely an interaction between a multiplicity of terms. 0t in/ol/es a fundamental redundancy: what occurred once in wood is repeated in thou2ht. letters dryin2 on a pa2e+. 0t is not static. 0f meanin2 is as it has been described here A an interface between at least . Pa2e '? Dound Two Beanin2 is not in the 2enesis of the thin2.'* 8hat occurred once as thou2ht is repeated in written or spoken words. nor in the words written or spoken of it. 0t is a dynamism.
bein2 an apprentice. hands. each with its own substance and form. and pertain to such different le/els of reality. makin2 a table+ ha/e such different re2imes of or2anization and lines of causality. #nother infinite fracturin2. common form. trucks. deli/ery. each encompassin2 clouds of hetero2eneous elements without number. a tree. tableness+ and an order of functions &bein2 a person. rain. 5!pression can only cut throu2h the fo2 and affect content by ceasin2 to be itself. each of these elements is itself an encounter between force fields of content and force fields of e!pression. #s we ha/e seen. the handle of the tool. into .two force fields. it is also true of that encounter"s encounter with the words we apply to it. it slips from our 2rasp. that on close inspection we see that between them there can be no actual 1conformity. sunderin2 with brain wa/es and fin2ers and word processor keys and paper pulp and consonants.1 '9 0f we try to pinpoint the encounter. a customer order. 0t must surrender itself to the cut of the blade. >ut many thin2s inter/ene between what has been defined as the form of e!pression and the ed2e of the blade: a boss. /arious sta2es of woodness. techni3ue. #nd between the blade and the form of content: a piece of wood. #nother interstitial /oid. nor e/en correspondence. The e!pressi/eness of thou2ht 2ettin2 packed into letters and phonemes. The 1hand$ to$hand combat of ener2ies1 comes to a head when the plane sha/es the wood. intentions. 0t must become the content$tool in the dominatin2 hand of the worker. #n order of 3ualities &treeness. %ur ori2inal duality has fractured into countless new dualities proliferatin2 in e/ery direction. between a form of content &an order and or2anization of 3ualities+ and a form of e!pression &an order and or2anization of functions+ A 2it stands to reason that there can be no direct causal relation between content and e!pression. a body. bein2 a woodworker. or more specifically. 0f this is true of the woodMtool encounter.
0f the dia2ram is indeed an inte2ration of disparate elements which ne/ertheless retain their distinctness. Thou2ht surrenderin2 itself to pen and pi!el. and a2ain in ideality &concept to concept+.'? The dia2ram combines a past &the workin2 of the wood+ and the future of that past &the thou2ht of the woodworkin2+. The only way out is to say that the dia2ram"s decepti/eness is precisely what makes it faithful &and /ice /ersa+. and if it is struck with the same redundancy as the meanin2$process it dia2rams. 0f meanin2 is a process of translation from one substance to another of a different order and back a2ain. the dynamism occurs twice twice: after bein2 translated into ideality &concept to concept+ it is ree!ternalized in words &phoneme to phonemeF letter to letter+ to resume its life amon2 thin2s in a new capacity. #ctually. 0f meanin2 is the in$ between of content and e!pression. The dynamism occurs twice: once as 2enesis in a state of thin2s &tool to wood+.forms of content which enter other causal circuits: speech. it is nothin2 more &nor less+ than the bein2 of their 1nonrelation. what it mo/es across is an Pa2e '@ unbrid2eable abyss of fracturin2. but does not e!plicitly acknowled2e that fact. and electronic media. but it skips o/er its own 2enesis A the present of the contentMe!pression encounter constituti/e of thou2ht &the unthou2ht of thou2ht+. then it is in a sense a slei2ht of hand. Deplay: 8hat the dia2ram dia2rams is a dynamic interrelation of relations. print.1 '< The non of the relation means that e/erythin2 said earlier to support the fidelity of the dia2ram of meanin2 can be turned a2ainst it. The dia2ram a2ain combines a past &the thou2ht of the woodworkin2+ and the .
the elided present.future of that past &pronunciation. 0f meanin2 is becomin2.1 The system of woodworkin2 techni3ues is ne/ertheless un3uestionably connected to chan2es in the wood"s 3uality. '@ They are not: wood and tool are cau2ht in their own circuits of causality and no . and because it reproduces the in$betweenness of the affect in the fracturin2 of its own 2enesis. The interrelation Pa2e ') of relations between the wood and the tool bears no resemblance to that between concepts. and false in its trueness to its content. in this case the present of the contentM e!pression encounter constituti/e of speakin2 or writin2 &the unsaid of communication: afterthou2ht+. it is a becomin2$other. e/en if they are separated from it by an abyss or two. in that it en/elops in that substance the same affect. The e!pression of meanin2 is true in its falseness to itself. publication+. the dia2ram reduplicates the process it dia2rams. >ut it is true. 0t is the alienation of the same in the different. like the in$between of tool and wood. which bears no relation to that between phonemes or letters: 1no conformity or common form. and the words that en/elop both are un3uestionably connected to the bipolar process of woodworkin2. skippin2 o/er its own 2enesis. 0n each instance. %ne more time: 0t is stretchin2 thin2s to say that the same affect is reproduced on both sides of the abyss of translation. and the sameness of the different in its alienation from itself. nor e/en correspondence. 0t is temptin2 to call these separation$connections parallelisms. The dia2ram is false. Translation is repetition with a difference. 0n skippin2 it. The &non+relation is a separation$connection. in that it contracts a multiplicity of le/els and matters into its own homo2eneous substance. is at any rate a /oid.
as restricted to the conceptual or lin2uistic planes+ the abstract machine is the sub6ect of meanin2 &in the sense of the a2ency responsible for its unfoldin2+. made you. The separation$connection of translation is more an asymptotic relation than a parallelism. 3uality. which it en/elops from a particular an2le. as the trace of a process of becomin2. 8hat brin2s these formations to2ether is the 1abstract machine. or statement. recapitulates on a 2i/en le/el. Deleuze and Guattari occasionally call meanin2 1essence1 &Deleuze particularly. the other to 2ou2e another woodF and no sooner do the words encounter that incision than they are swept away from both wood and tool. in such works as Proust and Si2ns and .'. # dia2ram is a contraction of the abstract machine. that made that tree. bound for circulation in a book. 0t is the meanin2 process. Beanin2 is the 1relation of a nonrelation.1'( The abstract machine is interpretation. made that worker. >ut it is a relation nonetheless. from the point of /iew of a 2i/en e!pression. brou2ht her to that tool. and the ""meanin21 is the formal dia2ram of forces e!tracted from the encounter in 3uestion. who or what introduces them to each otherJ 4o one person or thin2. brou2ht it to that workshop. 0f meanin2 is a meetin2 between asymptotic lines of causality which ha/e no common form or correspondence. most fortuitous. one destined to be reimplanted in a kitchen. made these words. brou2ht them to these pa2es. and A perhaps most mysterious of all A induced you to keep readin2 this interminably drawn$out e!ample. 0n the case of 1meanin21 as commonly understood &that is. but the infinity of forces. of formations with skew tra6ectories.sooner meet than are separated.1') the meetin2. can be considered a de facto dia2ram from which a formal dia2ram of the operati/e abstract machine could be de/eloped. some willed. #ny si2n. across a bottomless pit.
and the words that en/elop both are un3uestionably connected to the bipolar process of woodworkin2. Beanin2 is the 1relation of a nonrelation. the other to 2ou2e another woodF and no sooner do the words encounter that incision than they are swept away from both wood and tool. which bears no relation to that between phonemes or letters: 1no conformity or common form.1 The system of woodworkin2 techni3ues is ne/ertheless un3uestionably connected to chan2es in the wood"s 3uality. nor e/en correspondence. '@ They are not: wood and tool are cau2ht in their own circuits of causality and no sooner meet than are separated. brou2ht her to that tool. some willed. made you. bound for circulation in a book. made that worker.The 7o2ic of Sense+. that made that tree. who or what introduces them to each otherJ 4o one person or thin2.'. Pa2e ') of relations between the wood and the tool bears no resemblance to that between concepts. >ut it is a relation nonetheless. one destined to be reimplanted in a kitchen. 0t is called that because as the point of intersection between formations. 0t is temptin2 to call these separation$connections parallelisms. and A perhaps most mysterious of all A induced you to keep readin2 this interminably drawn$out e!ample. brou2ht it to that workshop.1') the meetin2. but the infinity of forces. of formations with skew tra6ectories. most fortuitous. made these words. across a bottomless pit. 8hat brin2s these . The separation$connection of translation is more an asymptotic relation than a parallelism. e/en if they are separated from it by an abyss or two. brou2ht them to these pa2es. 0f meanin2 is a meetin2 between asymptotic lines of causality which ha/e no common form or correspondence.
and the words that en/elop both are un3uestionably connected to the bipolar process of woodworkin2. # dia2ram is a contraction of the abstract machine.1 The system of woodworkin2 techni3ues is ne/ertheless un3uestionably connected to chan2es in the wood"s 3uality. the other to 2ou2e another woodF .formations to2ether is the 1abstract machine. '@ They are not: wood and tool are cau2ht in their own circuits of causality and no sooner meet than are separated. or statement. 0t is the meanin2 process. e/en if they are separated from it by an abyss or two. which it en/elops from a particular an2le. in such works as Proust and Si2ns and The 7o2ic of Sense+. 0n the case of 1meanin21 as commonly understood &that is. as restricted to the conceptual or lin2uistic planes+ the abstract machine is the sub6ect of meanin2 &in the sense of the a2ency responsible for its unfoldin2+. which bears no relation to that between phonemes or letters: 1no conformity or common form. #ny si2n. can be considered a de facto dia2ram from which a formal dia2ram of the operati/e abstract machine could be de/eloped. recapitulates on a 2i/en le/el. and the ""meanin21 is the formal dia2ram of forces e!tracted from the encounter in 3uestion. nor e/en correspondence. Deleuze and Guattari occasionally call meanin2 1essence1 &Deleuze particularly. 0t is temptin2 to call these separation$connections parallelisms. 3uality. 0t is called that because as the point of intersection between formations.1'( The abstract machine is interpretation. from the point of /iew of a 2i/en e!pression. Pa2e ') of relations between the wood and the tool bears no resemblance to that between concepts. one destined to be reimplanted in a kitchen. as the trace of a process of becomin2.
recapitulates on a 2i/en le/el. 8hat brin2s these formations to2ether is the 1abstract machine. 0n the case of 1meanin21 as commonly understood &that is. made you. Beanin2 is the 1relation of a nonrelation. from the point of /iew of a 2i/en e!pression. but the infinity of forces. across a bottomless pit. 0f meanin2 is a meetin2 between asymptotic lines of causality which ha/e no common form or correspondence. as the trace of a process of becomin2. . The separation$connection of translation is more an asymptotic relation than a parallelism. Deleuze and Guattari occasionally call meanin2 1essence1 &Deleuze particularly. made that worker. which it en/elops from a particular an2le. brou2ht it to that workshop. as restricted to the conceptual or lin2uistic planes+ the abstract machine is the sub6ect of meanin2 &in the sense of the a2ency responsible for its unfoldin2+. can be considered a de facto dia2ram from which a formal dia2ram of the operati/e abstract machine could be de/eloped. brou2ht her to that tool.and no sooner do the words encounter that incision than they are swept away from both wood and tool. bound for circulation in a book.'. that made that tree. made these words. who or what introduces them to each otherJ 4o one person or thin2. # dia2ram is a contraction of the abstract machine. 3uality. and the ""meanin21 is the formal dia2ram of forces e!tracted from the encounter in 3uestion. and A perhaps most mysterious of all A induced you to keep readin2 this interminably drawn$out e!ample. in such works as Proust and Si2ns and The 7o2ic of Sense+. most fortuitous. #ny si2n. brou2ht them to these pa2es. >ut it is a relation nonetheless. 0t is the meanin2 process. of formations with skew tra6ectories.1'( The abstract machine is interpretation. or statement. 0t is called that because as the point of intersection between formations. some willed.1') the meetin2.
addin2 and subtractin2 3ualities. Still. captured in a re2ularizin2 network of forces. there is always the possibility that the e/ent will be carried far enou2h afield that it will fall from its accustomed framework. Since the action of this reproducti/e network of forces is 3ualitati/ely different from that of the producti/e network of forces from which the e/ent arose in all its sharpness. the formations in interaction A from one point of /iew so unified in their effect &a table is born+ A crumble beneath us. multiplies it. >ut the multiplication of the e/ent is also its domestication. Power delimits and distributes the potential thus released. # dia2ram 2i/es us a handle on it by e!pressin2 it as a bipolar inte2ration. diffracted. 0ts dynamic potential is simultaneously carried to a hi2her power and dulled. the content was. The . makes it repeatable.1 Force culminates a boundless potential. 0t takes the uni3ueness of the e/ent to its limit. The e/ent remains on uncertain 2round. #s we ha/e seen. and will be many thin2s. it deser/es another name: 1power. is. *9 The institutional dimension of reproducibility does not imply a firmness under foot or fi!ity of connection. Translation adds another le/el of definition &de$finition+ to an e/ent"s dynamism.Pa2e '( infiniti/e is an especially apt form in which to e!press an essence: translation on the le/el of thou2ht and lan2ua2e catapults the ine!haustible comple!ity of each uni3ue encounter"s conditions of emer2ence into an indefinite circuit of reproduction and systematic /ariation. Since e/ery repetition of a process repotentializes it. 0t repotentializes it. if we mo/e out from cuttin2 ed2e of any particular occurrence of an encounter forward or backward in time or in any direction in space.
you cannot pinpoint any contact. 0n itself. 8hen sword sears flesh A on second thou2ht. and will be many functions. Beanin2 is the contraction %f difference and repetition in a self A e!pirin2 e!pression. 4o sooner do we ha/e a unity than it becomes a duality. a transformational carryin2$ o/er to another site or substance. The moment of death is un2raspable. many happenin2 returns. Power is the resuscitation of meanin2. is best e!pressed by two infiniti/es: 1to cut.1 *< # person is either still ali/e or already dead. The thin2s were. are. The fact that an e/ent can be reproduced &the fact that the dynamism is connectable. are. 0n the separation$connection of the act of meanin2. 0ts accomplishment is its e/aporation in the infinite inter$ Pa2e *play of its seethin2 components. For re$production is translation. For Deleuze. the e/ent has only e!tinction. the separation runs deeper than the connection. :al/e the distance . The functions were. and will be many functions.e!pression was. can be reinserted into states of thin2s+ does not belie its utter uni3ueness &its separation or difference from all other e/entsF the absolute sin2ularity of the conditions of occurrence of any 2i/en reinsertion+.1 1to die. the essence of essence. 4o sooner do we ha/e a multiplicity than it becomes a proliferation of fissures con/er2in2 in a /oid. The uni3ueness of the e/ent means that its happenin2 is always also its undoin2. let"s stick with our e!ample A when plane 2ou2es wood. is. and will be many thin2s. the essence of meanin2. Fractured. 5/ery step falls in a/oid. all. Neno"s parado!. 4o sooner do we ha/e a duality than it becomes a multiplicity. 0ts reproducibility means that it will ne/ertheless come a2ain to be undone: to each e/ent.
. The wood is always about to be cut. in a manner of speakin2 A someone told the woodworker to make that table. chance and destiny. but 2ou2e they did. will cut.*@ surface and depth. The boss"s words did not physically 2ou2e. only multiplyin2 surface &the surface of blade and the surface of the woodF the surface of the blade and the two surfaces of the wood after incision+. only the scintillatin2 abyss of a future$ past. or has 6ust been cut. uni3ue and repetitious. :as cut. the unity of a multiplicity. =et it cuts. instantaneous. but a meanin2 without depth. absolutely particular and superhumanly abstract. Definite tenses keepin2 company in time. The e/ent of the 2ou2in2 is empty. and may combine a2ain. different and the same.1 as always timeless and alone. and a2ain . sense and nonsense. They are serious attempts to pack meanin2 into the smallest Pa2e *' . The cuttin2 has no present. 0n the slash between their future and their past: ""to cut. The same words and tool may ha/e combined in the past. 8ords can cut. hal/e it a2ain.*? 0t is a meanin2. but in the infiniti/e. . The parado!es should not be taken as mere fri/olities. insubstantial. acti/e and e!tinct &1sterile. 0t can be en/eloped in words. the blade will ne/er reach its 2oal. empty and o/erfull. and so on. but that doesn"t make it any safer.between the blade and the surface. 0t is an e/ent. The comple!ity of the e/ent leads ine/itably to the kind of parado!ical formulations in which Deleuze deli2hts in The 7o2ic of Sense: essence as instantaneous and eternal.1 e/aporati/e+. like an incorporeal blade crossin2 the /oid between the inertness of sounds e/aporatin2 into the workshop air and the formati/e action of a tool in all its material density. with no reco2nizable tense.
one nature. and multiplicity of meanin2 are not mutually contradictory. in precise and useful ways. into dualities of content and e!pression.1 e/aporatin2 in the ""sterile1 atmosphere of thou2ht and lan2ua2e.*. # parado! is not a contradiction. The unity is a real 1dia2ram1 en/elopin2 the real dynamism of a duality and depositin2 it. as 1effect. perchance. They may be thou2ht of as le/els. as #nti$%edipus and # Thousand Plateaus set out to show. 0t does not ne2ate. They are moments or aspects of a process. The unity is before. duality. and should be prepared to 6ump at any moment. 0n between: the future$past e/ent of meanin2. or 1plateaus. 0t is twice. howe/er.possible space without betrayin2 it with simplification. and it is after. The duality is a real distinction between the o/erpowered and o/erpowerin2 formations those materials are taken up in. The unity. The multiplicity is a real hetero2eneity of sites and substances. *) 8hich ne/er ceases to di/ide into a multiplicity of sin2ular elements and composite materials. They are mutually determinin2. # parado! abolishes contradiction. The unity is somethin2 else a2ain: the real monism of matter. in reciprocal presupposition. and A below the 3uantum le/el of matter and beyond the synapses of our brains A one unified field. . on a pa2e. 5ach of these le/els is real. as 1cause. it compounds. The meanin2 can always be unpacked. 8e must remember. and can choose to emphasize that le/el"s connection to or separation from the others &the relation or the non+. into unifyin2 conceptual and lin2uistic contractions.1 lost in the 2ritty 1depths1 of the 2enesis of matter. Beanin2 as local fissure and cosmic contraction. Parado! and the lau2hter of the 2ods. 5ach has its e!pository efficacity. For there is only one world. that the 2round is ultimately unstable. >ut they can be unra/eled.1 8e can operate on whiche/er le/el seems ade3uate to the problem we are dealin2 with.
repeat the process on the resultin2 si!teen se2ments. >ut the apparent interiority of the fi2ure is misleadin2. a fractal is a fi2ure with a fractional number of dimensionsF for e!ample. 8hat you end up with looks like a snowflake. Such a fi2ure can be e!pressed as an e3uation ¶do! with precision+. %n close inspection.*@'. 0n spite of its infinite fissurin2. 0n non$5uclidean 2eometry. The outline is endlessly di/idin2 and is therefore infinitely riddled with proliferatin2 fissures. The easiest fractal to understand is one between a line and a plane. remo/e the base se2ment. optical effect. or a plane and a /olume. measure it into thirds. 0nstead. build an e3uilateral trian2le with the middle se2ment as its base. it maps a procedure &the e3uation is an 1abstract machine1 as the principle of a becomin2+.Dound Three >ein2 is fractal. it is seen to be a network of bifurcation: duality. and e/en has a name &the . and so on to infinity. the e3uation does not strictly speakin2 describe the fi2ure. 4ow start with an e3uilateral trian2le and perform the same operation on all three sides simultaneously.?( dimensions. somethin2 between a point and a line. it becomes a web of proliferatin2 fissures in infinite re2ress toward the /oid. 0t is a specific fi2ure that can be accurately described. 7ike the directions abo/e. %n still closer inspection. Start with a strai2ht line. a line and a plane. it looks like and can function as a unified fi2ure if we adopt a certain ontolo2ical posture toward it: monism as produced meanin2.och cur/e+. The fi2ure can ne/ertheless be assi2ned a precise /alue: it has '. as one would describe the contours of a static form. *( The e3uation is a set of potential operations . repeat the Pa2e ** process on the resultin2 four se2ments.
each of which would be different dependin2 on when the process was stopped. dependin2 on our purpose. it is the reproducibility of the fractal. duality &cut+. 0n one sense. This aspect is missin2 in this e!ample because the fractal proliferates accordin2 to a principle of self$similarity. but only if the fissurin2 is arbitrarily stopped at a certain le/el &produced meanin2 as e/aporati/e end effectF monism as the redundancy of the inert doubleF momentary suspension of becomin2+. 8e skipped multiplicity. and approach$to$the$/oid &the unreachable limit toward which the process tendsF death+ are in mutual presupposition but are really distinct.&affectsF /ectorial relations between pointsF abstract dynamism+ that comes 1before. and are therefore capable of bein2 unra/eled and minutely analyzed &e/en death. as >lanchot has shown+. The transformations are identical. >ut as we ha/e seen. 8hat is missin2 is chance. 0f chance /ariations are thrown in &the 1throw of the dice1 in .1 but is not a sufficient cause.1 as 1cause. Bonism &contraction$inte2ration+. there is a multiplicity Pa2e *9 inherent to e/ery meanin2 encounter taken separately. the potential for 2eneratin2 from the same e3uation a /ariety of dia2rams. since it needs someone or somethin2 &another abstract machine+ functionin2 on a different le/el of reality to actualize it by writin2 it clown or workin2 it out in a dia2ram &e!pression 6umpin2 the abyss and mo/in2 into content throu2h the inter/ention of an asymptotic line of causality+. 8e can operate on any of these le/els. so any two se2ments on any le/el are symmetrical. The dia2ram is drawable. in that each dia2ram en/elops a number of hetero2eneous le/els.
redundancy.9' Pause 8hat do we ha/e so farJ # slew of slippery concepts. creatin2 a formation resemblin2 a shoreline with islands.The 7o2ic of Sense and 4ietzsche+. . reciprocal presupposition. the endless snowflakin2 will de/iate into a truly random fi2ure in which no two se2ments are the same.1 The 1plane1 of 7ife itself &the 1cosmos""F nature$cultureF the abstract machine in its widest connotationF monism in its other aspect. Hncannily familiar as the shore may seem. %nce thrown. contraction$inte2ration. 0f randomization is taken one step farther and the chance /ariations of line$draw and cut are freed from the constraint of a trian2ular startin2 point. function. asymptotic causality. an abstract dynamism at a le/el at which it is a sufficient cause+ is a 1space$fillin2 fractal1 of infinite dimension. 3uality. form and substance of e!pression. #s it proliferates. the dice are destiny. Dionysus snickerin2 at fate as he steals an e!tra turn. This is called a 1random walk. #head lies nothin2 with the plane reliability of solid 2round. They seem to con2re2ate into two 2roupin2s. the fracturin2 will fill more and more space. Computer 2raphics employs fractals 2enerated by controlled stochastic procedures &pro2rammed de/iations+ to simulate natural formations. %ne set is best suited to a semiotic analysis of local encounters: affect. or what will flash across the synapse &pure instantaneous e/ent+. howe/er. 9>ut nature is ne/er effecti/ely controlled &causin2 but uncausedF foundin2 but unfounded+. =ou can ne/er predict where the subatomic particle will appear. 5/ery moment in life is a step in a random walk. e/entually producin2 a unified plane$effect. lookin2 back re/eals no 5den of interiority and self$ similarity. but which is still mathematically describable. as 2enerati/e matter$9'ener2y. God as a drunken 2ambler. form and substance of content. no snowflake state to re2ain. it will snake in and out on itself.
99 5/erythin2 is up for continual rein/ention. 0n fact. bein2. they self$combust in playful parado!. . That is. they are lo2ical operators or heuristic de/ices to be adapted as the situation re3uires.Pa2e *< dia2ram. /oid. is meant to add up to a system or a uni/ersally applicable model. They are less slippery than supple. The concepts were formulated to help meet the challen2e of thinkin2 the uni3ue. nonsense. immanence. 0n Cinema 0. The other to far$reachin2 speculation: meanin2. 4o two books muster the same array. Deleuze and Guattari themsel/es cannot be accused of makin2 a method of them. Puttin2 the two to2ether is the most fun. no two people will find a 2i/en formulation satisfyin2. Since no two people"s sense of play is alike. destiny. 5/ery situation is uni3ue and re3uires a specially tailored repertory of concepts. cosmos. They should under no circumstances be crystallized into a methodolo2y. none of which would be especially welcome in any woad of Proust"s. chance. to meet the challen2e of thinkin2 A for there is nothin2 in this world but uni3ueness. =ou will find that you cannot use the concepts without chan2in2 them or the way they interrelate. for e!ample. 9* 8hen Deleuze writes solo he tends to use different kinds of conceptual mi!es and concentrates on different aspects of problems than Guattari. 7ike all of Deleuze and Guattari"s concepts. 0n Proust and Si2ns. taken alone or to2ether. they are specifically desi2ned to make that impossible. 4either set. becomin2. he describes no less than si!teen different cate2ories of cinematic si2ns. %n the speculati/e le/el. Deleuze describes four Proustian 1worlds1 with /ery different semiotic or2anizations. Pick any local encounter and apply the semiotic set to it.
1 # 1substance1 is a formed matter &the thin2 understood as an ob6ect with determinate 3ualities+. and a 1matter1 is a substance abstracted from its form. as common sense mi2ht dictate. Since content recei/es form only throu2h its encounter with e!pression.Focusin2 in on another localized encounter will illustrate this conceptual /ariability. content is ultimately a bundle of forces both actual and potential. and since the bundle of forces that is content is a dominated one. and lead us by a different route back to broader 3uestions of lan2ua2e and meanin2. the most final formulation of school content would be: a selected set of humanoid bodies 2rasped as a biophysical matter to be molded. and is not reducible to an ob6ect. Deleuze and Guattari distin2uish between 1substance of content1 and 1matter of content. is lar2ely irrele/ant. The answer becomes ob/ious if the 3uestion is rephrased: 8hat 2oes into a schoolJ The content is the students. Bore precisely still. Bore precisely. Thus ""human bein2s of a certain a2e and a certain le/el of ability1 &the enterin2 students as . There are actually two le/els of content in play here. it is human bein2s of a certain a2e and a certain le/el of ability. what is tau2ht in the school. it is the Pa2e *? human potential of those bein2s. either as content or e!pression+. That. for as we ha/e seen. Dound Four Take a person in an institution.9< 8hat is the contentJ 0t is not. a hi2h school for e!ample. as any 2raduate knows. in other words isolated from any particular encounter between content and e!pression &the thin2 as all the forces it could embody in all the encounters it could ha/e.
the essence is 1the makin2 of a docile worker1 &future aspect+F from the an2le of content. 8hat is the form of e!pressionJ 0f a form of e!pression is an order and or2anization of functions. it is 1the makin2 docile of an adolescent1 &past aspect+. is 1to$make$ youn2$body$docile. and the answer will be: To build 2ood citizens. The chan2in2 placement of the 1of1 takes us from the pole of e!pression to the pole of content by switchin2 the emphasis from the function. then in this case it is the comple! of administrati/e rules. 8hat a school does as an o/erall process is its 1essence. and 1humanoid bodies 2rasped as a biophysical matter to be molded1 &the students" human potential+ is the matter of content.1 to the 3uality. therefore. before that the infiniti/e e!pressin2 an essence can be split in two. 1the makin2.1 8e saw.1 from action to passion. The school board"s rulin2s are not literally hammered into the Pa2e *@ students. laws. Thus the form of content is the architecture of the school itself. 1docile.formed by primary school+ is the substance of content. and traditions that determine how a school is laid out and what it doesF the substance of e!pression is the phonemes and letters embodyin2 those functions. The interrelation between these terms is 3uite different than in the woodworkin2 e!ample. The essence.1 8hat mi2ht that beJ #sk any politician what a school is for. Content and e!pression are relati/ely disen2a2ed. Substance of content and substance of e!pression do not come to a head in the way they did when tool met wood. The substance of content is not embedded in the form . 9? 8hat e/ery student body as substance of content enters is a school. This time we will make them 2erundi/es: from the an2le of e!pression.
a set of strate2ies operatin2 in nature and spread throu2hout the social field. so there are in fact two forms of content. has a form to walk around in. but not to the school. The definition 2i/en earlier of the form of content as an order and or2anization of 3ualities applies to the student form. The sub6ect is not psycholo2ical. # student. each relatin2 to the matter of content in different ways. for which another definition would ha/e to be in/ented. it is not contained in any one mind. %ut of all the potential in the human body. makin2 the fractal bifurcations of the process more immediately /isible. The terms of the analysis ha/e to be multiplied and modified accordin2ly. %ut of all the ways a body can be docile. 8hich is not to say that it is material in any deterministic way: 2enes result from chance mutation. ha/in2 been determined as content by different forms of e!pression for different len2ths of time &a school ne/er 2raduates+. 0t is a whole woad composed of . 8hich is not to say that it is simply interpersonal: it is also in the technolo2y that defined the kinds of producti/e work our docility ser/es. 8hich is not to say that it is simply socioeconomic: it is also in the raw materials at the basis of that technolo2y and in the 2enes that define the physical and intellectual potential of the human body. 0t is in the interactions between people. This selecti/e a2ency is the sub6ect. for e!ample. The 2ulf between content and e!pression is wider. somethin2 selected the particular kinds of docility our schools de/elop. The sub6ect is a transpersonal abstract machine. but belon2 to /ery different lines of causality. somethin2 selected human bein2s of a certain a2e and ability.of content. Student and school 6oin in the same content formation. somethin2 selected its capacity to be a docile worker. but walks the halls and e/en out the door. This e!ample has more le/els or 1strata1 and more causal lines directly in/ol/ed in the actual encounter. 9@ 8e need to ask one final 3uestion: 8hat is the sub6ect of the e!pressi/e process of schoolin2J %ut of all possible contents.
The form of e!pression on the most 2eneral le/el is composed of words and their combinations. all fractured by chance. Since words can and do couple with none!istent thin2s. or for that matter the electronic zeros and ones of machine lan2ua2e or the oscillations of radio wa/es A it is the materiality of the medium. 7in2uistic e!pression per se is psycholo2ical. . The form of content is the state of thin2s within which the words themsel/es are 2enerated &the content A e!pression encounter en/eloped 1/ertically1 in the lin2uistic form of e!pression+. or simply for2o any pretense of horizontal encounter. The substance of e!pression is the phonemes of speech. it is our world A and from the /ery precise an2le of the /ery localized e/ent of a hi2h school 2raduation. The substances of content are the respecti/e states of thin2s of the two forms of content considered in their materiality. 8ith the proper conceptual tools. Pa2e *) That the sub6ect of meanin2 is transpersonal is perhaps easier to accept for an e!pression of woodiness or studenthood than for one. and the more distant and autonomous state of thin2s with which the words are coupled A if there is one &woodworkin2F schoolin2: the content A e!pression encounter en/eloped 1horizontally1 in the words applied to it+. #lthou2h it is a whole chaotic woad. or the letters on a printed pa2e. of commitment. The content as a whole is two forms$substances of content considered as force fields.an infinity of causal lines on countless le/els. we can unra/el its se/eral strands. That e/ent lies in a re2ion of relati/e stability and clarity. yesJ Beanin2 in the strictly lin2uistic sense is in the mind. say. and the relations of force obtainin2 between them. the 1/ertical1 form of content is the crucial one. noJ 8e must adapt our terms a2ain.
0t e!ists only in relation to its /ertical content. # classic e!ample: sayin2 10 do1 at a weddin2 ceremony. 9. that it transformationally duplicates. the lin2uistic e!pression has no sub6ecti/e interiority. The e!pression 10 do1 does not dia2ram a more or less distant encounter. %nce spoken. course. conscious thou2hts and intentions play a part in the process. 0t is an abstract machine which. or interrelation of relations. but only as one line of causality amon2 the many proliferatin2 in the fractal /oid. and the dynamic in$between. There is no horizontal content with which the words 10 do1 couple. . %f Pa2e *. and so on A no psycholo2ical unity here. 0ts relation to its /ertical content is one of culmination: it is the end effect of an interrelation of relations that it en/elops as its own 2enesis. is immediately bipolar: on one side it or2anizes a form$substance of content. 5/en considered as a dia2ram en/elopin2 the abstract machine &s+.1 9) # sub6ect which is bipolar. as always. each pole of which is a sub6ect in its own ri2ht. only a redundancy of outsides: the meanin2$effect as e/aporati/e double. The &non+relation by which the o/erall abstract machine brin2s the content formed by the machinic assembla2e and the e!pression formed by the collecti/e assembla2e of enunciation into an asymptotic encounter is called a 1double articulation. to the dynamic state of thin2s within which it is 2enerated.1 >oth are abstract machines in their own ri2ht.The sub6ect is the a2ency that selects which words are 2enerated and coupled with which states of thin2s. %n the side of content it is called a 1machinic assembla2e1F on the side of e!pression it is called a 1collecti/e assembla2e of enunciation. and on the other a form$substance of e!pression.
and ta! law. in a kind of leap in place. 8hat has brou2ht them to say those words and what makes those words effecti/ely transformati/e is too bi2 to fit into a sin2le mind. alon2 with your entire se!ual. The stereotypical nature of the e!pression is an indication that it is fundamentally impersonal.9( >efore you open your mouth you are one thin2. 4othin2 touched you. They do not couple with or insert themsel/es into another encounter: they couple bodies in their own encounter. They ha/e no afterlifeF they are not written downF they are not retranslated into content to cut like a blade.<# particular man and a particular woman say 10 do. 10 do1 is not a particularly ori2inal thin2 to say at a weddin2. 0f it e!presses .1 Their words undoubtedly ha/e personal meanin2 for them in their heart of hearts. social pressure. >ut their personal intention is not in itself responsible for the ma2ical transformation that has touched their li/es. yet you ha/e been transformed. social. 10 do1 is a connector: it binds two bodies. 0t is a comple! interplay of laws. They coincide with &double+ and culminate &trans$form+ the /ery state of thin2s that 2enerates them. =ou ha/e been pronounced man and wife. =our le2al.the words 10 do1 e/aporate irretrie/ably into the air. #nd it is a component of passa2e: it transfers those bodies into a new network of power relations. psycholo2ical and financial economy. 10 do1 effects an 1incorporeal transformation1 &another name for e/ent+. That is the sub6ect of the enunciation: a transpersonal abstract machine contractin2 countless le/els and en/elopin2 many matters. customs. >y the time you close it you ha/e landed in another world. =et in their /ery e/anescence they ha/e lastin2 repercussions. and familial status instantly chan2es. =ou may file a 6oint ta! return. Say ""0 do. They e!pire with the breath that speaks them.1 and your life will ne/er be the same.
as uncaused cause of e!pression: the abstract machine of marria2e cannot make the essence without makin2 it essentially redundant. The stereotypical nature of the culminatin2 e!pression does not detract from the e/ent. Dou2hly the same interrelation of relations is actualized. in which case it repeats the incorporeal transformation. it is a remarkably dull one. 8ho has the saltJ 0 do. different bodies. two entirely different meanin2s. >ut there is one pro/iso: the words must be spoken by a different couple. The 101 is not a person. People speakin2 without bein2 fully conscious of the inhuman a2ency that speaks throu2h them. 0n the abstract machine. two entirely different 1statements. Barria2e would be meanin2less if only one couple did it. lent new life. %r. >odies leap in place in ritualized dance. Demonic possession would be a more fittin2 model for this process than personal e!pression. Dou2hly the same social function is fulfilled. 10 do1 as a form of e!pression can be reiterated in another weddin2. The abstract machine must brin2 a parade of bodies to stand in the same enunciati/e position. The form of e!pression 10 do1 can be reiterated in a way that does not repeat the same incorporeal transformation. 0nto the ears of each new bride and 2room it whispers an incantation spoken throu2h the a2es by le2ions of our dead. #ncient words. There are 2hosts in the machine. brush across poised lips. #s real as the /ariations are. the o/erall dia2ram remains the same. 0t cannot say 10 do1 6ust once. Dipe youn2 bodies animated by secondhand words. Glossolalia. to use Foucault"s terminolo2y. Ghoulish indirect discourse. Same e/ent. The same words. # /ariation on a theme.Pa2e *( an indi/idual sub6ecti/ity. 0t is a social function.1 <' 8hat makes them different is not of a 2rammatical or lo2ical nature. 0t is of its essence. The same 101 speaks A only throu2h a different body. %n those le/els they are .
#ustin calls a 1performati/e1 statement: words that directly accomplish an act and chan2e a state of thin2s merely by bein2 said. That is how #ustin himself saw it when he be2an his in/esti2ations. Deleuze and Guattari 2o e/en further. in addition to any meanin2 it may ha/e in the narrow sense of semantic &in our /ocabulary. 0n order to con/ey that meanin2. it immediately con/eys a presupposition without which the literal semantic content could not be e!pressed. howe/er. # simple e!ample illustrates the point: 1Paul suspects Cohn"s arri/al. The performati/e is often understood as a special cate2ory of statements.identical. he was led to conclude that the performati/e is less a special cate2ory than the most manifest instance of a transforma$ Pa2e 9tional 1dimension1 within e/ery statement.1 The semantic content of the statement bears on a mental act of Paul"s concernin2 Cohn"s location. the statement tacitly posits that Cohn has in fact arri/ed or is arri/in2. 7. 0n the end. 1horizontal1+ content. a commandin2 1illocutionary1 &nondiscursi/e+ ""force1 responsible for its pra2matic success &or lack thereof. <* 5/ery statement con/eys. The determinin2 factor is most immediately the state of thin2s within which the words are spoken. The literal meanin2 is simultaneous with and indissoluble from this 1implicit presupposition1F both are couched in a sin2le 2rammatical . they 3uestion whether it is possible to separate semantic content from the nondiscursi/e force in any ri2orous way. Followin2 %swald Ducrot. but which is not itself manifestly stated. in the case of an 1unhappy1 outcome of lan2ua2e$culminated force+. The 10 do1 of marria2e is a prime e!ample of what the lin2uist C. 0n other words.
not an assertion of bein2.<9 5/ery presupposition of this kind is also simultaneously and indissolubly an e!istential act: to say somethin2 in away that makes it 2o without sayin2 is to do somethin2. >ut that term obscures an essential point about incorporeal transformations: the doin2 of a sayin2 is not determined by or primarily aimed at the le/el of ideas &1ideo$1+. 8hat becomes of a meanin2 encounter is attributable to its uni3ue and contin2ent 1conte!t.se3uence. . To emit an implicit presupposition. is a 2roundless becomin2. that in itself is a lot: to make thin2s 2o without sayin2 could stand as a definition of 1ideolo2y1 as a motor of social relations.<< 5/ery meanin2 encounter. 5!tralin2uistic yet internal to lan2ua2e. or unifyin2 2roundwork upon which an endurin2 referential truth may be asserted or a system of belief built. is to say somethin2 in such away that it need not be said. Ducrot says. it should ri2htfully be the ob6ect of lin2uistics. 5/en if that somethin2 is only to direct or deflect a con/ersation. 0mpulsion is a 2eneral function of lan2ua2e. 7an2ua2e by essence includes e!tra/erbal factors. 8hich lo2ical presupposition embedded in a particular 2rammatical se3uence at any 2i/en moment is in no way determined by a1lo2os1 &1$lo2y1+. Pa2e 9' Hnity$in$mo/ement is the only unity lan2ua2e knows. as we ha/e seen.1 the nondiscursi/e network of forces within which particular speakin2 bodies are positioned and which ordains what those bodies say$do and thus where$how they subse3uently 2o. the lo2ical unity of which can only be concei/ed as one of mo/ement: the direction in which a speech$dri/en body is impelled. 1Conte!t1 is an infinitely comple! concertation of forces.
in other words sets of relations between points of pressure and resistance. The head of the house says 18ho has the saltJ1 &read: Don"t 6ust sit there. Beanin2 is only secondarily what the words say literally and lo2ically. the dynamism of a meanin2 encounter. for Christ"s sake. may be captured and inducted into a network of repetition &/ariation+ called 1power. #t bottom. The principal says 1:ere"s your diploma1 &read: Get a 6ob. sucker+. <? 0f conte!t is immanent to lan2ua2e. 0f our description has been accurate. for Christ"s sake+. 0t is more accurate to say that conte!t is 1immanent1 to rather than 1internal1 to lan2ua2e. hand it to him+.1Conte!t1 is what has been identified here as 1/ertical content1: a dynamic formation whose encounter with e!pression effects a transformation 2uided by an abstract machine and culminatin2 in a statement.1 Conte!t is the 6uncture at which force is translated into power. in other words A and outside words. the unity$in$mo/ement produced by a conte!t. and if those formations are force fields. 5/ery meanin2 encounter con/eys an implicit presupposition which more or less directly takes the form of a parenthetical imperati/e. in a shared field of e!teriority. 0f it in/ol/es two basic formations &of content and e!pression+. lan2ua2e has no inside. The minister says 10 now pronounce you man and wife1 &read: >e fruitful and multiply. and if the encounter between them is therefore an interrelation of relations. Deleuze and Guattari call the repetition$impulsion of this imperati/e function immanent to lan2ua2e the 1order$ . it is what the circumstances say. then what brin2s them to2ether is best described as a field of e!teriority: a relatin2 of interrelations of relations &in a nonrelation+. #s we saw earlier. 0t is imprecise to say that the unity$in$mo/ement produced by the 1conte!t1 and culminated by a statement is 1internal"" to lan2ua2e. %ne whispered by an inhuman a2ency that borrows for a moment a pair of lips. lan2ua2e as a whole is nondiscursi/e.
=ou doJ A then do it A it"s as 2ood as done. The transformation into polite family member thus effected is of a different kind than the .1<@ 1%rder1 should be taken in both senses: the statement 2i/es an order &commands+ and establishes an order &positions bodies in a force field+. but actually only positions one to be polite. Bany statements re3uire other words or physical actions to complete any transformation that mi2ht transpire. . The orderin2 force of lan2ua2e is most readily apparent in con/entional situations. J. one effecti/ely asks a 3uestion by sayin2 10s . in accordance with the laws of eti3uette.1 10 do1 is the slo2an for marria2e and salt.1 but the chan2e in a state of thin2s induced by the 3uestion is only consummated after recei/in2 &or failin2 to recei/e+ an answer. <) >ut as the CohnMPaul e!ample indicates. and fails in its mission if not followed by the salt shaker.word. Ban and woman are transformed by 10 do1 into the sacred procreati/e partnership of husband and wife. in accordance with the laws of God and the State. The dinner$table 10 do1 effecti/ely states a willin2ness to accept a responsibility. mot d"ordre. the French term for order$word. means 1slo2an. The order$word culminates transformations that place the concerned body or bodies in a position to carry out implicit obli2ations or follow a preset direction. The trinity formula for meanin2 in motion. 0mplicit presupposition L e!istential imperati/e L incorporeal transformation. 5ater of food is transformed by 10 do1 into polite family member. Pa2e 9* 0n e/eryday lan2ua2e. especially e!plicit rituals markin2 a life transition. For e!ample. not all words that accomplish an act by bein2 said chan2e a state of thin2s so dramatically. .
0"m ready to 2o out and e!ploit or be e!ploited.marria2e transformation: it is repeatable for the same body and easily re/ersible. with the redundancy of an anonymous murmur. 0 can make the re3uired distinctions. 0 know what is masculine and feminine.<( 5/ery society reproduces standardized conte!ts within which e/ery word spoken echoes those spoken in all the others. the content of school courses is indeed the analo2 of the woodworkin2 tool. 0t con/eys myriad mini$ order$words. howe/er indirectly. innocuous as it may seem. howe/er faintly. . and in the history of a family most likely is repeated and re/ersed many times. 0t is indeed irrele/ant from the point of /iew of its intellectual content. 0 know who"s boss. later summed up in the students" mute 2esture of takin2 their diploma. <. historically and in class. >ut it does play a role. 0t is less punctual. we 2lossed o/er the status of what is tau2ht in the schools. 8ho has the answerJ 0 do. takes place in a social or institutional conte!t that inflects it with an imperati/e. 8hat is tau2ht is a subsidiary form$substance of content in which the form of e!pression of schoolin2 must necessarily alienate itself in order to effecti/ely interface with the primary content of the students and do its 6ob of makin2 them mouth the endless incantation of social acceptabil$ Pa2e 99 ity. 5/ery utterance is struck. The principal"s 2raduation speech en/elops this len2thy incorporeal brain$car/in2 process in an implicit presupposition: the duty and ri2ht to enter the wonderful world of work. 5arlier. 0 know what 1democracy1 is. #lthou2h the teacher does not hammer. 5/ery utterance. but no less an order$word for that. in conduct as in 2rammar. 7an2ua2e is an endless hi2h school.
0ts own essence &the meanin2 of meanin2+ is the incorporeal transformation.?. 101 is not an e!pressi/e sub6ect.8hat effecti/ely speaks is the transpersonal a2ency that creates the conte!t by orchestratin2 a local encounter between content and e!pression and by brin2in2 that body to the 101 of that site. 0 mouths one"s words.?' # summary: # meanin2 is an encounter between force fields. 5ither you are or you aren"t. and will undoubtedly say a2ain. #t its most incisi/e. Free indirect discourse A reported speech not attributable to an identified speaker A is the fundamental mode of lan2ua2e. &5/en thou2h you can ne/er put your fin2er on the specific answer that made a youn2 body into a willin2 worker. 0t insinuates itself into the body tapped for possession by the ""one1 hauntin2 the premises. only a lin2uistic marker indicatin2 what body is addressed by the whispered imperati/e immanent to that particular position within that particular state of thin2s. it is the 1essence1 &dia2ram.+ The order$word as e!istential imperati/e &standardized function of e!istence+ is the motor of the incorporeal transformation. 5/en at its most diffuse it still participates in the mystery of death. #s en/eloped in an actual statement it A not . Bore specifically. The 101 does not inhabit the body. 5/ery body has as many 101s as there are 1ones1 in the world it mo/es throu2h. 0t is the unsaid doin2 of a sayin2. abstract machine+ of that encounter.5/ery word is laden with the implicit presupposition of what 1one1 says$thinks$does in such a circumstance. >ut it can also be spread out &across many a classroom+ and drawn out &o/er 2rades and years+ without losin2 its character. The first person only repeats here and now what the anonymous third person of the abstract machine has already said elsewhere in the mists of time. but is attached to the place of enunciation. which comes in many /arieties. it is as instantaneous and as localized as the cut of the knife.
but also the essence en/eloped in these. The dia2ram was a literal drawin2. ?* #t its most potent. it does not lose its character as an implicit presupposition. it is a connector that couples bodies and at the same time a component of passa2e that instantly transfers them from one set of power relations to another &thus culminatin2 the incorporeal transformation. Pause >efore we do. 0t too comes in many /arieties.1 for e!ample. or proposition A is the elementary unit of lan2ua2e. 5/en at its most cumulati/e.Pa2e 9< the phoneme. word. and is certainly the least understood. desi2natin2 both a 2i/en statement culminatin2 an incorporeal transformation and a social function. #n incorporeal transformation was a chan2e in a state of thin2s and the dia2ram of that chan2e. #t se/eral turns in the precedin2 remarks we ha/e obser/ed phenomena of redundancy. or /ice /ersa. . 0ts importance is ri/aled only by the complete lack of interest in it thus far displayed by the &admittedly few+ commentators who ha/e written on their work. The 101 spoke. 5ssence was on paper and in thou2ht. but only as spoken by a 1one1 splattered across the social field. did double duty. or e3uation. we need to take a look at what is probably the most pi/otal. or anonymous command immanent to a state of thin2s: do it. concept in Deleuze and Guattari"s philosophical /ocabulary: /irtuality. /erbal formulation. 1%rder A word. 0t can be a connector but not a component of passa2e. of which it is the operator+. 0t may be a summation of many a mini$order$word &correct answers+. as well as bein2 an abstract machine in the depths of matter. and all alon2 the way ha/e been fi2htin2 an apparent ambi2uity or doubleness in the terminolo2y itself.
. the distinction was presented as the difference between somethin2 actually in e!istence and a potential for e!istence. in the dualism of its composition. This is 2ettin2 closer to the mark. and a fully ade3uate abstract e!pression of any phenomenon must be tailored to its uni3ueness and is thus absolutely particular to it. and that a potential is not a possibility. ?9 Dound Fi/e >ack to the fractal. 8e ha/e seen that a fractal has three le/els or dimensions: the monism of its optical effect. but the second mi2ht still sound stran2e. 0t was implied that the same distinction was also between the particular and the abstract. These formulations are of only limited usefulness: under certain conditions an e/aporati/e effect can be reinserted into a state of thin2s and con/ert into a cause. The first point is a 2enerally accepted premise of poststructuralist thou2ht. it has ceased to be a fractal to become a snowflake or a plane. and a passport to the adroit use of Capitalism and Schizophrenia. 0n other words. the fractal as such can only e!ist on the second le/el. Pa2e 9? Finally. 0n spite of their inseparability. the dualism of its mode of composition and the /oid of its infinitely proliferatin2 di/ision. These are strictly simultaneous and mutually determinin2. they are in reciprocal presupposition. the present an abyss+.The distinction between the dual aspects of these concepts was e!pressed /ariously as the difference between an e/aporati/e effect and a 2enerati/e process marshalin2 cosmic ener2ies. Hnderstandin2 how a potential differs from a possibility is the key to Deleuze and Guattari"s concept of the /irtual. but only if it is borne in mind that 1e!istence1 is not a static presence &bein2 is a fractalization. #s a unity.
and attributes it potentials that it did not pre/iously ha/e &bein2 in a bookF bein2 part of a system of institutional inculcation and practice+. #n important aside: The future 1perspecti/e1 in 3uestion is not reducible to a sub6ecti/e point of /iew on an ob6ect. in the actual interaction between their essences.?< # fractal 1in itself1 &that is. and the abyssal past of its 2enesis. an insubstantial cuttin2 function that does but does not be. The thin2 1in itself1 is only the sum total of the 2raspin2s to which it lends itself. prior to a particular encounter+ is ne/er a plane. one of which o/erpowers the other and adapts it to its own ends. # thin2 can e!ist only in relation to at least two dimensions that belon2 to it yet lie beyond its bein2. it is pure di/ision. like e/ery meanin2 encounter. and in affront to their simultaneity. 0t is a perspecti/e in 4ietzsche"s sense: an 1ob6ecti/e perspecti/e1 that includes both obser/er and obser/ed. #s a first appro!imation. 2rasps its 1ob6ect1 from a particular an2le. but it can 1function as"" a plane because the human /isual apparatus will 2rasp it as such to certain effect at a certain Pa2e 9@ point in the fractal"s unfoldin2. The same correcti/e should be applied to the 1outside perspecti/e1 discussed earlier in relation to the lo2ical e!traction of forms of content or e!pression from their substances. those dimensions can be thou2ht of as dimensions of time: the future of the fractal"s reception &it can effecti/ely be a plane if obser/ed from the proper perspecti/e+. 0t is a perceptual e/ent which. a set of an2les of . like any thou2ht or perception.0n the /oid. is an interrelation of relations between two dynamic formations. and in that of the obser/er. but on their outside ed2es. The becomin2$plane of the fractal is a potential for transformational capture inherent in its essence. 7o2ical analysis.
Thou2ht$perception is a foray by one body into another"s essence in such a way that the second is carried outside itself.?@ To continue: future reception. altered. # threshold leadin2 across the synapses toward a new bein2. it enters new circuits of causality. Thou2ht$perception reaches into thin2s. where it meets another body and draws it into an interaction in the course of which it locks onto that body"s affects &capacities for actin2 and bein2 acted upon+ and translates them into a form that is functional for it &3ualities it can recall+. in the double sense that they are ne/er all$encompassin2.potential inter/ention by outside bodies. or mutual openness. two ways of passin2: a relati/e limit abo/e which a thin2 ceases to be itself but 2ets a new lease on life in a different modeF and an absolute limit below which no thin2 can 2o but upon which all thin2s tread. and in the same motion returns them. The dimension of the future mode and past 2enesis are absolutely real for the fractal but are not itF it cannot e!ist without them. ?? Thou2ht$perception is always real and always of the outside. >ut to remain in its dynamic present it must continue to di/ide. past 2enesis. into the depths of matter. The thinkin2$percei/in2 body mo/es out to its outermost ed2e. Deleuze and Guattari say that these dimensions are 1/irtual. Partiality does not preclude ob6ecti/ity.1 The /irtual is the . # set of affects. Two thresholds. but they do not e!ist with it. rushin2 impossibly into the /oid of its own past. From there. is drawn in. #ll thou2ht and perception are therefore partial. transferred into the substance of the thinkin2$percei/in2 body. a portion of the ob6ect"s essential dynamism. and a foundation of nonbein2. The fractal proper is in$between. To a/oid the parado!ical formulations the use of temporal e!pressions force upon us. launches them up throu2h the atmosphere of lan2ua2e. and that they follow upon a constitutional affinity. To pass into its future as a plane it must cease to be itself. of two bodies for one another.
0t can come out the far side of thou2ht and be dia2rammed at a point before it becomes a plane. 0t subsists in the actual or is immanent to it.1 # thin2"s actuality is its duration as a process A of 2enesis and annihilation. #ctualization is always death: a becomin2$other. but one that no lon2er mo/es. Since the process is infinite. but a dead one: before a fractal can be drawn and reinserted into a state of thin2s. 4ietzsche"s term. The /irtual is real and in reciprocal presupposition with the actual. but this time without ceasin2 to be itself. of mo/ement across thresholds and toward the limit. 5/en as itself. ?) There was one other way in which a fractal can cease to be. # fractal process can be stopped and dia2rammed at any point in its di/idin2. its infinite di/ision must be stopped in thou2ht. or a stayin2 the same but inert. The element of immanence A thou2ht$matter A could be called eternal. To a/oid philosophical ba22a2e. the number of potential dia2rams is also infinite. each of the same fractal. 0t is a fractal. but not without introducin2 an unwelcome reli2ious or Platonic tin2e. #ll the potential dia2rams are immanent to the many le/els of any one. ""untimely.Pa2e 9) future$past of the present: a thin2"s destiny and condition of e!istence &as one A the second meanin2 of monism a2ain+. The resultin2 dia2ram is the outcome of a fractal process. The o/erall identity of the fractal is .1 suits it best. as potential effects of the same process.1 To dri/e it home that actuality is dynamic they use the word 1becomin21 in place of 1bein2. the fractal is multiple and boundless. e/en between its two limits. 5/ery stop will yield a different dia2ram. they are more likely to say that a thin2 is 1actual1 than that it 1e!ists. but does not e!ist e/en to the e!tent that the actual could be said to e!ist.
1 Possibility is a restricted ran2e of potential: what the thin2 can become without ceasin2 to be itself &how the process can end without endin2 up outside+. The difference between the two . Thus between the limits there subsists a multiplicity of potential fractals. The fractal proper can therefore be described. of 1possibility. brin2in2 it all the closer to the /oid. as a continuum of /ariations lea/in2 one relati/e limit &its birth as a line+ and approachin2 another &its transformation into a plane+ as well as simultaneously lea/in2 and approachin2 a dual absolute limit &2enesis$in$di/isionLabyss+. This in$between constitutes a le/el of /irtuality lower than that of new bein2 or nonbein2: what could be called the fractal"s realm Pa2e 9. 0n reality the relati/e and absolute limits toward which it tends are one and the same: the further the 2enerati/e di/idin2 process is taken.en/eloped in each dia2ram. # mathematical e3uation or /erbal instructions on how to construct the fractal are 1dia2rams1 that e!press its latent identity$in$process more ade3uately than a static representation. but is not manifestly present in it. #ll of the dia2rams deri/able from the same e3uation &abstract machine+ subsist in each actual dia2ram produced &repetition as an inherent dimension of difference+. 0t cannot be. since the fractal"s identity &becomin2+ is one with the 2enerati/e process that must end for a 2i/en dia2ram to be produced. for con/enience. 0n theory. the more the fractal snakes in on itself and be2ins to appro!imate a planeF but the same motion furthers its fissurin2. the deri/able e3uations could be actualized one after the other and laid out in a series mo/in2 from its be2innin2 as a line toward the point where the fractal could be taken for and effecti/ely function as a plane.
0t can only . if the phrase is spoken by a spy. The way in which a 2i/en dia2ram as e/aporati/e effect contracts within itself all the other deri/able dia2rams is called 1implication. The way in which the e3uation as a process contracts the future and the past into itself is called 1complication. ?. Deturnin2 to the Cohn$Paul e!ample. 0t cannot be made any more e!plicit than the sin2ular and unreproducible mo/ement that it is.kinds of limit is that one can be crossed &if the process is captured by outside forces and thereby sa/ed from itself+ and the other cannot. 0t can be unpacked. 8hat is implicit in a speech act can be made e!plicit. the presupposition of Cohn"s arri/al is 1implicit"" in the statementF the e!istential act of deflectin2 a con/ersation is 1complicit1 in it &both can be said to be 1immanent1 to. The e!istential act &a deception to lure the listener into a murderous trapJ+ is a sin2ular and unreproducible mo/ement in space$time &maybe e/en into the ne!t woad+. translated into a lo2ical proposition &meanin2 as the 1e!pressed1 of the statement+ en2enderin2 a series of other propositions constitutin2 a chain of lo2ical possibilities. The implicit presupposition can en2ender a series of lo2ical propositions in continuity with one another &for e!ample. a number of clues as to Cohn"s actual whereabouts and what the speaker is doin2 in implyin2 his arri/al could be deri/ed from it+. or 1en/eloped1 in.1 because of the parado!ical noncoincidence &discontinuity+ of those two inseparable dimensions in reciprocal presupposition with the actual. 8hat is complicit is a physical potential Pa2e 9( that does or does not come to pass &meanin2 as 1attribution1+.1 because the continuity of the series of /ariations is a dia2ram"s most accessible le/el of latency. the statement+.
Biss O becomes the >ride. carryin2 them across one relati/e threshold &bein2 sin2le+ toward another: the implicit presupposition &2o forth and multiply+ of the 10 do1 marks the >ride and Groom"s departure on a 6ourney leadin2 ine!orably toward the 1do us part1 of di/orce A barrin2 the inter/ention of an outside force stron2 enou2h to defy e/ery weddin2"s statistical destiny &lo/eJ reli2ionJ boredomJ+. an essence complicates a discontinuity: the outside limits of marria2e. The 10 do1 is a component of passa2e that transforms the en2a2ed bodies into somethin2 other than what they ha/e been. 5/ery weddin2 is an actualization of the marria2e process. They are also of its essence. # statement"s e!istential imperati/e is always a death sentence.@.1 The absolute limit of marria2e is e/en more . 10 do1 holds all marria2es past and future in implicationF marria2e in 2eneral subsists in it as the whisperin2 1one1 without which the weddin2 would ha/e no meanin2. sin2ledom and di/orce. the boundaries without which it would ha/e no shape. in principle infinite. its culmination in a statement as e/aporati/e effect. ?( >ack to marria2e. but belon2 to a deeper le/el of /irtuality than the potential marria2es implicit in the slo2an 10 do. of all the ways different bodies can be 6oined in matrimony in different places by different authorities for different reasons to different effect &what the weddin2 could ha/e beenF its realm of possibility+.1 like e/ery ""0.The marryin2 10.be actualized. and if it is.1 is not sufficient unto itself. Bister = the Groom.1 to repeat a stereotypical incantation that makes the body to which it is attached coincide with a standardized function &social e3uation+. are an inte2ral part of e/ery weddin2. the essence of marria2e. could be e!pressed as a continuum of /ariation: a series. Thus in addition to implicatin2 a continuum. its passin2 sweeps the body in 3uestion toward a limit at which it is transformed into somethin2 other than what it will ha/e been. it needs to be possessed of the 1one. To wed. That meanin2.
but since the linearity of e!pression sprin2s from it &as endurin2 matter does from 3uantum ener2y @'+ it is described as 1superlinear. e!pressible as a realm of possibility: the connectin2 in actuality of one body to another as part of a life pro2ressionF the serialization of weddin2 after weddin2 o/er an implicit time span subsistin2 in each present connection. The sub6ect of the weddin2 is the social e3uation of which 10 do1 is the de facto dia2ram &the si2n of the culmination of a process. There are other desi2nations for them: P untimely 2enesis$destiny L durational procedureLpresent dia2ramF P insistent nothin2nessLacti/e becomin2Linert bein2F P pure /irtuality L /irtuality in the process of bein2 actualized L actualization arrested. # /oid is ine!pressible and has no particular shape. linearity &implicationF serialized de/elopment+.profoundly /irtual: it is literally death &unless of course the newlyweds are Bormon+. and surface &e!plicitnessF e/aporati/e optical or auditory effect+ are the three moments of the abstract machine.1@* Superlinearity &complicationF complete en/elopment+. Bore broadly. an inde! from which a formal dia2ram. the inescapable complicatin2 factor of the /oid. the sub6ect is the abstract machine is the insubstantial process of di/ision en/eloped by the e3uation: the incorporeal cut between sin2ledom and marria2e and between marria2e and death or di/orce. # sin2le philosophical term &essenceF meanin2F . for e!ample a discursi/e dia2ram consistin2 of a Pa2e <series of lo2ical propositions. could be de/eloped+. an e!perience no one can e/er ha/e &an e!perience only 1one1 can ha/e+. the discontinuity hauntin2 e/ery connection. The sub6ect of the weddin2 is the abstract machine of marria2e in its linear functionin2.
since the order$word acts to carry a body from one predefined set of potential relations to another. %utside the limits of marria2e: not the sin2les scene. the echoed refrain of the walkin2 dead.order$word+ can be used to straddle all three moments or dimensions for the /ery 2ood reason that in their multiplicity they are one. 5/ery step in the world of possibility skirts the impossibility of a 2enerati/e /oid. >ut perhaps lost in the zombied murmur of social acceptability there are presuppositions so implicit we don"t know how to hear them. 5/eryday lan2ua2e does not entirely strait6acket our potential. 0n e/ery order$word there is indeed an implicit presupposition of funereal normality. %utside producti/e work: in/ention. beyond boredom. not di/orce. but it does restrict us to the lowest le/el of our /irtuality. beyond reli2ion and ta!es. 0t limits the dynamism of our becomin2 to the stolid ways of bein2 deemed producti/e by an e!ploitati/e society. 0f the order$word as the basic unit of lan2ua2e is the culmination of a standardizin2 social function that makes a body do what 1one1 should do. This way of thinkin2 about thin2s mi2ht seem bleak. 1one1s so impersonal we . 0t deli/ers us to power. For if Deleuze and Guattari are ri2ht. discontinuity has the final word. maybe e/en beyond 1lo/e1 &that most potent of all 8estern order$words+. then we &10 and 01+ are imprisoned by the impersonality of lan2ua2e. but as yet unima2ined ways of bodies Pa2e <' mo/in2 to2ether. 0t takes us from one bland realm of possibility to another. This imprisonment is less an immobilization than a stereotyped pro2ression. %utside school: halls without walls. >leak it is at first 2lance. 5/ery step in time is a fissure. a uni/erse free for the learnin2. >ut it is ultimately 6oyous.
and 6ar2ons that often coe!ist in the same speaker. secondary function of lan2ua2e. Dewrite the slo2an of the Hnited States #rmy: dare to become all that you cannot be. not clear and distinct messa2es. 0nformation is /ital to this function. and chortle. Don"t plod the strai2ht and narrow path down the aisle A marry the /oid. information processin2 will always remain a deri/ed.don"t know how to place them in our 10. 4o matter how cybernated society 2ets. rather than limitin2 0 and 0"s realm of /irtuality. Don"t toe the line A be superlinear. it is in the occult sense. *. 8hat lan2ua2e con/eys are fundamentally redundant order$ words.@< 7an2ua2e as stora2e and retrie/al of pure information &the cybernetic model+ is a recent in/ention parallelin2 the rise of the computer. The Saussurian concept of 1lan2ue1 and the Chomskian concept of 1competence1 petrify li/in2 lan2ua2e into a structure. Complicate. @9 The order$word of Deleuze and Guattari"s philosophy is the anti$order$word of the call of the outside: listen closely for e!istential imperati/es which.1 deaths to breathe new life into our lun2s. 0f it is a medium in any essential way. 7an2ua2e is no less fractalized than any other thin2. for any departure from the rules laid down by the . These approaches are inherently prescripti/e. take it out of bounds. 7an2ua2e is not a transparent medium of communication. There are no constants of lan2ua2e. Pause Some ways in which Deleuze and Guattari"s theories of lan2ua2e differ from more familiar lin2uistic and semiotic approaches: '. idiolects. but only as the minimum semantic content necessary for the transmission of an imperati/e &the difference between 1hire1 and 1fire1+. 0t is fore/er fra2mentin2 into dialects.
not petrification. #t what point does one synchronous system end and another be2inJ 0s the . 7an2ue and competence are bedfellows to lin2uistic terrorism in the cause of uniformity. For Deleuze and Guattari. The operati/e concept is 1continuous /ariation. The Saussurian concepts of synchrony and diachrony are useless.1 @? 9. The problems of periodization na22in2 structuralist$ influenced disciplines testify to the constitutional inability of this framework to think in terms of becomin2. and to describe the mechanisms of passa2e from one continuum of /irtuality to the ne!t. # lin2uistic e!pression implicitly presupposes a continuum of /ariation between and across thresholds of meanin2 that are simultaneously thresholds of social functionin2. to analyze the mechanisms determinin2 which /irtual /ariation is actualized where.1 inde!in2 2rammar to relations of power and patterns of social chan2e.Pa2e <* lin2uist for a 2i/en dialect can only be concei/ed of as a de/iation from a norm. This is an in/itation for a dominant dialect imposed by one 2roup of speakers on others to become the lin2uistic 1standard1 a2ainst which the others are measured. is the essence of lan2ua2e. in other words endlessly. chan2e &incorporeal transformation+. #ny 2i/en lan2ua2e is a dialect amon2 others. 5ach dialect in the network /aries at the same rate as the functions its order$ words effectuate. in a network of power relations marked by 2rammatical formations standin2 as si2nposts to a site of e/eryday conflict. 0ts tasks should be to lay out a continuum of /ariations of the acts of sayin2$doin2 immanent to 2rammatical forms of e!pression. 7in2uistics should be a pra2matics that opens lan2ua2e to the /a2aries of 1conte!t.
shift 2radual or suddenJ :ow does it occurJ # synchronous structure is by definition a closed system of permutations. and the world is reco2nizable as the chaotic one in which we li/e. stasis e!ists only relati/ely &as a lower de2ree of difference: the repetition of different statements within the same relati/e limits of becomin2+. and is therefore lo2ically inconsistent with the open$ended pro2ress of diachrony. # cross$section of the present will not hit stable 2round. 0n the second. but descend into le/els of deepenin2 complication forkin2 infinitely into the future and the past. Deleuze and Guattari do not fault . The challen2e is to conceptualize the real conditions of production of particular statements &:ow does the system mo/e from one uni3ue permutation to the ne!tJ :ow is it fore/er becomin2 other than itselfJ+. The concepts of /irtuality and actualization allow us to think in the present and past$future tenses at the same time. the assumption is stasis and mo/ement is introduced as an afterthou2ht. The untimeliness of the /irtual in its reciprocal presupposition with the actual takes us entirely outside the false structure$history dilemma into a new dimension of fractal spatiotemporality. 0n the first case. # synchronous structure defines the lo2ical conditions of possibility of statements in 2eneral &8hat standard Pa2e <9 permutations can the system produceJ 8hat can it do without ceasin2 to be itselfJ+. to concei/e of the same and the different to2ether &continuous /ariation as the repetition of differenceF the order$word as transformati/e redundancy+. This does not mean that synchrony has simply disappeared in fa/or of diachrony. if at all. 0t 2ets us nowhere to say that synchrony is an instantaneous cross$section of diachrony. The terms of the problems forbid their solution.
@) The essential relation is that of a statement to the 2enerati/e process of 1/ertical content1 &the statement as order$word+. 0t subsists locally but 2lobally in each and e/ery one. Theories of the si2nifier replace this 1complicated1 asymptotic causality with an unabashedly perpendicular one accordin2 to which the statement lies at the intersection of two sets of rules. The term is a misnomer: the process is more multidimensional than 1/ertical. ?. # lan2ua2e does not e!ist in some pure and eternal realm outside the speech acts it produces. because the 2enerati/e a2ency. @@ 7in2uistics would do well to follow physics into the twentieth century by /enturin2 beyond the artificial calm of mere possibility. the abstract machine behind the order$word. into the unstable realm of the /irtual in all its immanence. beyond the implicit. because all enunciation is collecti/e and there is no indi/idual sub6ect to do the speakin2$performin2F second. a landmark pointin2 to a 2eolo2ic past. but for not bein2 abstract enou2h to account for chan2e A and its conditions of emer2ence. in relation to which the statement stands less as a 1content1 than as a culmination. First.lin2uistics for bein2 too abstract. is itself a /ariable in continual /ariation. chan2in2 with each actualization. in the same stroke. one 2o/ernin2 a Pa2e << .1 en/elopin2 many le/els and lines of causality. Qirtual and actual do not correspond to lan2ueLparole or competenceL performance. The relation of the si2nifier to the si2nified is not constituti/e of lan2ua2e. an e/aporati/e end effect. <.
of course. 0n other words. The 1horizontal1 combination of si2ns within a sentence and of sentences within a discourse does. a 2i/en statement"s efficient cause. The lurch of lan2ua2e. 0n so doin2. they dia2ram its formal cause as an abstract lin2uistic or semiotic machine. obey certain rules of formation. they cut it off from its efficient cause: the o/erall abstract machine that pra2matically determines the substance as well as the form of both content and e!pression in their double articulation. but they cannot e!plain why one substitution rather than another was effecti/ely made or why the same statement is repeated in different instances &let alone how it /aries functionally across those repetitions+. e/en to2ether with a set of paradi2matic rules. howe/er.1horizontal1 a!is of combination. Si2ns that ha/e dropped below that horizontal a!is supply a second smoothed$o/er dimension. These synta2matic rules are not. they unmoor lan2ua2e from its 1/ertical content. howe/er. the other a 1/ertical1 a!is of substitution. The infinite di/ision separatin2 e/ery e!pression from the ne!t and fissurin2 each internally is simply 2lossed o/er. purified of cut and stru22le. Synta2matic and paradi2matic rules describe how a statement is 2enerated as a form of e!pression. The complicated e!istential potentials en/eloped in unactualized statements are simplified into a pool of possible substitutions: metaphor .1 from the realm of /irtuality constitutin2 its real becomin2 as a hand$to$hand combat of ener2ies. Theories of the si2nifier reduce lan2ua2e to e!pression and e!pression to its form. >y bracketin2 the statement"s real conditions of social emer2ence. Paradi2matic rules define which 1/ertical1 substitutions can be made at each point in the ""horizontal1 flow of si2ns across the pa2e or of sentences throu2h time. its 1leapin21 between dimensions and emplacements. transformin2 the surface le/el of actualized statements &effects+ into a nice smooth lin2uistic line. appears as a tran3uil metonymic pro2ression alon2 an unbroken horizontal.
to remember that their occurrence is caused: the detachment from the /irtual is produced by determinable social functionin2s within a real network of power relations.as the latency of si2nifiers turned si2nified. 0n order to 2rasp the conditions of e!istence of these phenomena it is necessary to reattach them to their obscured 1/ertical content"" in all its fractal 2lory. most notably 1modern1 ones. 0ts dual causality &synta2maticLparadi2matic. >oth of these processes do indeed occur. >oth approaches reduce 1/ertical content1 to a si2nified &which >audrillard then claims has been abolished+. >audrillardian 1postmodernity1 2oes one step further and unmoors the 1horizontal1 line from the 1/ertical. horizontalL/ertical+ is lo2ical and tidy. Theories of the si2nifier are useful to the e!tent that Pa2e <? certain societies. pure unmoti/ated metonymy in a one$dimensional world without metaphor. 0t is crucial. howe/er. #n outside force must inter/ene to e!tract that potential and actualize it. Si2nification is inscribed in the essence of lan2ua2e as one of its own potentials: the potential for becomin2 other than it is &flat+. # kind of optical illusion. # neat two$ dimensional symbolic structure emer2es.1 creatin2 an ob6ecti/e illusion of unanchored slippa2e from si2nifier to si2nifier. This is precisely what Lacanians omit to do in their treatment of the unconscious as a metonymic-metaphorical deep structure. >ut it is also an illusion. do indeed e!tract the symbolic potential of lan2ua2e. and it is what >audrillard refuses to understand in his celebration of late capitalism as shimmerin2 metonymic surface. 8hat 0 ha/e called 1horizontal content1 &a second state of thin2s or force field with which certain classes of . or ob6ecti/e perspecti/e like the fractal"s afterlife as a plane.
secondary characteristic. a desperate humanist attempt to in6ect a comfortin2 sense of si2nificance into the seasonal reruns of our culture"s stereotyped symbolism. Deleuze and Guattari"s reintroduction of content should in no way be interpreted as the addition of a third dimension of romantic 1meanin2. 7an2ua2e produces linear series of si2ns and statements. Deleuze and Guattari reinstate content. a pra2matic embrace of meanin2 in its infinite but fractional dimensionality. # corollary to this is that the binarism of the si2nifierLsi2nified relation is a produced. 7an2ua2e necessarily presents many binarisms &content L e!pression bein2 the primary one+. >ut for them content is neither a si3nified nor a referent A a possibility that does not seem to ha/e occurred either to modernists or postmodernists. 8hat Deleuze and Guattari are after is a real perception of the superhuman becomin2 immanent to human bein2. . Pa2e <@ but they are produced by nonbinary mechanisms. @. once lan2ua2e comes to be seen as a senselessly replicatin2 one$dimensional 2ene.1 That time$worn strate2y is simply a denial of 1modern1 society"s inescapable two$dimensionality. Si2nifyin2 structures arise from nonsi2nifyin2 processes comprisin2 a multiplicity of /irtual spatiotemporal le/els and actual materials in reciprocal presupposition. it is discounted as none!istent &a typically postmodern mo/e+.o/erpowerin2 e!pressions are coupled+ is either dismissed as a 1referent1 lyin2 irretrie/ably outside lan2ua2e understood as a closed system or two$dimensional form of interiority &a typically modern mo/e+F or. but is itself superlinear.
1 @. The task of philosophy is to e!plore that ine/itable for2ettin2. The for2ettin2 will then be recast as a symbolic structural unconscious which will function in addition to &as a unity apart from and in reciprocal presupposition with+ the primary causal strate2ies. its complicated 2enesis must recede into the abyssal shadows from which it came.). The /irtual is the unsaid of the statement. That inferior de2ree of potential is not in this case the realm of lo2ical possibility &althou2h its mechanisms are lo2ically describable+ but A e3ually bland A an 1ima2inary. #s Foucault repeatedly contends. to reattach statements to their conditions of emer2ence. 0t will function. Hnder certain conditions of si2nifyin2 capture. into which it will be reinserted to ser/e as a new. a statement needs no interpretation.1R R #s the fre3uent references to Foucault were meant to indicate. but must be for2otten at least momentarily for a clear statement to be produced as e/aporati/e surface effect. the unthou2ht of thou2ht. but a 1stand1 &socle+ may be fashioned for it &its 1archi/e1 of implicit presuppositions may be recreated by ""archaeolo2y1+ in order to brin2 back to li2ht its realm of /irtuality &the immanent 1strate2ies1 that produced it+. The /irtual is not hidden in the sense of a repressed si2nified or lost referent. 0t is occulted. 1The statement is neither /isible nor hidden. the statement and its 1/ertical content1 will in fact be doubled by a repressed si2nified. 0t is real and subsists in them. For a statement or thou2ht to appear in all its apparent simplicity and clarity. but as part of a necessary clearin2. Deadin2 Deleuze and Guattari in terms of semiotic frameworks they e!plicitly re6ect A in particular Saussurian$ deri/ed systems A is the most common source of the . but accordin2 to different rules and at a lower le/el of /irtuality. secondary line of causality. Deleuze and Guattari"s theories of lan2ua2e are closer to Foucault"s than to any other contemporary thinker"s.
it is not . 0f the word all but disappears in # Thousand Plateaus. %ur 1humanity1 is to us as a plane is to a fractal: an ob6ecti/e illusion.* :ow there can be sensation without a unified sub6ect.1 empty effects that culminate a transformation whose complicated causality lies at other le/els. Stirrin2s that are not 6ust prepersonal. almost alone amon2 poststructuralist writers. more or less reproducible con2lomerate capable of bein2 taken in by its own ob6ecti/e illusion of identity. 0f it was chillin2. outside intentionality. they should be read to2ether. reser/e an important place in their thou2ht for the concept of 1sensation. apparently stable. wi/es. but not a reco2nizable human bein2 in si2ht. bodily but inhuman. or how inhuman intensities can produce humanity$ effects are 3uestions of synthesis: the 6oinin2 of separate elements throu2h chance encounters into an endurin2. There were 1humanoid bodies. =et Deleuze and Guattari pepper their books with the word 1intensity1 and. and zombies.1 Protestations in fa/or of 1human warmth1 betray an inability to feel an ardor of a different kind.1 husbands.@( Pa2e <) :abit is the ballast that chains the do2 to his /omit ' Deleuze and Guattari are sometimes accused of coldness. but impersonal. The pre/ious chapter may ha/e reinforced that perception. in particular Diff rence et r p tition and #nti$%edipus. it may be because in Deleuze and Guattari"s opinion human consciousness and identity are on the order of an 10 do. The same is true of Foucault. 1Synthesis1 fi2ures prominently in earlier works. To be read to best effect. open irre/ocably to chance.consistent unreadin2s that ha/e pla2ued their work.
# statistical process of this kind. in this case a set of natural laws. Somethin2 else comes alon2. to form a lar2er combination. Gi/en a particular 2rain. The resultin2 muck is an 1indi/idual. no one. each indi/idual is en/eloped in others. brou2ht to a point of accumulation by chance. They stay to2ether. stratum upon stratum.9 %n the way to identity: Buck Somethin2 comes alon2. can predict whether it will be one of the select.1? #n indi/idual is sin2ular A the element of chance assures that no two mucks are e!actly alike A but nonetheless multiple: a muck deposit en/elops a multiplicity of 2rains composed of a multiplicity of atoms. howe/er sa//y in sedimentation. can be called 1selection. 0n addition. but because it has become ubi3uitous.1 #n e!ample is sediment. They collide and stick. combinin2 chance and appro!imate necessity. the 2reater indi/idual of the deposit is .1 # selection is an act of perception. all of which followed multiple paths to their common a22lomeration. since somethin2. #ll that can be said is that a number of like particles probably will be. 4ot brute chance. 4ot all 2rains answerin2 to the description 6oin the 2an2. Bany 2rains follow from a /ariety of sources. Chance discrimination: the accumulatin2 2rains are in the same size and wei2ht ran2e and share certain chemical properties. #nother 6oins it. 7ayer accumulates upon layer. 1percei/es1 the 2rains that come to2ether in a layer. This is called a 1connecti/e synthesis.because the concept is absent. < # 2rain comes to rest. perhaps combine with somethin2 else a2ain Pa2e <. 1#bstract machine"" is another word for synthesizer. Hnder the proper conditions.
%/er time. but it is locked out of any future transformations &for e!ample. The ori2inally supple indi/idual has been transformed. or in a manner that could be called 1molecular. The basic chan2e is in the 1mode of composition"" or 1consistency1 of the indi/idual. this time a 1production of recordin21: ) once the particles and their 2eolo2ic pasts ha/e been re2istered in a stable formation. The end of this two$part connecti/e synthesis is the be2innin2 of a new synthesis. the minin2 of the rock to build a courthouse+: it has returned to the /irtual. The statistical accumulation started as a shiftin2 mass brou2ht to2ether by fra2mentary processes operatin2 particle by particle throu2h strictly local connections. in other words in the way in which the particles hold to2ether. under pressure. more re2ulated perceptions and more elaborate captures become possible: . or captured. %ozin2. the ability to be supple is still in the particles. or deactualizedF others carry o/er &basic chemical properties+F still others are added. The fluctuatin2 muck has ri2idified into a stable formation.1 The resultin2 multilayered indi/idual was then 2rasped as a whole by a set of outside forces workin2 in concert and molded into a well$defined superindi/idual or 1molar1 formation. 0n principle. or actualized &the ability to withstand 2ra/ity+. without ceasin2 to be itself.1 the creation of an indi/idual as if from scratch. while others are selected out.selected. %ne set of potentials has been deducted from the muck.@ Pa2e <( The connecti/e synthesis of the statistical accumulation of particles and their foldin2 and condensation into rock was a 1production of production. by another set of discriminatin2 forces &another perception+. Sediment folds and hardens into sedimentary rock. Certain potentials come into clear e!pression. for instance.
Sedimentary rock as a raw material is the content of a uni/ersal cate2oryF it could be called ¬ without ulterior moti/es+ a ""person. mineralo2y has abstracted a set of properties common to any number of distant deposits &in/entin2 a cate2ory+. The acts of perception in/ol/ed in this are not 6ust local selections of physical presence. Prospectors ha/e found the deposit and 6ud2ed it accordin2 to these distinctions. and directed toward more or less utilitarian ends. it is an 1e!clusi/e1 dis6uncti/e synthesis: it di/ides all but only 3uarries some. The connecti/e syntheses that made the muck and turned it to rock were passi/e. Buck is a supple indi/idual &e!istin2 locally and fra2mentarily. 0t employs a classification system of mutually e!clusi/e identifications A nominal identities A and chooses only the ones 6ud2ed suitable.1 0n this case. 0t was selecti/e. and has defined the appropriate type for the application. separation is the 2oal: di/ide and 3uarry. 0n keepin2 with its di/isi/e nature. with fluctuatin2 boundaries+. 0n the second synthesis. # dis6uncti/e synthesis can be . #s different as the dis6uncti/e synthesis is. 0t is inscribed in the balance books. # rock deposit is a superindi/idual &e!istin2 locally but 2lobally. recorded in the economy of capital. it cannot be separated from connecti/e syntheses: another case of reciprocal presupposition. has subdi/ided those properties &into types+. The dis6uncti/e synthesis that made it a buildin2 was acti/e. 4o concerted action by an isolable a2ent was in/ol/ed. with delimited boundaries+. 7on2 before the first bulldozer arri/es.1. or knowled2e. %nly then was the particular deposit selected. The acti/ity of 3uarryin2 is preceded by an apparatus of knowled2e that classifies the rock by kind and 2rade. but the selection came first and was in the interests of a con2re2ation.the deposit is 3uarried. it is called a 1dis6uncti/e synthesis. 0t was a product of self$reproducin2 cultural acti/ities drawin2 on a store of memory. The first synthesis was 2re2arious: find and lump to2ether.
Docks are not the only thin2s that come to these premises. but Pa2e ?also rises from them: its human a2ents are the result of connecti/e syntheses both biolo2ical and psychic.acti/e because it has connecti/e syntheses to act upon. a wall is built. and . and then continue on. con6oin in a less permanent way than mortar. :is power is far in e!cess of his physical prowess. Three walls 6oin it. The courthouse they frame is the site of a third and final synthesis. the dis6uncti/e synthesis leads to a new connecti/e synthesis. >ut le2al capture throu2h incorporeal transformation is only of conse3uence if preceded and followed by physical action &of police and 6ailors+. That such cooperation and complicity is normally forthcomin2 implies that /alue is collecti/ely attached to the 6ud2e abo/e and beyond his ( immediate attributes. and accused. #ny number of dis6oined thin2s. 0t swoops clown to capture connecti/e syntheses. law books. 0ts captures are essentially incorporeal: the pronouncement of a sentence instantly makes a man a criminal. awe. and if ac3uiesced to by the public.1 but not in the sense that it physically consumes its thin2s &the two earlier syntheses were more consumpti/e in that respect+. handcuffs. The dis6oined rock is methodically reconnected to itself in order to actualize a new potential: block by block. this time an acti/e one. follow their separate paths there. each the result of a uni3ue combination of connecti/e and dis6uncti/e syntheses. Finally. This 1con6uncti/e synthesis1 is also 1consumpti/e. # courthouse is more than a buildin2. This e!cess takes such intan2ible forms as respect for the law and its representati/es. 0t is also a con6uncture of 6ud2es. and their standardized knowin2 and 3uarryin2 procedures are the outcome of a di/ersity of cultural sedimentations.
a feelin2 in the air.'.'* # code is the same as a 1form1 in the sense discussed abo/e &an order and . we say that the transformation has created a 1surplus /alue. which is on the order of a 2lobal sensation emanatin2 from the courthouse con6unction. 0t can 6oin with others of its kind and lead. 0t is more like static electricity. The collecti/e consumption of an intan2ible e!cess and the consummation of a punctual process of transformation are the two aspects of the con6uncti/e synthesis: e/aporati/e e!cess$effect and the crossin2 of a threshold. The e!cess radiates diffusely from the scene of the 6ud2ment. # pattern of repeated acts is a 1code. The 1e/aporati/e1 e!cess can in fact be con/erted into a Pa2e ?' cause.1 # code is always of a 1milieu. a 2eneral effect.1 '' The story of the muck retold: The indi/idual of the first connecti/e synthesis was the outcome of repeated acts of erosion and flow endin2 in an accumulation of muck. to the election of a law$and$order candidate whose disciplinary attentions would then be la/ished on the connecti/e syntheses of the populace: more handcuffs. than a sealin2 of fate or a searin2 of flesh. and is not unrelated to the impressi/e appearance of the former muck within which the 6ud2e presides. often statistical.1 or relati/ely stable. For the con/ict. The sentence strikes like li2htnin2. #ny time a transformation on one le/el produces an e!cess$effect that bifurcates into a hi2her le/el causality. mi!in2 of elements &here. a trip out the door in handcuffs.intimidation. climatic and 2eolo2ic+.For the public. The accomplishment of an incorporeal transformation is necessarily accompanied by production of the incorporeal e!cess. satisfaction that 6ustice has been ser/ed. for e!ample.
The supple molecular code 2o/ernin2 wind$ and waterborne particles is replaced by a new 2eolo2ic pattern actin2 on the muck as a whole: the indi/idual is 1recoded1 as a molar formation.or2anization of functions+. facilitatin2 its insertion into a whole new le/el of synthesis: a con6unction with numerous other cate2orized indi/iduals. it was a 1deterritorialization1 &an uprootin2 of the indi/idual+ and 1decodin21 &a chan2e in the pattern of actions affectin2 it+. The recodin2 was directed by a dis6uncti/e synthesis that swooped down on the unsuspectin2 rock from a hi2her le/el of or2anization and applied a 2rid of identifications to it.') . it can be called an 1o/ercodin2. To distin2uish this recodin2 from its 2eolo2ic precursor. in a cate2orizin2 o/erlay of its indi/iduality. or persons. >ut only after bein2 transformed by a second connecti/e synthesis.'9 The muck. rather than an acti/e placin2 in relation of two hetero2eneous le/els+. #nd on the other.1'@ The o/ercodin2 2a/e the rock a nominal identity. and &re+recodin2 &the imposition of new patterns of connection with itself and its surroundin2s+. That recodin2 consisted in a condensation and foldin2 resultin2 in a rock deposit with ri2id frontiers: an ""interior1 &bounded+ milieu has separated off from the e!terior milieu throu2h infoldin2. %n the one hand.'< This is the 1double articulation1 of the last chapter. in a comple! assembla2e of thunderbolt 6ud2ment. but in its simplest form &two moments of the same passi/e process occurrin2 on a sin2le le/el.'? The superindi/idual of the rock deposit is an endurin2 1territory. would later become a form of content for operations of 3uarryin2 and construction. a 1reterritorialization1 &the rock"s reimplantin2 in a buildin2+.1 0ts capture by cultural forces was a two$pron2ed mo/ement. a form of e!pression in relation to its milieu.
the interaction between macromolecules forms feedback loops allowin2 one /ariety of macromolecule to reproduce itself by breakin2 down and recombinin2 others &perception$captureF passi/e e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis+. which then interact with each other as such &causal bifurcationF surplus /alue+. '. pro/es to be a multilayered formation of sta22erin2 comple!ity. biolo2ical. howe/er humble. the chemistry of the li/in2 cell is based on the propensity of certain molecules to connect end to end &statistical accumulationF indi/idual+ then automatically fold in on themsel/es &double articulationF supple indi/idual+ to form three$dimensional structures &molar indi/idual as the result of passi/e connecti/e syntheses+.Pa2e ?* #ny ob6ect we care to interro2ate. we still find the basic mechanisms repeated. 0n the proper medium. most intri2uin2ly: Euarks S Company The parado!es of atoms and the mena2erie of particles inhabitin2 them are well known: particle or wa/e. matter or . e/en below the 2rain of muck. and cultural strata. The whole process is the result of e/olution &natural selection+ and constitutes an infoldin2 of that aleatory outside. down to the /ery smallest &and lar2est+ le/el of all. and or2ans 6oin with other or2ans to a form a molar supersupersuperindi/idual capable of 2lobal sensations. some of which are preferred o/er others &o/erall con6uncti/e synthesisF o/erall surplus /alueF /alue 16ud2ment1+. For e!ample. The muck"s odyssey featured interlockin2 syntheses in/ol/in2 climatic. 0f we look below the le/el of the cell. Cells 6oin with other cells to form or2ans &inclusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesisF molar supersuperindi/iduals+. each of which is itself multilayered and recapitulates the same mechanisms in its own uni3ue way. 2eolo2ic. The cell itself is an infoldin2 of that process within a membrane &bounded molar superindi/idualF second capture+ and its re2ularization in a molar code &D4#+.
1 brin2in2 into bein2 one of the states the 3uantum phenomenon holds in /irtuality. their intrusion transforms it.0t chan2es the mode of reality of its 1ob6ect. 1Dealists1 make the unabashedly illo2ical assertion that yes. 1The 3uantum /oid is the opposite of nothin2ness: far from bein2 passi/e or inert. 0t simplifies a complication. This has led certain lo2ical people to deny their e!istence. The particle is produced in an encounter between two realities: it is cocaused. test it another way it"s a wa/e.*. it contains in a dimension of potential all possible particles.ener2y. They are Pa2e ?9 both particle and wa/e. a superposition of what are 1normally1 mutually e!clusi/e states. 0t is only statistically consistent because half the cause. 0t depends on the form the inter/ention takes.1 '( 8hen scientists use their instruments to try to pin down a subatomic phenomenon. both matter and ener2y. if you know its position you don"t know its /elocity. and therefore ha/e neither assi2nable position nor /elocity. the 3uantum . They are e/erythin2 and e/erywhere. The result is not entirely predictable. Euarks and thin2s ha/e the nasty habit of failin2 to obey the law of noncontradiction. 0f you know its /elocity you don"t know its position.1 Scientific perception actualizes a /irtual particle. they are /irtual. but no.*' 8hich state is selected to be here now is not arbitrary. they are real. Test it one way it"s a particle. 0n other words. they are not eitherLor: they are both and neither. This 1reduction1 of the phenomenon is called a 1collapse1 of its 1wa/e$packet1: many /irtual states which subsist e/erywhere and in e/erythin2 are contracted into a here and now. They are real but subsist in a dimension where our ob6ecti/e 1laws1 do not apply: ""abstract yet real.
the whole stratified world. is one 2iant perturber of /irtuality. does not obey our laws and is apt to elude us. confine it but not banish it.** #ll of matter. otherwise it would return to the 3uantum /oid from which it came. that eternal return of difference. 5ach le/el or stratum recapitulates mechanisms from the last . 0t mi2ht 2et borin2. %ur world is not static. and can coa! one of its states into e!istence. The physical and cultural woads are an infinite re2ress of interlockin2 le/els. 8e should thank God &or rather the lack thereof+ that the ob6ecti/e indeterminacy of the /irtual world that Pa2e ?< cocauses our becomin2 renders total control impossible. or contraction. 0t has no firm foundation on which to rest.half. The strata can en/elop chance but not abolish it. but since 5instein we know that they are only relati/e. 0ts e!istence. Their 6ud2ments strike like fate. Pause The upshot is: the assertion in the last chapter that be&com+in2 is fractal is not a metaphor. like that of the li/in2 cell. 0f it were possible. For it has no other place to be but in that crowded /oid. of an aleatory outside that it can only partially control. 8e can ne/er know its reality directly or completely. but we can be sure that it has reality outside our perceptions of it A if only because we are not the only thin2s that 1percei/e1 it. 0t has to be. that continual chance$ridden creation. would be an eternity of the same. The world is stable only to the e!tent that the strata workin2 in concert can re2ularize their infoldin2 of chanceF it is stable only within certain limits. 5/en an isolated atom is percei/ed: it is bathed in an electroma2netic field that 1perturbs1 it as surely as a scientist does. 0t is an eternally recommenced creation. depends on a constant infoldin2.
0n a molecular population &mass+ there are only local connections between discrete particles. a continual motion of mutual adaptation in a hand$to$hand combat of ener2ies. con6uncti/e synthesesF accumulation and foldin2F perception and captureF contraction and collapseF surplus /alues and causal bifurcationF double articulation. in the hopes that they may be found useful in understandin2 processes of structuration: the inte2ration of separate elements into more or less re2ular stratified formations. and o/ercodin2. but of mode of composition: it is 3ualitati/e.1 There are molarities of e/ery ma2nitude &the smallest bein2 the nucleus of the atom+. They are offered as a repertory to pick and choose from. 5/ery bifurcation to a new le/el has an essential element of randomness.on a lar2er scale. we ha/e a slew of concepts. Bolecular and molar do not correspond to 1small1 and 1lar2e. to remember that the distinction between molecular and molar has nothin2 whatsoe/er to do with scale. *9 Connecti/e. This is the cosmic fractal cut that sunders all thin2s and holds them to2ether: separation$connection.1 1indi/idual1 and 1society.*< # few obser/ations: '. and adds new ones of its own. and what follows here. but each with its own consistency. 7e/els on top of le/els within le/els. o/erlappin2 and interlockin2. dis6uncti/e. The distinction is not one of scale.1 1part1 and 1whole. codin2. %nce a2ain. 0n the case of a molar population &superindi/idual or person+ locally connected discrete particles .1 ""or2an1 and 1or2anism. They do not fit to2ether in a neat system. 0t is crucial for understandin2 Deleuze and Guattari. 8ith one difference: there is no ade3uate e3uation for our li/es. This is not a packa2e deal. >etween them. to recombine and refashion. not 3uantitati/e. 2i/in2 our uni/erse the di/er2in2 symmetry of a fractal fi2ure. from a basis in chance.
# contained population is called a 1sub6ected 2roup. as imposed on it from a hi2her le/el than the one on which the indi/idual e!isted up to that point &concerted 2eolo2ic action surroundin2 and compressin2 the muckF concerted cultural action swoopin2 down on the rock and sweepin2 it away+. and on their le/el+ and redundant &doubles the indi/idual"s multiplicity in a supplemental . but fluctuatin2 ones. 8e skipped somethin2: the muck as such. The particles are still there. Bolarity implies the creation or prior e!istence of a well$defined boundary enablin2 the population of particles to be 2rasped as a whole. The unity of the indi/idual e!ists in addition to its multiplicity. in time and in mode of composition. 0t is the threshold leadin2 from one state to another. 8hen we say that a molarity is 2rasped as a whole. they became stabilized and homo2enized. *? # molar indi/idual is the dominated term in a relation of power &a content for an o/erpowerin2 form of e!pression+. 0ts particles are correlated. # supple indi/idual lies between the molecular and the molar. # molarity remains a multiplicity A only a disciplined one.Pa2e ?? ha/e become correlated at a distance. but not ri2idly so. it must be 2rasped as such by outside forces.1*@ The unity of a molarized indi/idual is transcendent &e!ists only from the point of /iew of the forms of e!pression to which the indi/idual is sub6ected. %ur 2ranules of muck were an oozin2 molecular mass. increasin2 the or2anizational consistency of different re2ions in the deposit &correlation+. no less numerous than before. For a population to e!ist as a whole. 0t has boundaries. but as their local connections ri2idified into rock. the emphasis is on the as. *.
Passi/e and acti/e are e/aluations: they assi2n a /alue to the outcome of a synthesis on the basis of which constituent force dominates and what the product"s intrinsic potential for action is &the pra2matic 1meanin21 of the synthesis+. # person is an incarnation of a cate2ory. the actualization of an ima2e of unity &dia2ram of re2ularized actions+ in a substance other than thou2ht. but is part of the passi/e connecti/e synthesis of sediment. in addition to its 2eneralized functionin2 on the personal le/el. Docks are acti/e to the e!tent that they can be made into a wall that resists 2ra/ity. because e/ery process of synthesis in/ol/es a mi!ture of forces that could be characterized as acti/e or passi/e. #ctualization is always translation: conformity to the assi2ned actions will always be appro!imate &the de/iations skipped o/er in the process of 2eneralizin2 the indi/idual mark a residual hetero2eneity+. There is always some le/el of resistance to total re2ularization inherent in the Pa2e ?@ new substance &2eolo2ic imperfectionsF criminal tendenciesF 1per/ersions1+. 0n sedimentation.*) # molarized indi/idual is a 1person1 to the e!tent that a cate2ory &cultural ima2e of unity+ has been imposed on it. 9.1 These are only appro!imate terms. 8ind is acti/e. The indi/idual"s particularity remains. but are passi/e to the e!tent that they need an outside a2ency to do . 2ra/ity wins out o/er wind. a2ain in an appro!imate way. but less so than wind.dimension to itF constitutes a surplus /alue+. Gra/ity is acti/e. The syntheses and their products can be labeled 1passi/e1 or 1acti/e. and acts to induce passi/ity. and insofar as its subse3uent actions are made to conform to those prescribed by its assi2ned cate2ory.
so. 5ach kind of synthesis has an inclusi/e and an e!clusi/e usa2e. and 6ud2es that indi/idual on how well it repeats a modelF husbands are acti/e but only in order to reproduceF a 6ud2e acti/ely transforms indi/iduals but only insofar as he is representati/e of the law. 0t 6oins di/er2ent indi/iduals in a network of potential mi!tures in which no indi/idual is precluded a priori from 2oin2 from any 2i/en point to . reproduction. representation. #n inclusi/e connecti/e synthesis adds an accumulation or a repeatable collision to the world &this and thatF distinct muck deposits+. but can only react to the presence of a bodyF 3uarryin2 is acti/e but in/ol/es a dis6uncti/e synthesis which reduces a number of indi/iduals to their shared properties. reco2nizes a 2i/en indi/idual as belon2in2 to a type. #n inclusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis creates di/er2in2 series of indi/iduals that may dei2n to coe!ist but in principle do not mi! &this andLor thatF different biolo2ical species+.*( <. *. # synthesis is inclusi/e when it multiplies. De: habit. 15ntropic1 or ""ne2entropic1 would be better terms because they emphasize that the ob6ect of e/aluation is a process in/ol/in2 relations of motion and rest in an interplay of ener2izin2 or deener2izin2 forces &the celerity of 3uarryin2 /ersus the 2ra/ity of rockF uprootin2 and reimplantation+. reco2nition. There are two kinds of action. reduction. #ction itself is multi/alent and must be e/aluated before the pra2matic meanin2 of a synthesis can be fully accounted for. Deaction. repetition. So far we ha/e seen no e!amples of it. #n inclusi/e con6uncti/e synthesis takes the and of the inclusi/e Pa2e ?) dis6uncti/e andLor. #ffirmation is nonreacti/e action. Deaction: 2ra/ity is acti/e.
another &both this and thatF different species con/er2in2 in 1unnatural1 couplin2s+. 9- # synthesis is e!clusi/e when it subtracts. %nly a dis6uncti/e synthesis is fundamentally e!clusi/e. 0t creates series of di/er2in2 indi/iduals whose only fully authorized mode of coe!istence is in the abstract, in a cate2orical 2rid composed of mutually contradictory types. 5/en when its usa2e is inclusi/e, it is e!clusi/e in its operation: one cate2ory is applied at a time in a di/isi/e action or 6ud2ment &this or that+. 0ts /ersion of and is a succession of ors. The dis6uncti/e application of the cate2ory limits the ways in which the tar2et indi/idual can connect with the indi/iduals and ob6ects with which it coe!ists concretely &mortarF handcuffs+. 4ot only is the dis6uncti/e synthesis fundamentally e!clusi/e, it in/ades the connecti/e syntheses, imposin2 limitati/e usa2e on them. %nce be2un, the in/asion tends to accelerate. The se2re2ati/e con6unctions into which e!clusi/ely dis6oined indi/iduals are led &courthouseF 6ustice+ produce a surplus /alue sensation that can con/ert into a cause &election of slaw$and$order candidate+ that multiplies limitati/e connections and se2re2ati/e con6unctions with utmost efficiency &discipline+. 5!clusi/e usa2e spreads like a cancer. 0t is not only reacti/e but imperialist by nature. ?. #n indi/idual, supple or molarized, is stable only within certain limits. #ll li/in2 thin2s die, rocks crumble, 2enes mutate, uni/erses are created and destroyed. 5/en within the limits of its stability, an indi/idual is always chan2in2. Buck rises and recedes, an atom"s electrons leap to and fro unpredictably, new laws are passed e/ery day. # structure is at best metastable: stable on the whole &statistically+ or as a whole &from the re2ularized point of /iew of its molarity+. Stability is not fi!ity. 0t is /ariation within limits. 5lectrons unpredictably leap too far, fly off into space, and atoms combine to form a molecule. # law is broken and the
perpetrator 2oes to 6ail. # 6ud2e is bribed and a corrupt official 2oes free. 5nou2h indi/iduals mutate, and a new species arises. 4ot enou2h indi/iduals mutate, and no new species arises. #n unusually wet season washes away part of a sediment deposit. # structure is defined by what escapes it. 8ithout e!ception, it emer2es from chance, li/es with and by a mar2in of de/iation, and ends in disorder. # structure is is defined by its thresholds A the relati/e limits
Pa2e ?, within which it selects, percei/es, and captures, more or less consistently &its mar2in of de/iation+F and the absolute limits beyond which it breaks clown &chance, chaos+. # structure is a re2ularized infoldin2 of an aleatory outside. The closest thin2 there is to order is the appro!imate, and always temporary, pre/ention of disorder. The closest thin2 there is to determinacy is the relati/e containment of chance. The opposite of chance is not determinacy. 0t is habit. 8arm 8ater The precedin2 discussion was a co/er$up. 0t i2nored a basic problem runnin2 throu2h all of its formulations: the supple indi/idual was presented as the in$between of molecularity and molarity, but it was utterly passi/e. The most acti/e process in e/idence was transcendent, it swooped down on unsuspectin2 mucks to sweep them away to a future of walled oppression. :ow can forces become acti/e enou2h to be reacti/eJ 0f a human body"s acti/ities are limited by cate2orical 6ud2ment, doesn"t that imply that it was acti/e but not molarly limited before bein2 6ud2edJ #ll structures, it was said, arise from an infoldin2 of chance. Doesn"t that i2nore the fact that the sedimentation of a muck deposit and the 2eolo2ic action that molarized it in/ol/e deterministic forces, such as 2ra/ityJ
%nly half of the story has been told. There is a missin2 link. There must be supple, nonmolar indi/iduals that are acti/e, but accordin2 to an immanent principle and despite the presence of deterministic constraints. %nly then would supple indi/iduality truly be the in$between needed to e!plain the combination of passi/e and reacti/e forces we see around us, as well as pro/idin2 an escape route from that same double$pincered domination: it would be what we called 1affirmation,1 or free action. 9' The missin2 link is known.9* 0t can be found as close to home as warm water. :eat is applied to a tran3uil li3uid. 0t is perturbed. 0ts lower layer, closest the heatin2 source, becomes hotter than the upper layer. The li3uid"s e3uilibrium has been upset, and it endea/ors to re2ain its former state of rest. 0n classical thermodynamics, a physical system tends toward ma!imum entropy A the hi2hest de2ree of stability and homo2eneity it can achie/e 2i/en e!istin2 conditions. Faced with a disturbance, it carries out the minimal acti/ity necessary to return to
Pa2e ?( that ma!imally entropic e3uilibrium state. That means conduction. #s the li3uid"s molecules absorb the heat, their mo/ements increase, causin2 them to collide with one another. Their collisions diffuse the heat upward and out the upper surface. The li3uid has lost its stability, but retains it homo2eneity: e/ery part of it is e3ually chaoticF no pattern of acti/ity distin2uishes one part from another. 0n theory. 0n practice, somethin2 else happens. 0f the heat is increased at a certain rate, a threshold is reached at which order spontaneously arises out of chaos. The li3uid differentiates. Certain re2ions turn in on themsel/es, 1nucleate,1 form fluid boundaries. 8hirlpools form: con/ection currents. These
/orte!es appear because the li3uid is under another constraint besides the command to re2ain e3uilibrium throu2h thermodiffusion. That second constraint is 2ra/ity. The heat increases the motion of the molecules in the bottom layer, causin2 a 2i/en /olume in that layer to become less dense and therefore li2hter than an e3ui/alent /olume in the cooler upper layer. #s a result, the cooler molecules descend and the warmer ones rise, creatin2 a swirlin2 pattern. The system has mo/ed farther from entropic e3uilibrium: it is now not only unstable, it is no lon2er homo2eneous. De2ions ha/e differentiated. 0t has become ordered, e!hibitin2 a hi2her le/el of systemic acti/ity than either thermodiffusion or 2ra/ity actin2 alone would ha/e allowed. This phenomenon of spontaneous self$or2anization cannot be sustained. The probability of order sur/i/in2 under these unstable conditions is /irtually nil. 0n theory. 0n practice, if the heat continues to rise at the ri2ht rate, a second threshold is reached at which the /orte!es multiply to co/er the entire /olume of the li3uid A and continue indefinitely. The li3uid will display a tendency to conser/e its patternin2, reactin2 to any further disturbance as a system &rather than molecule by molecule+. Structural stability has been achie/ed under conditions of e!treme instability. 4o law of nature has been defied. Gra/ity is respected, and the /orte!es create an efficient pattern of circulation from the heat source to the coolin2 surface, acceleratin2 the heat dissipation called for by the Second 7aw of thermodynamics. #ll the li3uid has done is break the rule that ma!imum dissipation necessarily means minimum systemic acti/ity and differentiation. 0t has contra/ened the scientific wisdom that there is no such thin2 as a spontaneous dissipati/e structure. 99 0t did this not by breakin2 natural laws, but by combinin2 them in such a way as to end up with more than the sum of their parts. 0t
Pa2e @e!ploited a differential between them. Gra/ity alone would entail less motion and a hi2her density of molecules on a li3uid"s bottom layer. Thermodiffusion, since it re3uires molecules to absorb heat and pass it on, entails 2reater motion and a lower density nearest the heat source. 8hen the li3uid"s bottom layer was heated, the re3uirements of 2ra/ity and heat diffusion entered into tension. Combine the re3uirements, and you 2et a swirl. 4othin2 so unusual about that. :owe/er, both laws a2ree that the li3uid should be ma!imally stable and inacti/e at e3uilibrium, and unstable and acti/e when e3uilibrium is disturbed. 8hen the li3uid combined their re3uirements, it became stable and acti/e A each in a new sense. Stability no lon2er meant ma!imum systemic homo2eneity, but order A sustained patternin2, differentiation. #cti/ity no lon2er meant increased molecular chaos, but an ability to chan2e patternin2 by respondin2 systemically to further disturbance. The laws said 1>e this and that1 &stable and inacti/e+ or 1>e this and that1 &unstable and acti/e+. The li3uid responded by bein2 this and that, 2i/in2 both a new meanin2. 0t obeyed the laws, to new effect. 0t did this, of course, without ceasin2 to be this or that A turn off the heat, and it"s back to the or. This andLor that: an inclusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis. The clash in constraints was a differential that was also a potential, which the li3uid e!ploited to in/ent a new synthesis. The li3uid contracted two /irtual states into its actuality rather than one: it collapsed its 1wa/e$packet1 less reducti/ely than it was called upon to do by either constraint alone. 0n the process, the li3uid became ""sensiti/e.1 The effect of 2ra/ity on a li3uid at rest is normally ne2li2ible, but in its a2itated state, the li3uid suddenly 1percei/ed1 it and was transformed. 9<
Call a state toward which a system tends an 1attractor.19? 0n this e!ample, there are two: the constraint to dissipate heat and return to thermal e3uilibrium, and the constraint to lose momentum to 2ra/ity and return to kinetic e3uilibrium. Call the differential potential created by the contradictory motion and density re3uirements of the two attractors an 1intensity,1 and the new le/el of responsi/eness accompanyin2 the perception of the intensity a 1sensation.1 8hile passin2 from stability to instability under heat duress, as it was tryin2 to follow its tendency to dissipate the heat and return to e3uilibrium, the li3uid 1percei/ed1 another attractor. 0t added that attractor to the first, yieldin2 a new le/el of sensiti/ity. 1>oth this and that1: the inclusi/e
Pa2e @' dis6uncti/e synthesis of the 3ualities the laws entail is an inclusi/e con6uncti/e synthesis of the attractors 2o/ernin2 the laws. The resultin2 state of acti/e stability is a hybrid between the two attractors and the 3ualities they imply. This new e3uilibrium is undecidable A both one and the other, this andLor that. 0t is off on a tan2ent de/iatin2 from both attractors. Call the new e3uilibrium a 1sin2ularity,1 and the tan2ent the li3uid followed to reach that state a 1becomin2.1 The li3uid"s new state is stable, but only within certain limits &it is metastable, to e!tend a term applied earlier to molarity+. 0f the heat is turned off, or if it is turned up too hi2h, the li3uid returns to its former chaotic self and re6oins the paths set out for it by its attractors. %rder, the turbulent order of a dissipati/e structure, is a tan2ential passa2e between two thresholds. The sin2ularity the li3uid becomes is actually much more than a simple hybrid. 0t obeys the terms laid down for it by its attractors and at the same time transcends them. 0t
The li3uid is a correlated population of correlated populations A a supple superindi/idual. >ecause the li3uid is doubly correlated. The particles in one /orte! are correlated at a distance with the particles in all the others. 0t is produced by the differential relation$ Pa2e @* ships amon2 the local subpopulations or nucleations. it is not confined to any one of them. in e!cess of them. The li3uid has not surrounded itself with a fi!ed or self$reproducin2 boundary. The li3uid"s 2lobal responsi/eness is not the kind that would 3ualify it as a molarity. 5ach /orte! is a population of locally correlated molecules A a supple indi/idual. affectin2 the correlations within each and between e/ery /orte!. by the superindi/idual as a whole.redefines the terms of its e!istence &within certain limits+. The disturbance"s effect will be amplified instantaneously from the local to the 2lobal le/el. 0ts local and 2lobal le/els are completely interfused. and the differential relationship between those differentials and the 2lobal sensiti/ity they add up to at e/ery instant: it is local$ . effectin2 a synthesis that places it in irreducible e!cess of the causal principles 2o/ernin2 its own 2enesis. 0t will resonate throu2hout the li3uid. and is in fact multiplied. #lthou2h the li3uid"s responsi/eness in/ol/es all of its re2ions in their indi/iduality. 0ts suppleness has not been suppressed. 9@ #ny disturbance will be sensed separately by the indi/idual nucleations and simultaneously. any chance disturbance that mi2ht occur in one area will immediately be 1felt1 e/erywhere. The sensiti/ity the li3uid e!hibited toward 2ra/ity carries o/er into the li3uid"s new e!istence as an acti/ely differentiated system. This e!cess takes the form of a sensation accruin2 to the li3uid: a surplus /alue.
in which case the system of compossibility between le/els will crash and the li3uid will return to its ori2inal path mo/in2 to and from molecular entropy &death+. %ther disturbances may resonate with the /orte!es. # double bifurcation: life or death. this state or that. or be reco2nized by them. more than molecular but not molar A that ma2ical in$between. or 1noise.9( The /orte!es will ad6ust their shape to the disturbance and retain that shape for as lon2 as the disturbance is sustained. 0n other . Some disturbances reachin2 the li3uid from outside may resonate a2ainst the /orte!es. 0f this happens. sin2ular yet differentiated. dependin2 on what disturbance is recei/ed when+. multiple yet capable of concerted action. this time throu2h the absorption of chance. 5ach le/el offers possibilities for action that the other does not. The path selected is a function of the interaction between the particular disturbance and the particular correlations the li3uid has de/eloped. a new acti/e e3uilibrium is created. 8hat its nature will be is not entirely predictable. but the le/els ha/e combined without clashin2. the li3uid is a 1supermolecule1:9. and if life.1 the supple structure will either mo/e toward a new order or back to its disordered past.2lobal. The component molecules ha/e effecti/ely retained all of their molecular potential and can instantly return to their attractors if conditions chan2e. The li3uid has bifurcated into a new causal dimension &double articulation+ en/elopin2 new potentials &different /orte! patterns. 9) 0n its antiattractor states. The potentials of the two le/els are 1compossible1 &lie within the realm of possibility of the same actual formation+. # new sin2ular state of local$2lobal interfusion is induced. The local$2lobal resonation re2ulatin2 the li3uid"s responses are immanent to it &e/en if it infolds disturbances from outside+. The supplemental local$2lobal dimension is strictly consubstantial with the molecular. 0n the presence of a disturbance.
#t the precise moment of impact. The eitherLor of past and future is momentarily an and &a new con6uncti/e Pa2e @9 synthesis+. The system can return to the low$intensity. acti/e order &a metastable supermolecular system+. 0t has tapped the creati/e turbulence of its pool of /irtuality.words.The li3uid has contracted more /irtual states into its actuality than can be deterministically manipulated. or it can opt for li/in2 dan2erously as a hi2h$intensity. but its future has already arri/ed. ultimately unstable.1 0ndeterminacy has arisen out of determinacy. Past and future or: andLor. Probabilities can be assi2ned. low$order. The crisis is an inclusi/e dis6unction of two e!clusi/e dis6unctions. The tra6ectory leadin2 from effecti/e attractors to an self$or2anizin2 indi/idual or sub6ect$2roup 2oes a2ainst the 2rain of the passi/e syntheses predicated on .1 <. hi2h$ sensiti/ity. The li3uid now en/elops more tensions. 0t is in crisis. the li3uid"s state is indeterminate. 0ts intensity is hei2htened. translated into a choice between obedience to them and a future choice. as the amplification of the noise is occurrin2. 0t could 2o either way. 8hich path it will take cannot be predicted a priori and cannot be induced with accuracy e/en after lon2 trial and error. The e!clusi/eness of the dis6uncti/e syntheses of the laws of thermodynamics has returned at a hi2her le/el. 0t is still ordered by its past. freedom out of the constraint of law. stable attractor state. 0t is capable of free action. but the system will always e!hibit a certain 1de2ree of freedom. it is a function of its past as en/eloped in its locally$ 2lobally correlated substance and the future arri/in2 from outside. # supermolecular population capable of free action is called a 1sub6ect$2roup. and the future itself is an eitherLor.
unlike those of warm water. it was a way of sayin2 that nothin2 is e/er successfully molar. That is the other half of the story: cocausality. determinacy arose from indeterminacy. The supermolecular sub6ect$ 2roup lies at a doubly cocausal crossroads of chance and determinacy. in our earlier e!ample. #s tan2ential or sin2ular as such indi/iduals may be. with /aryin2 de2rees of success. the in/entors of the science of dissipati/e structures insist that they are in fact the rule. 4o body can really be molar. that chance was knockin2 at the doors of the courthouse. Bolarity limits indi/idual de/iancy but ne/er entirely suppresses it. The reacti/e . there were two full causes &attractor states+.<' %ff on a tan2ent: a sin2ular in$between state of cocausal local$2lobal self$or2anization. The o/erlay of a cate2ory confines an indi/idual to Pa2e @< prefabricated tra6ectories and discounts its particularities A but ne/er totally. a controlled state of /olatility.<* 0t is instead the kind of fi!ed or self$reproducin2 molarities we were concerned with earlier that are the e!ception. To be2in with. Stability is always actually metastability.chance encounters that led. 8hen we said that a molar structure was defined by what escapes it. The constraints of personhood. are essentially limitati/e and reducti/e. with no assi2nable destiny. Their line of cocausality then 6oined in cocausality with another causal line A constituted by chance. %ne thin2 does not lead to another as a full cause to a simple effect. 8e ha/e presented the acti/ely self$or2anized indi/idual as a special case. 5/ery person is a dissipated indi/idual s3uirmin2 in handcuffs waitin2 to escape. >odies are made molar. 4ow we see that indeterminacy can arise from determinacy. Throu2hout our first /ersion of structuration. to muck and other thin2s.
molecular instability departs from an entropic e3uilibrium and e/entually returns to it. and resentfully sub6ect others in turn. # new definition of molarity su22ests itself: the imposition of whole attractors on a far more comple! reality. Fractal or 1stran2e1 attractors are 6ust becomin2 a/ailable to scientific in/esti2ation. <9 5ach point corresponds to a . That the presence of whole attractors &tendential stable e3uilibriums+ cannot pre/ent the irruption of indeterminacy A howe/er scrupulously controlled the e!perimental situation may be A is more e/idence of 6ust how special a case molarity really is. 0f life is an infinite fractal. it must ha/e one monstrous fractal attractor. They are dissipati/e indi/iduals who ha/e been sub6ected. The system had a whole dimensionality of two &it had two independent /ariables: the tendencies determined by the attractors+. #t both ends.a2ents of molarization A the world"s 6ud2es and petty 2ods incarnate A are dissipati/e indi/iduals 2one bad. by contrast. and they were whole. The attractor state is /irtual insofar as the instability that departs from it and tends toward it is concerned. 0t is so special that it only e!ists as the ob6ecti/e illusion of a line of ade3uate causality that is always in fact deflected into cocausality by interference. # fractal attractor. actually: in classical thermodynamics. must be /isualized as a mi!ed set of points A 1dense points. but a brief sketch of the concept is.1 infinitely dense points. # whole attractor can be /isualized as a distinct point at the end of a line. The details are not important here. Cases like the one we 6ust saw would only e!ist in controlled settin2s. but in theory it is actualizable. The process is re/ersible. the kinds of settin2s molarizin2 forces try to create. There is a crucial difference between the dissipati/e structures that fill our li/es and the structure we ha/e analyzed thus far: there were only two attractors in the li3uid system.
e/ery one of its re2ions A down to the tiniest molecule A has the potential to resonate with the others in such a way as to actualize any of the 2lobal e3uilibrium states correspondin2 to a 2i/en dense point. The sin2ular threshold state effecti/ely resonates se/eral dense points at a hi2h enou2h intensity that more than one 2lobal state is materially present &in a hi2hly differentiated but undecidable mi!+. which it cannot fully actualize. 0n other words. The intensity of a dense point may /ary by re2ion ¬ e/ery part of the system will display the same inclination to 6oin the mo/e toward a particular e3uilibrium+. The supermolecule interacts more . The whole attractor 2uidin2 a tendency toward entropic e3uilibrium is weak. 0t pertains to more than one potential state.potential 2lobal state of e3uilibrium &stable or metastable. and can effecti/ely contract them into its actuality in the form of inclusi/ely dis6oined bifurcatin2 choices. but at too low an intensity to be entirely effecti/e. >ut the dense points are still there. howe/er far we 2o. The whole attractor is /irtual. includes e/ery kind of dense point. 0t pertains only to one potential state e!pressed as a destiny. but weakly so: it resonates one dense point correspondin2 to one 2lobal state. in e/ery possible state of the system. e/en if we dip below the molecular le/el. # mi!ed set of infinitely dense /irtual particles is a sin2ularity in much the same way we defined an actual sin2ularity: a differential local$2lobal resonance. They are still there e/en beyond our ability to probe: they are /irtual particles. classical or dissipati/e+. The cocausal tendency e!pressed by the sin2ular threshold state of an acti/e e3uilibrium is more dynamic. howe/er small. Say Pa2e @? that e/ery re2ion of the system.
Some potential states drop out of each 2lobal state"s actuality. 4o actuality can effecti/ely contract all of the fractal attractor"s states into its bifurcations. and renounces the other potential states. 8hen one contracts &resonates at a hi2her intensity+. or o/erlap with it entirely. The uni/erse is a double$faced supermolecule. To e/ery actual intensity corresponds a /irtual one. This is not to say that it is undifferentiated. #ctual intensity has e!tension &form and substance+. 8hen the actual passes a threshold. which is forced to infold the disturbance into its local$2lobal correlation as best it can. 5ach side has its own internal local$2lobal correlations: resonances and tensions between nucleatin2 subpopulations that respond indi/idually and Pa2e @@ to2ether. the /irtual dilates. The local$2lobal correlation of the actual and that of the /irtual interact as subpopulations of a sin2le indi/idual. They peacefully resonate to2ether. %nly . /irtual intensity does not: it is a pure intensity. as pure abstract potential. they clash. 0n that case. bifurcates toward a specific choice. #s the actual contracts a set of /irtual states into itself at a threshold state. The fractal attractor is the /irtual. The /irtual has only intension. or. The /irtual and the actual are coresonatin2 systems.e!tensi/ely with the fractal attractor comprisin2 the totality of dense pointsF it is closer to the /irtual. the other dilates &rela!es+. if the tensions on one side or the other reach turbulent proportions. but they 2o on 3uietly resonatin2 in another dimension. The uni/erse as a cosmic dissipati/e system. the /irtual contracts them back and the actual dilates. the turbulent side sends shock wa/es of crisis that amplify throu2h the other. each face of which is a supermolecule in its own ri2ht.
that it is indeterminate in our spatiality. 0ts only directionality is the 6a22ed. 0f it is the /oid. which does not ha/e two independent /ariables. insistently. the pool of potential from which uni/ersal history draws it choices and to which it returns the states it renounces. at /aryin2 intensities. superlinear line of becomin2 and debecomin2 leadin2 from its /irtuality into our actuality and simultaneously back a2ain in a local$2lobal interference pattern. distanced from it only by the intensity of its resonance and its nearness to collapse. the only end the actual world has is the constraint to re6oin its plane of immanence. 0t is destined. to pace the /oid &or as the mathematicians say. # system can be Pa2e @) . to take a random walk+. 5ach of its re2ions or indi/iduals is the future and the past of an actual indi/idual: its system of contractions and dilationsF the states it has chosen. appear to be. 5/ery one of its dense points is ad6acent to e/ery point in the actual world. 0ts only end is an endless becomin2$actual of immanence throu2h e!tension into our dimension and its mode of spatiotemporal composition. will choose. or our world. #ll of this is always there at e/ery instant. 0t is hyperdifferentiated. for e!ample. as the Taoists say. >ut the /essel was in the world. is the only destination the /irtual has. The fractal attractor of the world cannot be represented as a re/ersible line with two distinct end points. %ur li3uid. << 4o system is a closed system. it is a hyper/oid in continual ferment. Con/ersely. The actual fractal. The /irtual as a whole is the future$past of all actuality. howe/er. and could ha/e chosen but did not &and will not+. was in a /essel. The /irtual is not undifferentiated. This means that it is also indeterminate in relation to our temporality. Some.
a2ain for practical purposes. 4ot ade3uately. wherein we fill it with warm li3uid. The potential tensions and tra6ectories defined by that set of dense points is the system"s plane of immanence or consistency: its le/el of /irtuality. and within those limits it can be described as closed and as ha/in2 whole attractors. as lon2 as the controls hold. de/iant becomin2s that 2o off on a tan2ent to their nominal constraints. #ny sin2ular states or thresholds embodied by the system corresponded to other of that attractor"s dense points. &This is the conte!t in which we will approach the human body in what immediately follows. Coordinates around which potential states cluster are dense points.+ 8hen a system is treated as thou2h it were 2uided by a fractal attractor of its own. one capable of creatin2 sin2ular. open system with a stran2e &fractal+ attractor all its own. the dense point correspondin2 to the attractor state of 2ra/itational . 5ach coordinate a!is corresponds to an independent /ariable. or attractor states.controlled within certain limits. For e!ample. This is precisely what makes them of such interest: they are une!pected effects that spontaneously arise from deterministic constraints. only the dense points that most acti/ely resonate in its /icinity are taken into account. these sin2ularities are not deemed attractors because they arise intrinsically from the 1determined1 system A are in/ented in the course of its history. producin2 an eni2matic cocausal conte!t much closer to the actual situations we find outside the laboratory. The whole attractors attributed to the li3uid system were abstract ima2es of two of the fractal attractor"s dense points. 0n the limited deterministic conte!t. # cocausal dissipati/e structure of this kind can be treated. as a less limited. and each coordinate to a potential state combinin2 those /ariables. Scientists e!press a phenomenon"s plane of consistency as its 1phase space1: the sum total of the system"s mo/ements and moments contracted into the same set of dia2ram coordinates. but ade3uately enou2h.
space. The inte2ration of the Pa2e @. predicti/e knowled2e is a myth. meanin2 that the actual dimensionality is always fractional. interference between attractors adds an element of chance.rest lies at the intersection of three a!es A time. Fractionality &fractality+ is the measure of a system"s de/iation from the law. howe/er controlled. 4o system is a fully inte2rable system. <? The important thin2 is that any theoretical analysis or 1dia2ram1 of a phenomenon is an incomplete abstraction desi2ned to 2rasp from a restricted point of /iew an infinitely abstract monster fractal attractor that is alone ade3uate to the comple!ities of life. This is not because information is lackin2 and needs to be found. #s we ha/e seen. The number of independent /ariables defines the system"s dimensionality to the nearest whole. to ha/e a whole dimensionality and entirely predictable beha/ior. or cocausal. The perpetual . The dense point e!pressin2 the tendency of a li3uid system to self$or2anize as a dissipati/e structure would appear with the addition of a!es correspondin2 to the independent /ariables of heat and density. 0t can ne/er 2rasp the real indeterminacy of the e/erywhere$ all$the$time density of the /irtual. which ultimately forbids any system. 4o presentation en/elops a complete knowled2e of e/en the simplest system. phase space &the e3uation or dia2ram e!pressin2 the pattern of potential states and paths between states that the phase space en/elops+ is always an appro!imation &it is ane!act+. and /elocity A and e!presses a tendency for /elocity to approach zero. open systems+ are /alid conceptual tools within certain parameters. Complete. 8hole attractors &2o/ernin2 closed deterministic systems+ and fractal attractors &2o/ernin2 probabilistic.
%bser/e a smilin2 infant"s toes. =our 6ud2ments dance on the brink of a teemin2 /oid. where it is translated into an action that amplifies or muffles it. take heed: The world is an infinite&simal+ly stran2e double$ headed monster fractal attractor. 0t has differentiated body parts. and see what comes. Step li2htly. Cud2es and petty 2ods incarnate. but e/ery local e!citation brin2s a 2lobal response. >ut it is also encoura2in2: it throws their calculations off as well. The /ibrations a 2i/en part recei/es are more or less intense dependin2 on their ori2in. 5ach part will re2ister e/ery state. e/ery time it is stimulated. but to a different de2ree and translated into an action of which no other part is .in/ention called 1history1 paces a /oid of ob6ecti/e indeterminacy. The 2lobality of its responses does not diminish its local differentiationF on the contrary. The 6oy of eye$to$ eye contact with its mother resonates throu2h its body and comes out the far end in a kick. 8e cannot e/en be2in to understand the richness and surprises of life A and the possibilities it offers A without at least acknowled2in2 that line of cocausal becomin2 between the actual and /irtual worlds. The impulses it recei/es most directly are most intense of all. differentiation increases. # baby is a supermolecule. The baby as /ibrator. sends out Pa2e @( /ibrations to e/ery other part. 5/ery body part. #ll we can do is e!perimentally perturb it as we walk our life"s path. 0t can be frustratin2 because our calculations will always be off. 5ach local part is a uni3ue superposition of potential response$states of /aryin2 intensity. 5/ery impulse tra/els instantly in wa/es from the point of impact to e/ery re2ion of its body. >urp # baby is a /orte!.
The local bifurcations add up to an instantaneous 2lobal response. The interference pattern reaches a point of bifurcation at each of its local destinations: it will be translated into one action or another. like the stomach. from a 2enetically determined 1inside1 &which is ultimately an infoldin2 of the aleatory outside of natural selection+. The interferences are modulated in such a way . some ma6or. 0mpulses followin2 either tra6ectory are infolded to some de2ree by e/ery part. 0nterference patterns de/elop which /ary the de2ree and the actions of the same body part. %thers. They not only recei/e /ibrations of /aryin2 intensities from other parts. The toes are de/elopin2 a repertory. 5ach of its parts is a collection of potential modulations of impulses ori2inatin2 somewhere else in the body. but they /ary the intensity of their response to the same /ibration. That bifurcation in turn bifurcates: the action is e!ecuted to one de2ree or another.capable &no one can kick 6oy in the eyes+. The baby de/elops increasin2ly nuanced local reactions which translate increasin2ly comple! 2lobal interactions. 0ts stomach has modulated the toe response. recei/e their impulses from an aleatory outside. Differentiation on one le/el 2oes toe in toe with differentiation on the other. some minor. 0t is hun2ry. 5/ery part transmits the impulses it recei/es for modulation by all the other parts. # baby is a localM2lobal inte2ration of /ibrations. # new threshold is reached. # cocausal dissipati/e system. Some. The supermolecule sees its father and the smile is translated into a curl of the toesF it sees its mother and kicks. The baby flails its way from one threshold to the ne!t. like the eyes. The ne!t sin2ular state is an interaction of that 2lobal response and a new impulse. 0ts life is an endless succession of crises. 5ach sin2ular state is a threshold state composed of a set of potential responses. and those infoldin2s combine to create a sin2ular state or o/erall intensity.
or /irtuality. Call it a ""body1: an endless wea/in2 to2ether of sin2ular states. 4ow freeze it as it passes throu2h a threshold state on the way from one determinate state to another. That is a de2ree of intensity of the body without or2ans. and kicks at its father e/en thou2h he is a nice married man of the sort who would ne/er dream of pickin2 up a baby bottle. The dis6uncti/e synthesis constituted by the . <@ Think of the body without or2ans as the body outside any determinate state. Call that the 1body without or2ans1 &or >w%. From that perspecti/e. but at a lower le/el of /irtuality. and call it an 1ero2enous zone. each of which is an inte2ration of one or more impulses. poised for any action in its repertoryF this is the body from the point of /iew of its potential. call it an 1or2an.1 0ma2ine the body in suspended animation: intensity G -.1 7ook at it a2ain from the point of /iew of the or2an"s fa/orite actions. 0t is still the body as /irtuality. because only the potential states in/ol/ed in the bifurcation from the precedin2 state to the ne!t are effecti/ely superposed in the threshold state. Call each of the body"s different /ibratory re2ions a 1zone of intensity.that the sin2ular state is an acti/ely stable one more often than not. 8ho knows what is 2oin2 on in the con/olutions of its brainJ The infant is a supermolecular supple indi/idual.1 7ook at the zone of intensity from the point of /iew of the actions it produces. 0t is hun2ry. The mother comes. Certain parts associated with those responses are pri/ile2ed o/er others. The system 2ets so comple! so 3uickly that in spite of habitual patterns responses cannot be accurately predicted e/en in the youn2est of supermolecules. as D S G like to write it+. and only 2ets a curl. >eha/ior patterns de/elop. Certain Pa2e )responses are fa/ored.
and none of those states is e!cluded a priori from bein2 actualized ne!t. the dis6unctions become increasin2ly e!clusi/e: for each threshold reached. Since the body is an open system. a se2ment of its infinite fractal attractor. . all its potential sin2ular states are determined by a fractal attractor. #n or2an corresponds to each point &set of dense points+ on that se2ment.bifurcation can still be considered inclusi/e: althou2h only one alternati/e is actualized. and a part$ob6ect is a star. an infoldin2 of impulses from an Pa2e )' aleatory outside. pure /irtuality &its phase space+. but the body"s o/erall intensity is lower. it includes /ibrations from all the other states at different de2rees of intensity. 0t is the body as pure potential. Call the attractor point$set 2o/ernin2 the actualization of an or2an"s actions a 1part$ ob6ect1 A a subset of a subset of the fractal attractor of the world. #s beha/ior patterns de/elop. Fewer states are effecti/ely superposed: the body"s potential &1power. The body without or2ans is a subset of the body"s plane of consistency: the attractor se2ment containin2 the repertory of potential states amon2 which it effecti/ely chooses. 0t is a subset of the world"s plane of consistency. the /ibrations of all the states but the one 6ust left and the one about to come are muffled to the point that they are almost imperceptible. 0f the uni/erse is the plane of consistency of our woad. 0f you freeze it at the threshold state now. another state can be e!pected to follow with a hi2h de2ree of probability. The /ibrations associated with two of its states are amplified. then the body"s plane of consistency is the Bilky 8ay of its potential orbits and tra6ectories.1 1de2ree of freedom1+ has diminished. Call that stran2e attractor the body"s plane of consistency.
0t focuses in on the succession from one habitual connection with the woad to the ne!t. The baby"s con6unctions become more se2re2ati/e as its dis6unctions become increasin2ly e!clusi/e. 0t is these interpreted &dedensified+ attractor points that will 2o/ern the socially si2nificant actions of the or2ans of the unified adult body as >i2 or 7ittle Dipper into authorized surplus/alue satisfactions. The kick translates the e!pectation that the smile will 2i/e way to a suck. only the 1meanin2ful1 ones outlinin2 the constellation"s symbolic shape remain. 0t con6oins those two with the passi/e connecti/e synthesis of back$on$bed.The body without or2ans is a re2ion of the Bilky 8ay marked by a constellation but includin2 an infinity of back2round stars /isible at /aryin2 de2rees of intensity. and if the kick swin2s wide. The 2lare of city li2hts be2in to obscure all but the bri2htest stars in its re2ion of the sky: in the end. 0t be2ins to learn that a particular impulse will be followed by another with a hi2h de2ree of probability. 5yes meet. the beha/ior patterns that be2in to de/elop are the constellation as percei/ed from a ci/ilization center. Bother bends o/er crib. and the stomach will be happy. 8ho needs a toe acheJ The baby tones down its /ibrations. pares down its con6unctions. The beha/ior patterns that be2in to take hold reflect habitual patterns in the baby"s surroundin2s. and on the pri/ile2ed or2ans and sensations associ$ Pa2e )* . actually. The connecti/e synthesis of eye$to$eye is followed by the connecti/e synthesis of mouth$to$breast. #s we will now see. Bore. Smile$kick. The smile$kick threshold state is the con6uncti/e synthesis of two connecti/e syntheses. the painfully acti/e one of toe$to$crib.
a /eritable infinity of impulses. the period at the end of a prayer of deli/erance &if /omit could speak. The 6oy is the /omit fed back into the . The 6oy of the smile and kick is e/idence of a feedback loop. 0t did not e/en fi2ure on the list because it is of a /ery different nature: 6oy. >ut it lea/es a trace. an e/aporati/e aftereffect &a consumption$consummation+. a useless end effect that e/aporates in a whiff of bad breath. The burp is an afterthou2ht. <) #s we ha/e already seen. an e!cess effect accruin2 to the 2lobal le/el of a correlated molecular population. That set of sensations is a2ain contracted. The burp marks the satiation point. The baby is burped. 5ach of the sensations on the kick list was a surplus$/alue in e!cess of the sensations they in turn en/eloped: e!citations of the eye"s population of rods and cones. for e!ample. is contracted into a restricted set of hi2her order sensations. a sensation is a surplus /alue. it would praise the breast with reli2ious fer/or+. we must understand what follows the much e!pected mouth$to$breast connection. # mass of sensations. De2ur2itation A the all$too$human warmth of /omit on the baby"s chin. alle/iatin2 the last tension associated with hun2er. Sleep &happy obli/ion+ follows. The smile$kick was a contraction of many le/els of sensation: hun2er. alon2 with the set of mouth$ to$breast sensations. The /omit is the final 2astrointestinal landmark before obli/ion. were contracted into an o/erall perception which had the added /alue of bein2 able to interact with similar contractions by other or2ans &the toe"s contraction of a multitude of ner/e endin2s is one+. the /isual perception of the mother.ated with it. and one sensation is focused in on abo/e all the others. pressure on the back. 0t is recorded. into a sin2le retrospecti/e sensation. the taste of the curdled milk"s second comin2 A is utterly superfluous. The whole process is summed up in a burp. Sensations inessential to the e!pectation of the breast are filtered out. a pain in the toe. To understand 6oy.
The feedback le/el of sensation is a hi2her order sensation superimposed on the other sensations. usually nominally belon2in2 to distinct bodies: mouth and breast. there is only a 1lar/al self. and strictly localized. # reco2nition. This self is not alone. as the baby mo/es throu2h the circuit of anticipated states its life is be2innin2 to be. There are many con6unctions of the same nature. So far. as infolded in memory. Desonance has become redundancy.1 <( 0t is ineffectual. fleetin2. >ut it is no e!a22eration to say that on this le/el the breast is as much a part of the baby"s body as it is of the mother"s. The baby is a teemin2 mass of lar/al sel/es. 0t is the future$past of /omit: the memory of burps past and the e!pectation of burps to come.threshold smile$and$kick state that will ha/e led to it. %n the feedback le/el of reco2nition. each associated with a threshold state featurin2 a pri/ile2ed or2an on the way to satisfaction throu2h connection with another pri/ile2ed or2an. 0t is actualized whene/er that synthesis is actualized. %ne 2oes from determinacy &2enetics: the biolo2ical memory constitutin2 the in$between of bodies of different . 0t is infolded in the infant brain. 0t is the in$between of biolo2ical bodies. The human body as supermolecule has no determinate boundaries. 0t lies at the crossroads of two causal lines. there are always at least two or2ans in play. 1So that"s itT #2ainT Praise the breastT1<. #n abstract thou2ht that is in fact the afterthou2ht of the afterthou2ht it anticipates. in other words periodically. :o/erin2 o/er the con6uncti/e synthesis leadin2 from eye$to$eye to mouth$to$breast is a reco2nition. 0t is tied to the con6uncti/e synthesis o/er which it ho/ers. and a similar self for e/ery one of them. Pa2e )9 This is the be2innin2s of human sub6ecti/ity.
interbody action folded into the fabric of e/eryday life+. 5/en this is a misleadin2 formulation. #lthou2h it is con/enient shorthand to refer to or2ans as part$ob6ects.2enerations+ to indeterminacy &a contracti/e threshold state culminatin2 a social encounter across the 2enerational di/ide+F the other from indeterminacy &the appearance of the mother"s face abo/e the crib is uncaused as far as the baby is concerned: a 2ift of the 2ods+ to determinacy &habit: li/ed memory. So the anticipation is breast$ Pa2e )< directed. twice remo/ed. they are in actuality only the ob6ect part A the presence in the actual of a /irtual point set of the fractal attractor. which comes to epitomize the o/erall process of surplus /alue .?The breast comes to o/ershadow the mouth. and are thus closer in mode of composition to the /irtual attractor 2o/ernin2 the actualization of the threshold state than the or2ans are &they are superposable as opposed to 6u!taposable+. The besel/ed body in fact li/es more outside its literal boundary than inside it: the feedback loop of reco2nition tends to elide e/erythin2 but the breast. The mouth is always a/ailable for ser/iceF the breast is not. These dual connecti/e imprints are on the order of thou2ht &intensi/e rather than e!tensi/e+. The actual or2ans are inde!es. of the two$headed fractal attractor of smilin2. because presub6ecti/e memory traces &of the mouth associatin2 it with the breast and of the breast associatin2 it with the mouth+ are more directly in/ol/ed in the reco2nition at the basis of the sel/es than are any or2ans in their physical presence.
inducin2 the rebel /ibrations to recontract into a tame satisfaction. ?' The nonlimitati/e body without or2ans repels the sacred or2ans. nipple$drawn line to and from the e3uilibrium state of 2entle burpin2 and satiation. This creates a tension between all the down2raded /ibrations and the pri/ile2ed few ima2ed as whole attractors. The body"s syntheses become focus more and more on them. # new cocausal tension arises that pre/ents the body from sinkin2 into entropic . let alone /ibrations that ne/er made it to the le/el of a reco2nized tendency. The sucklin2 dri/e is to the baby what the Second 7aw is to warm li3uid: an e!hortation to be entropically satiated. to the e!clusion of other dri/es. now more metaphysical ima2e than or2an. The breast. # routine circuit de/elops from one satisfaction to the ne!t. the final cause of satisfaction. The down2raded ones clamor a2ainst the metaphysicalized or2ans and stri/e to throw off their tyranny. There are any number of part$ob6ects in a baby"s life. become addicti/e whole attractors. and the limitati/e body without or2ans attracts them back. the preeminent ima2e of a 6oyful future$past. The entire comple! causality with all its multiple le/els and /ibrations and crisscrossed tra6ectories be2ins to seem like a strai2ht. all associated with dri/es of /aryin2 stren2ths constitutin2 more or less habit$ formin2 circuits of anticipation$satisfaction. The fractal attractor is eclipsed by a whole attractor A the awaited breast seems to stand alone. %nly some. its end and ori2in in one.production$eruction. 2o/erns a tendency: a dri/e channelin2 the baby"s actualizations of its bodily potential toward a fa/ored satisfaction. like the breast. The body"s whole attractors and their potential circuits constitute a 1limitati/e body without or2ans1 &closed constellation+ which enters into combat with the 1nonlimitati/e body without or2ans1 of the submer2ed fractal attractor point sets and their infinitely more /aried potential paths &open constellation+.
1 Scratch the surface of reflecti/e commentary and an order$word erupts in its naked form: 14e/er do that a2ain . baby 6ust used the toilet. Some of the body"s /ibrations resonate with its surroundin2s and are amplified. Good babyT1 1The ne!t time you throw your peas on the floor . or should ha/e done. always do what 0 tell you. is about to do. the body"s action is limited to the kind characterized earlier as reaction: recordin2 of memory.lethar2y. . Some clash with them and are muffled. . Growin2 up is one lon2. %/erflyin2 the lar/al sel/es are new fled2lin2 sel/es. 0t would be interestin2 to calculate the percenta2e of what a child 6ust learnin2 to talk hears that is commentary on what it 6ust did. 1Good babyT1 They come back amplified into /irtues &the 2enealo2y of morals+. on which reco2nition becomes reflection. maintainin2 it as an acti/e dissipati/e structure. but not as acti/e as it could be. %/er all.1 Deco2nition has become self$reco2nition. . 8as that really meJ1 %b6ecti/e anticipation &8ill she or won"t she . constantly renewed becomin2$ reacti/e of acti/e dissipati/e forces. Desonant /ibrations are identified as belon2in2 to the body in some more essential way clashin2 ones. 1That"s itT1 becomes 1that"s meT1 1That was me. reco2nition of part$ob6ect. This is leadin2 us to a whole new le/el. 10 6ust threw my peas on the floor. Good babyT1 1>aby came to daddy. .1 1>aby 6ust went to daddy. reproduction of the same circuit. repetition of satisfaction."" The sensations of the first feedback loop are bumped up a le/el. contractin2 into sensations of pride or shame or 2uilt. The whole attractors always mana2e to reimpose their supremacy A with the aid Pa2e )? of reinforcements from e/en more powerful reacti/e forces. #cti/e. 1>aby 6ust used the toilet. is doin2.
from the point of /iew of their potential for 1free1 or 1willful1 action. parentLchild: replicate the family and the satisfactions of con6u2al life. The reacti/e nature of the syntheses of reco2nition pro/ides a hook for reacti/e forces from the social field to clamp into the flesh. or indi/iduals. on a/era2e. FaithfulLinfidel: replicate traditional . heterose!ualL homose!ual: replicate the customary separation between the races and se!es and the satisfaction of feelin2 superior. To2ether. the better to e!ploit their habit$formin2 potential. The nonlimitati/e body without or2ans of a socius is the sum total of its constituent supermolecular bodies. # 2rid of abstract cate2ories systematizes ima2es of su22ested attractor states and maps the patterns of reproducti/e action and consumption they authorize. #ll of this constitutes the creation of an incredible new potential. # proper name holds the two to2ether. 5/erythin2 be2ins to happen between a 1me1 and the 101 doublin2 it &another redundancy+. in other words for the undetermined selection of sin2ular states as a locally$ 2lobally correlated population. in their interaction. but also marks an important setback: the path taken at a point of bifurcation can now be 1willed. # society is a dissipati/e structure with its own determinin2 tension between a limitati/e body without or2ans and a nonlimitati/e one.comeJ+ becomes moral reflection &8as that meJ #m 0 like thatJ+. they are called a 1socius1 &the abstract machine of society+. The limitati/e body without or2ans of Pa2e )@ a socius is a set of whole attractors proposed by a society for its indi/iduals. what 1society1 wills for it. :usbandLwife. 8hiteL>lack.1 but powerful forces descend to assure that what the body wills is. manLwoman.
The 2rid is a proliferatin2 series of e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e syntheses addin2 up to a system of /alue 6ud2ment. incorporeally transformin2 it into its assi2ned cate2ories. 8hat is ultimately reproduced is society"s capitalist balance of power. Fewer satisfactions are offered to such lowly bein2s. 0f you don"t 2et as much out of life as 0 do. # full$fled2ed self only takes win2 after the 2rid of /alue 6ud2ment has been successfully applied to the body. #s infantile as this is. 0f the body doesn"t say 10 do. The whole system is an apparatus of capture of the /ital potential of the many for the disproportionate and sometimes deadly satisfactions of the few. =ou are either all one or all the other. and if you"re the other you"re not as 2ood. Surplus /alue"s doneT Come and 2et itT >ut 0"m better so 0 2et a bi22er piece of the cake. Qalue 6ud2ment and distribution of /alue are two sides of the same coin.1 Hnless of course the body happens to fall into one or more of the down2raded cate2ories &as most do+.1it"s in trouble. The list 2oes on. that"s me and 0"m proud to be one. %rder$words proliferate. DichLpoor: replicate social disparity and the satisfaction of economic e!ploitation. so the tension between the limitati/e and the nonlimitati/e bodies without or2ans remains hi2h and the moti/ation to fall in line decreases e/en as the dan2ers of not doin2 so increase. The fled2lin2 sel/es were still plural and relati/ely localized. Children 2row up in the ima2e of their . it"s 3uite simply because you don"t deser/e it. /acillatin2 between stayin2 on their own le/el and steppin2 clown to lar/al status. a new family replaces the old. it is no mere child"s play. 0ts home2rown habitual circuits ri2idify e/en further into a set of preestablished paths ordained for it in accordance with its cate2ories: school paths become career paths.reli2ion and the satisfaction of bein2 ri2ht. 1That"s meT L #m 0 like thatJ1 2i/es way to the smu2 satisfaction of 1=es indeed. play 2i/es way to marria2e. whispered commands and threats passed from lip to lip.
#s it mouths its /alue 6ud2ments. it e!hales a smell of rot. #nd so the world turns. eatin2 away at the body"s flesh as it smu2ly zombifies. Problem is. The balance of power tips. the indi/idual is 6oined in its breakaway by other indi/iduals in its correlated population. and a crisis ensues. mayhem ensues. breakdown /eers into breakaway. combinin2 potentials and creatin2 new ones rather than subtractin2 potentials already clamorin2 to . This is called 1re/olution1 &whether or not a new 2o/ernment is created A on second thou2ht especially when one isn"t+. 0n rare instances. # respectable person with respectable satisfactions is born. That is called 1art1 &whether or not a paintin2 or poem is e/er produced+.Pa2e )) parents. The cate2ories reacti/ate. Praise the 7ordT 0t"s a human. Decuperati/e mechanisms usually ensure that the lar/al breakout is a breakdown leadin2 back to the 2rid. inclusi/e syntheses in which the population as a whole sensitizes to the sin2ularities of its indi/iduals. 7ar/ae are teemin2 e/er more restlessly the more deeply they are submer2ed. 0n still rarer instances. clamorin2 to 2et out and to release into the world thin2s e/en more subhuman than ma22ots. ?* Sometimes the tension 2rows to the breakin2 point. 5/erythin2 is now 0$to$0 in ci/ilized connections. Qomit still clin2s in/isibly to the 2rown$up baby"s chin. a line of escape back to the nonlimitati/e body without or2ans and the increased potential residin2 there. e/en as its 101 looks down at others. a societywide crisis sets in. These are instances of a molarity becomin2$supermolecular. The odor of sanctity. resonatin2 with more than a2ainst them. The leash ti2htens. reactualizin2 its potential for e!pansi/e. The body is led as on a leash from one threshold in life to another. some eyes are hi2her than others.
inhuman &superhumanJ+ bifurcations on both 2lobal and local le/els. 5ntropic e3uilibrium sets in.e!press themsel/es. The /omit can speak now. # rebecomin2$acti/e of the body politic. and the mother$substitute is a lawfully wedded wife belon2in2 to a pious zombie. Dedundancy. 0t boils down to the process 6ust discussed: the reinforcement and amplification of the body"s whole attractors. such thin2s are pre/ented from happenin2 by a process of application &a channelizin2 o/erlay of social cate2ories+ centerin2 on the family. 5/erythin2 is pri/ate. The coordinates are set. %ur possessions are dearer to us than life . #n infusion of life. # breath of fresh air. the better to solidify the balance of power+. The breast is doubly pri/atized. Supple indi/iduals en/eloped in a supple superindi/idual. 0n our culture. but the breast is no lon2er a mysterious entity. and so on+.?9 Deleuze and Guattari call that process 1%edipus. Their allure attaches to whole bodies identified by social cate2ory. with possibilities for unheard$of. husbandLwife. The fer/id praise lands elsewhere &on a di/inized man. rather than to or2ans on those bodies e!perienced as a matri!es of transformational potential. Connections are now person$to$person. con6oin with &manLwoman. of course. 0t belon2s to a mother$ substitute. causin2 but uncaused A only a re2ressi/e playthin2. and e/erythin2 pri/ate has a double assi2nation &yours and mine+.1 Their analysis of it in #nti$ %edipus is perhaps the best$known aspect of their work. The still relati/ely unpredictable part$ob6ects are more successfully re2ularized by bein2 refocused on a hi2her le/el. bossLemployee. con/entionally e!pressed as authorized social cate2ories to be in or Pa2e ).
5/erywhere. The bi2 lie.itself. Deduction. The fifties ne/er stop comin2 back &after a fashion+. #nd it kept comin2 back. the lifeless promise of mutual possession. Then a2ain: that spot looked an awful lot like the pupil in Christ"s deeply . The future$past as the eternal return of the same. which ha/e folded yet a2ain into the reproducti/e family unit.1 =ou will see. %r: Demember the time 0 threw peas on the floorJ 8asn"t 0 a cardT >ut: There was that mysterious bi2 white thin2 with a dark spot in the middle with a darker spot in the Pa2e )( middle of that.1 10f you touch him 0"ll kill you. but we know how to share them with those we lo/e. They make the wife the husband"s mother. 0 was 2ood as 2old. 8as that GodJ Couldn"t ha/e been. 7o/e is con6u2al. #ll of the endless /ariations on what it is to be human ¬ to mention inhuman+ that can be obser/ed in the social field ha/e folded into a limited 2rid of repetiti/e cate2ories.1 10 am yours. 0t was only Bother. =ou will see that the future has folded into the past. >y definition. >odies mouthin2 the same touchin2 refrains: 10 do. wholly attracti/e couples dance ritual circles around each other like 4ewtonian planets around an in/isible sun. if you turn on the TQ. and the boss his daddy: e/erythin2 is always already reduced to cate2ories that are then mapped back into a whitewashed childhood home with a comfortin2 fire cracklin2 in the den. 5/erywhere. rather than the continual creation of difference. Collapse of the wa/e$packet. 8as it me who threw peas on the floorJ Bust ha/e been somebody else. then as now: children are cute. The TQ screen is only one of many mechanisms for reducin2 the boundaries of the uni/erse to the dimensions of a microcosm. =ou will see repeats A and commercials for home 2oods.
0 wasn"t 2ood and 0 wasn"t cute . in adorable hobbies that offer controlled reconnection with subhuman part$ob6ects as lon2 as they don"t 2et out of hand. . that dark spot was between my mother"s le2s . 0t is an ob6ecti/e illusion. 0 wanted to fuck my mother and kill my father. 0t"s a trap. .carin2 bi2 blue sufferin2 eye. %r was it the other way aroundJ 0"/e 2ot it: 0 didn"t ha/e a prick to do it with so 0 had to learn to lo/e my father and be my own mother. 0t is hi2hly determined A o/erdetermined. 8hen we do. #m 0 a boy or a 2irlJ #m 0 2ay or strai2htJ #m 0 me or somebody elseJ #m 0 ali/e or deadJ Did 0 kill God or am 0 GodJ %r. in predictable careers.1 o/er and o/er a2ain. . >ut this kind of indeterminacy is totally different from the kind we ha/e discussed up to now. . 8ait a minute. 5/erythin2 has 2otten fuzzy. but she belon2ed to him . indeterminate. The whole thin2 is an optical illusion produced by o/ercodin2. the past we resurrect is a myth: a 2olden a2e of satiation free from 2astrointestinal upsetF a 2arden of 5den of home comfort the fifties ne/er were. . The and of the indeterminate 1this and that1 was 6ust away of 2ettin2 in a 2ood or or two. 8e all know that he was white. . not the real choice presented by indefinitely bifurcatin2 becomin2s. but she was already herself and 0 hated her for that . . in identical suburban homes. . fantasied one: an ima2inary confusion between the present and the past. 0t is not an impin2ement of chance. . 8e"/e heard it . nipple and 2od. a real ima2inary capture that e!ploits a reacti/e streak in e/ery body to trap them in the same fantasies. only a retrospecti/e. like a broken record. it"s all a lie . The 1this and that1 that e/erythin2 is tend to be the same 1this1 and the same 1that. or. 0t is not an ob6ecti/e indeterminacy. both this and that. or. :a/e you seen my rock collectionJ The only easy way out of stereotyped re2ression is stereotyped breakdown: 0 see it now. . ?< 8e are all under pressure to re2ress.
?? # 3uick 2lance around the social field re/eals that many bodies are neither normally familialized nor stereotypically infantilized. Di/ine election. like a faraway con/ersation in a forei2n ton2ue in/adin2 the phone line. there is psychoanalysis to teach us how to keep swallowin2 our childhood /omit with all$too$human di2nity. The current sheriff of Phoeni! is named Dick Godbehere. The fact that many people. This su22ests that trap of molar personhood only has a limited hold after all. 7uckily. more and more it seems. Such people are de/iant. They are ri2ht on one count. and that they sometimes do thin2s most law$ abidin2 folks wouldn"t e/en dream of. and shepherd you into :is home. Too bad it costs so much to 2et across that threshold &to each his pri/ate surplus /alue+. The whisperin2s accompanyin2 the transmission of order$words sometimes blurs into distant echoes of rebellion.all a million times before. There is noise in the person$to$person communication. 0t keeps thin2s discreet. 8hich is more dis2ustin2 &or pathetic+: to throw a rock throu2h a courthouse window or to collect and label itJ To break out in lar/ae or to pin an insectJ Pause # 3uick sketch of how this differs from some common psycholo2ical and psychoanalytic conceptions: .Qote for DickT 0f you wander from the strai2ht and narrow path. :e will flash his bi2 blue eyes and e/en bi22er 2un. Gloriously so. behind closed doors. there are more archaic alternati/es. Pa2e . For those who don"t pay. consider those who amplify the noise into action to be de/iant and dis2ustin2 is e/idence that metastable molar personhood will ne/ertheless be with us for a /ery lon2 time to come.
familialized. Pa2e . *. %n that le/el. orphan. on other le/els and always threatens to break throu2h. muted. #s in the case of muck. a more ri2id boundary takes shape between 1self1 and 1other. self$ reflecti/e system. Sub6ectification is the constitution. Deacti/e forces do impose 1self1$reflection on the infoldin2 at a certain le/el. throu2h interlockin2 passi/e and acti/e syntheses on e/ery stratum. There is only multile/eled infoldin2 of an aleatory outside. atheist. The self remains susceptible to identity crises brou2ht on by confusions between ""inside1 and 1outside. 1:uman1 sub6ecti/ity in the sense of personal thou2ht or feelin2 is a special case e!istin2 only on one le/el of a dissipated human body system: the bounded.1 # membranous porosity subsists. These 2row intrinsically from the contracti/e syntheses &impersonal perceptions$ sensations+ of their infoldin2s. but doubled by surplus$/alue layers of lar/al and fled2lin2 sel/es. There is no interiority in the sense of a closed. inhuman. but acts on already$constituted surplus$/alue sel/es to e!tract a cate2orical person &stereotyped.1 but the cordonin2 off is ne/er complete.'. dominated le/el of the body as sub6ected 2roup. 0t does not create a self. an o/ercodin2 mechanism e!ists &%edipus+.' # human sub6ect in the broad sense is a superindi/idual composed of a multitude of subindi/iduals comparable to muck and sedimentary rock. with which the infoldin2 remains in contact &as a dissipati/e structure+. of infoldin2s of /aryin2 porosity. Since a person is only as . The person always has the potential to reconnect with its impersonality to become a sub6ect$2roup: sin2ular. pious reproducti/e system+.
There are /aryin2 de2rees of choice at successi/e threshold states. there is no self$sufficient a2ency that can 3ualify as intentional. The family is a de/ice for the capture of body potential &channelization+ by social forces of domination dedicated to the /ampiric e!traction of surplus /alue and the cyclic resupply of the bodies from which this surplus /alue is sucked. The 1will1 to chan2e or to stay the same is not an act of determination on the part of a unified sub6ect in simple response to self$reflection or an internal impulse. The family is not a closed microcosm. Dather. 0t opens directly onto the social field. 0t is a state of self$or2anized indeterminacy in response to comple! causal constraints. self$directin2. The family is a microcosm of society only to the e!tent that %edipal processes at work throu2hout the social field collapse cate2ories belon2in2 to other le/els of or2anization into family . but the choice belon2s to the o/erall dissipati/e system with its plurality of sel/es. the family opens the body to society"s feedin2 itself off it. enclosed in the family that feeds it. # body does not 2row up sheltered from society. 0t is an ob6ecti/e illusion of the molar person to percei/e the physical reality of free action as a metaphysical freedom or 1human ri2ht1 e!ercised by a unified. e/en if it is represented and represents itself as one. 0t constitutes a real de2ree of freedom. 8hat the family reproduces is more fundamentally collecti/e /alue relations than discrete physical bodies. 9. metastable A it can be precipitated into a crisis state despite its best intentions.stable as its constituent contractions A that is. full causal a2ent. and not to the personF it is ob6ecti/ely cocaused at the crossroads of chance and determinacy. 0n other words. <.
the relati/e stren2th of inclusi/e dis6unction o/er e!clusi/e . That le/el is more the strait6acketin2 of desire &desire turned resentfully a2ainst itself+. Desire is not desire for an ob6ect. but a tension between sub$and superpersonal tendencies that intersect in the person as empty cate2ory. 0t is the relati/e ad/anta2e of the nonlimitati/e body without or2ans o/er the limitati/e one. e!cept to the e!tent that whole attractors &represented by anythin2 from an or2an to a 2od+ are imposed on the body by reacti/e forces. Desire is the production of sin2ular states of intensity by the repulsion$ attraction of limitati/e bodies without or2ans &2o/erned by deterministic whole attractors+ and nonlimitati/e bodies without or2ans &2o/erned by chance$ridden fractal attractors+. it is the plane of consistency as multiple cocausal becomin2 &interactions between any number of fractal and whole attractors on many le/elsF nothin2 less than the abstract machine+. %n the human le/el. 0n an ethical conte!t. it is the tendency of one of the states created by the interplay of bodies without or2ans to remain in e!istence or return to e!istence. foreman with father.Pa2e . and it is not a structure in the sense that lan2ua2e is a structure in the Saussurian model adopted by 7acanians. 0t can be made to be these thin2s on one of its le/els. 0n its widest connotation. but in order to actualize its potential to increasin2ly hi2her de2rees: Spinoza"s conatus. ?. 0t is not a dri/e in the Freudian sense. not for merely reproducti/e ends.* cate2ories &e3uatin2 for e!ample. treatin2 one as the si2nifier of the other+ A in other words. to the e!tent that o/ercodin2 mechanisms select the family as the tar2et for a multiple o/erlay creatin2 a closed set of 0ma2inaryASymbolic relays &%edipus a2ain+. it is ne/er a strictly personal affair.
Desire is not desire for an ob6ect.dis6unction &the superposition of states. foreman with father. especially between self and other+ and the Symbolic &as structured by the sacred trinity of the father$phallic 1si2nifier of si2nifiers. Desire is the production of sin2ular states of intensity by the repulsion$ attraction of limitati/e bodies without or2ans &2o/erned by deterministic whole attractors+ and nonlimitati/e bodies . The unconscious is not fundamentally a repository of submer2ed feelin2s and ima2es as in the /ul2ar Freudian model. 0t is not a dri/e in the Freudian sense.1 ?@ @.1 the son the sacrificed si2nified. to the e!tent that o/ercodin2 mechanisms select the family as the tar2et for a multiple o/erlay creatin2 a closed set of 0ma2inaryASymbolic relays &%edipus a2ain+.1 Due to persistent sub6ecti/ist misunderstandin2s. treatin2 one as the si2nifier of the other+ A in other words. That le/el is more the strait6acketin2 of desire &desire turned resentfully a2ainst itself+. e!cept to the e!tent that whole attractors &represented by anythin2 from an or2an to a 2od+ are imposed on the body by reacti/e forces. and the holy 2host metaphor Pa2e . the addin2 to2ether of potentials from normally se2re2ated states+: 4ietzsche"s will to power. and it is not a structure in the sense that lan2ua2e is a structure in the Saussurian model adopted by 7acanians.* cate2ories &e3uatin2 for e!ample. in # Thousand Plateaus the word was chan2ed to the more neutral 1assembla2e. 4either is it fundamentally a 7acanian dialectic between the 0ma2inary &dyadic confusion. 0n #nti$%edipus. a tendency of this kind was called a 1desirin2$machine. ?. 0t can be made to be these thin2s on one of its le/els.
4either is it fundamentally a 7acanian dialectic between the 0ma2inary &dyadic confusion. in # Thousand Plateaus the word was chan2ed to the more neutral 1assembla2e.1 ?@ @. The unconscious is not fundamentally a repository of submer2ed feelin2s and ima2es as in the /ul2ar Freudian model. but a tension between sub$and superpersonal tendencies that intersect in the person as empty cate2ory. 0n #nti$%edipus. and the holy 2host metaphor Pa2e . treatin2 one as the si2nifier of the other+ A in other words. %n the human le/el. the relati/e stren2th of inclusi/e dis6unction o/er e!clusi/e dis6unction &the superposition of states. it is the tendency of one of the states created by the interplay of bodies without or2ans to remain in e!istence or return to e!istence. but in order to actualize its potential to increasin2ly hi2her de2rees: Spinoza"s conatus. it is the plane of consistency as multiple cocausal becomin2 &interactions between any number of fractal and whole attractors on many le/elsF nothin2 less than the abstract machine+. especially between self and other+ and the Symbolic &as structured by the sacred trinity of the father$phallic 1si2nifier of si2nifiers. 0n an ethical conte!t.1 Due to persistent sub6ecti/ist misunderstandin2s.* cate2ories &e3uatin2 for e!ample. 0n its widest connotation. it is ne/er a strictly personal affair. to .1 the son the sacrificed si2nified. a tendency of this kind was called a 1desirin2$machine. the addin2 to2ether of potentials from normally se2re2ated states+: 4ietzsche"s will to power.without or2ans &2o/erned by chance$ridden fractal attractors+. not for merely reproducti/e ends. 0t is the relati/e ad/anta2e of the nonlimitati/e body without or2ans o/er the limitati/e one. foreman with father.
0t is the relati/e ad/anta2e of the nonlimitati/e body without or2ans o/er the limitati/e one. 0n #nti$%edipus. but a tension between sub$and superpersonal tendencies that intersect in the person as empty cate2ory. a tendency of this kind was called a 1desirin2$machine. ?. 0t is not a dri/e in the Freudian sense. not for merely reproducti/e ends. Desire is the production of sin2ular states of intensity by the repulsion$ attraction of limitati/e bodies without or2ans &2o/erned by deterministic whole attractors+ and nonlimitati/e bodies without or2ans &2o/erned by chance$ridden fractal attractors+. That le/el is more the strait6acketin2 of desire &desire turned resentfully a2ainst itself+. the addin2 to2ether of potentials from normally se2re2ated states+: 4ietzsche"s will to power. but in order to actualize its potential to increasin2ly hi2her de2rees: Spinoza"s conatus. it is the plane of consistency as multiple cocausal becomin2 &interactions between any number of fractal and whole attractors on many le/elsF nothin2 less than the abstract machine+. it is the tendency of one of the states created by the interplay of bodies without or2ans to remain in e!istence or return to e!istence. it is ne/er a strictly personal affair. e!cept to the e!tent that whole attractors &represented by anythin2 from an or2an to a 2od+ are imposed on the body by reacti/e forces. Desire is not desire for an ob6ect.the e!tent that o/ercodin2 mechanisms select the family as the tar2et for a multiple o/erlay creatin2 a closed set of 0ma2inaryASymbolic relays &%edipus a2ain+.1 Due to persistent sub6ecti/ist . 0n its widest connotation. and it is not a structure in the sense that lan2ua2e is a structure in the Saussurian model adopted by 7acanians. 0n an ethical conte!t. %n the human le/el. 0t can be made to be these thin2s on one of its le/els. the relati/e stren2th of inclusi/e dis6unction o/er e!clusi/e dis6unction &the superposition of states.
0t is the perceptions of the human body as contracted into lar/al sel/es. 4either is it fundamentally a 7acanian dialectic between the 0ma2inary &dyadic confusion.1 ?@ @. productions of consumption. thou2h. Bore broadly. 0t is continually chan2in2 as all of those le/els are superposed and actualized to different de2rees as the body 6umps from one more or less indeterminate threshold state to the ne!t. in # Thousand Plateaus the word was chan2ed to the more neutral 1assembla2e. especially between self and other+ and the Symbolic &as structured by the sacred trinity of the father$phallic 1si2nifier of si2nifiers.misunderstandin2s. and the holy 2host metaphor Pa2e .9 and metonymy+. 0t is an interlockin2 of syntheses. passi/e and acti/e: productions of production. 0t can be made to be these thin2s. the unconscious is e/erythin2 that is left behind in a contraction of selection or sensation that mo/es from one le/el of or2anization to another: 0t is the structurations and selections of nature as contracted into human D4#. productions of recordin2. Production. . natural and cultural. >ecomin2. 0t is the fled2lin2 sel/es as contracted into the o/erself of the person. The only thin2s the unconscious is not are present perception and reflection &personalized redundancy+.1 the son the sacrificed si2nified. 0t is the lar/al sel/es as contracted into fled2lin2 sel/es. The unconscious is not fundamentally a repository of submer2ed feelin2s and ima2es as in the /ul2ar Freudian model. on two of its le/els. 0t is the multitude of e!citations of rods and cones and ner/e cells as contracted into a perception of the human body.
Transposed onto that le/el. the almi2hty trian2ulatin2 phallus. fusion and fra2mentation. be2 the 3uestion.). it appears as the distance separatin2 the self from its . sub6ect of the enunciation and sub6ect of the statement. as 7acanians describe it to be. >ut the split between self and other is only a recapitulation on the %edipal le/el of more fundamental bifurcations. translate a real bodily bifurcation: between the human person and its subhuman indi/iduals. only abstracts the assumed unity into a mysterious whole ob6ect A which must itself split if it is to cause a splittin2 in what it endows with fractured identity &its unity consists in always bein2 absent to itself+. The sub6ect is effecti/ely split. The 7acanian theory of splittin2 spirals into increasin2ly metaphysical speculation that only reduplicates at e/er$hi2her le/els of abstraction that which it falls to e!plain &a confusion between one and two+. 0ma2inary and Symbolic. Theories of sub6ecti/ity as a constituti/e splittin2 arisin2 from an ima2inary dialectic of presence and absence. the limitati/e and the nonlimitati/e body without or2ans. fusion or fra2mentation. The added third term. si2nified and si2nifier. there can only be an 1other1 to confuse 1one1"s self with if there is first a ""one1 to ha/e a self: in other words. They assume what they end up denyin2: 1oneness1 &enou2h to 2i/e presence and absence. %ne must come before two in order for two to be a doublin2 in which there is no three. if sub6ecti/ity functions as a closed system. a modicum of meanin2+.< reflection and the unconscious as defined abo/e. Pa2e . Clearly. The fractal 2ap between the person and its indi/iduals is translated by %edipal mechanisms onto a le/el at which it can be interiorized in a personality structure. The proliferatin2 metaphysical splits between otherness and identity.
8hat is left out is precisely the reality of the unconscious &1the real is impossible1+. 7acanian splittin2 is a retrospecti/e pro6ection of distinctions belon2in2 to the personal le/el of the constituted sub6ected 2roup onto the entire dissipati/e system of the body: the multitude of indi/iduals that contract to produce the person is reduced to the one$two$&three+ of self$other$&phallus+. #n e/er$present absent ob6ect of o/erpowerin2 attraction inspires an impossible ritual 3uest for fulfillment. three.ru2er: 10 shop therefore 0 am. The Commodity is the capitalist incarnation of the phallus as Baster #ttractor. this is 2ood for business. #t the center of the feedback loop. To 3uote >arbara . The sin2ular future$past of the threshold becomes a re/ol/in2 door: a sin2le past that returns in the future &repetition$compulsion+. 4ot incidentally. four. is short$ circuited by an infinite feedback loop of metaphysical redundancy.?. Desire. but a toaster is an acceptable substitute. 8hat is foundin2 is the ob6ecti/e indeterminacy of the body"s nonidentical threshold states. 7acanians need to learn how to count: three. not the foundation.1 . of the process of indi/iduation. Their complication &the multiplicity of noncompossible choices they en/elop+ is represented by the 7acanian model as an ima2inary undifferentiation. the tou2h 2o shoppin2."" to 3uote a popular suburban bumper sticker. distinctions which can e!ist only on the second$order le/el of identity and identity loss. fi/e come before one. The 6a22ed line of becomin2 buckles into a circle. the plane of consistency. 18hen the 2oin2 2ets tou2h.reflection &the 18as that meJ1 of the mirror sta2e+. two. ?) 0dentity and identity loss correspond to bein2 in or slippin2 out of one"s assi2ned cate2ory and the paths throu2h the social field associated with itF they are the end effects. 7o/e may be the li2ht of one"s life. a pri/ate sun that is and isn"t there. Their superposition with identity appears as an irresol/able dialectic.
%utside the %edipally or2anized Symbolic order there is said to e!ist only an undifferentiated infant body &the %w>: or2ans without a body+ laborin2 in a prelin2uistic state of ima2inary confusion between &fusion with+ self and m%ther..? maternal body. # corollary to the status of the split sub6ect as a deri/ed. second$order formation: the body without or2ans is not the 1fra2mented body1 of psychoanalysis. The so$called fra2mentation e!hibited by the 1pre$%edipal1 body is in fact the fractality of part$ob6ects as defined earlier A not the debilitatin2 lack of an old unity but a real capacity for new connection. From within a psychoanalytic framework. 0t is not a ne2ati/ity in contrast to which a plenitude mi2ht be desired. 0t is a positi/e faculty for the production of connecti/e syntheses in/ol/in2 a clear . # fre3uent criti3ue of Deleuze and Guattari casts them as toddler /isionaries in men"s clothes preachin2 a return to the Pa2e . identity$undifferentiation are retrospecti/e illusions pro6ected onto the infantile body. They are the normalized adult perspecti/e on it. plenitude$lack. This precludes lucidity of thou2ht in academics and strate2ic action in politics: anarchism as an infantile disorder. those are the only terms in which their calls for a 1return1 to the body without or2ans can be understood: as a re2ression to the 1pre$%edipal1 body..@This line of reasonin2 reflects a refusal to accept A or an inability to understand A the point 6ust made: for Deleuze and Guattari the %edipal alternati/es of phallus$castration. a denial of the 1fact"" of castration. ?( The only alternati/e to resi2nin2 oneself to the adult 1reality1 of desire$as$lack is to e!ult in an ima2inary union with a lon2$dead 2host from an incestuous past.
The added e!hortation for women to lead the way by first 1becomin2$woman1 themsel/es has the rin2 of the all$ . 8hat lies outside %edipal sub6ecti/ity &actually. not a protometaphysical 1confusion. Supermolecularity. Gi/en that e3ui/alence. # more sophisticated psychoanalytically oriented criti3ue of Deleuze and Guattari"s notion of the body without or2ans than the caricature 6ust addressed has been de/eloped by certain feminist authors. 4ot re2ression: in/ention. The body re2ains the self$transformati/e 1freedom1 accompanyin2 the hyperdifferentiation of the dissipati/e structure at a point of bifurcation.perception of 1necessity1 and an e!perimental assessment of chance &the chances of e!ploitin2 the mar2in of error in the artificially closed system of personhood in order to break out of its deterministic confines+. beside it: it is always contemporaneous with identity e/en if it is submer2ed by it@'+ is an effecti/e superposition of an unaccustomed ran2e of pra2matic potentials. a resurfacin2 of the /irtual. howe/er. it in/ol/es an increase in 1sensiti/ity1 &lucidity+. Deleuze and Guattari"s e!hortation for men to 1become$woman1 on their path of escape from molar manhood can only be seen as a denial of difference and thus a short$circuitin2 of 2ender politics.@* Pa2e . still accept a basic e3ui/alence between the fra2mented body and the body without or2ans. and a multiplication of strate2ic options. #ll the more reason to make the escape with utmost sobriety. There is no in/ention without a commensurate dose of instability. #s well as a raisin2 of the stakes. @9 These criti3ues. 0ndi/iduation at its most intense. The de2ree of dan2er increases apace with the de2ree of freedom.@ (.1 # return to the body without or2ans is actually a return of fractality. #s always.
8hat they are abstractions of are not the human bodies to which they are applied. 0n %ld 5n2lish. 18oman1 is the sub$Standard: the sidekick necessary to 2i/e 1Ban1 somethin2 to be superior to. the word meant wife$Ban. They are empty cate2ories. 1Ban1 and 1wo$Ban1 belon2 to the same le/el and the same system of cate2orical 6ud2ment. 18oman1 as an accessory 1Ban1 is etymolo2ically embedded in the 5n2lish lan2ua2e. the binary couple BanL8oman is one of the interlockin2 sets of coordinates on the cate2orical 2rid definin2 the person. ""Ban1 is the Standard: the socially established measure of humanity a2ainst which indi/iduals are 6ud2ed and hierarchically /alued. 0n their /iew.@? 4o real body e/er entirely coincides with either cate2ory.@< Deleuze and Guattari do not deny the reality of se!ual difference. but habit$formin2 whole . an 1%ther1 in contrast to which :e can be all the Samer. They correspond to 4obody &Personne+. # body only approaches its assi2ned cate2ory as a limit: it becomes more or less 1feminine1 or more or less 1masculine1 dependin2 on the de2ree to which it conforms to the connections and tra6ectories laid out for it by society accordin2 to which coordinate in 2ender 2rid it is 6ud2ed to coincide with.too$familiar 2esture of abstractin2 an essence of 1femininity1 and e!altin2 it as a state of 2race that all women should occupy. in blatant disre2ard of the real conditions under which women actually li/e. 18oman1 is simply the oppositional term without which 1Ban1 would ha/e no meanin2. They desi2nate two poles of the same e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis. They simply ar2ue that it does not lie at the foundation of sub6ecti/ity. 0t is a patriarchal construct. 0t is simply that in contrast to which what is desi2nated 1Ban1 is deemed superior. 1Ban1 and 18oman1 as such ha/e no reality other than that of lo2ical abstractions.
0t is akin to a mineralo2ical typecastF it is a reacti/e o/erlay. school. 4o body is ""masculine1 or 1feminine. 8hat is en2endered is a social brick. 2ender is not of course arbitrary in the sense that bodies are assi2ned cate2ories at random. Genderin2 is the process by which a body is socially determined to be determined by biolo2y: social channelization cast as destiny by bein2 pinned to anatomical difference. a buildin2 block used to construct not the walls of a courthouse but of another factory of 2uilt: the family fortress. like metal to a ma2net that recedes farther into the distance the closer one draws. # body does not ha/e a 2ender: it is 2endered. They are clich s that bodies are coerced into incarnatin2 as best they can. .Pa2e . Since supermolecularity in/ol/es a capacity to superpose states that are 1normally1 mutually e!clusi/e. a molar o/ercodin2 &reproduction+. motherLlo/er+. career: artificially closed ener2etic systems re/ol/in2 around subtypes of each 2ender cate2ory+. a socially functional limitation of a body"s connecti/e and transformational capacity. #lthou2h thorou2hly social.1 %ne can only come to one"s assi2ned clich . family. in an endless deflection from in/ention. church. 1Ban1 and 18oman1 and their many subcate2ories desi2nate stereotyped sets of ob6ect choices and life paths &stable e3uilibriums+ promoted by society. The feminine 2ender stereotype in/ol/es 2reater indeterminacy &1fickle1+ and mo/ement &1fli2hty1+ and has been burdened by the patriarchal tradition with a disproportionate load of parado! &/ir2inL whore. Gender is a fatal detour from desire$in$de/iation &e/ery body"s secret potential and birthri2ht+. The only end is death.) attractors to which society e!pects it bodies to become addicted &lo/e. Gender is a form of imprisonment. Gender is done unto it by the socius.
and 1women"s work1 2enerally+F 1fli2htiness1 made to soar to hei2hts of /ersatility in artistic creation &the in/ention of a women"s writin2+. mo/ement. . it can be assumed by a man wishin2 to escape his socially assi2ned orbit of affects and actions &in any number of ways. The feminine clich can be strate2ically misapplied: for e!ample. This necessarily in/ol/es a redefinition of the cate2ory by and for those it traditionally tar2ets: 1fickleness1 translated into a political refusal on the part of Pa2e . o/er the limit beyond which lack of definition becomes the positi/e power to select a tra6ectory &the leap from the realm of possibility into the /irtual A breakin2 away+. to bein2 the 1passi/e1 partner in a 2ay relation. uncompensated domestic labor. They therefore recommend what they call 1becomin2$woman1 for bodies of either biolo2ical se!. Strate2ies of cate2ory alteration other than re/aluation also ha/e a place.. to li/in2 as a ""female$ identified1 heterose!ual+. From a dismissi/e cate2ory to increased de2rees of collecti/e freedomF from /alue 6ud2ment to re/aluation. played with such skill by a woman.Deleuze and Guattari hold that the feminine clich offers a better departure point than masculinity for a rebecomin2$ supermolecular of the personified indi/idual. >ecomin2$woman in/ol/es carryin2 the indeterminacy. from ha/in2 a se!$chan2e operation. and parado! of the female stereotype past the point at which it is recuperable by the socius as it presently functions. %r it can be taken to such an e!treme by a tar2et body. women to remain fi!ed within the confines of the home or other constricti/e arenas of work &the feminist pro6ect of breakin2 down the barriers of traditional marria2e.
>reakin2 in is an enablin2 strate2y for breakin2 away. The ultimate 2oal. 0t is to lift the body from the constraints of reciprocal difference in a system of appro!imate closure &/ariation within e!ter$ Pa2e . and other se!ual minorities comin2 more fully into their collecti/e potential by assertin2 their 1e3uality.1 or of any cate2ory to any other. #ction in the con/entional political arena aimed at ele/atin2 the status of indi/iduals rele2ated to sub$Standard conditions by social o/ercodin2 is an indispensable aspect of becomin2: women. is not enou2h in itself. 0t is the system of molarity itself that needs to be dismantled before human bodies will be able to fully reclaim their potential. to push the apparatus of identity beyond the threshold of sameness. or e/en in/entin2 new cate2ories. 2ays. only establishes an e3ual ri2ht to the pri/ile2es A and limitations A of molarity. Their aim is to destroy cate2orical 2riddin2 alto2ether. or strate2ically e!a22erate a cate2ory.( nal limits set by an o/ercodin2 differential 2rid imposin2 a se2re2ati/e binary lo2ic+ and catapult it into the absolute . @@ #s lon2 as there is familial o/ercodin2. but not an end in itself. >reakin2 into the e!istin2 order is a necessity. for Deleuze and Guattari. 0t is ultimately self$defeatin2 unless it is used as a protecti/e mechanism. nor e/en to in/ent a new identity.that the tables turn and men are cau2ht in their own identity trap &1feminine mas3uerade1+. misapply.1 >ut re/aluin2 a cate2ory. is neither to redefine. there will be a need for 2ender politics to defend and empower those disfa/ored by the e!ercise in containment that is molar Ban. into sin2ularity. #ssertin2 the e3uality of 18oman1 to 1Ban. a political shield for becomin2s$ other. 0t is fundamentally a becomin2$the$same A molarized.
. >ecomin2 is not immediately an option for heterose!ual men. only more so. molar men. for e!ample. The Standard Ban$form with which their bodies and desires are in near$total symbiosis is the personification of anti$becomin2. in a locally$2lobally correlated cascade of supermolecular self$in/entions. 0t is 1real1 men. @) The 2oal would be for e/ery body to un2ender itself. They do not dwell on the possibility of a similarly re/olutionary becomin2$man that would push the masculine stereotype beyond its threshold of recuperation &followin2. is the destruction of 2ender &of the molar or2anization of the se!es under patriarchy+ A6ust as in their /iew the end of class politics is the destruction of class &of the molar or2anization of work under capitalism+. howe/er e/enhandedly: from difference to hyperdifferentiation. material differential in an irre/ersibly open system en6oyin2 infinite de2rees of freedomF life in the /orte!F intensity+.difference of dissipation &a bodily state so differentiated that it differs e/en from itself. Bolarity is by nature unbecomin2. self$destruct. Deleuze and Guattari"s formulation of the concept of 1becomin2$woman1 is indeed se!ist. since it is their clich that is sin2led out. strate2ies of the kind employed by some se2ments of the 2ay and lesbian SLB communities who theatricalize 1masculinity1 in order to take it to a deconstructi/e e!treme+. The burden of chan2e is placed on women.@.. since in doin2 so he would not be becomin2 other than he already is but rather stayin2 the same. De$form themsel/es. creatin2 a nonmolarizin2 socius that fosters carnal in/ention rather than containin2 it. for Deleuze and Guattari. The end of 2ender politics. 0t would be impossible for a strai2ht man to become$man in this way. holdin2 its past to2ether with its many futures in each of its undecidable presentsF the body itself as a nonbinary.1 0.e. Dissociate their bodies and desires from the apparatus of o/ercodin2 that has up to now defined them. who should consent to 12o first.
@( Pa2e ('-. ). Saussure openly describes lan2ua2e as a reducti/e mechanism. that si2ns only ha/e /alue by /irtue of their reciprocal difference. it is the form of the Same: it is the most abstract form of e!pression of society"s homo2enizin2 tendencies. what he disdainfully calls the 1heteroclite.1 and second. first. it is unlikely that molar men will embrace this mission of self$e!cision with immediate enthusiasm. and in relation to which unity must always stand apart &1self$contained1+. 0t is only when they cease to be that they will be able to become. and ha/e no positi/ity.and forced complementary definitions on others in their name. 0t should be abundantly clear by now that a call for an end to binary systems of difference is not a call for undifferentiation or sameness. The unity of lan2ua2e e!ists on a le/el of pure abstraction &1lan2ua2e is a .1 8hat it classifies is the 1confusin2 mass1 of thin2s we e!perience in the world. 17an2ua2e is a self$contained whole and a principle of classification.:ow can lan2ua2e be a system of e3ui/alence. :e says. %ppositional difference is the same. yet be made up entirely of differenceJ %nly if difference amounts to the Same. Their suicide may ha/e to be assisted. 8omen and se!ual minorities ""should1 not 2o first A but neither should they wait.1 7an2ua2e in its Saussurian functionin2 pro/ides a unity &1whole""+ for that which by nature has no unity. Saussure. that meanin2 &lin2uistic /alue+ 1is a system of e3ui/alence between thin2s &si2nifieds and si2nifiers+ belon2in2 to different orders. Gi/en the pri/ile2es the e!istin2 social order accords them. the 2odfather of the diacritical thinkin2 so pre/alent in cultural analysis today. is 3uite e!plicit about this.
# cate2ory con/entionally desi2nates a thin2 &the celebrated tree dia2rams+. deemed 1difference.1 1#dult1 is 1not$Child1. These fall away in fa/or of what it has in common with other similarly prescribed bodies: membership in a class. . . 10t"s a boyT1 Determination. lea/e one order. and in the process are constituted as thin2s &determinate. 0n a Deleuze$Guattarian framework. one would be tempted to re/erse that formulation and say that bodies &as defined abo/e: as indeterminate ener2etic matri!es+ are desi2nated for the cate2ories. the 1heteroclite. 0t 2ains 1/alue1 &both in the lin2uistic sense and in the sense of utility or presti2e in the dominant cultural order+. 18e"ll make a man of him. The body is ne2ati/ized as the price of its entry into an officially reco2nized system of meanin2. with all due haste. if arbitrarily so. but Pa2e (' loses.1 18oman1 is 1not$ Ban. socially manipulable ob6ects+ A that lan2ua2e is prescripti/e rather than referential. This process of . 1Ban1 is 1not$8oman. #n e3ui/alence is imposed between two orders that lifts a body out of its uni3ueness and places it in a system of 1difference1 &1not that1+ in which it is reduced to the Same &one in a class of 1not that1s+. e/en if it kills him1: it is hereby ordained that the body before us shall. not a substance1+ at which there is only ne2ati/e difference: a si2n is understandable only in opposition to what it is not.1 %ppositional difference. Prescripti/e e3ui/alence. lan2ua2e is still referential. from society"s determinin2 perspecti/e. the particularity of its time and of its spaceF what is unreproducible in it. They are empty cate2ories formin2 an oppositional 2rid cleansed of the heteroclite. 4one of these terms ha/e positi/e content. For Saussure.1 to 6oin another. .form.
far more comple!.1 but 1identity$undifferentiation /ersus hyperdifferentiation. /alue is the dynamic interplay. The operati/e distinctions made by its rules of formation are too fine to be cau2ht in the mesh of binary abstraction: they are 1indeterminate1 by its measures. at a 2i/en point in space$time.lin2uistic perception &in our stron2 sense as a material 2raspin2+ is identification &a body"s ad/ent to personhood throu2h incorporeal transformationF in the 1pri/ate"" sphere. 0dentification is arbitrary in the sense that there is no 1natural1 connection between a body and its cate2ory. :yperdifferentiation is conceptually indeterminate from the point of /iew of oppositional difference. it is .1 rather than bein2 undifferentiated. but not in the sense that it has 1presence1 &simple bein2F identity by the traditional definition of self$sameness+. the sin2ular.1)9 0dentity$undifferentiation is a system for the determination &reduction+ of potential &/alue+. the 1heteroclite. a body"s ne2ati/e difference. :ere. is called 1personality1+. of material tensions en/elopin2 potential paths of becomin2. Qalue in this conte!t is a positi/ity. )' For Deleuze and Guattari. or social /alue.1 is not 1confused1 and unanalyzable. is hyperdifferentiated. 0t is not outside but rather inte2ral to the system of identification. 0t simply obeys other. 0t is the realm of supermolecular indi/iduality. 0t is 1undifferentiated1 only from the point of /iew of a system of 1difference1 predicated on e3ui/alence and yieldin2 sameness.1)* 0t is that in contrast to which ne2ati/e difference &identity+ has /alue. but necessary in the sense that society ne/ertheless demands that the link be made &on the basis of anatomy+. The 1heteroclite. >ut it is materially indeterminate in 1itself1 A which is a teemin2 /oid &as opposed to a diacritical emptiness+. 1Hndifferentiation1 is the flip side of this 1difference. 0n other words. The real distinction between orders is not 1identity /ersus undifferentiation. rules of formation.
To be a do2. %r2an by or2an. resol/in2 .1 :e analyzes step$by$step the 3ualities of two molar species. one must walk on all fours. %ptin2 out of that path. %r shoppin2$to$be: 4ot e!actly mental stability. the man becomes a do2. Stealin2 away from the shoppin2 mall on an e!orbital path tan2ent to identity and undifferentiation is called 1schizophrenia. it seems.1)@ Schizophrenia is a breakaway into the unstable e3uilibrium of continuin2 self$in/ention.* :e is not imitatin2 a do2F he is 1dia2rammin2.seethin2 with fractal future$pasts &sin2ularitiesF dense points+. Pa2e (9 4ormality is the De2ree Nero of Bonstrosity ' >ecomin2$%ther # man complains of bein2 hun2ry. The hero decides to wear shoes on his hands. >ecomin2 the person it is said to be: the slow death of stable e3uilibrium. So the man decides to become a do2. are ne/er hun2ry. only to disco/er that there is no hand left to tie the laces on the fourth shoe. but not 3uite breakdown either. #ll the time. 8hat does a shoe$shod do2 tie laces withJ 0ts mouth.)< Pa2e (* %peratin2 within the framework 1identity &ne2ati/e difference+ /ersus undifferentiation &confusion+1 lea/es a body three options. Do2s. into its opposite: neurosis and e/entual breakdown. The kind of positi/ity it has is the pra2matic copresence of unactualized potentials &complication+. )? The frenzy of the purchasable A potential e!perienced as infinite choice between ha/in2s rather than becomin2s.
:e rein/ents Ban and Do2 or2an by or2an. but a monster. The premises" lack of truth /alue is a direct result of the nature of the constraint. 0t does not matter whether that constraint or do2s" e!emption from it is ""ob6ecti/ely true. The analo2 of the tail. . #t each point in the pro2ression.1 The constraint was effecti/ely percei/ed and led to action. molar personhood itself. of course. and childhood family memories pour in. or bodies without or2ans. phallocentrism. he combines a certain number of affects from each abstract body in a sin2ular way and incarnates them in his alle2edly human matter. is the penis. a freak. 0n other words. 8hat he comes up with is neither a molar do2 nor a molar man. or his powers of analysis not refined enou2h. by the perception of a molar constraint: hun2er. on the conscious le/el. Dather than Pa2e (< freakishly combinin2 with its human analo2. it stubbornly remains 6ust what it is A in order for its analo2 to stay the way it is. :e is e!plorin2 the bodies" 1mode of composition1 or dynamic ran2e. The process is real. and then actualizes a selecti/e combination of them. to pull the linchpin. The outcome of the process re/eals what it was. The process stops.them into constellations of abstract relations of mo/ement and rest. The tail defies transformation. but he hits a sna2. if not entirely rational. The man"s anti$ %edipal desire was not stron2 enou2h. 0t is now clear what constraint was bein2 escaped: %edipus. # do2 with shoes. The man"s becomin2$do2 fails. :e has selecti/ely con6oined two molarities. :e resol/es the bodies into two bundles of /irtual affects. The selection was determined. he 2radually e!tracts from each body a set of affects: ways in which the body can connect with itself and with the world.
. 0t carries both of the molar normalities in/ol/ed out of themsel/es into the realm of the monstrous. The point of departure is ine/itably a molarized situation within the confines of which alternati/es tend to present themsel/es as choices between molar bein2s. >ecomin2. an o/erpowerin2 imposition of re2ularized affects. >ecause it constricts actions into a limited dynamic ran2e. is a tension between modes of desire plottin2 a /ector of transformation between two molar coordinates. %edipus has no truth /alue. as is any mo/e away from it.+ 8hat matters is that the constraint is there. # new dynamic ran2e outlines itself in the in$between: a fusion of potential relations of mo/ement and rest mappin2 a mutant tra6ectory ne/er before tra/elled by Ban or Do2.The escape attempt was not rational because the constraint is not rational. >ecomin2 be2ins as a desire to escape bodily limitation. it is ine/itable that it will be e!perienced by the o/ercoded body as a physical constraint. sameness$difference and hyperdifferentiation. Bolarity is a mode of desire. 8hether the constraint in 3uestion is 2enerally characterized as a 1natural1 or 1cultural1 necessity makes little difference &all constraints are both simultaneously: 1real1 hun2er is as much an economic reality as a di2esti/e fact. >ecomin2 is a tension between two modes of desire A molarity and supermolecularity. bein2 and becomin2. the process set in motion is not itself molar. Con/ersely. and that there is a counterdesire to lea/e it behind. The cate2ories taken as startin2 points are ima2es of the attractor state of stable e3uilibrium typical of molarity: Ban as %edipalized animal. in its simplest e!pression. as Foucault has shown. # molarity other than that normally assi2ned to the body in escape from constraint su22ests itself as an ima2e of 1freedom. 0t is a matter of force: it is a cate2orical o/erlay. 1cultural1 limitations are effecti/e only to the e!tent to which they insinuate themsel/es into the flesh.1 #lthou2h the choice may be couched in molar terms.
rather than what it has come to be. >ut somethin2 happens. #lthou2h the indeterminacy of the supermolecular state in/ites the use of such words as 1choice1 and 1freedom. from the point of /iew of its potential. howe/er. faces a choice: fall back into one or the other molar coordinate.1 1irrational. or keep on mo/in2 toward the 2reat dissipati/e outside stretchin2 uncertainly on the wild side of the welcome mat. The man. Domesticity Pa2e (? and calm.1 it is not a 3uestion of a consciously willed personal decision. >ecomin2 is an e3uilibrium$seekin2 system at a crisis point where it suddenly percei/es a deterministic constraint. as if the perception of the constraint set up affecti/e interference patterns perturbin2 the shape of contentment. mesmerized by snapshots. 8hat the ne!t mode of locomotion would be is any body"s 2uess. :e may either re/ert to his normal self or suffer a breakdown &identity confusion between Ban and Ban"s >est Friend+F or he may decide not to look back and set out instead on a sin2ular path of freakish becomin2 leadin2 o/er undreamed$of 3uadrupedal horizons. and is catapulted into a hi2hly unstable supermolecular state en/elopin2 a bifurcatin2 future. >ecomin2 is directional rather than intentional.1 . and has ne/er been. as what it is not. to reclaim his old familial self. preferrin2 to plod home.Do2 as tail$wa22in2 pet sharin2 human hearth and home. forcin2 each contained and self$ satisfied identity to be 2rasped outside its habitual patterns of action. becomes 1sensiti/e1 to it. The direction it mo/es in may appear 1unmoti/ated. ha/in2 superposed human and canine affects. 0n this story. the man opts a2ainst li/in2 dan2erously. :e turns his back on the hi2h$ener2y e3uilibrium of hyperdifferentiation.
of Ban into somethin2 with canine affects. Personhood is in the middle: preperception and postbecomin2. The perception of the con$ Pa2e (@ straint of hun2er seems to come out of nowhere. or 1counteractualizin21 it by remo/in2 the body from its normal habitat. but it does not actualize them. 0mitation respects the boundaries between molar wholes. in an alteration of their perception of constraint. and of Do2 into somethin2 more human than science would allow.or 1arbitrary"" from the point of /iew of molarityF but becomin2 is no more deser/in2 of these epithets than molarity itself. >oth are modes of desire. The model is the or2anism: a body is made up of parts &or2ans+ with identifiable characteristics. as entities unto themsel/es. >ecomin2$other is not imitation. The place where nothin2 happens. 8here the process leads is toward a suprapersonal le/el. 9 Supermolecularity or 1becomin2$other1 necessarily be2ins with molarized bodies. The process of translation be2ins at a subpersonal le/el. 0t concei/es of the body as a structural whole with determinate parts in stable interaction with one another. The man does not literally become a do2F but neither is do2dom unscathed. 4either is 1free1 in the sense of bein2 untouched by deterministic constraints. >oth are affecti/ely redefined. into a beyond of mutation and monstrosity. supposedly . 0t imposes itself on the man as a fact of life that has suddenly leapt into his consciousness and can no lon2er be i2nored. The mo/ement is a double translation. 0t counteractualizes them. Bolarity and supermolecularity are different ways of respondin2 to constraint: actualizin2 it in the body. settin2 up comparisons between bodies considered separately. it is the empty e3uilibrium state.
They are subsumed by a 2eneral idea. :e has made one representati/e part of one body$type coincide with a habitual action proper to a correspondin2 part of another species. 0n other words. Similar. 0n this mode of thou2ht. De/iations from the norm are disre2arded within certain limits. and thus share the body"s self$identity. >ut this time the comparison body has intrinsic 3ualities and habitual circuits of action e!hibitin2 a le/el of de/iation from the norm that cannot be disre2arded. These bodies are considered particular instances of a type. %ther bodies may ha/e more or less the same intrinsic 3ualities and habitual actions. bodies are reduced to what they ha/e in common. # man makes his hand mo/e 1like1 a paw. and to others+.intrinsic 3ualities. The similarities definin2 one body can be contrasted to those of another body belon2in2 to a different type. with themsel/es and with others of their species. and presto. or norm. the body is defined by that which in or of it remains the same. he"s 1done1 a do2 imitation. but different. There are de2rees of sameness. To each its 2eneral idea. To each or2an in the first body corresponds a functionally e3ui/alent part in the other. The body is defined by its similarity to itself across its /ariations: self$identity. They are 2rasped solely from the point of /iew of their 2enerality. formed by a double system of similarity &intrinsic and e!trinsic: of the or2anism to itself. The 2eneral idea ""Do21 temporarily superimposes itself onto a body belon2in2 to Pa2e () . 0t is abstracted from the sin2ular flow of its mo/ements throu2h the world and the succession of often chance alterations it under2oes in the course of its life"s path. which predispose the whole they compose to certain habitual patterns of action. Paw /ersus hand.
the 2eneral idea 1Ban.1 #fter the imitation, both bodies re/ert. 4othin2 has chan2ed. 4othin2 was translated. 4othin2 mutated. 4o new perception came. 4o body escaped. 4othin2 really mo/ed. 5/erythin2 took place on the le/el of the person. The mode of thou2ht characteristic of imitation is 1common sense1: the abstract o/erlay of one predefined, self$identical whole on another, playin2 on de2rees of similarity &1differences1+ between their parts. #nalo2ical thou2ht A the 5mpire of 17ike."" 10 was 6ust "like" you when 0 was your a2e,1 the sa2e father says to his son &read: 1>e me when you 2row up1+. 10t"s 6ust "like" her to do that. People ne/er chan2e1 &read: 10f you chan2e, 0"ll lose my hate, and then what would 0 ha/e to li/e for J1+. 1Politicians are "like" that A all crooked. 4othin2 e/er chan2es1 &read: 10 refuse to think the world can chan2e so 0 myself won"t ha/e to1+. 7ike, habit, reaction: same difference. 0mitation of life. Scientific and philosophical 12ood sense1 operates in essentially the same way as common sense: isolation of the typical indi/idual &considered outside the real flow of its actionsF as essentially dead+F decomposition into parts and determination of intrinsic 3ualities &dissection+F lo2ical recomposition into an or2anic whole e!hibitin2 si2ns of 1life1 &artificial resuscitation+F e!trinsic comparison between wholes &analo2y+. Common sense and 2ood sense share an ima2e of thou2ht that assi2ns the de/elopment of a 12eneral idea1 as its 2oal &cate2orical thinkin2: Ban and Do2 as classes+. < To the e!tent that they reach this 2oal, they coincide with neurosis. The analo2ical correspondences established by 2oodLcommon sense delineate a system of potential symbolic relays from one or2anic &molar+ whole to another. The sin2ularity of each indi/idual &its 1minority1+ is eclipsed in the play of similarity$difference. The social contract of molar coe!istence has been sealed: 1ShakeT1 &paw G hand+.
Desemblance dominates, boundaries blur, metaphors proliferate and identity confusion looms. 8e are back in the %edipal lo2ic discussed in the pre/ious chapter. Puppies are cute and cuddly &6ust 1like1 a babyT >oth ha/e to be toilet trained+. Soon, they learn to walt whinin2 at the door for the return of their master &whose /oice of authority they always reco2nize, 1like1 a 2ood wife+. 7o/e and re2ression in a fur coat. 0t is often remarked how do2s and their owners 2row to resemble one another. >ecomin2$the$same.? >ecomin2$other is a different animal alto2ether. 0t does not proceed analo2ically. 0t ends where analo2y be2ins. 4or does it acti/ate
Pa2e (, metaphor: rather than establishin2 e3ui/alences between or2anic wholes, it dia2rams differences in potential associated with bodily parts as such &the or2ans 1hand1 and 1paw1 as part$ob6ects 2o/erned by a fractal attractor+. 8hat thou2ht$in$becomin2 in/esti2ates is first and foremost realms of action A what paw and hand can do, where bodies can 2o, not on a/era2e, but in the e!treme: their ran2e of affect, or 1latitude.1 @ Dather than decomposin2 a typical indi/idual into intrinsic 3ualities, it unfolds potentials en/eloped in a sin2ular indi/idual at a crossroads of mutation. Dather than clea/in2 to resemblances, it e!ploits a difference in nature in order to compose another, takin2 two latitudes that do not coincide and yieldin2 a third that coincides with neither. Thou2ht$in$becomin2 is more abstract than analo2ical thinkin2, since it bears primarily on what may or may not come to pass, rather than on what 1is1 by 2eneral consensus. #t the same time, it aims lower and stays more concrete. The 2oal is not to de/elop a 2eneral idea &model+ that would stand out and abo/e &transcend+ the
bodies it subsumesF it is to create a new body at 2round le/el. 0n spite of its emphasis on the none!istent, the procedure of becomin2 is entirely immanent. 0n other words, it operates on the same plane as its ""ob6ects.1 Thou2ht$in$becomin2 starts in the middle, at the point of intersection of two realms of action &bodies without or2ans+, in the milieu common to two bodily dynamisms &in the Ban$Do2 case, the domestic en/ironment+.) The interiority of the bodies in/ol/ed does not concern it. 0t lod2es itself instead in the distance separatin2 them, in their space of interaction, the field of their e!teriority to one another. 0t is that plane of coe!istence, or consistency, that is the ultimate ob6ect of the process. To become a new body, an old body needs a new milieu throu2h which to mo/e. >ecomin2$other orchestrates an encounter between bodies, considered from the point of /iew of their /irtuality, in order to catapult one or all onto a new plane of consistency, in the kind of leap in place characteristic of incorporeal transformation. #nalo2ical thou2ht starts from an isolated indi/idual considered to be typical, and ends in a cate2ory coherent enou2h to take its ri2htful place in a pree!istin2 system of 2oodLcommon sense. Thou2ht$in$becomin2 takes that end point as its be2innin2, counteractualizin2 the entire system of analo2y, metaphor, and %edipality:, it mo/es in the in/erse direction, from the 2eneral &the cate2orical or stereotypical+ to
Pa2e (( the indi/idual. 8ith the indi/idual understood differently A as uni3ue, not as typical. 0t stri/es to in/ent the sin2ular animal that could walk away from %edipus. >ecomin2 is bodily thou2ht, beyond the realm of possibility, in the world of the /irtual. #t once superabstract and
infraconcrete, it 2rasps the en/ironment of molarity common to different bodies from the perspecti/e of the potential curtailed. Thou2ht is an unhin2in2 of habit. #s a body matures, it de/elops a repertory of stimulus$response circuits. The re2ularity of the normalized situations within which the body is placed is inscribed in it in the form of autonomic reactions. Same input, same output. Same stimulus, same response. %n schedule. The circularity of the e/eryday. Trainin2. 1Growin2 up.1 Deacti/ity. >ut somethin2 happens when habits of speech and action start to accumulate. 5ach scheduled stimulus takes its place in a 2rowin2 constellation of others 1like1 it, to which there is a correspondin2ly increased constellation of 1like1 responses. The task of trainin2 is to ensure that the 1appropriate"" response will be matched to the stimulus more often than not. This re3uires 2oodLcommon sense: analytical thinkin2 capable of discernin2 the de2ree of similarity$difference of the stimulus presented to those in its constellation, and of selectin2 the fittin2 response. >ut for each stimulus, there is now a host of analo2ous responses that mi2ht be substituted for the 1ri2ht1 one. 0f the body selects one of those responses, its habitual course throu2h the common en/ironment of molarity may be e/er so sli2htly deflected. # crack has opened in habit, a 1zone of indeterminacy1 is 2limpsed in the hyphen between the stimulus and the response. Thou2ht consists in widenin2 that 2ap, fillin2 it fuller and fuller with potential responses, to the point that, confronted with a particular stimulus, the body"s reaction cannot be predicted. ( Thou2ht$in$becomin2 is less a willful act than an undoin2: the nonaction of suspendin2 established stimulus$response circuits to create a zone where chance and chan2e may inter/ene. 0t does not close the door on analo2y and analytical thinkin2, but rather pulls it open, suspendin2 analysis 6ust lon2 enou2h to carry it o/er the threshold of
habit. Thou2ht$in$becomin2 e!pands the selecti/e capability of 2oodLcommon sense to the point at which it becomes other than it is: a momentary stall instead of an automatic response, then a sprin2 into a new, synthetic, mode of operation.'- 1Dational1 thinkin2 is not o/er$
Pa2e '-turned, nor the e2o dissol/ed. They are set a6ar, opened onto a space of in/ention A raised, in fact, to a hi2her power as their hitherto canned responses take on fle!ibility to the measure of the moment. >ecomin2 is a mode of synthetic thou2ht whose relation to analytical thinkin2 and the e2o is less a counterin2 than a counteractualization A a chan2e in mode strikin2 habit, molarity, e/en reacti/ity itself. Thou2ht$in$becomin2 is the process of a body"s rebecomin2$ supermolecular. The body re2ains the 1spontaneity1 characteristic of the undomesticated body, becomin2 an untrained animal a2ain, or a child, or anythin2 else it chooses. >ut always with a difference. For the response selection must be informed by the peculiarities of the shared en/ironment, to a/oid precipitatin2 a crushin2 reaction from the molarizin2 forces that delimit and police the common space within and around coe!istin2 bodies. 0t must also take into account the 3uirks of the mutatin2 body, to a/oid hittin2 a sna2 that will make the process crash under its own wei2ht &somethin2 as small as an insufficiently deanalo2ized tail is all it takes+. >ecomin2 is supremely pra2matic, or it fails. >ecomin2$other is an e!ponential e!pansion of a body"s repertory of responses. 4ot only does each stimulus e/oke an indeterminate number of pra2matic responses, but there is a chan2e in the body"s mode of response. The body is capable of selectin2 any one of these responses, but it does not ha/e to. 0t en/elops a 2rowin2 number of bifurcatin2 futures in
each of its presents, but none is preordained. 0ts responses are no lon2er autonomic. 0ncreasin2 complication. # fractal abyss has reopened where there was only a hyphen between stimulus and response, cue and canned reaction. The body"s zone of indeterminacy, thou2h confined to its synapses, has widened beyond measure. #utonomic responses ha/e been counteractualized as autonomous. This increase in the body"s de2rees of freedom is called 1ima2ination.1 0ma2ination is rational thou2ht brou2ht back to the body. 0t is a pra2matic, synthetic mode of thou2ht which takes the body not as an 1ob6ect1 but as a realm of /irtuality, not as a site for the application of an abstract model or prefabricated 2eneral idea but as a site for superabstract in/ention. 0t bears directly on the body"s affects A its capacity to affect and be affected, to act and to percei/e, unleashed. 0ma2ination, like habit, is a circuit A less between re2ularized stimuli and ac3uired responses in the actual world than between the actual
Pa2e '-' and the /irtual as such. '' Thou2ht$as$ima2ination departs from the actual, dips into the fractal abyss, then actualizes somethin2 new. 0t short$circuits molarity, passin2 directly from a particular state of thin2s to a sin2ular response. The 2enerality of molar e!istence is present only to the e!tent that the selection of the response is still informed, as a pra2matic precaution, by the system of similarities dictated by molarity.'* The fact that becomin2$other takes analo2y, metaphor, and molarity as its point of departure and mo/es from the 2eneral to the indi/idual means that it is social throu2h and throu2h. 0t is a collecti/e undertakin2, e/en if only a sin2le body mutates. 0ts point of departure is not the 2eneral in
habitually. but it is no sooner sur/eyed than institutionalized. not e/en the do2. it 6ust mo/es in a different direction and fre3uents different circles.'9 %ther bodies may slip into that zone of indeterminacy.2eneral. and 2rouppoliced cate2ories of thou2ht and action. >ecomin2 performs an operation on collecti/ely elaborated. 5/en if a body becomes in the pri/acy of its own home. # life$space opens. in an endless bein2$made$what$one$is$a$priori &2enerally the same+. # new cate2ory is added to the reco2nized list. #ccommodatin2 a supermolecule means adaptin2 the 2rid of molar identities to it. it is still committin2 a social act. the cate2orical le/el of this body &Ban or Do2J+. mutually accepted. new circuits of response. 0t is an o/ercodin2 that e!ists only as imposed and reimposed. There is no other way. in this situation &%edipal or notJ+. 8hen supermolecularity succeeds. socially selected. and procedures are established to ensure that the inte2ration of the new kind of body into the shared en/ironment does not upset the 2eneral e3uilibrium. unheard$of futures and possible bodies such as ha/e ne/er been seen before. 0t is no less a process than becomin2. as instituted. 0t maps out a whole new /irtual landscape featurin2 otherworldly affects.'< 0f the bodies that come to inhabit the newly Pa2e '-* . in/entin2 new tra6ectories. Generality has no e!istence outside of its application to actual bodies. 0t opens a space in the 2rid of identities those cate2ories delineate. with no one else around. creatin2 the conditions for a conta2ion of becomin2$other A a process as fra2ile as it is infectious. or captured: molarity is an apparatus of capture of ener2ies that escape it. >ecomin2 starts from the 2eneral as operati/e in a particular situation: in other words. but this 2enerality &1my1 :ome+. or autonomous zone. the forces of molarity must accommodate or kill it.
that the body$in$becomin2 and its cohort will be reduced to the confines of a cate2ory A the . precipitatin2 a hyperdifferentiation that e!ponentially multiplies the potential bodily states and possible identities it en/elops. then slides into a cascade of differentiations. For the becomin2$other to continue. one subtle enou2h to con/ert them into opportunities A and to translate the body into an autonomous zone effecti/ely en/elopin2 infinite de2rees of freedom. The body$in$becomin2 does not simply react to a set of constraints. >ecomin2 must keep on becomin2. 0nstead.reco2nized &remolarized+ space of affect simply mo/e in without reproblematizin2 it. '? >ecomin2 is an escape. 0t is probable. e/en when it is initiated by a sin2le body: e/en one body alone is collecti/e in its conditions of emer2ence as well as in its future tendency. in maneu/ers of capture and escape that only increase the chances of collision and mutation. the bodies$ come$lately must submit the new in/ention to the same treatment to which it submitted the molarities of it took as its point of departure. they are merely findin2 new accommodations for their own curtailment: adopt$a$ sameness. Successful becomin2$ other concerns the entire body politic. so monstrously hyperdifferentiated that it holds within its /irtual 2eo2raphy an entire population of a kind unknown in the actual world. it de/elops a new sensiti/ity to them. The body is abstracted. creatin2 a /olatile situation. in an indefinite mo/ement of in/ention openin2 wider and wider zones of autonomy populated by more and more sin2ularities. but not a fore2one conclusion. >ecomin2 bears on a population. with bodies mo/in2 in all directions at cross$purposes. but in a way that makes it a sin2ularity. not in the sense that it is made to coincide with a 2eneral idea. >ecomin2$other be2ins by differentiatin2 one molecular body from two molar cate2ories. but it is not for that reason ne2ati/e or necessarily oppositional.
The social mo/ements of >lacks. Htopian thinkin2 that would assi2n a shape to the . 0t lea/es a specific orbit but has no predesi2nated end point. 0t rarely happens that a becomin2$other pi/ots on a sin2le body. bein2 instead the same. '@ #ny population. no matter how oppressed &molarly compressed+. but not directed &no one body or will can pilot it+. The becomin2s of typically indi/idualist Standard Ban &usually $animal or $woman+ are almost always destined to fail. >ecomin2 can only proliferate with carefully formulated 2roup strate2ies &whether the 2roup is yet to come or already here A and it is preferably both+. 0f it could. it cannot be e!hausti/ely described. #2ain. >ecomin2$other is thorou2hly politi$ Pa2e '-9 cal. Bost becomin2$others are initiated by pree!istin2 populations who de/elop a collecti/e sensiti/ity to the molar constraints applied to them and 6oin to counteractualize them. in which case it wouldn"t be becomin2 at all. abori2inals. >ecomin2$other is the counteractualization of necessity. en/elops more affects or potential actions than the most in2enious indi/idual body. The ima2e of a body at home alone is misleadin2. it would already be what it is becomin2. Solo becomin2s are constitutionally limited A lea/in2 home on all fours is not likely to sol/e the problem of world hun2er. 2ays and lesbians A of 2roups rele2ated to sub$Standard conditions A pro/ide far better frames of reference than Standard Ban alone at home with his do2. em$barkin2 on an anti$%edipal ad/enture. >ecomin2$other is directional &away from molarity+. feminists. For that reason. because they do not draw on the power of an actual population.world may 6ust ha/e to e!pand to fit them. # snapshot of the past.
at at least one of its spatiotemporal coordinates. it belon2s more to the constrictions of the past than to any e!pansi/e future. 0t is an apparatus for the capture of synthetic thinkin2 and the desire for a new world that animates it. There are. Some su22estions: '. >ecomin2 is about mo/ement. Htopia is the 2entle death of re/olution. in other words submitted to e!perimental e/aluation and remapped as needed. They ha/e no /alue unless they are immanent to their 1ob6ect1: they must be /erified by the collecti/ity concerned.now 0t. but it be2ins with an inhibition.supermolecularity$to$come is a function of molarity. Stop the world. #t least some of the automatic circuits between re2ularized stimuli and habitual responses must be disconnected. Stoppin2 the 8orld #s 8e . Society"s molar e3uilibrium is breached by a fractal /oid into which freakish thou2ht$bodies rush as if sucked into a creati/e /acuum. The most that can or should be done is to enumerate ways in which becomin2 mi2ht be mapped without bein2 immobilized. of course. Pa2e '-< and out of which more mutant becomin2s come pourin2. as if a crowbar had been inserted into the interlockin2 network of standardized actions and tra6ectories constitutin2 the 8orld #s 8e . harsher containments. 1Strate2ies1 is the best word for ways of becomin2: they are less theories about becomin2 than pra2matic 2uidelines ser/in2 as landmarks to future mo/ement.now 0t. The resultin2 zone of indeterminacy is a tear in the fabric of 2oodLcommon sense. Tactical sabota2e of the e!istin2 order is a . is a prere3uisite for settin2 up the kind of actual$/irtual circuit crucial to the political ima2ination.
They may be 2eo2raphical: an 1underde/eloped1 area in the capitalist economy.1 pro/ided that it is understood that the re/olution has many rhythms. 0t is seen for what it is not &without the yet+.necessity of becomin2.now 0t is dysfunctional for molar purposes. to fi2ht for inte2ration into it on its terms. >ecomin2 concerns speed. This state of supermolecular hyperdifferentiation mi2ht be called 1permanent re/olution. but for sur/i/al"s sake it is 6ust as necessary to impro/e the e!istin2 order. The end is for there to be no end. The site of a breach in the 8orld #s 8e . of this kind come in many 2uises. The /elocity of becomin2 must only be different from the refle! speed of the e!istin2 apparatuses of molar capture. a wasteland. and the collecti/e desires embodied in them. and is therefore percei/ed by 2oodLcommon sense as a simple ne2ati/e: a lack of functionin2. 0ts dan2er as a site of political in/ention 2oes unnoticed. 0ts pace will depend on historical conditions. Sometimes e!treme slowness passes more easily unnoticed. but speed is relati/e. >odies$ in$becomin2 ha/e no future if the perceptual capabilities of molarizin2 forces are enou2h in synch with them to 2rasp them for what they are not &yet+. Their combined 2oal is a redefinition of the conditions of e!istence laid down by the molar order: their con/ersion into conditions of becomin2. it can be instantaneous or spread o/er a2es.1 which may in fact occur within . Cherish derelict spaces. to turn collecti/e e!istence into a repeatedly self$applied series of incorporeal transformations. #utonomous zones'. and they should be practiced in such a way as to reinforce rather than mutually e!clude one another. or a 1Third 8orld. ') *. 4either is an end in itself. The derelict space is a zone of indeterminacy that bodies$in$becomin2 may make their own. These are two sides of the same coin. They are holes in habit. what cracks in the e!istin2 order appear to be from the molar perspecti/e.
7ike 1outside. they should not be thou2ht of as 1outside1 the e!istin2 structures in any strai2htforward sense. 5scape always takes place in the 8orld #s 8e . but an absolute outside that is e/er and already in this world. they are where bodies in the world but between identities 2o: liminal sites of syncretic unorthodo!y. 5/en thou2h autonomous zones are derelict spaces that become sites of escape.the borders of the 1First 8orld1 &the 12hetto1+. as shreds of futurity. they take the world with them A into the future. Daydreamin2 is an autonomous zone for the 1delin3uent1 in school. 0f the circumstances are ri2ht. The ""outside1 of autonomous zones is not the relati/e outside of topo2raphy. %r they may be widely scattered throu2h the social field. Politics is one for 1dissidents1 fleein2 standardized &molarized+ collecti/e action &0deolo2y+. 1# structure is defined by what escapes it. >odies in fli2ht do not lea/e the world behind.now 0t.1 1future1 is only an . or field of mutual e!teriority+. For e!ample. physically separated from one another so that e/en thou2h they are 2eo2raphically implanted they do not define a continuous territory. they inhabit the in$between of socially si2nificant constellations. #utonomous zones are interstitial. conti2uous to e/ery one of its spatial coordinates. a se!ual minority may turn the pri/acy of the home or a semipri/ate club into an autonomous zone in which e!perimentation may be under$ Pa2e '-? taken in relati/e safety.1 #utonomous zones may be thou2ht of in temporal terms. #utonomous zones are irruptions in the actual world of that other dimension of reality A the /irtual &bodies" plane of coe!istence. '( Deli2ion is one for latter$day 1pa2ans1 fleein2 or2anized &molarized+ belief &the Church+. %r they may be entirely deterritorialized.
** >odies$in$becomin2 must be passin2$persons capable of simulatin2 the molar bein2 assi2ned to them by the 2rid of political /alue 6ud2ment. This is a delicate operation. in a kind of mirror sta2e of politics in which one becomes what one hates &the 1microfascism1 that often infects oppositional 2roupuscules+. Pa2e '-@ <. 1in order to become apparent. *9 8hen in doubt. Sidle and straddle. Deform politics fa/orin2 2radual chan2e runs the risk of slow death by creepin2 molarity.appro!imation: there are any number of potential futures in the cracks of the present order. but tenseless: time out of 6oint. is forced to simulate structural states and to slip into states of forces that ser/e it as masks. Study camoufla2e.*9. but only a few will actually unfold. re3uires the ability to 1pass1 on the 1inside. in an immanent outside &4ietzsche"s untimely+. Somethin2 new. Think of autonomous zones in terms of time. and thus unwittin2ly condemn your supermolecule to a molar death &1recuperation1+. . %ppositional politics intent on head$on confrontation at all costs carries other dan2ers: sudden death on an ill$prepared battle2round. or throu2h instantaneous molarization. 0t is all too easy to become what you are.1 This is seemin2 to be what you are &by molar definition+. frau2ht with the dan2er that a 2roup 2ainin2 representation in such apparatuses of capture as 2o/ernment and media will be trapped into operatin2 entirely on their terms. to work within the e!istin2 order to ensure the sur/i/al of oneself and one"s 2roup.1*' To succeed at the reform side of the coin. The latter is brou2ht on by the common e!pedient of a would$be body$in$becomin2 definin2 itself solely as the in/erse of what it desires to escape.
sidestep. or entropic e3uilibrium. The 2oal is a limit approached. in an artificially closed system. camoufla2e$showin2 oneself. ne/er reached. throu2h cracks in accepted spatial and temporal di/isions. 8hat one comes into is 2reater transformational potential. 0n establishin2 actual$/irtual circuits. but like becomin2$other it is in reality a producti/e process: a makin2$the$same. an effecti/ely re/olutionary mo/ement establishes many other circuits: reform$confrontation. 8hat one comes out of is identity. To 2et there. a dynamic in$between. and many permutations of these. These strate2ies. but as a 2eneral principle it is as self$defeatin2 as uncritical acceptance of reform. The De/en2e of the Same Bolarity presents itself as stasis. a simultaneous comin2 and 2oin2 in a borderland zone between modes of action. one must mo/e sideways. #lthou2h the system of the Same stands for . rationality$ima2ination. Stasis. Throw off your camoufla2e as soon as you can and still sur/i/e. To achie/e the 2oal that has no end means ceasin2 to seem to be what your are in order to become what you cannot be: supermolecular fore/er. taken to2ether. 8hat is important is the process: desire for the future.1*< ?. 0t is constructed. constitute resistance: friction in the molar machine. bein2$becomin2. Char2in2 strai2ht ahead may be necessary and effecti/e at times. e!ists only under special conditions. with others like them. Come out. molarity$minority. The place of in/ention is a space of transformational encounter. Comin2 out is ne/er complete. >ecomin2 is always mar2inal. and its preser/ation re3uires a certain le/el of ener2y e!penditure. De/olutionary sidesteppin2 is called 1trans/ersality.
8hen it does. Bolarity is producti/e acti/ity kept to the minimum necessary to 2uarantee relati/e closure. knows only contradiction: binary distinction is the element of its analytical thinkin2. 2oin2 from the typical to the 2eneral. >y contrast. 0t tends toward entropy. it carries its operations to a hi2her power. is a limit ne/er reached. 8hen becomin2$other starts to succeed. it is surreptitiously acti/e. returnin2 thou2ht to the body 2rasped from the point of /iew of its transformational potential A monstrosity. from the indi/idual 2rasped from the point of /iew of its predictability to the Standard of that normality. what it aims for is not the . it is when becomin2$the$same be2ins to falter that it carries its process to a hi2her power. The synthetic mode of thou2ht proper to becomin2$other is ima2ination.Pa2e '-) stasis. The oppositional cate2ories it deals in are by definition 2eneral ideas which no particular body can e/er fully embody. >ecomin2$other is problematic. The producti/e processes of becomin2$other and becomin2$ the$same follow /ery different paths. becomin2$the$same is haunted by an irresol/able contradiction written into its /ery mode of operation: its ob6ects can ne/er be what it makes them. but entropic e3uilibrium. Since its only 1ob6ect1 is parado! &strate2ic indeterminacy+. the threat of e/entual catastrophe. 0ts problem is complication. which is also its measure of success. Bolarity. >ecomin2$the$same mo/es to a/oid that same potential. it is apocalyptic. The contradictions of becomin2$the$same are na22in2 reminders of irresolution. on the other hand. contradiction holds no sway o/er it. a2ain like its supermolecular nemesis. >ecomin2$other 2oes from the 2eneral to the sin2ular. That is its problem. aimin2 all the more intensely for the connecti/e freedom of fractality. *? :appily so. 8hile becomin2$other is rife with endless complications. 8hen molarity is not morose.
members of a well$to$do$family from the north of France who are either too youn2.1 we are always already where it wants to take us. or too female to be war heroes flee to unoccupied territory in the south to work on the wine har/est. in Spinoza"s sense of tendin2 toward an au2mentation of the power to li/e in this world. 0t takes the di/ide$and$con3uer approach of rational analysis to the e!treme. This escalation of se2re2ation is called 1morality1: the mo/e from 2eneral ideas to the 0dea as 2uarantor of the Pa2e '-. To succeed at it. it is necessary to pass a test.1 *@ >ecomin2$other is the madness of the ima2ination. # silent film by 7ouis Feuillade 2i/es some concrete indications on the workin2s of this molar machine: Vendémiaire. Dather than takin2 the materials at hand and synthesizin2. all one must do is to be ali/e. and re/els in its 1thisness. carryin2 thou2ht e/er farther from the body and the 3uantum world it inhabits. and to make it bindin2: the separation of thou2ht from the body &transcendence+. To 3ualify for molar paradise. 1Good. 0t contents itself with abstraction plain and simple. 0n the final days of 8orld 8ar 0.*) To 3ualify for it. it stri/es to make the ultimate separation. There they meet one dau2hter"s husband$to$be and a sinister pair of German prisoners of war passin2 themsel/es off as #llies until they 2et enou2h money to flee . one need only li/e more fully: dissipate &e!pend ener2y at a state far from e3uilibrium+. Since becomin2$ other concerns this world. 0t sets its si2hts on paradise &2lorified 2enerality+.superabstraction of immanence. on the other hand. 0t is eminently ethical. The select achie/e death &ma!imum entropy+. Borality &molarity+ is the delirium of Deason. too old.
and the mo/ie ends with a sentimental tableau of the /ines and a final intertitle sayin2 that from these /ineyards a new nation wall be reborn. #n abstract flow of wine infuses a 2lorified national body with intimations of rebirth. 0t presents itself as the producer of all /alue. and the dead man"s lonely comrade betrays himself by drunkenly speakin2 in German. arro2atin2 to itself the powers of lo/e and /irtue. The Germans" plan is to rob the /ineyard owners and frame a 2ypsy coworker. 0t is a seminal flow presentin2 itself as first and final cause. but the 2rapes themsel/es. 5/ery crucial moment in the film is e!pressed in terms of wine: lo/e is e!pressed by the scintillatin2 ima2e of the faraway wife dancin2 in the husband"s army$supply wine cupF the German menace in its hi2hest e!pression is one of the escapees stompin2 on the 2rape /ineF heroism is e!emplified by an altruistic trooper who bra/es death to brin2 wine back to the trenches to 2i/e his comrades a taste of the homeland that will re/i/e their will to /ictoryF when /ictory does come. and thereby moti/ates the man to be a 2ood husband and 2i/e sons to the . rather than any human hero &they are all at the front+. %ne of them. we are led to belie/e. hides in an empty 2rape stora2e tank. :is corpse is found still clutchin2 the loot. The film is bracketed by 2rapes. 0t e!presses lo/e. also resol/e the dilemma.to Spain. about to be found out. and dies from to!ic 2ases produced by 2rapes fermentin2 nearby. it is toasted with wine. Pa2e '-( The ima2e of the wine contracts into itself the sensations attached to e/erythin2 /alued in the film. was won with wine. the 2ypsy woman is sa/ed. >ut does not merely establish a monopoly on surplus /alue. 4ot only does the 2rape har/est moti/ate the plot. The war.
2lorious 2rowin2 4ation. 0t is not an ima2e of acti/e production: it is an ima2e of reaction. #n incidental effect of the wine"s unmaskin2 of the schemin2 Germans is that the 2ypsy pro/es to be a dependable. family. She is for2otten by the time the final encomium to wine comes on. and 2i/es 2enerous portions of 2lory to the deser/in2 ones. Praise the wineT That the wine"s miraculous powers lead to a rebirth &Qend miaire is the first month of the French De/olutionary calendar+ is a tacit acknowled2ment that its producti/ity is parasitic of productions takin2 place on other le/els. more or less. The potion works its ma2ic before our /ery eyes. and thereby spurs the soldiers to /ictory. in the aftermath of 8o#d 8ar 0. 0t shows the ideal bodies of the film for what they"re worth. 7ess than more: the 2ypsy"s role is a minor one. entire re2ions le/eled. 5/ery 2reat war has a powerful deterritorializin2 effect: the mobilization of troops and supplies. Thanks to it. hard$workin2 woman in spite of her heathen blood. 0ts causality is an optical illusion. families broken. The 2ypsy"s role has to be downplayed because she belon2s to a wanderin2 race that does not respect territorial boundaries e/en when it is accepted into them. The entire plot re/ol/es around reco2nizin2 the Germans" line of escape and reactin2 to it in time to block it. nation. The film abstracts from the bodies and thin2s of postwar 5urope a transcendent plane of ideal identities: spouse.nation risin2F it e!presses patriotism. Then it fills the 12ood1 with 2lory by fillin2 them with a miraculous li3uid: 2lorious :usband. >ut her role is ne/ertheless an important one: she . traitor. 2lorious 8ife. The wine operates e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e syntheses: it is e/aluati/e and distributi/e. Gypsies do. Qend miaire was made in '('(. The film presents an ima2e of society apparently meant to insert itself into that dis6ointed situation to help induce a unifyin2 reterritorialization in a new moral order. a new France will rise. Germans don"t make it. 2lorious Family.
The mechanisms of selecti/e e/aluation the film sets in motion could 6ust as easily be applied to social mo/ement associated with forces other than war. The real alternati/e between potentially creati/e chaos and reproducti/e order is transposed into a moral distinction between /alued terms on the identity 2rid and de/alued ones: honest French and conni/in2 Germans. 0t can e/en be seen as an accelerated. The film translates that percei/ed threat into its own terms. This is e!actly the kind of mo/e we defined in the last section as an %edipal mechanism. wine instantaneously and incorporeally transformed the bodies to which the cate2ories were applied into a stron2 and ordered nation mirrorin2 the prewar period as the film wishfully remembers it. the blurrin2 of territorial. Perhaps she will be the e!ception to the rule and embrace the French faith. the break$up of the traditional family structure. 5/eryone left ali/e will be in/ited to communion. 0t absol/es her of her sin of bein2 born an infidel.2i/es the wine an opportunity to demonstrate its Christlike 2enerosity. Pa2e ''0n the film. The concern of the film is less a particular instance of social dislocation than the dan2ers posed by social fluidity per se. ni2htmarish /ision of chan2es inherent to industrialization: the uprootin2 of indi/iduals from their ancestral homelands. 2ood self and e/il other. racial and ethnic boundaries. >ad bodies combine two . The distinction between the sameness of order and the indeterminacy of hyperdifferentiation is transposed into a distinction between identity and undifferentiation: some bodies are what they are and are 2oodF others are not what they seem to be and are bad. The social fluidity of the off$screen situation after the war is not in fact uni3ue to that period.
The identification is retrospecti/e: the film not only transposes its outside into an internal contradiction. 0n the ima2e. 0n practice. future$lookin2 . 0t embodies a contradiction in terms. They imitate a /alued identity in an attempt to mask the de/alued one that is ri2htfully theirs.identities that should be mutually e!clusi/e. ally or enemy. Social fluidity A the hyperdifferentiated outside of e/ery ima2e A is 1reco2nized1 in the film as a masked %ther that is in fact a de/alued same: a bad identity. Fluidity is displaced onto a supernatural a2ent of selecti/e e/aluation that afffi!es a cate2ory to a body by the way in which it pools &for Pa2e ''' e!ample. 0t passes in one identity. The problem is to resol/e the contradiction. 0ndeterminacy is presented as a criminal 6u!taposition of two already$defined molar identities in a ri2idly bounded body &as opposed to a superposition of any number of real but undefinable supermolecular potentials in a fluid body+. The complicated. This a2ency makes it possible in principle to determine which cate2ory a 2i/en body truly belon2s to. it is impossible for the 2ood 2uys to tell which side it is on. >efore the bad body has been put to the test. into the standard$issue wine cups of the battlefield heroes+ or wafts &poison 2as+ in its /icinity. *. before the issue of what form a national rebirth should take could e/en be raised. it pro6ects it back in time to a point before the war was won. outside the theater. lyin2 thief or patriot. the situation is less clearF it is not at all certain that a substitute for filmic 2rape 6uice will step in to sa/e the day. but under the surface continues to function in the other. the outside of the ima2e is identified as %ther. to determine which of the possible identity cate2ories a 2i/en body should be confined to. # true identity and a false one: them or us.
That system consists in a 2rid of identities abstracted from actually e!istin2 bodies and transposed onto another dimension: from the here and now into the 2reat beyond. but at the same time of embodiment.1elsewhere1 of the autonomous zone has become a neutralized 1other1 rele2ated to the past tense. a utopian future France+F in another. it is the identity 2rid coe!tensi/e with that ima2eF in yet another. For an ima2e of 2enerality can only e!ist concretely. identities. or e/en in terms of a medium. #bstraction and reconcretization &application+. # plane of transcendence is a mo/ement of abstraction. The plane of transcendence. and back to our world. the plane of transcendence is an ima2e of the 2lory beyond &in this case. but as the process presidin2 o/er the creation of a certain kind of ima2e &2eneral ima2es: those constitutin2 cate2ories. Bechanisms of capture and containment like the one charted in Qend miare induct the outside into a system of interiority.and certain media functions &reductions: from the multidimensionality of life in the flesh to the two$dimensional flatness of the sil/er screen and the li/es of those who are identified with its ima2es+. on the screen or in a photo2raphF an 0dea has nowhere to be. howe/er. Bolarization in/ol/es the creation of a 1plane of transcendence. is best understood not in terms of the content of any particular ima2e. 2oodLcommonsensical ideas+9. #pplied abstraction Pa2e ''* . the medium that brin2s the ima2e to li2ht &the apparatus by means of which the identity 2rid is reapplied to and e/aluates some of the bodies from which it was abstracted+. if not in a book or on our lips or in a brain.1*( 0n one aspect. 0t mo/es in two contradictory directions simultaneously: toward a beyond.
identity A which in fact is no foundation at all. Bolarization is the in$itself of contradiction. The plane of transcendence lifts bodies out of the uni3ueness of the spatiotemporal coordinates throu2h which they mo/e. despite its best efforts. is transformational but in a different mode than becomin2$other. This is its sadness: its /ery e!istence is a contradiction in terms. 0t abstracts them. Transcendence. demands that they li/e up to its abstraction. Their /ery corporeality is stripped from them. abstraction$application. to reduce the complications of desire as becomin2 to the simplicity of mind or body. . e!tracts from them a system of identity. in an instantaneous redescent of the plane of transcendence toward the flesh. Transcendence is the 2lorification of habit. Dather than plun2in2 into the fractality of the li/in2 body. The world rarely obli2es. the plane of transcendence reconnects to the bodies from which it rose. /ia a technical and social apparatus or medium. 0t disre2ards what is most intimate to bodies. the infoldin2 of a forcibly re2ularized outside. embody its 2lory. The double mo/ement of the plane of transcendence. That identity 2rid is actualized in ima2es. their tendency to escape not only from molar constraint but from themsel/es &illness and death. 0ts problem is always to take a bothLand and make it an eitherLor. not to mention becomin2+. The abundance of oppositional ima2es and binary distinctions it produces e!press its own impossibility.is the only kind there is. in fa/or of a supposed substrate A soul. it tries with utmost do2matism to ele/ate bodies to its own le/el of percei/ed stasis and putati/e wholeness. :ea/en or :ell. but an end effect. their sin2ular way of decayin2. 9' 0n descent mode. sub6ecti/ity. personality. to reduce the comple!ity of pra2matic ethical choice to the black or white of Good or >ad. >odies that fall prey to transcendence are reduced to what seems to persist across their alterations. is a mode of becomin2 immanent. but in a way that imposes upon them conformity to its system.
7endin2 credence to the miraculous powers of ima2es of a2ency plays into the hands of molarMmoral containment. is to fall into a molar trap. 8ine cannot capture a criminal. >ecause e/ery term on one identity 2rid corresponds to a Pa2e ''9 functional e3ui/alent on each of the others. any more than a none!istent God can punish one. or a fla2 defend freedom. the acti/e principle of the plane of transcendence. to attribute anythin2 approachin2 full causal power to a 1dominant ideolo2y. 0t is to accept the plane of transcendence too much on its own terms. 5/ery molar or2anization produces an ima2e of transcendent a2ency of this kind. there can be no direct causal link from one e!pression to the ne!t. 8hat some Bar!ists call a society"s 1dominant ideolo2y1 is its system of authorized symbolic relays between /arious planes of transcendence. The cate2orical 2rids policed by these ima2es of a2ency are analo2s. the phallus and semen.1 it is not because they produce effects only on the conceptual le/el &by influencin2 belief+ or on the lin2uistic le/el &throu2h a semiotic constitution of the sub6ect+. 8ine is the soul of the film. :owe/er.1 as if it were the soul or sub6ecti/e essence of a society. This is not to say that these ima2es lack all causal force. Bolar ima2es of a2ency are 13uasicauses.9* For the State.Qend miaire portrays the sa/in2 a2ent of molarization. it is possible to circulate amon2 them with metaphoricMmetonymic ease. #n e!pression must be con/erted into .1 99 0f their causal force is 13uasi. 0f the account of thou2ht and lan2ua2e presented in the first chapter has any /alidity. as a superhuman substance responsible for the creation of all /alue. it is often the blood of the race or the fla2F for Christianity. the blood of ChristF for the Family.
The identity 2rid created and con/eyed by the plane of transcendence is a code. to make it physically able to fulfill the producti/e. 0t cannot do that by itself. alienate itself in the dominated force field it e!presses but with which it can ha/e no common form or correspondence. or uniformJ Dress or pantsJ+.9< >y 1lower1 is meant ""hi2her1: 1en/elopin2 a 2reater hetero2eneity of formations and therefore a correspondin2ly wider ran2e of potentials.a cause &it is a surplus /alue+: it must leap the fractal 2ap into content. 8arF its desire must be turned to 2loryF it must be marked &:ard$hat. is actualized by disciplinary institutions &such as cinema or school+ that operate on le/els of reality other than its own. made recepti/e to o/ercodin2.1 1more inclusi/e. the tar2et body must be prepared.1 The plane of transcendence. its code must be applied. to 2i/e it habits of thou2ht and beha/ior in consonance with society"s o/erall autonomic desire for stable e3uilibriumF it must be kneaded into shape. reproducti/e. . dirty itself with their decay and impermanence. To act. 0t is only effecti/e to the e!tent that it alienates itself in its content. and destructi/e duties it will be assi2ned in the central molar domains of 8ork. as defined earlier: an order and or2anization of functions. must swoop back down on bodies. suit. it is empty and inert. 0n itself. >efore a cate2ory will take. %penin2s must be cut into its perception to pro/ide entryways for 2eneralityF it must be coa!ed into ac3uiescence or punished into docility. it must step down to a lower dimension. Family. Pa2e ''< The power of the plane of transcendence depends on its becomin2 immanent to the social field to which it applies. which is that of e/aporati/e meanin2 effects &ima2es. in order to accomplish its mission of containment.
it is likely to reproduce in its own ima2in2s the codes it has forcibly absorbed. tortured in return for what is considered 6ust compensation &a share of society"s surplus /alue+. 0ts outside limits fall shy of superabstraction on the /irtual side and of hyperdifferentiation the actual side. ca6oled. 2lorifyin2 itself as the ideal of a2ency. >ut its amplitude is narrower. %ne desi2ned to finish each cycle ha/in2 lessened the 2ap between between the inducted bodies and their 0deas &their assi2ned 1personal1 ima2esF their identity and the 2eneral ideas 1appropriate1 to it+.words. 0t is part of the functionin2 of a plane of transcendence to obscure the fact that molarization. swin2in2 no further than . all of which ha/e power only by /irtue of their interaction and ability to alienate themsel/es in each other. 9+ unfoldin2 into life"s paths. That cate2ory is a map of habit. 9? >y the time a body claims its due. >ut it is a special kind of cocause A a 3uasicause A to the e!tent that it denies its own insufficiency and alienation. *+ application of the code to bodies L infoldin2 into habit. Disciplinary institutions do the dirty work of transcendence. becomin2$immanent. a coded ima2e en/elopin2 a life"s path. is a /irtualMactual circuit between thou2ht and states of thin2s. thou2hts+. # plane of transcendence is a cycle of becomin2$transcendent.9@ #n ima2e belon2in2 to a plane of transcendence is a cocause in the sense that it participates in one line of causality amon2 many. like molecularization. a blueprint for how a body it will be cut. <+ reproduction of the code in new ima2es &most likely with defects or selecti/e modifications+. The life cycle of a plane of transcendence: '+ production of a coded ima2e. kneaded. Their function is to see that a body is channeled into the constellations of affect and orbits of mo/ement set out for it by its assi2ned cate2ory. and rebecomin2$transcendent: # special kind of /irtualMactual circuit. none of which taken separately is a sufficient cause for anythin2.
1 identified as 5nemy. it must constantly e!pand its domain in an outward dri/e of con3uest of the 1%ther. 0t is imperialist by nature. Bolarity cannot tolerate anythin2 remainin2 outside its pur/iew. is reacted to as a potential threat to the purity of the plane of transcendence and the stasis it polices. :aunted as it is by contradiction. #ny suspicious mo/ement. or assi2nin2 it a bad cate2ory and attackin2 it. dri/en as it is by the impossible desire to make corporeality disappear Pa2e ''? into ideality. 0ncorporate or annihilate. # new front of domestic con3uest widens the war for molarity. a sub/ersi/e and de2enerate. e/ery body is a potential enemy. no terms with which to understand it in its own ri2ht. 0f bodies can be duplicitous. e/en on the part of a duly identified body A particularly one assi2ned a de/alued identity A lands it in the enemy camp. 0t can only deal with an unidentified body by puttin2 it to the test. # system of interiority. 0nstitutional re2ularization becomes e/er$more se/ere .analytic abstraction and identity confusion. the plane of transcendence as 3uasicause tends to turn its circuit into a /icious circle. the plane of transcendence has no mechanisms by which to interact with the outside as outside. but resistant to selecti/e e/aluation. Bolarization is as paranoid as it is imperialist. either assi2nin2 it an acceptable cate2ory and takin2 into the fold. #nythin2 perceptible to the forces of molarity. #ny body mi2ht pro/e to be an intruder threatenin2 the belo/ed identity with masked sub/ersion and contamination by forei2n matter. an internal enemy answerin2 to the enemy from without: a potential defector from habit. That becomes the catch$all cate2ory. passin2 as one identity while continuin2 to incarnate another. the operati/e cate2ory.
in order to pre/ent unseemly mi!in2 and the identity blurrin2 it may lead to. a pyramid of super/isory and command positions. Sur/eillance re3uires a carefully maintained hierarchy. The closer molarization comes to success. The more /i2orously it inducts bodies and internalizes its outside. its ima2e of unity or plane of transcendence. Bore precisely. Fascism is a manic attack by the body politic a2ainst itself. The promised oneness tends to translate as e!treme compartmentalizationF the lon2ed$for rest.19. 9) Bolarization is another word for 1fascism. Bolarity"s plane of transcendence promises two thin2s: oneness &unity in identity+ and rest &hea/en+. it is an attack by the 1whole1 of society. The attempt to reduce the distance between the plane of transcendence and the states of thin2s to which it is applied only widens the 2ap &the Good is no closer+. as an an!iety$ridden war on two fronts. Discipline re3uires ri2id se2re2ation of bodies accordin2 to cate2ory. 0t is desire turned a2ainst itself. :ea/en has turned into :ell on earth.&discipline+. and selecti/e e/aluation increasin2ly /i2ilant &sur/eillance+. 5/en harsher measures are taken a2ainst the e/er$present specter of the ubi3uitous 5nemy." its bodies or plane of immanence. the more bodies seem to elude definiti/e capture. The 2oal of makin2 the plane of transcendence coe!tensi/e with the plane of immanence on which it depends for its effecti/eness is farther than e/er from realization &the 3uasicause has not been con/erted into a full Pa2e ''@ cause+. a2ainst its 1parts. the worse it fails. Fascism can be defined as the incorporeal transformation of a system operatin2 under two deterministic constraints and . in the interests of its own sal/ation.
Ba!imum entropy &rest+ means ma!imum molecular chaos &disunity+.<. >ecomin2$other encompasses becomin2$the$same: it takes a stable e3uilibrium. fascism and anarchy. This entails the perception of another attractor A the unpredictability of becomin2$other. Since it is of the outside.The attractors are limit$states.1 Since it undermines identity. # social formation is defined by its particular mi! of becomin2$other and becomin2$the$same. and incorporeally transforms the system into an acti/e order that counteractualizes oneness and rest into a line of perpetual self$escape. The outside always seeps in. if only because the ener2y infusions necessary for the molar synthesis re3uire an openin2 onto an aleatory outside. To2ether they define the fascist attractor A becomin2$the$ same. The constraint of differentiation is in fact the entire system of stable order. welcomes a measure of instability &chance+. or the maintenance of correlations at a distance &unity in mo/ementF oneness+. The constraints of entropy and order can be synthesized into a stable e3uilibrium only in a closed system. The constraints are oneness A ma!imum order A and rest A ma!imum entropy. re3uires infusions of ener2y and is thus ne2entropic. its process can be considered schizophrenic. unreachable e!tremes lyin2 at opposite ends of a . That attractor is defined by two constraints as well: disorder and differentiation.tendin2 toward stable e3uilibrium into a hi2hly unstable.9( 5/ery society responds to both attractors. frenetically dissipati/e structure. becomin2$other is naturally the more inclusi/e process. 4o system is closed. %rder. schizophrenia and paranoia. >ecomin2$other is 1anarchy. >ut by thermodynamic definition they are a contradiction in terms.
with 2reater or lesser chances of endurin2+. # social formation takin2 fascism$ . >ecause the attractor components of anarchy$schizophrenia are not a contradiction in terms. # tension of this kind is called a 1/alue1 &in 4ietzsche"s sense. <' Since anarchy$schizophrenia welcomes chance. but their tension takes the form of a hi2hly complicated set of differentials mappin2 a matri! of /irtual potentials &as opposed to a 2rid of possible identities+. and each of these both in the form of /irtual superposition and as actual coe!istence. 0ts terms are not mutually e!clusi/e in principle: the potentials they define can accommodate both molecularity and molarity.Pa2e '') continuum of potential syntheses of interiority and the outside. each containin2 a ran2e of /ariation. They are in tension. not an economic or moral sense+. Disorder can be entropic &molecular chaos+ or ne2entropic &intrusionF infusion of ener2y+. or less stable and more acti/e &metastability: order within wider or narrower mar2ins of error. in other words their preferred impossibility: the pure immanence of continual social self$in/ention &permanent re/olution+ or the pure transcendence of perfect and endurin2 order ¶dise+ A an un/iably superabstract line of escape. are oppositional terms in irresol/able contradiction which ne/ertheless attempt to impose themsel/es on the social body as a necessity. on the other hand. closure and open$endedness. a society tendin2 in its direction possesses a nearly infinite de2rees of freedom. 0ts terms are asymmetrical. intrusion and closure. chaos and order. Differentiation can be less acti/e and more stable. or the /iciously abstract circle of domestic peace throu2h /iolence. They define a field of death. Social and political systems can be tracked alon2 the continuum accordin2 to which e!treme they are approachin2. it constitutes the more powerful pole of attraction. The attractors of fascism$paranoia.
They may be actualized in 1collecti/e1 bodies &StatesF institutionsF modes of production+. This asymmetry is underlined by the fact that anarchy$schizophrenia effecti/ely encompasses fascism$paranoia. # formation actualizin2 one pole more stron2ly than another will display a tendency to follow a different path throu2h the world than a formation piloted more often than not by the other pole. Fascism$paranoia and anarchy$ schizophrenia are transpersonal dri/es in reciprocal presupposition. an e!acerbation of the constituent tension of identity. and all three simultaneously to /aryin2 de2rees. or sub$bodies &thou2htsF desiresF perceptions$sensations+. 0n e/ery case. Theirs is not a formal distinction between two binary opposites. 1indi/idual1 bodies &human bein2sF animalsF minerals+. they comprise a hetero2eneity of le/els and a multiplicity of constituents. 0t is normality to the e!treme. Fascism is social Deason. The two poles are /irtual modes of composition or consistency e!trapolatable into di/er2in2 /ectors. There is nothin2 e!traordinary about fascism. # fascist state is a suicide state. an acceleration of the /icious actualM/irtual circuit peculiar to the process of social induction. they are not symmetrical. and Deason is its own re/en2e. <9 The former can only indirectly . #lthou2h fascism$paranoia and anarchy$schizophrenia can be concei/ed as two poles at either end of a continuum of /ariation.paranoia to the e!treme does not so much self$transform as self$destruct.<* >etween the disciplinary mechanisms pro/idin2 its point of departure and the death frenzy of its end there is less a difference in kind than a difference in de2ree. but a real distinction between modes of dynamic interaction and directions of mo/ement. Pa2e ''.
1 with the leader as 1head1 of state and his ceremonial sword a symbol of the phallus said to constitute collecti/e . 0t is a codin2 of affects &ways of affectin2 and bein2 affected+ applied to a body in such a way as to modify its interaction with other bodies. mo/in2 both the indi/idual &o/ercoded as a person+ and its assi2ned collecti/ity &o/ercoded as a class+ closer to the attractor state of would$ be stable e3uilibrium. 0n the process. # molar identity cate2ory is an ima2e of fascism$paranoia"s whole attractor. >oth are selecti/e.<< The distinction between the two /irtual poles. or dri/es. The application of the cate2ory is an attribution of the supposed wholeness characterizin2 the attractor state to the Pa2e ''( tar2et body. Fascism spreads death &stri/es for stasis+. Fascist$paranoid bodies are autonomic. the tar2et body"s sub$bodies are incorporeally transformed into what are in principle smoothly functionin2 parts of an or2anic whole that corresponds part for part to similar wholes on other le/els &forced analo2yF the body as a microcosm of the 1body politic. but in different modes. anarchy stretches the limits of life &fosters mutation+. Fascism$paranoia is se2re2ati/e &tends toward e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis and the creation of ri2idly bounded compartmentalizations: 2hettoes+F anarchy$schizophrenia is e!pansi/e &tends toward inclusi/e con6uncti/e synthesis and the mi!in2 of bodies and desires: misce2enation+.acknowled2e its reciprocal presupposition with the later: fascism$paranoia merely implies anarchy$schizophrenia in its se2re2ati/e reactions to indistinct perceptions of chaotic incursions and supermolecular acti/ity. ne/er autonomous. can be concei/ed as a battle between a limitati/e body without or2ans or plane of consistency and a nonlimitati/e one.
all. Fascism$ paranoia. imperialist process resembles nothin2 more than a metastasizin2 cancer. of course.1 each of which functions. work in perfect harmony for the common 2ood: the Dussian dolls of morality+. the molar$moral dri/e of %edipal desire. . it can be likened to a /irus &it hi6acks and scrambles life codes. it is the process of molarization as such. . <? The result is an infinite microcosmic re2ress of representations of the unrepresentable A of the impossible attractor state of oneness and rest &an endlessly borin2 proliferation of analo2ical ima2es of pretended unity: institution as or2an of the State. person as or2an of the institution. . 0t induces them to follow the fractal attractor of the world as infinitely open system. #narchy$ schizophrenia is 1becomin2$minor.1<. Fascism$ paranoia is the condition known as bein2 in the molar A moral 1ma6ority. body$parts as or2ans of the indi/idual. 1Part$ob6ects1 are translated into 1or2ans. works to fashion society into samenesses of /aryin2 scales A a mise en abyme of homolo2ous or2anic structures &normality as the embodiment of analo2yF bein2 as self$similarity+. non$5uclidean.<@ This imposition of whole attractors on the body is the operation called %edipus in the last chapter. Since its process is mutational.desire+. They are superposable 1dense points1 &essentially ima2eless shreds of /irtual space$ timeF dynamic coordinates of becomin2 in a superabstract.<) #narchyschizophrenia is anoedipal desire that respects the partiality of bodies &their polymorphous connecti/e potentialF their 1per/ersity1F their difference+. as a whole attractor in its own ri2ht. rather than replicatin2 them . by metaphoric transference. 0n its broadest definition.1 The ima2e of the cell fits best: its lethal. the cells as or2an of the body$part. post$5insteinian space+. 0ts constituents are not discrete if interlockin2 or2ans or cells &abstract models of wholenessF points describin2 ideal 2eometrical fi2uresF ima2es of bein2 as a closed structure+.
wholesale+.<( # society &socius+ A any formation, for that matter A is an endless tu2$of$war between the cancerous limitati/e body without or2ans of fascism$paranoia and the /iral nonlimitati/e body
Pa2e '*without or2ans of anarchy$schizophrenia, as cosmic principles. ?- The two /irtual poles to2ether constitute Desire. Bore of the Same Few societies e/er approach either limit$state. :itler"s Germany and Cambodia under the ;hmer Dou2e are e!amples of murderous fascist$paranoid attack taken to suicidal e!tremes. Groupin2 to2ether such ideolo2ically di/er2ent formations A one 1far ri2ht,1 the other 1far left1 A is in no way meant to minimize the /ery real differences between them. The distinction between fascism$paranoia and anarchy$schizophrenia ad/anced abo/e is a dynamic distinction between /irtual tendencies, not a typolo2ical one between actual formations. Typolo2ies of actual molar or2anizations can be deri/ed from it, but their cate2ories neither coincide with nor contradict traditional demarcations based on ideolo2y or mode of production?' &1fascism$paranoia1 is not a terminolo2ical substitute for 1fascism1 proper+. The analysis focuses less on a formation"s present state concei/ed as a synchronic structure than on the /ectors of potential transformation it en/elops. >ut the approach is not by that token diachronic: it is unconcerned with plottin2 a line of descent from the past to a more or less deterministic future, and implies no e/olutionary or teleolo2ical framework. # typolo2y based on /irtual tendencies charts a superlinear network of possible futures and indicates actual points of inter/ention likely to influence
which future is selected. 0t assesses direction and 3uality of mo/ement &mode of composition+ and maps pressure points &opportunities for resistance+. Functionin2 only within a pra2matic horizon, it claims no scientific status. 0t must be continually rethou2ht, as happily pro/en wron2 as ri2ht.?* Social formations approachin2 the supermolecular e!treme are harder to locate than fascist$paranoid ones. They neither take a Statist form nor re/ert to so$called primiti/e social structures, and thus slip throu2h e!istin2 cate2ories of political or2anization. 0n addition, they elicit a ferociously repressi/e reaction from molar forces, and rarely last lon2 enou2h to be percei/ed by history in any other than ne2ati/e terms, as the opposite of order A 1anarchy1 as a pe6orati/e epithet. Social breakdowns such as Bay '(@, in France and the initial phases of most modern re/olutions &anywhere the cry for 1direct democracy1
Pa2e '*' is heard+ can be considered supermolecular becomin2s$other to the e!treme. >ut becomin2$other may also take the shape of more diffuse and lon2er$li/ed 1mo/ements1 which A in the 6ud2ment of both those in power and already$established opposition forces A are of indefinite and hi2hly suspect ideolo2ical character: e!amples from si!ties include the Situationists in France, the Pro/os and ;abouters of the 4etherlands, the =ippies and their allies in the H.S.F in the se/enties, the 0talian autonomistsF in the ei2hties, the con/er2ence of s3uatters, associated mar2inals, and e!traparliamentary Greens in 4orthern 5uropeF and in 2eneral, the 1radical1 win2s of feminist and other minority mo/ements. %ne of the few e!amples of a possibly supermolecular formation holdin2 a territorial base o/er a
si2nificant stretch of time is the Catalonian anarchists durin2 the Spanish Ci/il 8ar. ?9 Bost actual social formations fall midran2e between the e!tremes and display comple! tendencies mo/in2 in both directions simultaneously. For most of the twentieth century in the 8est, the ideolo2ical cate2ory correspondin2 most closely to the dominant middle$ran2e formation is the liberal or social$democratic nation$state.?< This formation departs from the fascist$paranoid dynamic most si2nificantly in its response to pressures from the outside, from the field of e!teriority without which no structure of interiority A no molar apparatus of capture A can sur/i/e. 8hen it percei/es an 1%ther,1 or ubi3uitous 5nemy, its refle! action is more modulated than the draconian 1be one or die1 of fascism. 0t insists on molarization as the prere3uisite to a reco2nized ri2ht to e!ist, but rather than forcin2 the percei/ed intruder into a pree!istin2 identity cate2ory, it 2i/es it the latitude to redefine one, or e/en fi2ht for a new one all its own. #dapti/e enou2h to ad6ust its identity 2rid when re3uired, it a/oids a continual state of war a2ainst the forei2n bodies that crop up e/en in the most obsessi/ely cleansed social field. 0t mana2es to be at least 2rud2in2ly dialo2ical and inte2rati/e. Bolarity with a human face. The identities open to redefinition are, of course, sub$ Standard ones. Their status is up2raded, but at a price. Groups workin2 to re/alue them must a2ree to operate within the established limits of indi/idual and collecti/e action. They must beha/e, act like 1responsible1 citizens. They must measure up to Bolar Ban. 7abor, women, >lacks, and at times se!ual minorities, may be admitted into positions of power, but
only to the e!tent that they become, for all practical purposes, capitalist, male, white, and strai2ht A honorary members of the ma6ority. The 1%ther1 &the outside+ is interiorized by bein2 identified, and all identification is a2ainst the Standard of the 5uropean 8hite Bale :eterose!ual as the 8estern embodiment of 2oodLcommon sense, in politics as in personal conduct. Binorities are e!pected to become e3ual$intheory but in practice less powerful /ersions of the Same: children of Bolar Ban. 4eonormalities. The di/ide$and$con3uer approach of fascism$paranoia is toned down to a paternalistic reco2nize$ and$subdue. 0n the economic domain, this 1corporatism1 &molar incorporationF 1inte2ration1+ takes the form of a ;eynesian alliance between capital and labor, layin2 the foundations for a welfare state. ?? 0n the political domain in the H.S., it takes the form of an electoral system monopolized by two parties which, thou2h often hard to distin2uish, preser/e a residual asymmetry. The Democratic Party ser/es as a holdin2 pen for identified others, helpin2 minorities win limited institutional participation A thereby translatin2 their /olatile mo/ements of resistance into a predictable dialectic of opposition, presidin2 o/er their accession to the political mirror sta2e. The Democratic Party tilts e/er so sli2htly toward the anarchist$schizophrenic pole, the Depublican Party toward the fascist$paranoid. The tension between the limitati/e and nonlimitati/e bodies without or2ans that constitutes the social field is recapitulated by representational politics as a ri/alry between Parties that are rou2hly homolo2ous A similar enou2h to operate within the same 2round rules, different enou2h that their 2entleman"s a2reement to takes turns in office yields a de2ree of continuin2 systemic self$ ad6ustment. The stayin2 power of the liberal nation$state rests on its adapti/e ability to represent the 1%ther1Lthe outside A but only represent it. Stirrin2s at 2round le/el in
the social field, embryonic escapes into hyperdifferentiation, are translated into a circle of mirror$ima2e ri/alry A others as alter$Sames /yin2 for a 1piece of the pie.1 The ri/alry is not, as a rule, allowed to turn /icious. The outside is percei/ed, but neither as the in/enti/e mo/ement of desire that it is, nor fundamentally as the ubi3uitous 5nemy of fascism$paranoia. 0t is percei/ed as a representable reser/e of ri/als and potential partners, a collection of molarizable interest 2roups. The e!istence of others is acknowled2ed, but is in the same stroke transposed onto a different
Pa2e '*9 le/el of collecti/e e!istence, a system of party politics open only indirectly to ""2rass roots1 social a2ents throu2h their 1representati/es.1 Social a2ents of desire are allowed to act, literally. They are 2i/en power on condition that they dele2ate their transformational potential to 1actors1 on the 1political sta2e.1 The real mo/ement of desire is channeled into a le/el at which it can be watched and contained, becomin2 a 1forced mo/ement,1 a parody. ?@ The mass media are a specialized percepti/e apparatus char2ed with aidin2 in this parodic translation of difference into more of the same. The liberal nation$state is not repressi/e as such. 0t is 1democratic.1 0t makes the 1ri2ht1 to /ote 1uni/ersal1 A in other words, it 2i/es e/ery body the 1free1 choice to abdicate power. The electoral system as it functions in a 1democracy1 creates a separate political domain that seems to stand apart from society. Party politics translates dispersed mo/ements occurrin2 2round$le/el throu2hout the social field in a manner that selecti/ely contracts them into a smaller space. 0t pro/ides them with a second arena, a representati/e space apart 2o/erned by its own procedural rules, with its own
perceptual apparatuses and forms of e!pression. This translati/e separation may be e!perienced by the bodies whose power is abdicated in it as a simple 1alienation.1 >ut it is much more than that: it is a process of transformation, as was the plane of transcendence, thou2h in a different way. The space apart does not stand abo/e bodies and try to force them to coincide with it, to ele/ate their mundane world to its hea/enly le/el. Euite the opposite, this 1separate1 sphere is entirely at home amon2 bodies whose mo/ements it translates. 0t transposes mo/ements into its particular arena and then retransmits them laterally to their source, in modified form. 1Democratic1 2o/ernment is a force con/erter &as opposed to a cate2orical model+. 0t 2athers up mo/ements of desire, rephases them, then chan2es their direction, sendin2 them back to propa2ate at 2round$le/el in wa/es of 2entle orderin2. 0t is less 2odly than cerebral, ser/in2 as a kind of central ner/ous system for a brain dama2ed society. 0t is not moral, 6ust mana2erial. 8hat it demands of its bodies is a practical acceptance of certain parameters of action, rather than a principled conformity to an absolute ideal. 1Democracy1 embraces the becomin2$immanent fascism fears most, but cannot e!orcize. The sin2ularity that pre/ents a body from coin$
Pa2e '*< cidin2 entirely with its identity cate2ory can be made a stren2th. 0f it is amplified enou2h to win reco2nition on the le/el of representation, it is allowed under certain circumstances to modify the cate2ory, a /ariant of which can then be reimplanted in society with the help of institutions desi2ned to ser/ice the new identity &unions, caucuses within parties, lobbies, etc.+. 0n other words, a body has the option
The whole is now relati/ely open$ended. 0t is not abo/e but between the molar formations it 2o/erns. Bolarity is o/ercodin2. the imposition of a plane of transcendence or absolute identity 2rid.1 in spite of the relati/e openness of its mode of composition. translate it into a 2eneral mo/ement &parody it+. 0t need not accept an identity cate2ory as is A but it must accept identification. is sub6ect to its own laws. and insert that mo/ement into an identity cate2ory &custom$made 3uasicause+ whose new meanin2 &modified code of actions+ is then reapplied to the social field. 1Democracy1 is limited becomin2$ supermolecular contained by a loosely bounded field of e!teriority or immanence. 0t does not itself act in a molar fashion o/erall. 0t can pool its force of sin2ularity with that of others considered similar to it. 1Democratic1 2o/ernment. 0n this way. but still bounded by administrati/e bordersF the 2o/erned space of controlled self$transformation does not 3ualify as a pure field of e!teriority. 1Democratic"" 2o/ernment places all collecti/e formations in a space of coe!istence of which itself is a part A e/en thou2h it is a part that recapitulates the whole &1represents1 it+. Go/ernment re2ulates more than rei2ns. 4o sin2le 3uasicause can . 0t ser/es as a medium con/eyin2 a molarizin2 force. situated as it is on the same le/el as the bodies and institutions it mana2es. because of it: they proliferate precisely because they too take their place in a field of immanence. 0t need not accept a particular 2eneral idea A but it must accept the idea of the 2eneral in 2eneral. a body can 6oin with others deemed to be of its kind in Car/in2 out a customized social space for itself. Fascist$paranoid 3uasicauses and institutions de/oted to their actualization abound in a 1democracy. %r rather. whereas 1democracy1 is recodin2. 0t arbitrates between old and new molar formations and ad6usts them to one another. The only condition is that the body molarize.of 2eneralizin2 its de/iancy.
howe/er.1 e/eryone hates the 2o/ernment but lo/es the political$economic 1system.claim a monopoly on 2o/ernance or coincide completely with the territory &as does the blood of the 2od$kin2 in an absolute monarchy. This e!pands the definition of 1democracy1: e/ery body"s 1free choice1 to dele2ate its becomin2 in return for li/in2 out . and special title to it is claimed by the central 2o/ernment: the 2eneral idea 1democracy1 itself. %nly mildly fascist$paranoid. o/erarchin2 powers of unity. remains more e3ual than the others. carried abroad by the neocolonial e!pansionism of the late capitalist economy. institutions ser/in2 to apply them. the spirit of Pa2e '*? God in a theocracy. e/eryday machinery of 2o/ernment from miraculous. the blood of the race in a fascist state. 0n a ""democracy. church. >ut only in miniature. family. police. 8hat the 1democratic1 2o/ernment arbitrates between and mutually ad6usts are minidespotisms: school.1 /aunted as the nation"s most /aluable e!port. or the toil of the workers in the state capitalism of the old$style 5astern 5uropean 1Communist1 re2imes+. or despotic. with a broad array of fascist$paranoid. %ne 3uasicause. and althou2h it is the fundamental 3uasicause of the liberal nation$state it in fact o/erflows State borders. office. and a 2rowin2 number of /ariations on each. but also between the central 2o/ernment and its fra2ile unity &the 1system1+. The 2aps between these le/els allow more forcefully fascist$paranoid 3uasicauses to operate locally within the State. it presents itself as fallibly 2odlike &Greek+. There is a certain dis6unction not only between the 12rass roots1 and the central 2o/ernment. The becomin2$immanent of the administration of the territory dis6oins the actual. and between that unity and the territory.
Thus e/en in a liberal nation$state . Bolarity is reduced to the most miniaturized and 2eneralizable form humanly possible: supposedly self$ directin2 sub6ecti/ity operatin2 within the limits of 2oodLcommon sense as socially defined &indi/idual life confined to an artificially closed system ruled by the whole attractor of stable e3uilibrium. or a suitable substitute &a conscience will do. Choose your 3uasicause.1 at least in the pri/acy of its own home. Bost of the minidespotisms that proliferate under 1democracy1 are more normalizin2 than outri2ht disciplinary. in a personalization of the plane of transcendence.its 1producti/e life1 in the despotism it most desires. the only minidespotism to which e/ery body is re3uired to submit without e!ception is its Self. 4either total conformity nor sincere belief is necessarily called for. also known as the 1#merican Dream1+. or simply a phallus+. 5/ery body becomes a 1le2islatin2 sub6ect. Pa2e '*@ 0n other words. 0n a 1democracy.1 the kin2dom of %edipus. a man"s home is his castle. and in the process reproduce the social order &with sli2ht 2enerational /ariations+. Bolarity molds itself to the human shape. They often allow se/eral 3uasicauses to function simultaneously. >odies are not re3uired to conform in their life"s path to a ri2idly defined code of actions and e!pressions en/eloped in a particular 3uasicause. %nce a2ain. #ll that is re3uired is that their form be respected. The only uni/ersally applied 3uasicause is the soul. and apply them almost haphazardly. 1Democracy1 is the 3uasicause representin2 the choice of 3uasicauses: e3ual opportunity despotism. that the body be molarF that it be 2eneralizableF that its tra6ectory throu2h the world be more or less predictableF that it work and ideally reproduce itself.
they e!perience the same multiplication and dispersion as other molar institutions.lu! . Pa2e '*) becomin2$lesbian or $2ay. 0n a liberal nation$state. This is because a successful becomin2$woman. The liberal nation$state"s ability to find an inte2rati/e response to perceptions of the outside is stretched to limit when confronted by se!ual minorities. and the capitalist relation. directly challen2es the uni/ersal form . or becomin2Mboy lo/er.?( Still Bare 5/ery formation is defined by thresholds of mo/ement beyond which its mode of composition chan2es in nature and it ceases to be itself. because it has seen to it that its citizens will take up where it lea/es off. The State itself can afford to depart from that form. Fascism proper has been rele2ated to the pores of society &sur/i/alism+. and so on+. becomin2$sadomasochist. as 2rass$roots associations without a reco2nized ri2ht to participate openly in the 2o/ernment or e!press themsel/es broadly in the media. 0n fact. 8hen bodies refuse molarity or simply o/erstep the limits of molar sense. the form that e/ery body must respect is still fundamentally a State$form. they are abandoned to unabashedly disciplinary minidespotisms &prison. these are the e!ceptions that pro/e the rule. >ut they are only tolerated at an e/en more local le/el. The liberal nation$state has two such limits: molar humanity. Frankly fascist institutions are also tolerated. but fascism$ paranoia is e/erywhere.?. howe/er.u . reform school. and proliferate up to a point &the . ?) Strin2ently disciplinary mechanisms are not dismantled.where neonormality rei2ns supreme.lan and its neo$4azi offsprin2+.
pressures toward hyperdifferentiation build e!ponentially. This happens up to a point. 0t is no accident that the issues it chose to do battle on were those the %ld 7eft considered secondary 1lifestyle1 or 1cultural1 3uestions. The antiabortion mo/ement that has been so central in rallyin2 the Di2ht is 6ust one front in a continuin2 campai2n in defense of Bolar Ban &and God A the concept that abortion is murder assumes a soul present from conception+. 0t percei/ed that the most /olatile pressure points ha/e shifted from class conflicts to sub6ecti/ity battles. of the se!ual minorities its population in/ents. but is restrained by its own ideolo2y of 1ci/il liberties. and do/etail with the health craze that is repropa2atin2 the 2eneral idea . but ne/er all. The antiobscenity and antiporno2raphy mo/ements police the part$ob6ectification of desire. The rise of the 4ew Di2ht in 4orth #merica in the late se/enties is an indication that the threshold state was bein2 reached.1 The task of resettin2 limits falls to the minidespotic 2roupin2s closest the fascist$paranoid pole. @. and true se!ual becomin2s endea/or to erase it: to the e!tent that they are antiphallocentric and play on the fractality of the part$ob6ect.Bolarity is the bottom line. for all its apparent archaism. >ut once unleashed. 0n principle. they attack the only fascist$paranoid 3uasicause that paternalist democracy cannot do without.of molarity under 1democracy1: %edipal personhood itself. 0t must redraw the line somewhere. has been far more attuned than the traditional 7eft to the actual lines of force in late capitalist society. The defense of the family a2ainst feminists and assorted 1de/iants1 is an attempt to shore up the system of oppositional difference as embodied by 2ender. The ""dru2 war1 and antiM drunken dri/in2 campai2ns are a reimposition of 2oodLcommon sense as applied to the body. there is nothin2 that pre/ents these becomin2s from bein2 re$ %edipalized or corporatized. The 4ew Di2ht. # 2i/en liberal 2o/ernment can inte2rate some.
This is because when the threshold of molarity is passed mechanisms kick in to pre/ent new modes of e!tramolarity from o/erflowin2 the other threshold of modern 1democracy1 A the capitalist relation. unlike their ri/als on the sur/i/alist frin2e. and in political economy 1postindustrial society1 or 1late capitalism. They are used as an2les of insertion into the social field for minidespotisms of properly fascist cast which. Their importance should not be underestimated. Cultural$political issues such as these are fundamental.1 0t is characterized by a breakdown of the . but remain in the ""cultural1 domain of 1lifestyle1 issues and forms of e!pression. crossin2 the limits of the liberal nation$state to enter a new realm: neoconser/atism. are Pa2e '*. 0n spite of this. facin2 a network of bifurcatin2 choices leadin2 to any one of a number of modes of composition and alternate futures A includin2 alternate fascisms. . The neoconser/ati/e transnation$state corresponds to what is called 1postmodernism1 on the cultural le/el. their o/erall mode of composition has passed the threshold of molarity. patently Statist in orientation.eynesian alliance and a renewed war by mana2ement a2ainst labor. in particular ha/e not turned fascist. 8hen a social formation reaches one of its thresholds.S. So far.of the body$as$or2anism. society"s pressure points do not re/ert to sites of class conflict. 8estern societies in 2eneral and the H. accompanied by a dismantlin2 of the welfare state. it starts to supermolecularize in spite of itself. %n the contrary. The assault on affirmati/e action and on the inclusion of non$8estern cultural content in the curriculum rehabilitate white 5uropean pri/ile2e &faciality+.
Capital is a 3uasicause. and the other ob6ect or body has been transformed into a commodity. e/en a human body. 0t can 6ump le/els. Capital itself is not an ima2e of social a2ency operatin2 on other le/els. has been 2i/en a price. Capital can be 2i/en an ima2e A in fact it must ha/e one in order to act A but it is ima2eless as such. one of the most powerful that has e/er e!isted. 0t is a /ehicle of concretization rather than a tool of abstraction. a selection of which is immediately actualized at 2round le/el where/er one of capitalism"s workin2 ima2es &or2ans+ 2oes.1 1democracy. Capital functions directly throu2h incorporeal transformation. 0t is a body without or2ans. without ha/in2 to step down or up to another le/el.1 or 1wine. This kind of workin2 ima2e of capital functions differently from the fascist$paranoid ima2es that may also be pro/ided for it. They are operati/e cate2ories. as are 1God. Capital is often 2i/en a fascist$paranoid ima2e. or e/en be clearly concei/ed of by it A let alone belie/ed in A in order to be acti/ated. De2ardless of whether you 1belie/e1 in capitalism. they are not ideolo2ical by nature. >ut this kind of 1ideolo2ical1 application of the 0dea of capital is supplemental. but it does not ha/e to ha/e one. and whate/er ob6ect is before you. The cate2ories do not ha/e to be percei/ed by the body they apply to. The 2rid of capital is simple. but of a /ery different kind than the ones we ha/e seen up to now.1 0t is a social a2ency. 0n other words. They are automatically in operation in any state of thin2s touched by capital. 0ts cate2orical distinctions are two in number: workerLcapitalist and commodityL consumer.1 1soul. The hundred$dollar bill is an ima2e of capital as means of payment. =ou ha/e been incorporeally transformed into a consumer. a network of /irtual relations. #lthou2h they recei/e endless ideolo2ical e!pression. # 2eneral idea of it can be produced and function in con6unction with a plane of transcendence. These ima2es are con/eyances &components of . Pull out a hundred$dollar bill.
The commodity$body is reduced to a pure e3ui/alence. which may be a sin2le human body or &more often+ a collecti/e apparatus. The actualization of the capitalist relation transforms a body"s de2rees of freedom into a bifurcatin2 network. not of /irtual futures for the body to become. 0t is numerical. and could be substituted for it.passa2e+. Boney incorporeally transforms the relationship obtainin2 between bodies into a potential e!chan2e. The e!chan2e is 6ust as une3ual: also acti/e in the consumer$commodity encounter is a third hetero2eneous term. They brin2 to desi2nated bodies at each spatiotemporal coordinate throu2h which they circulate a relation that fundamentally chan2es those bodies" social and physical reality. >ecomin2 has been translated. but of possible ob6ects a consumer mi2ht own A any consumer. 0t e3uates elements that are ob/iously hetero2eneous A a desired body &which is perhaps e/en desired for its uni3ue intrinsic 3ualities+ and a piece of paper bearin2 a reco2nized denomination. The other body is 2eneralized as well. 3uantitati/e rather than 3ualitati/e. #pples and oran2es. This abstraction has nothin2 to do with moralMmolar ideas. The e3ui/alence that is set up is entirely une3ual if 6ud2ed by any other criteria than numerical. # commodity$body is 2eneralized in a way that not only disre2ards minor de/iations from a norm but is basically disinterested in the body"s intrinsic 3ualities and their similarity$difference to those of other bodies. but not into a molarized bein2 A as was the case with fascist$paranoid 3uasicauses A but into a ha/in2. The body desi2nated as the commodity is 2i/en an abstract /alue. That relation is capital as an immanent social a2ency. 0t is 2eneralized in the sense that any number of other bodies carry the same numerical /alue. e!chan2ed in its stead. and is rarely physically present at the .
3uantitati/e rather than 3ualitati/e.buyin2 site. 0t is a /ehicle of concretization rather than a tool of abstraction. # commodity$body is 2eneralized in a way that not only disre2ards minor de/iations from a norm but is basically disinterested in the body"s intrinsic 3ualities and their similarity$difference to those of other bodies. This abstraction has nothin2 to do with moralMmolar ideas. 0t is 2eneralized in the sense that any number of other bodies carry the same numerical /alue. not of /irtual futures for the body to become. 0t is numerical. De2ardless of whether you 1belie/e1 in capitalism. it simply collects A surplus /alue. This kind of workin2 ima2e of capital functions differently from the fascist$paranoid ima2es that may also be pro/ided for it. e!chan2ed in its stead. Boney incorporeally transforms the relationship obtainin2 between bodies into a potential e!chan2e. and could be substituted for it. They brin2 to desi2nated bodies at each spatiotemporal coordinate throu2h which they circulate a relation that fundamentally chan2es those bodies" social and physical reality. 0n other words. but of possible ob6ects a consumer mi2ht own A any . The body desi2nated as the commodity is 2i/en an abstract /alue. That relation is capital as an immanent social a2ency. 0t is a body without or2ans. Capital can be 2i/en an ima2e A in fact it must ha/e one in order to act A but it is ima2eless as such. The commodity$body is reduced to a pure e3ui/alence. The hundred$dollar bill is an ima2e of capital as means of payment. These ima2es are con/eyances &components of passa2e+. a network of /irtual relations. 0t is not assi2ned a numerical /alue. a selection of which is immediately actualized at 2round le/el where/er one of capitalism"s workin2 ima2es &or2ans+ 2oes. The actualization of the capitalist relation transforms a body"s de2rees of freedom into a bifurcatin2 network.
The e!chan2e is 6ust as une3ual: also acti/e in the consumer$commodity encounter is a third hetero2eneous term. 0t has all the characteristics of desire as earlier defined. as a /irtual .consumer. or abstract machine. The e3ui/alence that is set up is entirely une3ual if 6ud2ed by any other criteria than numerical. 0t e3uates elements that are ob/iously hetero2eneous A a desired body &which is perhaps e/en desired for its uni3ue intrinsic 3ualities+ and a piece of paper bearin2 a reco2nized denomination. Pa2e '9' of bodiesF that it has ima2es but is ima2eless as suchF that it is capable of transformin2 states of thin2s without the intermediate step of the application of a plane of transcendenceF and that it 2rasps the bodies it transforms from a /ery particular an2le. but not into a molarized bein2 A as was the case with fascist$paranoid 3uasicauses A but into a ha/in2. in other words partially. it simply collects A surplus /alue. capital"s mode of operation is uni3ue enou2h to 6ustify considerin2 it a /irtual pole in its own ri2ht. 0t can be analyzed as a /irtual mode of composition that is percei/ed as such only when the constraints of molar personhood start to falter. >ecomin2 has been translated. :owe/er. Capital is an unmediated desire. # society actualizin2 that desire can be conceptualized as a particular mi! between fascism$paranoia and anarchy$schizophrenia &tendin2 stron2ly toward the latter+. which may be a sin2le human body or &more often+ a collecti/e apparatus. The other body is 2eneralized as well. 4eoconser/atism is the clear perception by a liberal nation$ state of the capitalist attractor in all its purity. 0t is not assi2ned a numerical /alue. #pples and oran2es. and is rarely physically present at the buyin2 site.
and stron2er than the ideolo2ies that help to reproduce it. 0t is superabstract. and acti/ities. The 3uasicause of capital resol/es the body into a set of pri/ile2ed affects en/elopin2 certain paths of mo/ement and circuits Pa2e '9* . a new 2olden a2e of 2reed that dares to say its name. The capitalist relation 2rasps the body not as a putati/e whole.pole of e!istence. the a2ency of that irrationality is not abstract like the 3uantities it be2ets and induces these post$human bodies to accumulate. a mania for accumulatin2 numerical 3uantities. Capitalism no lon2er has to 6ustify itself. Possessin2 thin2s is understandable from the moral$molar point of /iew. 0n itself. :e is the personification of a mode of irrationality. because it is now stron2er than molarity. thin2s. 0t can dispense with belief and 2ood sense. 1Partiality1 is a key word for understandin2 capital"s basic mode of operation. #n abstract desire. The men who personify it A the Donald Trumps and Bichael Bilkens of the woad A do not so much represent an ideolo2ical cause as embody a desire. as is wantin2 to accumulate capital for what it can buy in the way of time. 8ithout a wince. and its potential to sell its time and acti/ities or to buy those of others. >ut to accumulate more than anyone could e/er spendJ #nd then keep on accumulatin2 2reater and 2reater sums. but partially. with no other interest or aim in life J That is beyond 2ood and e/il. The neoconser/ati/e capitalist is defined less by what he possesses than by what possesses him. 0t is the comin2 out of capital. 0t no lon2er has to hide behind fascist$paranoid 3uasicauses and ar2ue that it ser/es the common 2ood. from two precise an2les: its potential to buy or sell a commodity.
The capitalist relation consists of four dense points A commodityLconsumer. @' Hnder formal subsumption. >ut it is ultimately superabstract because its terms are fundamentally ima2eless operati/e cate2ories immanent to society. it surfaces as a fractal attractor whose operational arena is immediately coe!tensi/e with the social field. and if doesn"t happen to be a capitalist. %ther undercapitalized domains persist on the periphery. The capitalist relation is abstract in the sense that it is indifferent to its content: it doesn"t matter what a body buys or what acti/ities it sells. workerLcapitalist A which in neoconser/ati/e society are effecti/ely superposed in e/ery body in e/ery spacetime coordinate. rather than cate2orical ima2es standin2 as wholes apart from the population they purport to unify. an e!tensi/e e!pansion.1 Deal subsumption in/ol/es a two$pron2ed e!pansion of the capitalist relation. That is the meanin2 of the 1real subsumption1 of society by the capitalist relation. in the 1Third 8orld.1 That is the meanin2 of 1pri/acy1 in the liberal$democracy: less a reser/e free of 2o/ernmental inter/ention &which on the contrary makes leaps and bounds as ""social welfare1 and 1protecti/e1 ser/ices proliferate+ than an oasis not yet fully e!ploitable by capital. only that it buys. the four dense points of the capitalist relation are not yet immanent to all of society"s spacetime coordinates. First. family relations A anythin2 defined as 1pri/ate. This a neocolonialist mo/ement imposin2 the capitalist relation of une3ual e!chan2e on all the nations of the world &the creation of a forei2n debt is the point of entry for mana2ement of national economies by international in/estment brokers actin2 collecti/ely throu2h the . There are still domains it has not fully penetrated: leisure time. 2ets a wa2e$earnin2 6ob. whereby capitalism pushes its 2eo2raphical boundaries to the point that it encompasses the 2lobe &before launchin2 into space aboard commercial satellites+.of une3ual e!chan2e. 8hen capital comes out. belief.
The e/aluati/e 3uasicause is a1collecti/e assembla2e of enunciation. .1 The selecti/e constellation of institutions is a 1machinic assembla2e. an intensi/e e!pansion. 0t still relies on an army of Pa2e '99 despotic. schools. # whole constellation of interlockin2 institutions selects the content of that encounter. 0t can only mo/e into a prepared medium. that this acti/ity or 3uantity of time is bou2ht rather than another. They determine that this purchase is made rather than another. . They select one e!chan2e here and now from a countless number of theoretically possible 1e3ui/alent1 e!chan2es &that is. .1 The two to2ether constitute the abstract machine of selecti/e e/aluation that is capitalism. This is 1endocolonization.+. They determine the particular forms of content taken by the capitalist relation. disciplinary and liberal institutions to open bodies to it. These institutions concretize the capitalist relation. Second. it remains a 3uasicause.@* Capitalism becomes a transnational machine that swallows weak nation$states whole and can no lon2er be completely controlled by e/en the stron2est &the much lamented 1decline1 of the H. malls. as superabstract form of e!pression.1@9 #s powerful as the capitalist 3uasicause is.0nternational Bonetary Fund and the 8orld >ank+.S. Capitalism is the cofunctionin2 in the same field of immanence of processes of e!treme abstraction and utter . +. in/ol/in2 the same abstract 3uantity of monetary /alue+. churches. whereby the last oases of domestic space are in/aded by the four irrepressible dense points. to make them susceptible to its ma2ic &armies. The 3uasicause of capital e/aluates the mode of relation obtainin2 between the bodies in/ol/ed in its actualization &consumer or commodityJ capitalist or workerJ+.
#n a!iomatic functions by inclusi/e con6uncti/e synthesis. 5/erythin2 can be bou2ht. The capitalist machine has de/eloped perceptual abilities that enable it to penetrate life and direct its unfoldin2. There is a patent out on the human 2enome. resol/e it into its constituent partob6ects &in this case 2enes+. 0t can 2o strai2ht to the code of its molarity. it recodes relati/ely static forms of content and e!pression on the molar le/el. the choices offered by the a!iomatic become effecti/ely infinite &for those with ade3uate cash flow+. at any one of its steps. # new mouse was 6ust copyri2hted. 0t operates on codes. Freed by the neoconser/ati/e transnation$state to follow its fractal attractor to the limit. 0t is captured from its future. The system of re2ularities that determines how superabstraction is embodied in particular situations is the capitalist ""a!iomatic1 &as distinct from despotic o/ercodin2 and liberal recodin2+. recombine them to yield a special$order product &adult indi/iduals+. 1Postmodernity1 is the presence of the consumerLcommodity a!is of the capitalist relation in e/ery point of social space$time: endocolonization accomplished. and market the final product A or the Pa2e '9< transformational process itself. it operates a fission and . 8hole species are now bein2 bou2ht and sold. 7ife forms are not simply captured by an e!ternal mechanism and put up for sale &as in the fur industry or trade in wild animals for pets+F the /ery form of a life that has ne/er e!isted in nature is commercialized at its point of emer2ence.concretization. @< 8hen capital comes out under neoconser/atism and real subsumption is a fait accompli. e/en life itself. #s embodied in the liberal nation$state. Capital ne/er operates as a code.
# body may be 1transse!ual. 8hat can be bou2ht or brou2ht forth with money is effecti/ely infinite. a definition more suited to 8estern society"s pre/ious mode of composition. The citizen of the liberal nation$state is 2i/en the latitude to recode an e!istin2 code. more fundamentally ener2etic than ob6ect$oriented. The denizen of the neoconser/ati/e transnation$state can in/ent new codes by mi!in2 and matchin2 ima2es. 3uantum rather than 3uantitati/e or 3ualitati/e. as new se!ualities come onto the market. 0t has de/eloped its transformational powers to such a de2ree that it can 2rasp matter at its point of emer2ence from the /irtual. 0t is not only white mice whose molecular makeup has been capitalized. # whole ser/ice industry e!ists for each.1 or many other thin2s.1 1ase!ual.reconstitution of transformational matri!es on the molecular le/el &its a!iomatic re2ularizes decodin2s+. 0t is often remarked that 1postmodernity1 is associated with an information$based economy in which ima2es as such &in the e/eryday usa2e+ become the basic commodity. 1Postmodern1 neoconser/atism is much more than the miniaturization and dissemination of mutually ad6ustable codes. the subcodes in 3uestion are affects+. wannabe rappers abound in white suburbia+.1 1se! addicted. and ad/ertisin2 are mechanisms for abstractin2 and commercializin2 codes of human identity and their molecular components &in this case. to redefine a cate2ory. Dace sells &this season. 1Postmodernity1 is the con6unction of superabstraction and e!treme powers of concretization at e/ery point in a social field saturated by the capitalist relation. The sub6ect of a despotic State must assume its assi2ned identity cate2ory and unfold its life alon2 the lines laid down by the code en/eloped in its ima2es. marketin2. :uman identity has under2one the same treatment. Bedia.1 1bise!ual. Capitalism is now more processual than it is producti/e."" 1sadomasochistic. 0t . Gender becomes increasin2ly ne2otiable.
the shreds of patternin2 they en/elop left to unfold in chance directions. belief systems. health.used to be that assumin2 or redefinin2 an identity took a lifetime. Postnormality. and allowed to proliferate. #ffect has not become 1flat. leisure A and e/ery other aspect of molar human e!istence A has been resol/ed into component parts: ima2es that may be purchased by a body and self$ applied as desired. 0t has simply been 2rasped from another dimension by the social machine. Traditionally. race. %ften.1 or pass from one whole$hearted 1comple!1 to another with amazin2 rapidity. reli2ious practices. ethnicity. uprooted from the spatiotemporal coordinates in which it ""naturally1 occurs and allowed to circulate. The affect packets are actualized in a new substance at an unfamiliar location. The old territorialities &habitual constellations of affect and patterns of mo/ement+ are di/ided into ima2e$borne packets which are reimplanted in social field. beauty. at an ad6usted &usually accelerated+ rate. ima2es en/eloped molar codes. which may run throu2h an endless series of self$transformations &serialized inclusi/e con6uncti/e synthesis+. 7ife as a succession of soap operas. 8hat used to be mutually e!clusi/e identities or beha/iors can Pa2e '9? now o/erlap 3uite comfortably in the same body. Gender. The 1lack of affect1 in 1postmodern1 culture that some commentators find so disturbin2 is in fact a surfeit. They were ima2es of whole attractors A and only indirectly of the dominated part$ob6ects composin2 those . either separately or in free combination. 4ow it can be done in as lon2 as it takes to shop for an ima2e. The unchallen2ed rei2n of Bolar Ban has ended. all that remains of %edipality is a caricature: a person will 2et 1flaky.1 :uman e!istence has not been made unidimensional. @? #ffect has been deterritorialized.
or from the an2le of its mutational aptitude. ima2es en/elop what were formerly subcodes of molarity: they now attach directly to part$ob6ects. and function in much the same way as the workin2 ima2es of capital itself. 0f it is a becomin2.@@ Pa2e '9@ The body is now allowed to e!ercise its partiality more fully. it is fundamentally a becomin2$consumer. The self is allowed to relar/alize. becomin2 an immanent abstract machine of mutation &with the mass media ser/in2 as its collecti/e assembla2e of enunciation. Society now 2rasps 1human1 e!istence in its /irtual dimension. Sub6ecti/ity is becomin2 isomorphic to capital A an a!iomatic 2o/erned by a fractal attractor. The ima2es so ubi3uitous in the urban landscape are nothin2 less than commodified transformational matrices in an escape run from molarity. . =ou can 2o anywhere your fancy takes you and be anyone you want to be A as lon2 as your credit is 2ood. 0t is bein2 disen2a2ed from the plane of transcendence of 1human1 bein2. 0t is perfectly functional &it in/ol/es shoppin2+. This post$human condition is not fundamentally a re2ressi/e state &althou2h it can easily turn into one: re$%edipalization+. and a ran2e of apparatuses from tele/ision studios to fashion shows to health clubs combinin2 to form its machinic assembla2e+. 8ith 1postmodernity"s1 deterritorialization of affect. and you show for work the ne!t day. >ut that e!tramolar transformational potential tends to be restricted to ima2e$consumption and $production.attractors. 5/en when it isn"t. The body"s realm of possibility has e!panded beyond anythin2 anyone could ha/e ima2ined e/en a 2eneration a2o. it is e/erywhere reined in by the one remainin2 deterministic constraint: the double a!is of the capitalist relation. 4either is it in any way re/olutionary.
that capitalism is a force for human betterment. can e!press them in words and 2estures. The only correspondence it re3uires is with the credit card company. The demolarization of humanity has destroyed the conditions for this kind of self$similarity. now residual. or a more or less accurate correspondence of a body to its model &its official. 1Postmodernity1 is not nothin2F it constitutes a limited becomin2$supermolecular that can increase some bodies" de2rees of freedom Pa2e '9) . identity cate2ory+. This assumes a more or less bounded interiority that has intrinsic 3ualities &thou2ht patternsF personality traits+. Qerisimilitude has been replaced by simulation as the e!plicit operatin2 principle of indi/idual e!istence. This creates a situation of structural cynicism &as opposed to personal hypocrisy+. The only correlation it demands of e/eryone is between buyin2 power and ima2e consumption. :ypocrisy A thinkin2 or feelin2 one thin2 while sayin2 or doin2 another A implies a molar framework of human bein2 that defines the noncoincidence of thou2ht$feelin2 and speech$action as a problem. but of all of e!istence. # businessman doesn"t ha/e to belie/e. =ou no lon2er ha/e to belie/e in the le2al system to be lawyer.The e!pansion of potential in 1postmodernity1 2oes hand in hand with the real subsumption by capital not only of society. and remains identical to itself across the /ariations of its sayin2s and doin2s. #ll a body need do is desire A and subordinate its desirin2 to earnin2 and consumin2. or in the 2o/ernment to be a ci/il ser/ant or politician. e/en pretend to belie/e. Society no lon2er re3uires a true correlation between interiority and its e!ternal manifestations.
The fact that society has reached the point that it can fore2o both interiority and belief and embrace creation is not to be lamented. 0ts outward sur2e of e!pansion has nearly e!hausted the earth. 4ot only do most bodies not ha/e infinite de2rees of freedom. This means that the pri/ile2e of self$in/ention will ne/er e!tend to e/ery body. @) but within limits: a body"s transformational potential is inde!ed to its buyin2 power. Capitalism"s endocolonial e!pansion has made the law of une3ual e!chan2e that is written into its a!iomatic an inescapable and lethal fact of life. Bere sur/i/al is a pri/ile2e in the bra/e new neoconser/ati/e world. # real cause for concern is that it has done so in a framework that restricts mutation. alarmin2 and increasin2 numbers are star/in2 or malnourished.beyond anythin2 seen before. the 1First 8orld1 and the 1Third 8orld.1 resource depletion and technolo2ical pro2ress. while 2rowin2 numbers ha/e been rele2ated to a 1permanent underclass1 locked out of steady . the capitalist class and the proletariat. Some proletarians ha/e been inte2rated as corporatist workers who are both commodities on the ""6ob market1 and consumers &Fordism+. #ll it can do is displace its own limits. These boundaries were o/ertaken by capitalism as it 2rew to saturate its field of e!teriority: BolarityLmolecularity has been counteractualized as a distinction between commercialized codes and e3ually commercialized subcodes &the identification of the 1%ther1 replaced by traffickin2 in affects for use in becomin2$other+.@. Capitalism has not ushered in an a2e of uni/ersal wealth and well$bein2 and ne/er will. The limits of capitalism used to be e!ternal boundaries fallin2 between its formations and non$ or precapitalist ones: between molarity and molecularity. The forced mo/ement of liberal 1democracy1 &parodic /erisimilitude+ has re$become real mo/ement &simulation+. threatenin2 to destroy the en/ironment on which all life depends.
and its fatal weakness. ha/e been. 0t is capitalism"s destiny to cross it. be crossed. 8hat the final deterministic constraint that is the capitalist relation ultimately determines is 2lobal death.1 not only remains but has become absolute A the death of the planet. thou2h in a /ery different way A by /irtue . 0ts fall will be a 2reat deal harder. Pa2e '9. The /irtual pole of capitalism turns out to be no less suicidal than fascism$paranoia. is to ha/e ele/ated consumption and accumulation to the le/el of a principle marshalin2 superhuman forces of in/ention A and destruction. The abstract machine of consumption$ accumulation has risen. The last limit. 0t can.@( The inclusion of all nations in the international debt economy and the creation of 1peripheral1 areas of underde/elopment in the /ery heart of the 8estern world"s lar2est capitals ha/e blurred the boundaries between the 1First1 and 1Third1 8orlds. between resource depletion and technolo2ical 1pro2ress. Capitalism"s stren2th.employment and thus restricted to participatin2 in the economy as consumers A of the inade3uate social ser/ices still a/ailable after the 2uttin2 of the welfare state. Trump$like in all its inhuman 2lory. it has clone so in the ser/ice of 3uantity: consumption and accumulation are. in the sense of bein2 subsumed by its a!iomatic. For althou2h capitalism has turned 3uantum in its mode of operation. and will always be its reason for bein2. The first three limits ha/e been internalized by capitalism. howe/er. This limit cannot be internalized by capital &althou2h the nuclear arms race of the Cold 8ar period that transformed the 1ad/anced1 nations into permanent war economies based on postponed confla2ration was a delirious attempt to do 6ust that+.
it frees some bodies to transcend forced personification+. a real differential. but one that is mediated by a detour throu2h molarity.of its success. as a side effect. # swin2 back to the fascistparanoid pole could easily be brou2ht on by a self$preser/ati/e response to the threat of e!tinction on the . The four fundamental dense points of its a!iomatic 2rid constitute a creati/e tension. not because of an irresol/able contradiction endemic to its dynamic. 1Postmodernity1 as we know it is the cultural condition accompanyin2 the comin2 out of the capitalist 3uasicause from under the yoke of the fascist$ paranoid ones that ha/e traditionally curtailed it. 0t is also a transpersonal desire. ). Capitalism is not defined by its contradictions. or abstract machine.0t is the social tendency to o/ercome contradiction. The lo2ical contradictions hauntin2 fascist$paranoid formations are indirect e!pressions of a forcibly personalized desire to transcend matter. Fascism$paranoia is a desire for unity that is applied to a body by an intercedin2 a2ency whose operation consists in carryin2 a body outside of itself in order to find its identity. The culture of 1postmodernism1 is incapable of risin2 to the challen2e of disarmin2 the final constraint of capitalism. The two strictly coincide. 0n spite of that. it is as ill$e3uipped to a/ert a swin2 back toward the fascist$paranoid pole &a recon/ersion of society into a more limited Pa2e '9( mode of capitalism+ or an outbreak of fascism proper as it is of for2in2 ahead into full hyperdifferentiation. the unmediated operation of a mode of transpersonal desire. Capitalism"s limits are a direct result of its more successful desire to make itself immanent to matter &in the process of which.
Disciplinary and e/en outri2ht fascist minidespotisms are not merely archaic holdo/ers. will almost always win out o/er other forms of desire. and an outbreak of fascism by an attack response by those same minidespotisms a2ainst the real mo/ements of supermolecularization that the /olatility of the present situation occasionally allows to slip out of the confines of relati/e becomin2 &becomin2 relati/e to commodification+. They are neoarchaisms with a perfectly contemporary function: puttin2 the brakes on capitalism. =ou cannot be a 1functionin2 member1 of capitalist society if you do not retain the 2ood L common sense to realize that the literal bottom line is the bottom line. 5/ery body must buy. 8e all stand naked and alone before the capitalist relation that has come to encompass e!istence.part of the many minidespotisms still operatin2 in the capitalist field of e!teriority. simply by re3uirin2 that e/ery body considered to be of any worth. )' The reason that 1postmodern1 culture is powerless to respond to these threats is that e/en thou2h the human body is no lon2er necessarily 2rasped as a molar whole and e/en thou2h the concretizations of the desire possessin2 it may be partial or e/en per/erse. re2ardless of who or what it is and how it desires. ha/e its own bank account. 1Pri/ate1 interest. ""Pri/ate1 is in 3uotation marks because what is bein2 described is a thorou2hly social mechanism. 5itheryou consume or you don"t. defined in monetary terms. The /ast ma6ority must work. 1Pri/ate1 interest applies to a body taken separatelyF but as an operati/e rule written into the capitalist . either you work or you don"t: this last remainin2 e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis shortcircuits the conta2ious potential of becomin2$other. The capitalist a!iomatic ensures that no /irtual$actual circuit other than its own will reach full amplitude. =ou cannot be a part$consumer or a fraction of a worker. it is still subsumed by a superabstract relation that pertains to a sin2le human body considered separately.
a surpassable historical period uncontaminated by formations belon2in2 to other 1a2es1 or a sub6ecti/e stance an indi/idual could ade3uately define and choose to eschew. it is not surprisin2 that most becomin2s$other fall short. >ut few are they who find their collecti/ity. The hyperdifferentiated futures a body$in$becomin2 holds in /irtuality rarely come to pass. from the thin2 they need most to run their course: a population free for the mutatin2. if it applies to one body it applies to them all. >ecomin2s are e/erywhere in capitalism. # tendency of this kind was defined earlier as ""ethics. but they are always separated from their full potential. once actualized. There is nothin2 to be 2ained by takin2 an oppositional stance toward 1postmodernity1 A as if it were a topolo2ical space it was possible to demarcate and step out of. >ut when it does produce precepts. # body may cross the threshold of molar indi/iduality with relati/e ease. To >e Continued 0f there is a way out of this impasse. to persist and e!pand. it will not lie in turnin2 back. Capitalism dispenses with the need for its sub6ects to accept ideolo2ical or moral 6ustifications of its &or their+ e!istence. one is heard with o/erwhelmin2 re2ularity: the idea that a body can ser/e the interests of society by ser/in2 itself ¬ only Pa2e '<1can1: can only+.a!iomatic. Faced with such a compellin2 ad/ersary. 1Postmodernity1 as we know it is one aspect of a broader dynamic that co/ers the face of the earth and actualizes both .1 Capitalism is the ethic of 2reed. it is the most direct e!pression of the capitalist 3uasicause"s impersonal 1conatus1 A the tendency of a system. That is to say. 1Self$interest1 is the basic capitalist e!pression of the Common Good.
and whether or not we like to belie/e it. beyond 2reed. it is ri2ht where we are: in the final constraint. in a worldwide resonation of desires. There is no 2ettin2 outside it. whether we like it or not. . This re3uires a 2lobal perception of the capitalist relation as the constraint that it is. in takin2 the in/enti/e potential released by capitalism so far that we become so other as to no lon2er act in the percei/ed 1pri/ate1 interests of a Pa2e '<' separate Self that we ha/e in any case already ceased to be &if we e/er were it+. The absolute limit of capitalism must be shifted back from planetary death to becomin2$other. The e!tramolarity &relati/e molecularity+ we are now allowed must be pushed beyond the pale of self$interest. 8e must reclaim molecularity as a limit. 7amentin2 the loss of such 1traditional /alues1 as belief and sincerity and re/ertin2 to moralism. >ut most of all. and the only way out is to2ether. no matter who or where we are. The last bastion of 2oodLcommon sense must come down. The way lies ahead. The aim would be less to o/erthrow neoconser/atism than to counteractualize its residually molar indi/iduals as a local$2lobal correlation of becomin2s$other. or mournin2 the 1death of the sub6ect1 and re/ertin2 to molarism. into a supermolecularity where no 3uasicause can follow: a collecti/e ethics beyond 2ood and e/il. will only take us a step back in capitalism. 8e are in this to2ether. 8e must embrace our collecti/ity. or on to somethin2 worse.our sub6ecti/e and ob6ecti/e conditions of e!istence. the de/elopment of a systemic sensiti/ity to its a!iomatic. and shared strate2ies of resistance to it and its symbiotic despotisms. 0f there is a way out.
at a state far from e3uilibrium. 14omad Thou2ht. 17"0ma2e de la pens e. Deferences to works that ha/e not been translated or for which the translation is of 3uestionable 3uality 2i/e only the French pa2ination &in Doman+. Deleuze de/elops an e!tended criti3ue of D#T0%4#70ST P:07%S%P:= in Diff rence et r p tition: see esp. note '-. 10 :a/e 4othin2 to #dmit. Depletion must end. 9)<M. Dialo2ues. p. pp.#4T as 1enemy. the second &in italics+ to the ori2inal French.The e3uilibrium of the physical en/ironment must be reestablished. note @(+ 2i/e two sets of pa2e numbers: the first &in Doman+ to the translation. B%4STD%HS %FFSPD04G: Deleuze.+. <. 0f this sounds /a2ue.1 . Pa2e '<9 4otes First references to central works for which a ser/iceable translation e!ists &see Pleasures of Philosophy.U'9V &translation modified+. '<. Pleasures '. .1 p. U')9V. that we may de/ote oursel/es to our true destiny: dissipation. see also # Thousand Plateaus. '@(M*').. for the /ery 2ood reason that in that future there would be no place for it A ha/in2 finally become what it cannot be. S:#D%8 %F T:5 D5SP%T: Gilles Deleuze. *. %n the relationship between P:07%S%P:= and the ST#T5. 0t is one body"s desire for a future it cannot en/ision. and Force.1 p. '9. *. :5G57: 18hat 0 detested more than anythin2 else was :e2elianism and the Dialectic1 &ibid. so that cultures may 2o on li/in2 and learn to li/e more intensely.1 pp. it is. '* &translation modified+F Pourparlers. Deleuze and Parnet. p. 9.U<@<M )-V.
10 :a/e 4othin2 to #dmit. ''9 U'<V.ant"s Critical Philosophy. or %edipus in #nti$Psychiatry. @. '-. . ''.ibid. The 6ournal Decherches. &Deaders should be wary of the translation of The Bolecular De/olution: Guattari"s specialized terminolo2y is inconsistently translated or simply 2lossed o/er. # S5CD5T 704. . ). #C#D5B0C #PP#D#THS: Deleuze.. p.1 p. 10ntellectuals and Power. U7a D /olution mol culaire &'())+.1 pp. pp. 1Bary >arnes. ')9n. pp. #4T0PS=C:0#TD=: Delations were strained because Guattari belie/ed that 7ain2"s communitarian solution reconstituted an e!tended %edipal family &Guattari. *@<+. Guattari was tried and fined for committin2 an 1outra2e to public decency1 by . *. >D04G %HT B#D45SS: F li! Guattari. *-?M') U9M'-V.M. 04T5775CTH#7S 04 S%C05T=: See Deleuze"s discussion with Bichel Foucault. 4umber *' &BarchM#pril '()@+ of Decherches is a collecti/ely written history of 7a >orde. '9*M9<V+ and because he was critical of >asa2lia"s assimilation of mental illness and social alienation and his re6ection of any kind of institutions for the insane &Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit . 1Sur les rapports infirmiersm decins1 &'(??+. 04ST0THT0%4#7 PS=C:%T:5D#P=: Guattari. of which Guattari was an editor. <-.: 0bid. was the mouthpiece of the institutional analysis mo/ement..1 Bolecular De/olution.(. p.+ ''. pp. ?. in Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit . Pa2e '<< (. ?@M?. The study alluded to is Deleuze. Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit . G#=$D0G:TS B%Q5B54T: 0n '()9.
*'. late$modern /ersion. p. '<<. <. pp.. '?. pp. often 3uoted by Deleuze: 1The Thou2ht from %utside. **. U'(@V. ''-n+.U'(9M*-9V. %n ST=75 in literature. P7#T5#H: See # Thousand Plateaus. pp. *-. U?(@M()V. Guattari himself be2an his political life in the early fifties with stormy attempts at membership in two Trotskyist splinter parties &Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit . 9*M99. 99)M<(. C0DCHB5ST#4C5S: Deleuze. '<. 75FT0ST >HD5#HCD#C= %F D5#S%4: 7a D /olution mol culaire &Decherches+. Pourparlers. '). but the /olume was later reprinted under the title Trois milliards de per/ers. pp. *@. p. '*. 70ST54 # D5C%DD: Dialo2ues. . The terms SB%%T: SP#C5 and STD0#T5D SP#C5 were in fact coined by Pierre >oulez: see # Thousand Plateaus. PDHSS0#4 B04D$B57D: CWr2en :abermas"s notion of 1consensus1 may be seen as the updated. '<*M?. 9(M<-. Proust and Si2ns. pp. The disinte2ration of the left into do2matic 12roupuscules1 and the amoebalike proliferation of 7acanian schools based on personality cults confirmed the char2e of bureaucratism but belied the potency of the mi!. p.M)'+. %HTS0D5 T:%HG:T: See Foucault"s essay on >lanchot. '@. p. pp. see Deleuze.1 '.. p. <))M). %P54 S=ST5B: Deleuze. 75G0T0B#T5D SH>C5CT: 7yotard.publishin2 an issue of Decherches &no. The Postmodern Condition. '*+ on homose!uality. #ll copies were ordered destroyed &7a D /olution mol culaire. ST#T5 P:07%S%P:=: Diff rence et r p tition. <(M ??. '?. Pa2e '<? '(. '9. 9 U'-V. Pourparlers.
in the literal sense of 1turnin2 away from"" &away from the 1royal road1 of the unconscious. 4or is it to re$produce an author"s identity as one"s own.1 p. to wrest writin2 away from the State$form of phallo2ocentric identity. to cut the pro off male creation. *-.*9. %ne and the %ther A the form of identity itself A in a process of mutual mutation. see :abit. as Freud dubbed the %edipal comple!+. by bodies se!ed masculine. they be2et monstrosity. to destroy the centrality of the phallus. on the part of a physiolo2ical male. note <<. below. 0t is a refusal to e!ercise the patriarchal prero2ati/e of imposin2 self$likeness. %n the creation of the world. and /eer off on less tra/eled paths A includin2 but emphatically not limited to re2ions for . U?V. Deleuze"s ima2e e!presses a desire to per/ert the phallic function. The idea is to a/oid the officially appro/ed face$to$face of the intellectual missionary position in fa/or of an encounter between primary and secondary author in which both disappear as identified indi/iduals A and as an academic species. 0t e!presses a desire to bypass that crossroads &the alternati/e between the castration of sadistic re/olt and conformist reproduction+. The approach is anti2enerational and anti$ male bondin2. when men meet. The phallus can no lon2er fulfill its 1natural1 function of 2uarantor of male identity if. T%%7 >%O: Deleuze and Foucault. The 2oal is to abolish %ne and Two. *<. The aim is not to impose one"s Self on the 1ob6ect1 of one"s attention &the sadism of patriarchal 6ud2ment+. an attempt. in the e!pectation that newcomers will re$reproduce it as their own &the borin2 %edipal normality of discipleship as se3uential adopti/e parenta2e: becomin2 the mentor"s son in order to ha/e sons by himF the male motherin2 of metaphysical brotherhood+. 10ntellectuals and Power. #lso: Deleuze"s ima2e of philosophy as approachin2 an author from behind to produce a B%4STD%HS %FFSPD04G is antiphallic in spite of its manifest content: it e!presses a desire.
)<M)?. content. p. %n D5C0PD%C#7 PD5SHPP%S0T0%4.'M. and Deleuze. %n EH#70T05S and S0G4S. '<?M<@ U?(M@-. p.. p. (. pp. and . The terms F%DB %F C%4T54T and F%DB %F 5OPD5SS0%4 deri/e from the work of lin2uist 7ouis :6elmsle/. 9 U9V. see Deleuze. <<M<?. see note @( below+.. p.@+. 4ietzsche and Philosophy. polymorphously. . 9*' &and note '(+.. U(V &translation modified+. ). < U?V &translation modified+. @. form of content. @. #FF040T= 8iT: # F%DC5: 4ietzsche and Philosophy. '. p. ?. e!pression. Q#7H5 0S T5D4 :05D#DC:= %F F%DC5S: 0bid.*V. see # Thousand Plateaus.'M. and # Thousand Plateaus. 9'<. See # Thousand Plateaus. 9. see also Deleuze. p.which a patriarchal map is normally drawn. #S B#4= B5#404GS #S F%DC5S: 4ietzsche and Philosophy. Pa2e '<@ Force '.( &for comments on the 5n2lish translation of this work. <-M<'. :#4D$T%$:#4D C%B>#T %F 545DG05S is a phrase from Proust &1uncorps$X$corps d" ner2ies1+. p. < U?V &translation modified+. Foucault. and a2ain in # Thousand Plateaus. . '. ''(. *. The 1anti$ %edipus1 is an 1unnatural1 desire to reclaim pleasure for in/ention. <.M9( U?(M@-. 8%%D: This e!ample is mentioned in passin2 by Deleuze in Proustand Si2ns. 5O0ST04G F%DC5: Deleuze. %n the 1battle1 between form and content. p. < U'-V. For Deleuze and Guattari"s de/elopment of the concepts of form. .. <-( U?-(V. Foucault &'(. pp. p. 99. pp.M. Diff rence et r P tition. 9') U9(-V.*V.
1 1transcodin21+. *@?n'@V and Foucault &'(. and 7o2ic of Sense.V and Foucault &'(. '**M*@.(. %n the D0#GD#B. '?'. ?). see # Thousand Plateaus. ?9)n'@ U')@M)(. see # Thousand Plateaus. %n D5#7 /ersus 7%G0C#7 &1modal1+ D0ST04CT0%4. '. '@'. pp.. @* U). <*M<<. '(. 9(M<*. pp. pp. S.@+.9. ''. '. B tamorphoses du corps. PeirceF see Guattari. pp. )@. pp.-M'(. '<*M<9 U??.) U')9. Pa2e '<) '*. translation is a specific mode of dynamic transfer amon2 others &1induction. ?. )(M. 9'M99. pp. @<. .form of e!pression &as well as the related distinction between matter and substance discussed below+. see 7o2ic of Sense. )* U?(. the abstract points of the dia2ram are called S04GH7#D0T05S. . 0n their /ocabulary.*M. '<'M<9.. pp.@. ?. pp. . 10t is not enou2h to say that consciousness is consciousness of somethin2F it is the D%H>75 of somethin2.M@-. '*?M*@. (?.. '-@V. see # Thousand Plateaus.'V. %n D5DH4D#4C=. '<@. For a Deleuzian usa2e of the concept of translation similar to the one de/eloped here. pp. *(-M('. <-M<'.?. See # Thousand Plateaus. '). For thou2ht reproducin2 the clynamism of the apprehended ob6ect &B0B0C. '<). pp. pp. )?. 9*)M9*V. @@M@). <9M<?. )(.9. '-.04G it+.< U'--. (*V. '<@M<) U<<M<). . The term 1dia2ram1 is borrowed from C. see # Thousand Plateaus. <<. ''9. and e/ery thin2 is consciousness .. ')*M)9V &meanin2 as doubleF the word translated as 1di/ision1 on pa2e 9' of the 5n2lish is 1d doublement""+. *. Deleuze and Guattari do not themsel/es use the term TD#4S7#T0%4 in this 2eneral sense.1 1transduction. (-M('. 0n the /ocabulary of The 7o2ic of Sense and Foucault &used sporadically in Diff rence et re p tition and in all other works+. 7es ann es d"hi/er. see Cos Gil.@+. .-. @-.
. *<.&1crack1+ U*<*M<? &fYlure1+V. *?. T:5 >504G %F # 4%4D57#T0%4: 0bid. . ?(M @-. ?9. @(M)*.. . Cinema 0. '?. the other ideal1 &Diff rence et r p tition. '<. and # Thousand Plateaus. pp. pp. ''(. '.@+. %n a similar nonrelation in perception between thin2s and ima2es.@ &1fYlure1+V. '@. . ').. '-(M'' &1inter/al1+ U'<. This fissurin2 in all its forms is the SC:0N of 1schizoanalysis1 &the name Deleuze and Guattari 2i/e the form of philosophy ad/anced in Pa2e '<. <'. *<<+. %n the necessity for philosophical thou2ht to 1burst thin2s asunder1 &1fendre les choses1+ in order to see beyond their apparent unity and conformity to words and 2rasp their conditions of e!istence. 9*'M99 &1crack1+ U9)9M.@. p. . see Deleuze. as the abstract machine+. .V. D%H>75 D=4#B0SB: 10t is accurate to speak of a double series of e/ents unfoldin2 on two planes. @'M@@ &1inter/al1+ U(-M() &1inter/alle1+VF in human life between conscious thou2ht and the real becomin2 at its basis &thou2ht in the widest sense. @(M)*. >er2sonism. . %D C%DD5SP%4D54C5: Foucault &'(. pp. p. pp. ''<M') &1 cart1+VF in beha/ior between action and reaction. )'. pp. (*M(. *. 7o2ic of Sense.. C%BB%4 F%DB.. 4% C%4F%DB0T=. one series real . %n B04D$>%D= P#D77570SB. %n the relation between words and states of thin2s as a 4%4D57#T0%4. pp. '@. ''*.@M(' U*.@.@+. see Foucault &'(. '9.. howe/er far away and estran2ed from it1 &Diff rence et r p tition. ''(. pp. see Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. echoin2 each other without resemblance. pp. Foucault &'(.@+. '-). .<+..M*-. pp. .because it has a double. '(.
. 0t is instructi/e to compare the /arious uses of the word 1schiz1 in #nti$%edipus: see.Capitalism and Schizophrenia+. 8hat was said pre/iously of the relation between content and e!pression could be said of thin2s. '. thou2ht. Con/ersely. '<'M<*. %n the #>STD#CT B#C:045. and lan2ua2e. '(. 9). <?9V. To the nonrelations listed abo/e. '?. U<). )-M)'. The articulated differentiations constituti/e of meanin2 can be multiplied indefinitely. and Foucault &'(. pp. @9@M9. *< U9)V+. for e!ample by brin2in2 words into collision with thin2s and lettin2 thou2ht fall. *<'. for e!ample. the important point is not the particular way in which any of these planes is defined. 9?'. **9M*<. *. #s the followin2 discussion will illustrate. pp. The 7o2ic of Sense is an e!tended meditation on the S5P#D#T0%4$C%445CT0%4 of 1bein21 &states of thin2s+. and each of these is di/isible in turn into distinct modes of discourse. thou2ht. The 1point al atoire1 discussed at len2th throu2hout 7o2ic of Sense is another word for the cuttin2 ed2e of fracturin2. 17an2ua2e1 is di/isible into the autonomous planes of speech and writin2. *<<. Derrida would add another: between speech and writin2. *. see # Thousand Plateaus. p.V and passim. . ')?M).@+. <<. the planes can be telescoped. dependin2 on the point of /iew.. '9'. 9<'.). *)9M)<. '9*. 9'?.. but rather the principle of their structurin2 as /ariations on one another and the pra2matic possibility of tailorin2 the analysis of their structurin2 to a concrete task at hand. ??. 9)@. *)*M)9. *9-M9'. Deleuze repeatedly e!presses the autonomy of these 1parallelisms1 and their simultaneous imbrication. 0n the present discussion. ?'-M'* U(-M('. *(-. 0n it. 9(M<-. they are o/erlappin2 moments of becomin2 that can be placed in continuity or dis6unction. and lan2ua2e &and will be said in what follows for other formations+: they are really distinct but in reciprocal presupposition. <'-. p. Beanin2 is the ""articulation of their difference1 &7o2ic of Sense.@.
?. '(?M(@. @9. pp. 9<M9?. see 7o2ic of Sense. below+. the point at which too much is reached+. %45 H40F05D F057D: Chapter 9 of # Thousand Plateaus. .1 charts the /icissitudes of . '. see 7o2ic of Sense. **?M*@. '?U'<. T% CHT. '))M. '@@.*-. *<. pp.1+ %n the 5Q54T. *'. *@@. '. (?. pp. %n the FHTHD5$P#ST. pp. %n the 1sterility1 of meanin2. '?'M?< U'<. (? U<<M<?. pp. *)V. '. see Proust and Si2ns. 9'M 9*. ''@V &in the present work 1sterile1 will usually be replaced by 5Q#P%D#T0Q5 to a/oid any phallic connotations+. ?<<. see 7o2ic of Sense. Deleuze re6ects the term 1essence1 because of its Platonic o/ertones. Pa2e '<( *'. 7#4GH#G5.M?9 U')<M)(V and passim. ')@V. p. *9. the e/ent is called an 1incorporeal transformation1 &see note <-. passimF Diff rence et r p tition.1 or 10dea. pp. %n anti$Platonic 5SS54C5. *-M*'. but it also 2oes beyond limits. P%85D: 17an2ua2e sets limits &for e!ample. *?-VF and >er2sonism. ?. T% D05: 7o2ic of Sense. *'< U<. 0n # Thousand Plateaus.-V. preferrin2 such terms as 1e/ent.-. 9@*V. * U''V &translation modified+.) U''-V. %n the #TTD0>HT5 and the 5OPD5SS5D as the two faces of meanin2. )). &0n numerous passa2es in many of his works..9.* U9*M99. *?.@M. '<@. pp.1 1problem. pp. p.*. *). F%DC5.1 1#ion. D0#GD#BS: See # Thousand Plateaus. 1The Geolo2y of Borals. 9< U*9M *<. *9(F 7o2ic of Sense. see 7o2ic of Sense. *'9V. **. '9?.. *@. ?<? U'@(M)-. 9?(. pp. '<. and # Thousand Plateaus. . 9*M99. restorin2 them to the infinite e3ui/alence of an unlimited becomin21: 7o2ic of Sense.
'(-M('. pp.content and e!pression on the physical. biolo2ical and cultural 1strata. (*M (9 U(<M(?V. and passim &the 1plane of consistency1 or 1plane of immanence1+ U9'. pp. for the action of the operator UGil"s term for the abstract machineV has ceasedF part of the remainder may form a precipitate constitutin2 a si2n. *?<. no si2n emer2esF there is but the pure acti/ity of the operators. #s lon2 as the forces are at work. 9*@V.1 %n B%40SB. *. *-M*'. as a distant residue of forceF it is at once the memory of the operator"s acti/ity and the result of its cessation. 2eolo2ical. pp. the force that takes the upper hand in the combat lea/es a remainder. is also a measure of the power one force has o/er the other. which measures the relation between the forces... 9''. (*M(9 U'*-M*'V &14ature""+F 7o2ic of Sense. Pa2e '?Thus the si2n emer2es from the absence of the operator. *@@. producin2 thin2s &which of course . '?9 &1matter e3uals ener2y1+. This remainder.M*''VF and # Thousand Plateaus. %n 5FF5CT. :owe/er. *-. or the 2ap between them. '-9 &1the potential ener2y of the pure e/ent1+. the remainder is no lon2er a force si2nifyin2 itself for another force. who bases his pro6ect of an 1anthropolo2y of force1 on Deleuze and Guattari"s 4ietzschean$deri/ed theories of meanin2. 8hen two opposed forces enter into relation. see 7o2ic of Sense. '))M. see >er2sonism. Cos Gil. <M'' U'9M*'V and passim.&1uni/ocity1+ U'*?. *(. pp. in residual form. also emphasizes that the emer2ence of the si2n or dia2ram corresponds to a B%B54T#D= SHSP54S0%4 %F >5C%B04G: 1There is an entropy proper to si2n systems that diminishes their capacity to si2nify. and passimF Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. pp.
pp. (*F also on 1space$ fillin21 fractals. and Dimension. ((F on a randomized . and in directions strikin2ly .1 pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. Chaos. has become increasin2ly important in Guattari"s writin2: a prime e!ample is 1Cracks in the Street.1 trans. The moment of suspension corresponds to the interruption of desire constituti/e of the >%D= 80T:%HT %DG#4S &defined in :abit.och cur/e. see Bandelbrot.'<+F on the solidity of nature concealin2 fractal porosity.become si2ns for other forces+. p. 99)M9<<F on B5#404G #S %PT0C#7 5FF5CT. . Chance. 'M'@. '(. see %rbach. and Diff rence et r p tition. 1>urp1+ as described in #nti$%edipus &see esp. see Ceffrey. 1Cracks in the Street1 has appeared in French: Guattari. 8e see that the meanin2 of the si2n has to do with a differential 2ap resultin2 from the relation between forces1 &B tamorphoses du corps. 9-.(+. see 7o2ic of Sense. pp. p. December *.?F on the 1random walk1 as a 1space$fillin21 &or 1plane$fillin2""+ fractal. 9@M9) U'M**. 9'(M9'.1 p. '(. FD#CT#7S: For an illustration of the basic procedure behind the . Does God Play DiceJ.och cur/e formin2 a coastline with islands. The concept of the fractal. '-?M'-@. 1Bimickin2 Bountains.VF for a full illustration of the snowflake effect. a paper on >althus deli/ered at the Bodern 7an2ua2e #ssociation con/ention in 4ew =ork. The same book de/elops the philosophy of the fracture at 2reat len2th.. pp. <.. . #nne Gibault and Cohn Cohnston.) U@-. Fractals: Form. see Gleick. p. **( &the uni/erse as a 1multi$fractal1+F on fractal 2eometry and computer 2raphics. see Gleick. e!plicitly mentioned only once in passin2 in # Thousand Plateaus.U'). and Stewart. Chaos: Bakin2 a 4ew Science. p. 1Dynamics of Fractal 4etworks.'<M'( &1The structure ceases to be fractal at /ery Ular2eV scales. p. where it appears homo2eneous or continuous. see Bandelbrot. . Fractals. p.V. .1 pp. ''(. Carto2raphies schizoanalyti3ues &Paris: Galil e.Z<9M<?V+. ). pp. USince this writin2.@ &as yet unpublished+. ). *-+. p.
see Diff rence et r p tition.?F on the #FF0DB#T0%4 of the eternal return as Ballarm "s dice$ throw. whereas Deleuze prefers to . '((M *-?+. *'. . and Foucault &'(. refrain. see # Thousand Plateaus.M)(V. '<*. 9)(M. Proust and Si2ns. ')9.<V. >oth are discussed as processes of 1possibilization. pp. 9?*M ?9. %n the F%H4D#T0%47#5SS45SS of the foundation of be &com+ in2.1 pp. and 7o2ic of Sense. 99. **?V. pp. see Diff rence et r p tition. ?9M?< U).. and the 2lossary to Cinema 0. '*9. pp. D0FF5D54T S5B0%T0C %DG#40N#T0%4S: Deleuze. pp. The fracture at the basis of meanin2 is e!plicitly related the concept of the fractal &for e!ample. Dionysus was dismembered after his first birth.M*<+. see Spinoza. pp. For more on the 5T5D4#7 D5THD4. see 4ietzsche and Philosophy.*V &1%f the 0deal Game1+F on the 1cosmos1 &or C:#%SB%S+ as the unity of nature and culture. which is in turn connected to the concept of the synapse &pp. is fascinated with phenomena of sub6ecti/e redundancy &resonance. . *(@. '@<. ?M'*. 9*. U'<-M. '() U*(M9'. '''M <.similar to those of the present e!position.1V Pa2e '?' 9'. pp. pp. pp. p. for e!ample.@+. ?(M@-. 99) U<'@V and the references for 1monism1 in note *) abo/eF on the uncaused cause &10BB#454T C#HS5""+. U'*M*-. *?M*). 9''M'<. p. see 4ietzsche and Philosophy. *')M'.'-9M'-(V. '?'. 1%n Se/eral De2imes of Si2ns. pp. black hole+.<M. D575HN5 Q5DSHS GH#TT#D0: Guattari. '(9M(< U***VF and the precedin2 pa2es on C%= as the affirmation &willin2+ of the eternal return &repetition$translation+ of difference &multiplicity and fissure+.(M(*. <<. %n the 7#HG:T5D of Dionysus$Narathustra. ?.M@? U)<M. U*('M(9VF see also # Thousand Plateaus.
pp. use the e!ample of the prisonF see # Thousand Plateaus. pp. Deleuze and Guattari depart from Spinoza"s /iews on substance on one crucial point: for Spinoza. and Foucault &'(. each attribute coincides with a substance. For Deleuze and Guattari. micropolitics &some are discussed below+. and Foucault &'(.@+. pp. <9. followin2 Foucault.@V. Deleuze and Guattari redefine attribute under the influence of the Stoics. pp. see 7"0nconscient machini3ue. 9. ch. <'M<*. ')M'. 9'M9?. esp. and in 7"0nconscient machini3ue.. and only two #TTD0>HT5S of that substance are knowable to human bein2s &thou2ht and e!tension+. pp. @@M@) U. # Thousand Plateaus. U*<V. Deleuze comments on this temperamental complementarity in Dialo2ues. many key semiotic concepts used in # Thousand Plateaus are of Guattari"s de/isin2. <9M)9. Substances can be or2anized into 2eneral types accordin2 to their mode of composition. and were first worked out in 7a D /olution mol culaire &'())+. many of the properly philosophical concepts were ori2inated by Deleuze. the . there is only one substance. 2roup sub6ecti/ity.@+. and the number of both substances and knowable attributes is infinite. trans/ersality. pp.1 Bolecular De/olution. %n the other hand. war machine.emphasize 1lines of escape1 from sub6ecti/ity. <'. molar$molecular. <'(V. Pa2e '?* 9?. :0G: SC:%%7: Deleuze and Guattari. #s can be seen by the references abo/e.U?. pp. pp. 9<. '''M)*+. Guattari also contributed some of the most effecti/ely political concepts of Capitalism and Schizophrenia: territorialization$deterritorialization. p. *()M9)@ &some of these essays are translated in 1Towards a 4ew Qocabulary. desirin2$machine. 9<. %n SH>ST#4C5 /ersus B#TT5D.
. Compare Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. ?'M?*. e!pressible as a dynamic >0#GD#B or infiniti/e. or.@. Content considered outside its encounter with e!pression. The F%DB %F C%4T54T. is B#TT5D %F 5OPD5SS0%4 &the o/erpowerin2 thin2 as a bundle of potential functions+. Deleuze de/elops his readin2 of Spinoza at 2reat len2th in 5!pressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza. >oth content and e!pression are substance A form comple!es. 8hat places the two in relation is the #>STD#CT B#C:045. 9@. '(-. The interface bet8een content and e!pression is meanin2 or interpretation as a process of becomin2 &essence+. '?9. '(?V. as ha/in2 therefore neither substance nor form. a literal form of containment &such as a school or prison+ within which affects are actualized. therefore as ha/in2 neither form nor substance. is B#TT5D %F C%4T54T &the o/erpowered thin2 as a bundle of potential affects. pp. as e!hibitin2 its assi2ned 3ualities+. '?) U''-. # rule$of$thumb o/er/iew of the semiotic framework: C%4T54T is what is o/erpowered. is an order of 3ualities &a se3uence of actualization of selected affects+. # SH>ST#4C5 %F C%4T54T is an o/erpowered thin2 as a 3ualified ob6ect &that is. The F%DB %F 5OPD5SS0%4 is an order of functions &a se3uence of actualization of selected functions+.M'-( U)*M)<. .prime e!amples a2ain bein2 thou2ht and e!tension. '-. '<)M<. or content abstracted from its substance but in the conte!t of its encounter with e!pression. pp. at one remo/e from the substance of content. 5OPD5SS0%4 what o/erpowers. 5!pression considered outside its encounter with content. abilities to affect or be affected+.V with # Thousand Plateaus. in other words. # SH>ST#4C5 %F 5OPD5SS0%4 is what embodies an o/erpowerin2 function.
pp. pp. 9'*.Pa2e '?9 9).. pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. would ha/e led him far from the analytical philosophy of his ori2ins: 1the sense in which sayin2 somethin2 produces effects on other persons. <-M<'. pp. %n the same pa2e. @9M)' U''?M 9-V. 9. #ustin comes close. . and Foucault &'(. %n the e/ent as 04C%DP%D5#7 TD#4SF%DB#T0%4.?. p.V. <-. see ibid.9. Qineland. '. see # Thousand Plateaus. *). ''9n+. passim. .. in one footnote. %n C%BP%454TS %F P#SS#G5. pp. '-(M''*. see # Thousand Plateaus. to assertin2 a theory of incorporeal transformation the conse3uences of which. esp. is a 2eneral semiotic concept applicable to nonlin2uistic systems+. p. 9(. '9@M9. 9((V &the conte!t is animal beha/ior: the component of passa2e.<V. its line of causality is discontinuous.. ().@+. or causes thin2s. '99. pp. '<-. 9*? U9. he states that the action of this nonphysical causality is marked by a 1break in the chain1 of statements: in other words. The P5DF%DB#T0Q5: See C.. #ustin. :ow To Do Thin2s with 8ords. Chan2e . '<). .afka is the same as a 1component of passa2e1 in # Thousand Plateaus. '<) U')<. like content and e!pression. ?. %n the ST#T5B54T & nonc + see # Thousand Plateaus.<. pp. 0 D%: See Thomas Pynchon. <<. :e omits that the line of causality of sayin2s is discontinuous because it is punctuated by doin2s. '@. 7. <'. if fully elaborated. ?) U?<M??.. )?V. . is a fundamentally different sense of cause from that used in physical causation by pressure. 0 use C%445CT%D in a different sense than Deleuze and Guattari in . U''*VF on the D%H>75 #DT0CH7#T0%4 &a term borrowed from the lin2uist #ndr Bartinet+. '-)M'-( U'-*M '-@.?M. .M?(.afka. . <*.-M. . 0t is probably the ori2inal sense of "cause"1 &p. %n the B#C:040C #SS5B>7#G5 and the C%775CT0Q5 #SS5B>7#G5 %F 54H4C0#T0%4. # 1connector1 in . etc.
desires.brou2ht about throu2h the nonphysical causality is attributed to thin2s. . %n 0BP70C0T PD5SHPP%S0T0%4S.M((V. p. 0D5%7%G=: 1To presuppose a certain content is to make the acceptance of that content a precondition for further dialo2ue. e/en thou2h it is enacted in words. They cite >akhtin as sayin2 that lan2ua2e is the form of ideolo2y. (<M(( U9@M<-. and interests of the listener. U(. <?. but ne/ertheless meet at a 2i/en point A that point bein2 the ""break1 &fractal abyss+ markin2 the operation of the [ Pa2e '?< abstract machine.V. 0D5%7%G=: Deleuze and Guattari re6ect ideolo2ical conceptions of the link between power and lan2ua2e. it is a 6uridical or institutional transformation1 &Ducrot. ))M). <<. pp. %ne can easy read this in DeleuzeMGuattarian terms as the mutual inter/ention &reciprocal presupposition+ of asymptotic lines of causality: lines that follow different tra6ectories &body$to$body /ersus statement$to$statement+ and e/en belon2 to different orders of reality &matter and ideality+. )) U(. Dire et nepas dire. and %swald Ducrot. Deleuze de/elops the notion of D%H>75 C#HS#70T= at 2reat len2th in 7o2ic of Sense &see esp. **M*<+. Dire et ne pas dire. . the performati/e and the illocutionary. see # Thousand Plateaus. This is not a causal transformation tied to the fact that any enunciation influences the beliefs. passim &the e!ample de/eloped here is on pp. p. pp. <9. %n the contrary. . ''?M*'VF for Deleuze and Guattari on #ustin. see # Thousand Plateaus. 0t inter/enes in the line of physical causality A which is therefore also discontinuous. . ('+. *9M*). The chain of body$to$body relations is broken by a break in statement$to$statement causality.
but that the form of ideolo2y is not itself ideolo2ical &# Thousand Plateaus. Forms of content and forms of e!pression ha/e substance. 0deolo2ies do e!ist. passim.1 Semiotic formations are awash in e!tralin2uistic. This is a way of sayin2 that lan2ua2e is the form of e!pression of power relations in society. but that as a form of e!pression it is nothin2 outside of the 1forms of content1 &/ertical and horizontal+ with which it is in reciprocal presupposition. ?*?n*' U''9n')V+. 8hat distin2uishes an ideolo2ical meanin2 from any other e/aporati/e effect is only the re2ularity with which a society produces it. Connotation is the embeddin2 of an implicit 5!pressionLContent relation in an e!plicit or . structures of meanin2 in the sense of e/aporati/e end effect. on the three syntheses. Pa2e '?? The way in which a statement en/elops a literal meanin2 and a lo2ical presupposition should not be confused with what Doland >arthes calls C%44%T#T0%4 and defines as the form of ideolo2y. 0ts functionin2 cannot fully be e!plained by recourse to a concept of ideolo2y as formati/e a2ent of speech and belief. p. #n ideolo2ical statement is more a precipitate than a precipitator. see :abit. For more detail on re2ularizin2 processes of semiotic formation. That re2ularity is the work of a double$sided abstract machine A of power and of lin2uistic e!pression &simultaneously a ""machinic assembla2e1 and a 1collecti/e assembla2e of enunciation1+. but their rules of formation are not coe!tensi/e with those of lan2ua2e or power: they are end results of processes at work on other le/els. preideational A and therefore pre$ideolo2ical A fields of force. and they and their substances arise in a cocausal 1combat of ener2ies. Power can be concei/ed as lan2ua2e$dri/en but not lan2ua2e$based.
Qolosino/ U>akhtinV. (<M'-?+. is 5LC. 4. pp.denotati/e one. pp. then connotation would be 5&5LC+LC &SLN. Despite his use of :6elmsle/"s /ocabulary. The Sub6ect of Semiotics+. photo &fla2Lpatriotism+Lcloth. @M''+. 0f the formula for denotation. or literal referential meanin2. >arthes"s form of ideolo2y is ideolo2ical. and the connotati/e. in common with >akhtin.a6a Sil/erman. For e!ample. 0n other words. whose concept of meanin2 as an e/aluati/e ""theme1 that has a uni3ue and unreproducible directional effect in a concrete situation can be compared to the order$word"s 1unity$in$mo/ement1 as described abo/eF see Q. they doubly e!clude what they set . :is connotati/e content is a 1si2nified1: the process of connotation is purely lin2uistic. pp. e!tralin2uistic act en/eloped in the statement. dependin2 on whether the focus is the 1social1 or the 1indi/idual1F a useful e!ample is . a photo2raph of a fla2: the denotati/e relation would be photoLcloth. 0n so doin2. **9M9'F for Ducrot"s criti3ue of >en/eniste. 1Patriotism1 would be an implicitly con/eyed content. Bany semiotics$influenced theories of ideolo2y combine >arthes"s internalization of power in lin2uistic structure and >en/eniste"s lin2uistification of sub6ecti/ity &typically with /aryin2 doses of #lthusser and 7acan thrown in. )-M)?+. Bar!ism and the Philosophy of 7an2ua2e. 8hat falls out of >arthes"s e3uation is precisely the immediately transformational. 5mile >en/eniste makes an analo2ous mo/e in relation to #ustin when he ar2ues that performati/e utterances are purely self$referential and that the act they perform is nothin2 other than the constitution of the speakin2 sub6ect in discourse &see 1Sub6ecti/ity in 7an2ua2e. >arthes"s orientation is entirely different from Deleuze and Guattari"s. see Dire et ne pas dire. pp. and produces its effect in the first and last instance on the le/el of ideas. :is formulas lea/e no room for the nondiscursi/e dimension Deleuze and Guattari insist on &a2ain.1 in Problems in General 7in2uistics.
#ustin speaks at len2th of the con/entional or D0TH#7 aspects of P5DF%DB#T0Q5S. *@. >ecause they place the functionin2 of power primarily on a dematerialized lin2uistic or sub6ecti/e plane they end up doin2 little more than idealizin2 the formations of power they set out to criti3ue. (?. The #rchaeolo2y of .. ?-. )?M . %n what is tau2ht in the schools as con/eyin2 %DD5D$ 8%DDS.(. see 7"%rdre du discours.-. p. see Bichel Foucault. pp. or 1power. ?*. esp. '9<V. %n the %DD5D$8%DD. <(.U(?M''9. <@M<).@+. %n the #4%4=B%HS BHDBHD &a phrase of Foucault"s+. '. pp. @*. '-@M''. %n T:5 101 as the marker of a social function. p. but he a/oids the ob/ious political conclusions by ne/er linkin2 them to mechanisms of social control: see. %n education &and by e!tension all institutionalized speech A and all speech to the e!tent that it is institutional UDucrot. '-)M'-. see Deleuze. '--M'-' .<. The 575B54T#D= H40T %F 7#4GH#G5: # Thousand Plateaus. The concept of the Q0DTH#7 comes most directly from >er2son. '<'M?(.M'(. . Foucault &'(. The concept is borrowed from Qolosino/ &>akhtin+. pp. pp. <. )@ U(?V. %n FD55 04D0D5CT D0SC%HDS5 &or 13uasi$indirect discourse1+. Bar!ism and the Philosophy of 7an2ua2e. ?9. <). :ow To Do Thin2s with 8ords. see # Thou$sand Plateaus. Pa2e '?@ <@. note <* abo/eV+ as ritual. ??M@*. Foucault is less restrained. '-@ U'-'. and is assimilated by Deleuze to Spinoza"s potentia. '9?M9(V. <*M<9. pp.nowled2e.out to e!plain: relations of force between bodies. .. ?'. )? U(?V. p. for e!ample. see # Thousand Plateaus.1 See >er2sonism. pp. see # Thousand Plateaus.
@(.M'-(. The prelin2uistic si2ns which 2i/e it e!pression are in a lan2ua2e that has only one speaker &more a 6ar2on than a lan2ua2e+. ''-M''' U'9<M9?V. ??. p. ()M'-< U'9<M<9VF see also Diff rence et r P tition. <(9M ?-). pp.9 U(*M'''VF and Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. pp.1 %n 6ar2on and prelin2uistic or . <(-. p. pp. *)<. pp. ?-M?). 9)9 U<<. # partial ob6ect is the site of what 0 called a 1D5P5T0T0%4$0BPH7S0%4. 9'.M@(. *)*M)@. *@(. *@@M@). %n the /irtual in relation to 7eibniz &the inherence of all monads in each+. Cinema 00. @( U(<V. see 7o2ic of Sense. pp. 99(M<-+.'. *9n. <. # partial ob6ect is a libidinally in$ Pa2e '?) /ested ob6ecti/e perspecti/e of one body on another &or of one part of a body on another part.. ?@. 9?)M?.1 which is the tendency of a traumatized body to reduce its libidinal e/ents as much as possible to one of their three simultaneous moments or dimensions &the past+. secs. which may be on that same body or a different one+. and 7e Pli. *. '<-M<'. Diff rence et r p tition. '-. see :abit. p. For more on part$ob6ects.U9@M9).U)9M)<V.1 0t is a pri/ate order$ word. ?<. ?'. '-9M'-?VF Cinema 00.V.M. 9-@M9-). and Proust and Si2ns. "">urp. 17ibidinally in/ested1 means prone to be repeated. Deleuze and Guattari rename the 1part$ ob6ects1 of psychoanalysis P#DT0#7 %>C5CTS. @. ?)M@. ??@.'. pp. *?). and Deleuze. the 6uncture at which power and lan2ua2e meet on and for an indi/idual body. The repetition$impulsion is not to be confused with Freud"s 1repetition$compulsion. @9@ &pp.. For 4ietzsche on P5DSP5CT0Q5 as an interaction of real selecti/e forces. 0n #nti$%edipus. #n ob6ecti/e perspecti/e is also called an %>C5CT0Q5 077HS0%4 or 1ob6ecti/e dissimulation1: see #nti$%edipus. 9-'. *)-M)'. see The 8ill to Power.
or better. '*@M*). pp. 9*)M9* on thou2ht carryin2 a thin2 outside itself by reproducin2 its essential dynamism in its own substance. p.M'*-V:1effects Uthou2hts or perceptionsV are indeed thin2s. 9.. pp.@+. the 3uantum wa/es crossin2 the brain"s synaptic fissures..1#SlG40F=04G1 S0G4S of desire. Foucault &'(.+ The assertion of substance allows Deleuze and Guattari to maintain that the proposition that thou2ht$ perception is always real and of the outside applies e/en to fantasy: if a fantasy has substance. ?@. or body with e!tension &thou2ht and perception ha/e only 1intension. and its apprehension by another thou2ht$body is as real as the perception of an ob6ect. ?'. 9<9V. and Foucault. see #nti$%edipus. *.lossowski or >odies$7an2ua2e1 &7o2ic of Sense. (?. &Today. p. '*(. ('M(* U''. p. Foucault &'(.. (*M(9. it is a body. ibid. ?* U)9VF on perception as ha/in2 the same substance as thou2ht. in other words real bein2s with an essence and e!istence of their own. *. '*-. # Thousand Plateaus. D5F75CT0%4+. p. pp. '-< U'<*VF on a thou2ht as a body.@+. one mi2ht in/oke the in/olutions of brain matter. pp. 1The Thou2ht from %utside.1 or /irtual realityF they are real but not ob6ecti/e+. Deleuze"s essay 1.1 %n thou2ht and e!tension as different substances. See the definition of 1mode1 in Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. ibid. of course.( U<@. 0n this essay Deleuze calls the ob6ect"s constitutional openness to 2raspin2 and manipulation by thou2ht F75CT0%4 &the process of its reproduction in thou2ht is.-M9-' U9*?M?-V+ co/ers many of these issues: see esp. pp. . . The D5PT:S %F B#TT5D: Deleuze and Guattari &followin2 both Spinoza and 7eibniz+ do indeed assert that P5DC5PT0%4 #4D T:%HG:T :#Q5 SH>ST#4C5.1 FoucaultL>lanchotF on the outside of thou2ht as atmospheric.@ U''-VF on thou2ht as %HTS0D5.
see Foucault &'(.1 if properly understood. ?. ?. 1insister1 is translated as 1inhere1+. 9?(. '*(F #nti$%edipus. in the . and 7o2ic of Sense. p. since it does not e!plicitly account for each potential actualization. # fuller e!pression would de/elop the series of actualizations implicit in the infiniti/e into a continuum of /ariation &for e!ample. pp. '?*. U'9?M9@V. p. %n C%BP70C#T0%4 /ersus 0BP70C#T0%4. '. if carefully used. and 7o2ic of Sense. %n the %DD5D$8%DD #S D5#T: S54T54C5. see Diff rence et r p tition.@+. pp. pp. pp. e!presses the realm of possibility of marria2e. pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. *(@ U9@9V.. %n SH>SlST54C5 &also called 1insistence1+. 0t is possible for e/ery 10 do1 to be uni3ue. neither is it ine!act. '''. because it does not o/erstep the limits beyond which an essentially different e/ent transpires.Pa2e '?. ''?. yet actualize 1rou2hly1 the same interrelation of relations. 5/ery essence is in any case ane!act by nature because the actualizations it en/elops are in principle infinite. Such a dia2ram is not e!act. 5/ery /ariation fallin2 between the two relati/e thresholds of a meanin2 can be subsumed in a sin2le dia2ram or statement. '-)M'-. pp. %n the H4T0B57=. pp..M<(. *-*. The infiniti/e &1to marry1+ is the most economical way of e!pressin2 an essence because it connotes ri2or but by its /ery name con/eys limitlessness. because 10 do. ?(. ''-. 0t is calculated to be ane!act. to precisely span a ran2e of /irtuality. *() U9<?V. @-.U'9. '9<. '<. see # Thousand Plateaus. The concept of ane!actitude allows one"s analysis to function at a certain le/el of 2enerality without losin2 si2ht of the multiplicity immanent to each uni3ue speech act. %n D5#T: #S C%5OT54S0Q5 80T: 70F5. *''V &on pa2e ? of the 5n2lish. '-*. 99-M9' U9(<M(@VF and Diff rence et r p tition. ?). >ut. see Diff rence et r p tition. '@'M@*.
?..1 The ima2e these phrases in/oke is of a set of mutually e!clusi/e linear tra6ectories throu2h the woad coe!istin2 in a state of potential. see Deleuze. . see 7o2ic of Sense.antian 1schema1+. # Thousand Plateaus. had been carried a sta2e further and these primary 3ualities had themsel/es become secondary to the property of potentia in which they all lay latent1 &3uoted in C. as if crumpled into a superchar2ed bundle bristlin2 with ener2y. %n #45O#CT0THD5 and 1Q#GH5"" 5SS54C5 &a term coined by :usserl+. U<?<M??.'+. The path the body follows can be represented 2raphically as an arrow passin2 between two ad6acent points &# Thousand Plateaus. ''?. ('. p. one of the in/entors of 3uantum mechanics. pp. @'. it breaks from the bundle.9+. %n SHP5D7045#D0T=. '*'V. ?-)M?-. (? U'-. see # Thousand Plateaus. p. EH#4THB 75#P: 8erner :eisenber2. 9@). For more on . The Euantum 8orld.M*(V. The .V. C. which in/ol/ed discardin2 secondary 3ualities &color. in/oked a concept of potentia to describe the /irtual reality of the 3uantum le/el of matter as it emer2es from ener2y: Pa2e '?( 1it is as thou2h the pro2ram of Galileo and 7ocke. strikin2 out into the world of actuality.54 7045 %F >5C%B04G.+ in fa/or of primary 3ualities &the 3uantities of classical mechanics+. ''<M'? U'9(M<-V. U*. or more ade3uately. p. @*. and &in relation to the . 8hen one of those tra6ectories finds a body to e!press it.form of an ordered array of literal dia2rams. etc. as an e3uation or set of 5n2lish instructions for the 2eneration of any number of 2radated dia2rams+. . *(<n.ant"s schema. taste. Polkin2horne. The superlinearity of the abstract machine is also e!pressed in the phrases 1#>STD#CT 70451 and 1>D%. pp. . '. <-)M<-.ant"s Critical Philosophy.
)@ U(@V. @9. '9-M99VF for the criti3ue of the notion of a ST#4D#DD 7#4GH#G5. %n the abstract line and the broken line. <'(. For the criti3ue of lin2uistic C%4ST#4TS. p. and away from the actual and /irtual states of certain other bodies. pp.V. *@? U9*<VF and Foucault &'(.. 04F%DB#T0%4: # Thousand Plateaus. mi2ht o/erpower the body$in$becomin2. 5/ery becomin2 runs the risk of all or part of its transformational potential bein2 anne!ed to a forei2n body throu2h a process of forcible repotentialization &capture+. and '-. *@. The bodily coordinates in the actual world throu2h which the body$in$becomin2 mo/es en/elop other potential tra6ectories still crumpled in the ball of /irtuality. pp. p. '**. seen from the point of /iew of their own pathmakin2 capacity. pp. Pa2e '@@<. ibid. 9?(n@). '-9M'-? U''@M*).points represent other actual bodies around which the body in becomin2 na/i2ates. 9. @*'M*<V. (*M'--. <<. 9@?M@@. %n the %45. *(.. see # Thousand Plateaus. '--M'-9 U'*)M9'VF on C%4T04H%HS Q#D0#T0%4.M'-(. *(<n. @*. p. reen/elopin2 its tra6ectory A but at their coordinates. see Diff rence et r P tition. 9??. @?. and Diff rence et r p tition. pp. ibid. '<(. pp. pp. .@+. if not passed by. see # Thousand Plateaus. as an an2le on the /irtual+. The line of becomin2 is ""abstract1 because its linear directionality can only be concei/ed or dia2rammed in relation to other lines remainin2 in a state of en/elopment &in other words. *(9M(<. <?.. 9<-.9. '?* U'). 9@( U'9)M9.V &1on1 is translated in this passa2e as 1they1+F # Thousand Plateaus. <()M(( U9?(M@-. from one actual state of a body toward another. 9?*M?<.*F 7o2ic of Sense. Those bodies. 0t is 1broken1 because the path taken is a breakaway of potential: a zi2za2 from the /irtual into the actual. ').
@V.. Deleuze and Guattari"s criti3ue of the S0G40F05D is de/eloped throu2hout #nti$%edipus &see esp. it tends to submer2e the all$important concept of /irtual$actual by such word choices as 1particular element1 and 1particular feature1 for 1sin2ularit . 450T:5D Q0S0>75 4%D :0DD54: Foucault. Se\n :and UBinneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. p. most notably: rehabilitate his much mali2ned #rchaeolo2y of . pp. *. '<'M<)V. *-?M*-(. 1d"aprIs un principe de parcimonie1 becomes 1be2rud2in2ly1 and 1le possible1 becomes 1sense of possibility1+. '')+.<M.. The #rchaeolo2y of . Hnfortunately.(V+.1 1e/olution1 for 1de/enir1 &becomin2+. @(. and in # Thousand Plateaus. *?+. The translation should be used with caution. the 5n2lish translation &Foucault..1 1realization1 for 1actualisation. Such a rereadin2 of F%HC#H7T would.nowled2e by helpin2 to clarify its philosophical underpinnin2sF and correct the impression that Foucault is reducible to a philosopher of lan2ua2e by hi2hli2htin2 the ne2lected role in his work of 1nondiscursi/e formations1 &institutions understood as forms of content+ and 1/isibilities1 &what 0 ha/e called 1/ertical content""F in this connection. Foucault U'(. 1which is con/entionally translated as 1machinic1+ and sub6ecti/ism &in one passa2e.1 1medium1 for 1milieu1+. 704GH0ST0CS #S 04SHFF0C054T7= #>STD#CT: ibid... p. ''*M') U. p. '(. The appearance of Deleuze"s book on Foucault should 2o a lon2 way toward moti/atin2 a reassessment. @). and both mechanism &1machine$like1 for 1machini3ue. pp.V+ sometimes obscures key philosophical distinctions Deleuze takes pain to make.). see Foucault U'(. @. (-M(' U''?V.nowled2e..@@. %ther slippa2es reintroduce a communicational model of lan2ua2e &1transmission1 for 1 mission. *<'M<< U*<9M<. and by phraseolo2y assimilatin2 /irtuality to possibility. pp.)M. 0n . Bost seriously.@V. '-( &3uoted in Deleuze. @?M@. trans.
pp.1 7an2ua2e. >oth of these points are de/eloped below &althou2h not directly in relation to Foucault+.1 becomin2 other+ is primary in relation to power rather than a deri/ed response to it. in an escape from . can be had by referrin2 to 7"%rdre du discours. p. 0n 1Coldness and Cruelty. Proust. D%G Q%B0T: Samuel >eckett. as seen from Foucault"s side.1 Deleuze analyzes two hi2hly elaborated kinds of C%7D45SS &that of the masochist. :abit '. Deleuze and Guattari state their areas of disa2reement with Foucault in # Thousand Plateaus. See also Foucault"s brilliant re/iew of 7o2ic of Sense and Diff rence et r p tition: 1Theatrum Philosophicum.. and the sadist"s 1apathy1+ as strate2ies for chillin2 humanity in order to reconnect with intenser pleasures. # 3uick indication of the philosophical o/erlap between Deleuze and Foucault. pp. For the confluences with Deleuze and Guattari"s political thinkin2. ?.M@'. Counter$Bemory. force is more fundamentally a phenomenon of D5S0D5 &which is not a personal phenomenon. but rather the conte!tual impulsion or unity$ in$mo/ement immanent to lan2ua2e+ than of P%85D &which as we ha/e seen is a network of elaborated forces operatin2 in a certain impulsi/e mode+F and second. Practice. *.. where Foucault describes his celebrated Pa2e '@' historical 1breaks1 as incorporeal 1e/ents1 and speaks of ""cesurae1 in a /ocabulary similar to the /ocabulary of fractalization adopted here. ?9'n9( U')?M)@nV: first.the present work. see 10ntellectuals and Power1 in the same /olume. D5S0ST#4C5 &1escape. p. . 0 ha/e chosen to 2i/e pa2e references only to the French. '@(M(.
'')M'( U?-M?*. )@M). # third usa2e of cold &this time in/ol/in2 dru2s+ as the de2ree zero of sub6ecti/e reconstruction is described in # Thousand Plateaus. ''-. For the criti3ue of phenomenolo2y.. <*9M*<V. This will become clearer later in this chapter. see Diff rence et r p tition. pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. esp. 9<9 U'9. see Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. pp. *-. '')M*-V+. %n the #>STD#CT B#C:045 as synthesizer. *)(M. p. pp.@+. .(. ?. see #nti$%edipus. Pa2e '@* 9. 1Coldness and Cruelty. in the section comparin2 sub6ecti/ity to inhumanly warm water. 9<*M<9 U99*M<*. %n the concept of the 04D0Q0DH#7. pp.1 1superindi/idual1+ are e!trapolations which do not occur in Deleuze and Guattari"s own work.). *?< U9'-M''VF and 7e Pli.M9' U*?9M. passim. p.<M. pp. <' U??V. .1 1indi/idual. esp. ')(.warmed$o/er %edipal normality &Deleuze.M('V. '-(M'' U'99M9?VF Diff rence et r p tition. pp. p. see # Thousand Plateaus. <. 9')F # Thousand Plateaus. pp. #lthou2h intensity and sensation are on the le/el of the complicated causality from which sub6ecti/ity arises. Deleuze and Guattari"s use of terms such as 1intensity1 and 1sensation1 should not be mistaken for a back$door return to sub6ecti/ity as understood by P:54%B54%7%G=: a field of untamed e!perience 2roundin2 conscious thou2ht. p. '@(M)-VF 7o2ic of Sense.1 in Deleuze and Sacher$Basoch. and # Thousand Plateaus. pp. %n S5D0B54T. '*?M*@ U'-(M''. @. %n B%7#D and B%75CH7#D. they ha/e nothin2 to do with the phenomenolo2ical concept of ori2inary e!perience.M<-. ?'M?*. Basochism. passim. '?*M ?< U'. esp. <-(M''V. ''@M'(.9V. The e!act terms employed in this discussion &1supple indi/idual. and Foucault &'(..
M9(. *-. see #nti$%edipus.. 1theater mask1+ e!presses its nature as a 2eneralizin2 o/erlay. ?)*. F5T0S:0SB. includin2 but not limited to surplus /alue in the Bar!ist sense. '))M). pp. ibid. see #nti$ %edipus. The French consommation encompasses both 1consumption1 and 1consummation.. '-. ?9. 9'<. %n the /arieties of surplus /alue. as described by Bar!. 0ts etymolo2y &from the 7atin persona. pp. '-?M '-@ U'99M9<V and Diff rence et r p tition. %n the human le/el. it is the miraculous powers attributed to capital as a fetish. <'<. '9. <<@M<)V. %n the PD%DHCT0%4 %F PD%DHCT0%4. ''<M'.1 1nobody1+.).1 ''.(. )-. pp. @'9M'<V. pp.1 see # Thousand Plateaus. %n the person as ""4%>%D=. '(*M(9. '@ U**V. pp. and surplus /alue. *?9F for the 2enesis of the person as C#T5G%D= &12eneral concept. '-. see 7o2ic of Sense. U'9(M<9. (. ?@9. %n Bar!.@.1 1e!tensi/e class1+ from the indi/idual &1class with one member1+.. . '@9M@<. *@(M)-. '@9M@<. The P5DS%4 as empty cate2ory is inscribed in the semantic ambi/alence of the French personne &1person.M*-(V. pp.*... Deleuze and Guattari reco2nize se/eral forms of SHDP7HS Q#7H5. **<. <('M(* U'). 99@. and # Pa2e '@9 Thousand Plateaus.1 0n the case of economic surplus /alue. That Ban is the model of 1molar1 &phallocentric+ human identity is de/eloped below. *)@M. p. *9*M9@ 9)* U')@. <?. 9. the surplus /alue sensation always takes the form of a 1presti2e. '. '?-. . @M) U'*M'9VF the phrase 1PD%DHCT0%4 %F D5C%DD04G1 occurs on p.V. '-M'* U'@M'. The B#SCH7045 PD%4%H4 is retained here because the function of the 6ud2e is patriarchal re2ardless of the se! of the body fulfillin2 it. <?'. **@M*.
9'9 U9. Deleuze distin2uishes between se/eral kinds of foldin2. '(. 99. pp. . pp. *-(M '-. and # Thousand Plateaus.. pp.'V. see # Thousand Plateaus.afka put it1F 1The strata are the 6ud2ment of God1 &# Thousand Plateaus. %n D%H>75 #DT0CH7#T0%4 in its simplest form. p. %n F%7D04G. '9?M9@. <'M<*. 15/ery order$word carries a death sentence A a CHDGB54T. %n C%D5 and B0705H. <9-VF # Thousand Plateaus. U??. U*@@V.'*. see # Thousand Plateaus.@+. The 7o2ic of 7ife.. %n C%D5 and F%DB. <'M<*. ideal without bein2 abstract1 &abstract in the sense of an empty concept+: see Proust. <'. *?? U??M?@.(. <')V. pp. <-M<' U??V. pp. see #nti$%edipus. *--M'9 U*9@M ?*V. 10deal yet effecti/eF absolute yet differentiated. @* U?)M?. see # Thousand Plateaus. p. '(. see 7o2ic of Sense. pp. *)'M)<V. passim. 1D5#7 80T:%HT >504G #CTH#7. 9?.M)(F #nti$ %edipus. pp.. p. 7e Pli. @'M@*. ?) &translation modified+ U)9M )<VF # Thousand Plateaus. pp. For present purposes. Deleuze and Guattari often 3uote Proust"s phrase. '--M'-'. The concepts of territorializationLdeterritorializationLreterritorialization. these are reduced to 1infoldin21 &foldin2 resultin2 in a more or less bounded space+. as .. . (( U(@V. <@M<).<V. '). '?. *@)M@. %n the syntheses of C577H7#D >0%7%G=. *). *'. pp. '))M). <' U(@. p. *?(nVF Diff rence r p tition. and # Thousand Plateaus. and decodin2Lrecodin2 are de/eloped throu2hout these two books and . ***M*< U??M?@.M?(. ?<V+. p. see Fran]ois Cacob. pp. *<)M(.M)-. '@. '-'M9-. <*.M?( U'*-. 9??M?@n9 U*9-. '9. pp. %n %Q5DC%D04G.. pp. .. '@. )@M). (< U''(VF Diff rence et r p tition. '99M<-F and Deleuze. p. )@. 9'*VF Foucault &'(.. 9'(. '<. ?.afka.1 # Thousand Plateaus. '. *@(F and >er2sonism.
. note @*. *<. pp. ?-'M'@ U?9M(<. there is a whole series of inte2rations. 9<M9. . >ut there is no breach either in the . p. They fa/or 04T5GD#T0%4 &especially in earlier works by Deleuze such as Diff rence et re P titionF the term should be understood in the mathematical sense. built by a series of inte2rations . 7i/in2 bein2s thus construct themsel/es in a series of successi/e "parcels. S5P#D#T0%4: 15ach le/el of or2anization represents a threshold where ob6ects." They are arran2ed accordin2 to a hierarchy of discontinuous units. . as a function. . abo/e. P5DC5PT0%4 #CTH#70N5S: 0lya Pri2o2ine and 0sabelle Sten2ers. Pa2e '@< **.5T. The most condensed presentation of Deleuze and Guattari"s theories of STDHCTHD#T0%4 are to be found in # Thousand Plateaus. . '@9. *'. The process bein2 described here is the 1breakaway1 of potential discussed in Force..1 C%445CT0%4: 1From particle to man. . '9*9. a cur/e 6oinin2 discrete points+. SC054T0STS P5DTHD>: Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. 5ntre le temps et l" ernit . . of le/els. They rarely use the word 1structuration1 due to the totalizin2 connotations it often has. @*@M<'V &1The Geolo2y of Borals1 and 1Conclusion: Concrete Dules and #bstract Bachines1+. see Polkin2horne. Construction in successi/e sta2es . and STD#T0F0C#T0%4 &# Thousand Plateaus+. 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . 9(M)<. The Euantum 8orld. For a 2eneral treatment of the C%77#PS5 %F T:5 8#Q5$P#C. pp. methods and conditions of obser/ation suddenly chan2e.*-. of discontinuities. p. Phenomena that are reco2nizable at one le/el disappear at the lower le/elF their interpretation is no lon2er /alid at a hi2her le/el.
*V. p. 9*'+. pp. The wasp is an inte2ral part of of the orchid"s reproducti/e . pp. UTVhere is no complete break Ubetween cultural le/elsV and the le/els of biolo2y1 &Cacob. %n C575D0T#S /ersus GD#Q0T#S. is badly translated A as is the rest of the para2raph A as 1dependent 2roup1+. p. 9-?. p. %n #FF0DB#T0%4. <?'M?<VF and # Thousand Plateaus. 9(M)* U<<M. *@?M@@. 999. 1Trois problImes de 2roup1 &translated as 1Three Group Problems"" by Bark Seem. Semiote!t&e+. *. where 12roupe assu6etti. ?@)V.composition of the ob6ects or in the reactions that take place in themF no chan2e in "essence". pp.+ were introduced by Guattari in his essay 17a Trans/ersalit 1 &'(@<+. U)?. *). ')'M(< U'()M***V. ibid. 9)?M). . imposed meanin2$effect.M<(. 9). The concepts of SH>C5CT5D GD%HP and SH>C5CT$ GD%HP &see pp. see 4ietzsche and Philosophy. See Deleuze"s preface to that collection.9 &'())+. The 7o2ic of 7ife. . . Bolar redundancy is a limitati/e. The D5DH4D#4C= of molarity Pa2e '@? should also be distin2uished from the redundancy of the e/ent of meanin2 as discussed abo/e. p. pp. Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit . see # Thousand Plateaus.. 9-. ''@ U'<@V. #nti$%edipus *. *. )@ &Bolecular De/olution. '<.U'(9M*-9V. %n the P7#45 %F TD#4SC54D54C5.*. pp. 9<?. see Proust and Si2ns. *@. %n the 8:%75 #S #P#DT from the parts it unifies. '<*M?. pp. ((M'-(+F #nti$%edipus.-. *. see # Thousand Plateaus. %n D5#CT0Q5 and #CT0Q5. *?. <?< U9*?M*@...U<@-V.'M. @9ff.1 or sub6ected 2roup. @<. *@@. 9<. Deleuze and Guattari"s fa/orite e!ample of an H44#THD#7 C%HP704G are the 8#SP and the %DC:0D. *(. 9-*. <')M '. pp.
9(.. 9*.system and morpholo2y. '9-M9. Sten2ers. 9*9 U<). 9. Pri2o2ine was a ma6or influence on Guattari"s work in the late ei2hties: see Guattari. <-. 99(. . eds. Temps et de/enir: # Partir de l"oeu/re d"0lya Pri2o2ine. 9'. see # Thousand Plateaus. <?. %n the D%H>75$P04C5D5D D%B04#T0%4 %F STDHCTHD#T0%4.( &the passa2e in 3uestion is not included in the 5n2lish book based on this work. p. See also Deleuze. Guattari assimilates the concept of PD%C5SS in #nti$ %edipus &passim. 9(). pp. pp. See Proust and Si2ns.$P. 17es 5ner2 ti3ues s mioti3ues. pp. ?*M @<. The science of 4%45EH070>D0HB T:5DB%D=4#B0CS is dedicated to 6ust such phenomena. ..)M. p. 99. %rder out of Chaos &4ew =ork: >antam. *(9M(< U*-. . pp. 0. '*. and 5ntre le temps et l" ternit .-M'(.(.?.?VF and # Thousand Plateaus. 9@-V. 9. *'<M'). 0ts founder.. the orchid uses the wasp for fertilization &they con6oin alimentary and reproducti/e functions+.?. . The orchid"s patternin2 1mimics1 a wasp &their forms con6oin+F the orchid is hermaphroditic and the wasp heterose!ual &they con6oin reproducti/e systems+F the wasp uses the orchid for food. pp. <*@M*. esp. @''M'9V. U9'?V &1unnatural participation1+. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. pp.)V. pp. Pourparlers. P. pp. '@)M@. ibid. Qincke. <9.U'@<VF #nti$%edipus. *?. U'??M@*V with Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers" 1D0SS0P#T0Q5 STDHCTHD51 &defined later in this chapter+ in 7es ann es d"hi/er: '(. @-.1 in C. @(. %n FD55 #CT0%4. 0lya Pri2o2ine. <(-M(' U<(<. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. *. '-. @9. This D0SS0P#T0Q5 STDHCTHD5 is called the 1> nard instability1: see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. '(. *(9. >rans. reprinted in Carto2raphies schizoanalyti3ues. p. @) U?<.<+. pp.. See also # Thousand Plateaus. @)M(*. e!presses an affinity with Deleuze in 0lya Pri2o2ine and 0sabelle Sten2ers.*. pp.
'9-. pp. ')(. *(?. @9'V.. *'?. *@9M@<. pp. 9)*F 7o2ic of Sense. 9@. .. see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. *'*.V. pp. '-9. @-. '99M9. '('. *''.?F on #BP70F0C#T0%4. '-(M*-. see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. ')(. pp. For Deleuze and Guattari on 4%47%C#70N#>75 70#0S%4S. ')<. ?9(M<-. %n #TTD#CT%DS. *-9. **9M*<. 9<)F 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . *'. '<-M<* U'. <99. <*. ?(M@?. <(. pp. 9?@. see 7a 4ou/elle alliance. '@*M @9. pp. *)*M)<. and 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . **(. *?). *-<. @(..@. *@@M@). *9( U'*?. 9?. **<M*?. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. '99. '@@. pp. For Deleuze and Guattari on resonance &as de/eloped in the remainder of the present chapter: the interaction between the actual and the /irtual as resonance. The instantaneousness of 2lobal resonances caused by a local disturbance in a supermolecule means that what Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers call a le/el of 1nonlinear1 &superlinear+ or 1delocalized1 relations has been added to the le/el of linear amplification from one local subindi/idual to another. Carto2raphies schizoanalyti3ues. *?(. 9@. ). '9<. see Proust and Si2ns. and 7e Pli. ?-@ U)?. pp. p. )*. '('M(*. '?. *'*. *. pp. '?<M??. )'M)*F and Guattari.M'(V &the third set of pa2e references from the re/ised French edition are not in the earlier 5n2lish translation+F Diff rence et r p tition. see 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . 7a 4ou/elle alliance. %n the S54S0T0Q0T= of dissipati/e structures. ?). (*. **@. interiority as resonance. pp. *)(VF # Thousand Plateaus. *'9.'M. 9@*. '. @*'.. pp. pp. For Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers on D5S%4#4C5. and 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . <9-M9'. *?(.@. see #nti$%edipus. 9?). and striation and molarity as ri2idly coordinated resonance+. 9-( &translation modified+ U9<'. '--M'-'. *?@. pp. ''.Pa2e '@@ 9<. *@'. *-(M'-.M?(.
See also 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . *@'M@? &animal species.'M.. 9. pp. *9-. 9(. pp. *9@. %n C%C#HS#70T= and the suppression of the duality between chance and determinacy. see Diff rence et r p tition. p. pp. . were "informed" of the system"s 2lobal state. 9<*. p. Pa2e '@) <-. pp. and 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. 9@*. p.M<-*. *9<M9?. and 5ntre temps et l" ternit . . @. %n FD#CT#7 #TTD#CT%DS and D54S5 P%04TS &also called 1sin2ular points1+. .M@(. <')M**. *9?M9@. pp. and 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . 9?'F 7o2ic of Sense. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. pp. *'@. . 99(.9). see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. <9. The dense points are none other than the mysterious S04GH7#D0T05S Deleuze analyzes &most notably in The . %n C%BP%SS0>070T= &a term from 7eibniz+. For e!amples of the theory of self$or2anizin2 D0SS0P#T0Q5 STDHCTHD5S applied to what are often considered B%7#D F%DB#T0%4S.< &climate+. pp. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. ibid. . ')'M)* U'9<M9?. 9*(. *9'. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. @-. )(M(-. pp. '9. <*. @'. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. pp. pp. the system be2ins to beha/e as a whole1: Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. '9. pp. see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. '''.. p. *@-M@9. . **@. their biochemistry and e/olution+. '*?M*@. *--M*-'VF 7e Pli. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. ''. <*?M*@. (?M(@. <'. D5S%4#4C5 and D5C%G40T0%4: 1#s if each molecule . see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. '<M'?. 9(. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. and 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . %n increased D5GD55S %F FD55D%B in dissipati/e systems. %n SHP5DB%75CH7#D0T= as a suppression of the duality between the molecular and the molar &the 1microscopic1 and the 1macroscopic1+. *9@. )9M)@.
99. .M9*.?. '?@. pp. pp.@+. '9M'<. U'(. but in ways that do not harmonize. **(. 9. <<.1 trans. See also Diff rence et r p tition. *. passim. 9*< U9@(n. Semiote!t&e+. ?-M?9. The abstract points of a DeleuzeMGuattarian D0#GD#B are e!pressions of these sin2ularities: see 7o2ic of Sense. pp.@M. see Gior2io #2amben. <@'. *@'. pp. pp. *@(M)<F #nti$ %edipus. 9-(n. . '')M9?+F # Thousand Plateaus. the turbulence in the /irtual is amplified to the point of an e!plosi/e contraction releasin2 an unima2inable amount of pure ener2y.? U'())V. . They theorize that the /irtual is inherently unstable because Pa2e '@. #nti$%edipus. 0n the absence of matter. but only to the e!tent that 3uantum mechanics and astrophysics are. 7a Communaut 3ui /ient: Th orie de la sin2ularit 3uelcon3ue. and in relation to part$ob6ects. esp. . . and in relation to P#DT$%>C5CTS.<M. <-?. pp.7o2ic of Sense+. pp..*. Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers apply the coresonance model to the debate on the ori2in of the uni/erse. ?-?. *'*. '**M 9*. For a brilliant post$Deleuzian presentation of the philosophy of sin2ularity. . <-. *'.@ U9<-V..'. '. 9)*. *. pp. <@*. '9@ U@?M@. at ma!imum entropy. *@-.).. '(<. Dobert :urley. '@'V. it may well be. <)?V &the last pa2e reference to the French edition cites an appendi! that was published separately in 5n2lish as 1>alance$Sheet Pro2ram for Desirin2$Bachines.-. '--M'-. *. 0f all this talk of Q0DTH#70T= and #CTH#70T= and resonance between them sounds mystical or mythic. *(. The ener2y is as .VF Foucault &'(. pp. it is composed of different particles that are in constant flu!. ''. ?-.).) &it is most re2rettable that the term 1sin2ularity1 tends to disappear in the 5n2lish translation of this book+F and 7e Pli.
creatin2 matter. 0t does not precede the present but is contemporaneous with it &pp. ?(M@' U??M?)V+. There is a time line or 1arrow of time1 &clinamen. e/en more. as many as the phenomena that will ha/e been born and died in those worlds A because the resonance between the /irtual and the actual ne/er ends. #fter the initial contraction$ dilation. see Force. pp. 1The "present" that endures di/ides at each "instant" into two . For Deleuze on 7ucretius and the clinamen. ?) U?*V+. and # Thousand Plateaus. or 1swer/e. '@)M@. &%n the eternal return. # uni/erse is born &and 7ucretius is /indicated+. pp. '. p. 9@'M@*. Bore accurately. pp. see 17ucretius and the Simulacrum.@.?M. For references to Deleuze on the eternal return. by pro/idin2 a dimension ri2id enou2h to limit it but fle!ible enou2h to absorb it. a past inaccessible but necessary to personal e!perience. and immediately dilates. abo/e. he calls the /irtual a PHD5 P#ST. 5ntre le temps et l" ternit .unstable as the /oid. see Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. The /irtual is the 1past in 2eneral that makes possible all pasts1 &>er2sonism.F on D5S%4#4C5 between the /irtual and actual.U<<@M<). '9-. <. there are many time lines. pp.1 in 7ucretius"s /ocabulary+ leadin2 out of the /oid throu2h the material world and back into the /oid. @'-M''V. as many as there are uni/erses that will ha/e been. Then it all starts o/er a2ain.(M (. 8hat we 2et in the form of 1chance1 and indeterminacy is o/erflow from the actual"s absorption of the /irtual. the material uni/erse 2oes on dilatin2 slowly until its future is consumed by its past and it disappears into ma!imum entropy. note 9'. The presence of matter muffles the turbulence by 2i/in2 it an outlet. This amounts to a scientifically deri/ed /ersion of 4ietzsche"s theory of the 5T5D4#7 D5THD4 %F D0FF5D54C5 that is /ery close to Deleuze"s philosophical /ersion.+ Deleuze supplements 4ietzsche with >er2son.1 7o2ic of Sense. Followin2 >er2son. *@@M *)( U9-)M*<V.
The present is the 1ti2htest.1 1neutral. '-. at each instance and at the e!tremes of history. :owe/er. 9@)M@. '@* U'. p. @9M @< U@-V+. is an Pa2e '@( in/erse ima2e of matter in its most rela!ed state: total entropy &see Diff rence et r p tition. The 1pure past1 at its deepest le/el is.+. accordin2 to which the /irtual is not 6ust an in/erse ima2e of the actual &a dilation of its contraction+ but has its own contractions and therefore resonates in its own ri2ht.VF each le/el can be thou2ht of as correspondin2 to the 1phase space1 of an actual stratum+F that althou2h it is indeterminate in relation to our world. The most dilated le/el of present.directions. it is far from undifferentiatedF and that actualization of the /irtual. one oriented &dilatin2+ toward the past. '**V+ A in other words. Batter and Bemory. From that 1pure past. This is not consistent with Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers"s perpetual turbulence model. ?* U<@V+. (?. the use of the word 1pure1 would probably trouble them. pp. Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers would probably a2ree that the /irtual can be concei/ed as ha/in2 le/els &as in >er2son"s famous cone dia2ram. the purest le/el of the pure past. 9'M9*.'V. *(< U'-.1 ""sterile. entropic. pp.1 Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers add. 0t is . @-. reproduced in the 5n2lish edition of Deleuze"s >er2sonism.1 1eternal1 &some of the most fre3uently repeated words in 7o2ic of Sense: see for e!ample pp. ?. ''@M'). a new future e!plodes: the /irtual is the end and be2innin2 of e/erythin2.U'9M'<. in Deleuze"s words. p.1 most 1contracted1 le/el of a future$past that coe!ists with it at /arious le/els of dilation. the contraction of the 1pure past. p. and in Cinema 00.1 is a 1translation1 of its mode of differentiation into ours &>er2sonism. <<M<?. 1impassi/e. the other contractin2 toward the future1 &p.
9 U)'M. 2in2erly perturbin2 a potential out of it when it needs one. #ctualization does not coa! /irtuality out of its impassi/ity. The only 1unity1 would be in the sense of a holdin2$to2ether of disparate elements &/irtual and actual+. This is the strate2y used in the present work.1 already discarded by >er2son in relation to the actual. 1Sterility1 would ha/e to be restricted to meanin2 in its aspect as a culminatin2 end effect. only function &see for e!ample # . # conse3uence of Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers"s theories is that there is no 1unified field. pp. '. p. would ha/e to be discarded for the /irtual as well. 5ntropy only applies to the actual &5ntre le temps et l" ternit . con/ertin2 to a cause and re6oinin2 the turbulent potential of the /irtual at its point of intersection with the actual.1 Deleuze and Guattari"s 1monism1 of matter$ener2y would ha/e to be interpreted to imply no stasis or homo2eneity on any le/el. with the understandin2 that the 1effect1 can be reinserted into the syntheses. the pure past 1in itself. p. see 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . )9M. resultin2 in a thorou2hly :eraclitean position. The entire concept of the 1in$itself. althou2h they are tainted somewhat by >er2son"s insistence that the /irtual at its 1purest1 le/el.more the flipside of matter than its in/erse ima2eF it is the same matter plun2ed into two different dimensions at the same time &on the 1rupture of the symmetry1 between the actual and /irtual. but instead holds its e!plosi/eness in check. That tendency is e!pressed in Deleuze and Guattari"s definitions of the abstract machine as ha/in2 no form or substance. '('+. :oldin2$to2ether is in fact the Pa2e ')predominant definition in Deleuze and Guattari"s work.9V+.(+.1 is monistic and only the actual has a multiplicity of time$ lines on all le/els &see >er2sonism.
outside our space of relati/ely stable matter and 3uantifiable ener2y. relati/ely stable dissipati/e system whose states can be described probabilistically. '*(M9-F and Foucault. and the /irtual would be outside their outside A in other words relati/e to it and mediated by it+. no fractal attractor can be detected A meanin2 that wakin2 life is 2o/erned by a fractal attractor of a dimensionality so hi2h that it is beyond bein2 an open system. The abstract machine in its /irtuality would be indeterminate in position and /elocity. it would be a PHD5 %HTS0D5. for e!ample+ are applied to human brainwa/e patterns. ?'' U')@. <?. '<'.1 1distant.1 1deep. (*M(9. (M?. pp. 0f the /irtual is a space of pure e!teriority. an outside so far out that it would ha/e no 1itself"" of any kind to be 1in1 &see Foucault &'(. re2ardless of whether those points are ad6acent to each other &otherwise some actual points would separate the /irtual from other actual points. 85 45Q5D C7%S5: 8hen methods de/eloped to calculate the fractional dimensionality of systems 2o/erned by fractal attractors &the weather. indicatin2 the presence of an open. 1Baurice >lanchot: The Thou2ht From %utside.04G state. the results are hi2hly su22esti/e.Thousand Plateaus. pp.+.1 would in fact lose all meanin2 in relation to the /irtual. but not 1in itself1: rather than a pure past. Terms like 1far. 0n deep S755P. then e/ery point in it is ad6acent to e/ery point in the actual world.@+. and 1le/el1 would ha/e to concei/ed nonspatially &as a de2ree of immanent /ibratory intensity+. @9)V+. pp. esp. passim. 0t is a hi2hly unstable dissipati/e .1 FoucaultL>lanchot. The later Deleuze and Guattari becomes increasin2ly consistent with this more >lanchotian position. Function with no form or substance to confine it would be a continually chan2in2. brainwa/e patterns are 2o/erned by a fractal attractor whose dimension is between four and fi/e. turbulent pool of matter$ener2y. 0n the 8#.
. 9@@. '. '-'. 9*<. '*(. 1me1: at this le/el.Pa2e ')' structure that can ne/er be scientifically described. ''?. %n D5DH4D#4C= and sub6ecti/ity.?M*-<. pp. **<V. pp. See also Deleuze. ?-@M?-. '?M'@F 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . )'. 9-. pp. 1P:#S5 SP#C51 dia2rams are used e!tensi/ely throu2hout both booksF for an e!planation of what one is. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. see # Thousand Plateaus. see 7a 4ou/elle alliance.). *(@M (). %n S54S#T0%4 as the C%4TD#CT0%4 or en/elopment of a plurality of le/els. and Deleuze. See Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. '-). The word translated as ""self1 is moi. '*9M*) and passim. passim. pp. 9.M*(. '--M'-*. '9*M99. <(. 9*?M*( U'?M*'. pp. '<(M@@. esp.lein. pp. see #nti$%edipus. 9(-M('VF on how Deleuze and Guattari"s /iew differs from that of Belanie . '-@M'-).. 9. U'. ?-.1 1passi/e self1+. see #nti$%edipus. '??. 9*@M*) U'*. see #nti$%edipus.?M. Francis >acon: 7o2i3ue de la sensation.. (M '?. )'M)9. see Diff rence et r p tition. e/en probabilistically. . passim. %n the >%D= 80T:%HT %DG#4S. %n P#DT$%>C5CTS. see ibid. 9@@M@). '?'.(M(9V.M*(. <' U<(V. '<<. see Diff rence et r p tition. and # Thousand Plateaus. ''@M'. '*. . the lar/al sel/es are not unified in an 10..<. pp. <-. pp. p. p. @'M )'. <. see ibid. ?M@.1 The term 1F75DG704G S57F1 used below does not occur in Deleuze and Guattari. ''9. /ol. pp. %n >#>= >HDPS. esp. 9?<. pp. pp. '@?M@@. *. '9*. see Diff rence et r p tition. '. %n the 7#DQ#7 SH>C5CT &1dissol/ed self. ''M'*. %n :#>0T &or 1habitus1+ as C%4TD#CT0%4 and D5S%4#4C5.). 5mpirisme et sub6ecti/it . p. the ori2inator of the theory of part$ob6ects.. %n the inade3uacy of the concept of the inte2rable system. '-<. '??. <@.9 U?<. <). @9*M 9<V. '<*.
9'<M*'. U'*-M*'. as discussed abo/e. see >er2sonism. ch. pp. and # Thousand Plateaus. <<)M<.. %n the #TTD#CT0%4$D5PH7S0%4 between the nonlimitati/e and limitati/e bodies without or2ans &also e!pressed as the re6ection of the or2ans by the body without or2ans: the re6ection by desire of the or2anic functionin2 of part$ob6ects+. class. 0t is not e/en that of the 8:0T5 B#4F it is 8hite Ban himself. The face is Christ. The 1face1 in 3uestion &or 1black holeLwhite wall system1+ is less a particular body part than the abstract outline of a libidinally in/ested cate2orical 2rid applied to bodies &it is the 1dia2ram1 of the mother"s breast andLor face abstracted from the maternal body without or2ans and set to work by the socius toward patriarchal ends+: 1The face is not a uni/ersal. 9. Deleuze and Guattari analyze the con6unction between reli2ion. '--M'-'. 9*?M*) U')M'. 0t is also called 1rabattement1 &usually translated in #nti$ %edipus as 1fallin2 back on1 or ""reduction1+. Pa2e ')* ?9. early childhood e!perience. see #nti$%edipus. ?<. and race in terms of F#C0#70T= &# Thousand Plateaus. ?'. %n %DG#40C or2anization. note <?. 99? U<-'V. 9@?M @)V. pp. esp. %n B5B%D= as /irtuality.pp. in short. ?'M)* U<?M)-V. '))M)(. pp. see Bonstrosity. *-(M''. The face is the typical 5uropean. with his broad white cheeks and the black hole of his eyes. p. .(M(-V. passim. pp.M?(V. 9-@M9-. ?*. U?9-. pp. <*M<@ U?-M?<VF see also :abit. '@)M('+. %n #PP70C#T0%4. see #nti$%edipus. ''M'*. 9. abo/e. #pplication is a form of F%7D04G. note <9. what 5zra Pound called the a/era2e sensual man. ??. see #nti$%edipus. below. <*?M*@. %n the N%B>05 as a 3uintessential modern myth.
4ot a uni/ersal. "an ! or a y. the black hole acts as a central computer. a rich person or a poor one. constitutes so many dichotomies or arborescences . but facies totius uni/ersi. . . which did not preclude its ac3uirin2 and e!ercisin2 the most 2eneral of functions: the function of biuni/ocalization. UTVhe face is by nature an entirely specific idea. =ou don"t so much ha/e a face as slide into one. . . the tra6ectory of the third eye o/er the surface of reference. whether it Pa2e ')9 2oes or not. . . an elementary face in biuni/ocal relation with another: it is a man or a woman. . insofar as it is composed by a black hole L white wall system. . . Cesus Christ superstar: he in/ented the the facialization the entire body and spread it e/erywhere. . the other the choices. the abstract machine of faciality assumes a role of selecti/e response. functions in two ways. Christ. . Hnder the first aspect. these combinations of units. on the basis of the elementary units. UCVoncrete indi/idual faces are produced and transformed on the basis of these units. Hnder the second aspect." The mo/ement of the black hole across the screen. . or binarization. .the ordinary e/eryday 5rotomaniac. This time. De2ardless of the content one 2i/es it. the binary relation is of the "yes$no" type. which endea/ors to inte2rate nonconformin2 traits into increasin2ly eccentric and . one of which concerns the units or elements. the third eye that mo/es across the wall or the white screen ser/in2 as 2eneral surface of reference. . a leader or a sub6ect. or choice: 2i/en a concrete face. 0t has two aspects: the abstract machine of faciality. the machine constitutes a facial unit. the machine 6ud2es whether it passes or not. Dacism operates by the determination of de2rees of de/iance in relation to the 8hite$Ban face. an adult or a child.
# connection may be made between the /ery different .).@M. %n the P:#77HS as 1despotic1 a2ent of >04#D0N#T0%4 and social control. of the binary systems re2ulatin2 the personal and the political: a common 1operatin2 system"" and 1machine lan2ua2e1+. pp. now defunctionalized. De2ression and breakdown are when the distance between binarized le/els is effaced.V+. see #nti$%edipus. which ne/er abides alterity1 &# Thousand Plateaus. :allucination returns the oppositional systems to their plane of contact in faciality A but in a dysfunctional way that sees only the e3ui/alences and erases the differences. Communication between le/els also creates the possibility of a collapse of le/els. correlationsF they are when society"s 1is like1 becomes a painfully personalized 1is. sometimes erasin2 them from the wall. it is the 1central processin2 unit1 throu2h which each binary pro2ram runs+. pp. and functions as their dynamic point of contact: an abstract plane with which they all intersect. ')@M)) U*'@M'. in a 2i/en 2hetto. sometimes toleratin2 them at 2i/en places under 2i/en conditions.1 ??. This authorizes one to proceed metaphorically from any 2i/en distinction to its counterpart on any le/el. *<*M<). *-?M*-(. 9?. howe/er. and by /irtue of which they can communicate with each other and with the world at lar2e &to continue Deleuze and Guattari"s computer metaphor. for e!ample. *(<M(?. ser/es as the default reference le/el to which all symbolic relays automatically return unless otherwise pro2rammed &%5D0PHS+. )*M)9. The family. <9-V. lea/in2 only the socius"s analo2ic. 0t sets up functional correlations between distinctions made on one le/el and analo2ous distinctions on another.M?( U. 0t ensures cross$system consistency &the mutual adaptation. 1Faciality1 or2anizes systems of >04#D= %PP%S0T0%4 operatin2 on different le/els.backward wa/es. 9?-M?'. su22estin2 a web of standardized symbolic relays between le/els.
1 occurs+. esp. %n desire and the H4C%4SC0%HS #S D5#7. pp. *-?M'). '-' U'*'VF on the 8077 T% P%85D. For Deleuze and Guattari"s criti3ue of the mirror sta2e. pp.).M'-< U. but do not take the ne!t step of 3uestionin2 the notion that the presenceLabsence dialectic and resultin2 splittin2 is the necessary foundation of human sub6ecti/ity. p. ?(. Pa2e ')< ?@. ?(M@-./ocabularies Deleuze and Guattari use to analyze processes of sub6ectification in #nti$%edipus and # Thousand Plateaus by interpretin2 the phallus as the operator of F#C0#70T= &the 1cursor. ')'M)* U*-9. and # Thousand Plateaus.<. @'M@<. passim. (. 1willin21 in the sense of affirmin2: not power o/er somethin2. '()M*-'V &1power1 in the sense of potential. ?).. )9. See Ser2e 7eclaire. pp. which is reacti/e rather than affirmati/e+. *'-V. '@<M@? &where the term %w>. @'M@*V. 9?-M ?*V. pp. see Dialo2ues. ()M'--. '9?M<9VF on D5S0D04G$B#C:045 /ersus #SS5B>7#G5. p. ')'M)? U?@M@*. *(<M(@ U)'M)*. pp. see #nti$%edipus.. .*M . p. 1or2ans without a body. see pp. @(M)*. . ?*M?9 U9<M9?. Some 7acanian psychoanalysts admit that the 17%ST %>C5CT1 is a retrospecti/e illusion. *@M*). %n C%4#THS.1 or Christ"s eye+. ')' U*'-V. *<*M?). <(M??. rather than ima2inary or symbolic. The theory of desire and the unconscious is de/eloped throu2hout #nti$%edipus. ?. @-M@'. in passa2es too numerous to cite. . see #nti$%edipus. see 4ietzsche and Philosophy. see Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. 9*@M*) U9(-V. Psychanalyser. )'M)9. see # Thousand Plateaus.?M. %n 7acanian psychoanalysis and the B5T#P:=S0CS %F 7#C. %n the FD#GB54T5D >%D=.9.
9<(M?'V.1 Criti3ue 9-@ &4o/ember '()*+. '9?M<<+.. esp. **)M9' U*?'M?*. For practical tips on how to do it successfully. %n 1childhood blocks.@-. @*.M((.1 ha/in2 re2ressed to a state of ima2inary confusion in which they are no lon2er capable of percei/in2 difference &7"5spresso.1 see . '@<M@?. *-?M*-@. Hmberto 5co uses a FD#GB54T5D >%D= paradi2m in his lament on the condition of 0talian youth in the se/enties and Deleuze and Guattari"s influence on their #utonomia mo/ement A the youn2 re/olutionaries. *))M. 9@-M@'V.9. C:07D:%%D >7%C.M*9. Gynesis. They are unconscious traces of infantile hyper$ Pa2e ')? differentiation that are still acti/e at some le/el in the life of the adult. Bay '. F5B040SB #4D T:5 >%D= 80T:%HT %DG#4S: See especially #lice Cardine. '<'M<9V and # Thousand Plateaus.afka. Den Girard 2i/es Deleuze and Guattari credit for tryin2 to break out of the SymbolicL0ma2inary alternati/e. '**. pp.?M*-9V. '<(M@@ U'. '())F translated into French as 1Soyez tran3uilles. landin2 back in the 0ma2inary. <. pp. pp. ). pp. pp. %n the D#4G5DS of returnin2 to the body without or2ans &in/entin2 a 1line of escape1+ and the need for sobriety. but feels that they fail in their mission. it seems. they are reinforcin2 a social trend to retire to a fra2mented$body state: 1SystIme du d lire. (. @'. @).1 in 0talie ")): 7e ""Bou/ement1 et les intellectuels.1# Thousand Plateaus.S are Deleuze and Guattari"s answer to the theory of re2ression. are takin2 1symbols for facts. pp. and can ser/e as keys to unlock a perfectly up$to$ date becomin2supermolecular of the adult. 0n doin2 so.M)( U(. *-. *(< U*-9. pp. 6e ne me suiciderai pas. see # Thousand Plateaus. @9. see 1:ow Do =ou Bake =ourself a >ody without %r2ans. See also 7uce .
1De/enir femme.M@@. @?. *'@M'. 7es Trois colo2ies. @' U)'M)*V. *9M*<.. Gender. pp.U99*M<<. Dietrich. pp.* U'99M9<. For the few passa2es in which Deleuze and Guattari come close to discussin2 the practicalities of G54D5D P%70T0CS.. 9?@M@'V. pp. pp. <). see # Thousand Plateaus. pp.. *(?M9-* &e!ecrably translated as 1>ecomin2 a 8oman1 in Bolecular De/olution. and on the potential for play with 2ender stereotypes to yield less constrainin2 alternate identifications for women. p.. pp. pp. '<. %n the feminist potential of what Bary #nne Doane and other feminist film critics ha/e termed F5B04045 B#SEH5D#D5. <@(M)9 U?. see #nti$%edipus. Technolo2ies of Gender. )9M. ?<<n.)M(*.)M. @). *99M9?F this essay does not appear in the French Decherches edition+F and # Thousand Plateaus.'. 7es 4ou/eau! espaces de libert . Badonna mi2ht be considered a contemporary e!ampleF see Susan BcClary. see Tania Bodleski. *. see Gaylyn Studlar"s analysis of Barlene Dietrich: 0n the Dealm of the Senses: /on Sternber2. @@. *)'M. see Guattari. %n >5C%B04G$8%B#4. and Teresa de 7auretis. *.0ri2ary. *('M(<. and the Basochist #esthetic. pp. Feminine 5ndin2s: Busic.@. pp. This Se! 8hich 0s 4ot %ne. especially her analysis of Dear 8indow. Se!uality. '-?M'-@. *). <@ &1not only should the di/erse le/els of practice . # Thousand Plateaus. 9?*M?.@M('VF F li! Guattari and Toni 4e2ri. %n men bein2 cau2ht in their own identity trap.new Too Buch: :itchcock and Feminist Theory. pp. p. See also note ?< abo/e and 1Bonstrosity. %n 8:0T5 B#4 as the ST#4D#DD of identity &the 1B#C%D0T=1+.1 7a D /olution mol culaire.M*(F Guattari. pp. The 8omen 8ho . *'9+. ')@M ). ?. '<-M<' &3uoted in part in Cardine.1 below.V. @<.
). see also . p.1 Ten =ears of Co$5/olution Euarterly: 4ew That Stayed 4ews. *(<M(@. )-. and there is no reason to demand that immi2rants renounce their cultural traits. . pp. :%B5: 18ords e!pressin2 nei2hborin2 ideas reciprocally limit each other . . pp. .<. 1Basculinity. . . pp.1 Ferdinand de Saussure. 9?<M?@ U9?-M?*.of # Thousand Plateaus. the rare. @9M@(. >D04G04G 0T #77 >#C. Spectacle.afka. . <). *99 U*. Course in General 7in2uistics.< U*9M*. *'-M''V &the second set of French 3uotes come from a passa2e in the re/ised French edition which does not appear in the earlier 5n2lish translation+. . ''< . the /alue of a 2i/en term is determined by what surrounds it. within the least intrusi/e state structure possible1+. %n :5T5D%S5OH#70T= as a molar containment of becomin2. 1Feminism and Sadomasochism. ''(M*? U'@9M)-. they should be en2a2ed in a process of :5T5D%G545S0S. Particularist cultures should be allowed to de/elop. '*M'?. 9<M9. %n >5C%B04G$#40B#7. see Ste/en Sha/iro. see Pat Califia. *9*M9-( U*. '()<M'(.?V. and # Thousand Plateaus. Feminists will ne/er take becomin2$ woman too far. <*?M*)V.-V. . and S#B%0S.<$ 9.. For comparable lesbian strate2ies. Comin2 to Power: 8ritin2 and Graphics on 7esbian SLB. the e!ceptional.. see Proust. pp. '?-M?'VF on 14%4:HB#41 S5O. @. There are many kinds of becomin2 >5=%4D T:5 :HB#4 P#75: becomin2$animal. see #nti$%edipus. #ccommodation should be made for the sin2ular.Pa2e ')@ not be homo2enized . *-@M*'<+. These are discussed at len2th in section '.1 in The Cinematic >ody &forthcomin2+. and the >ody of Euerelle. @(. . For a description of a 2ay$male >5C%B04G$B#4 &in relation to Fassbinder"s film Euerelle+. pp. and best of all. $/e2etable. at the same time as new contracts of citizenship are in/ented. p.. becomin2$molecule. $mineral.
but more often than not it forbids an ade3uate treatment of the interconnection of lan2ua2e and power. doin2 away with the referential function moorin2 meanin2s to thin2s &e/en arbitrarily+. Saussure seems to contradict himself a few pa2es farther.U''?. '-. only reciprocal difference. ''. Saussure does not support the idea that an opposition in/ol/es positi/e terms. . *<. This is meant as a radicalizin2 2esture.1 The relation between two such 1positi/e terms"" is an %PP%S0T0%4 &which is not a difference but a 1distinction1+. and G54D5D D%75S within the family are rendered no more self$e/ident by lin2uistics than by biolo2y. but that the si2n formed by a si2nified$si2nifier combination is a 1positi/e term. The prescripti/e capacity of lan2ua2e A its ability to directly effect a transformation of a bodyF the order$word A is usually left by the wayside alon2 with referentiality. (M'-. when he says that a si2nified or si2nifier taken separately has no positi/ity.M'( U'@@M@)V+ The ideolo2ical proposition that 2ender cate2ories are in any sense scientific positi/ities has Pa2e ')) lon2 since been debunked by the feminist mo/ement.5DS ha/e taken his concept of lan2ua2e as a system of reciprocal difference e/en further. '*. '@(V. 0 ha/e chosen to i2nore A as ha/e most of his followers A Saussure"s dubious claim to ha/e found a positi/ity of lan2ua2e in oppositional pairs.-. or e!plain why oppositional pairs deser/e to be /alidated as scientifically trustworthy 1distinctions. Bany P%ST$S#HSSHD0#4 T:04.1 :e only offers what appears to ha/e been for him a self$e/ident e!ample: 1fatherLmother1 &pp. The 3uotes from Saussure can be found on pp. *?. . an opposition is still a ne2ati/e difference &a reciprocal difference reduced to two contrastin2 terms+. )'. >y my reckonin2.U'@-V.
>ecause 1ob6ecti/e1 is confused with 1bodily1 or 1material. )*. :ow an author ne2otiates the distinction between these distinctions is a 2ood =#DDST0C. 0t stands to reason that only a similarly disembodied &formal+ power could act on a disembodied body. 0n order to reco/er it. . what resists it is formal as well A the re/olution in style. Deleuze and Guattari insist on the materiality of both lan2ua2e and the body.riste/a. confluence with Deleuze and Guattari on the 3uestion of difference &althou2h Deleuze and Guattari do not themsel/es use the term 1hyperdifferentiation1+. )9.%b6ects can no lon2er be referents and thus fall outside the pur/iew of lan2ua2e and e/en of thou2ht &if a concept is a si2nified and a si2nified has no positi/ity. Bany of the thinkers they are commonly compared with &>arthes. see #nti$%edipus. >audrillard+ fall more on the side of . it is claimed that the body is only in discourse: the 1>%D= #S T5OT. by which to measure his or her philosophical Pa2e '). ''.1 the body falls out as well. ). '9'V. pp.M)(. masked by such 1sub/ersi/e1 concepts as 6ouissance. #lthusser. and the two to2ether as an %edipal mechanism.U(9M(<. 0t all ends in 0D5#70SB. Derrida. free play: if power is formal. the body in discourse is a disembodied body &1no substance""+. %n H4D0FF5D54T0#T0%4 as the flipside of %ppositional difference. thou2ht is only a network of empty lin2uistic units in continual metaphoric and metonymic slippa2e+. the pleasure of the te!t. without appealin2 to referentiality as a fundamental function of lan2ua2e and.1 Since lan2ua2e is still concei/ed of as a form &howe/er self$underminin2+. parado!ically. without positin2 any other direct mode of relation between discourse and its 1ob6ects1 &see the precedin2 chapter+.
does not allow for the possibility of a positi/e &in the sense 6ust 2i/en+ description of nonbinary modes of differentiation.lossowskiF in addition to the more ob/ious names of Spinoza. :e 2oes on to say that e/erythin2 is therefore undifferentiated. )?. Deconstructi/e strate2ies are of 2reat importance in demonstratin2 the limits of oppositional difference. . :e accepts the e3uation identity G ne2ati/e difference. This takes us . . #t that point of /icious circularity. surrenderin2 oneself to the allure of the si2n. and for that reason can still be said to repose in the shadow of Saussure"s tree. howe/er. the only alternati/e to cynicism &1e/erythin2 is e/erythin2 else. >audrillard can be seen as T:5 C%4SHBB#T5 P:07%S%P:5D %F S:%PP04G. and Foucault+. it does not e!ist. This is the famous 1implosion of meanin2. as 7acan did with his counterillustration &5crits. >er2son. e/en if they claim to ha/e closed the door on it. and takes the ob/ious ne!t step of assertin2 that if identity has no positi/ity. )<. and unsustainability of what subtends identity. . unthinkability. p. Pri2o2ine and Sten2ers. in a playin2 out of the specious conceptual re/ersibility inherent to oppositional difference: not$O G =F not$= G OF N G not$O not$ =F therefore N G = K O. D5C%4STDHCT0%4.identity$undifferentiation. 0t lea/es the identity$ undifferentiation system basically intact. and applyin2 o/erwhelmin2 ne2ati/e terms to the underminin2 of binary oppositions &typically analyzed in terms of aporia+. so nothin2 matters and 0"ll do what 0 please1+ is seduction: affirmin2 the play of empty si2nifiers. %ther authors whose names do not necessarily sprin2 to mind offer a more compatible philosophical constellation &Simondon. includin2 si2n systems.1 accordin2 to which one abstract cate2ory ine!orably slides into the ne!t. Ducrot. >akhtin. emphasizin2 the ineffability. '?' U<((V+. it is an empty cate2ory. . :e takes the Freudo$ Saussurio$capitalist system of identity$undifferentiation to its lo2ical conclusion.
*-(M'-V &the French term is 1contre$effectuation1+. '@'.. *?. see #nti$%edipus. 9. %n schizophrenia as a process. C#4045 7#C5S: This is a summary of a story by Qladimir Slepian. *. '<)V. '@-. Surrenderin2 yourself to them means 2i/in2 yourself o/er to consumerism. p..from cynicism to what passes these days for sophistication &10"ll still do what 0 please. Bonstrosity '. see 7o2ic of Sense. '). &For an analysis of shoppin2$to$be as a consumerized form of affirmation. '@. Dawn of the Dead. a new microcosm to be trapped in &in which mo/ement is still circular but not habitual A bein2 totally lost+. 1Shoppin2 Disorders. '?-M?*. pp.. but 0"ll ha/e fun doin2 it1+. '(). >audrillard"s 1hyperspace1 is eccentric but not e!orbital. pp. but was thwarted by society or otherwise failed. Hnfortunately.M)( U')@M). see #nti$%edipus. >audrillardians Pa2e ')( ne/er make it past the shoppin2 mall A after the breakdown of the family. see Dhonda 7ieberman. 7a Connaissance de la /ie. . D5GD55 N5D%: Geor2es Can2uilhem. :e fails to 2o off on a tan2ent. # SC:0N%P:D540C in the clinical sense is someone who attempted an escape from identity$undifferentiation. discussed in # Thousand Plateaus. '*9M*< U'9<. in an 1information economy1 si2ns cost money. pp. ''9. '. 1SC:0N%P:D540#1 in Deleuze and Guattari"s is not a maladyF it is a process &that of becomin2+. 9<M9? U<'$<9V and passimF on clinical schizophrenia. pp.M?( U9'@$ ')V.1+ )@.. %n C%H4T5D#CTH#70N#T0%4. # dia2nosed 1schizophrenic1 is produced when the process ends in an abrupt impasse.
.M*(. in a continuum of re/ersible intensities.. . UTVhere is no lon2er a sub6ect of the enunciation. for e!ample. 8e are no lon2er in the situation of an ordinary. nor an assi2nation of metaphors by means of a fi2urati/e sense. '?@M@9 U')9$. UTVhere is no lon2er man or animal.. ibid. %n the traditional 10B#G5 %F T:%HG:T.U'(?. %n #4#7%G=. Batter and Bemory. *()M(. . pp. see . ). *. '*)V: 1There is no lon2er a desi2nation of somethin2 by means of a proper name. 9?(M@-. @?. *(9.@M(-VF on >5C%B04G as nonanalo2ical. *)< U99@VF on G%%D S54S5 and C%BB%4 S54S5. %n >5C%B04G always passin2 throu2h the B0DD75 &milieu+.. 9'<. )M'*. 0t . U<'. pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. ?. ')*. would directly desi2nate an animal and would apply metaphorically to other thin2s &so one could say "like a do2"+. pp. *). pp. ibid. >ut like ima2es. in a con6unction of flows. . %n 7#T0THD5 and 7%4G0THD5. .afka. 9-<V. *(<. 9@?M@@V. . pp. ')<M)?. *-M **. Pa2e '..VF on becomin2 as distinct from B5T#P:%D. nor a sub6ect of the statement. 9<?M<(. ibid. see # Thousand Plateaus.. . <<M?*. and # Thousand Plateaus. @. U9).<. . . and >er2son &on whose work Deleuze bases his own criti3ue+. *<-. *@. *9<M9) U*. rich lan2ua2e where the word do2. the thin2 no lon2er forms anythin2 but a se3uence of intensi/e states. *?. p.V. '?)M?. see Diff rence et r p tition. Diff rence et r p tition.'V. %n >5C%B04G$#40B#7 as an attempted escape from %edipality. pp. %n D%GS #S %5D0P#7 animals. *<..*-M** U9)M<'. . 9'. pp. since each deterritorializes the other. (M'? U')M*. *('M(*F on G545D#7 0D5#S. pp.1 see Diff rence et r p tition. see # Thousand Plateaus. *?@M?).
This momentary SHSP54S0%4 of circuits of action$ reaction is the same process described in #nti$%edipus as the 1arrest1 of the desirin2 machine &the >%D= 80T:%HT %DG#4S emer2es in the space of suspension+: see pp. %n the 0B#G04#T0%4 as an #CTH#7$Q0DTH#7 C0DCH0T.04G %F SP55C:. . you emit a molecular do2. *)<M)? U99?M9)V: 1Do not imitate a do2. with enou2h necessity and composition. pp. *'M** U9(M<-VF translation modified+. with the sub6ect of the enunciation remainin2 a man. see Cinema 0. '-. but by barkin2. 0n order to escape control. see # Thousand Plateaus. but make your or2anism enter into composition with somethin2 else in such a way that the particles emitted from the a22re2ate thus composed will be canine as a function of the relation of mo/ement and rest. Dather. the most important thin2 is perhaps to create Q#CH%75S %F 4%4$ C%BBH40C#T0%4. %n becomin2 as distinct from 0B0T#T0%4 based on a structural analo2y between relations.. For an early . p. there is a circuit of states that forms a mutual becomin2. Pourparlers. '*) U'@@M@)V. 18hat must happen is a :0C#C. if it is done with enou2h feelin2. ('M(*. see Deleuze. Pourparlers. Creatin2 has always been a different thin2 from communicatin2. . pp. .is no lon2er the sub6ect of the statement who is a do2. . %n the foundation of thou2ht as a N%45 %F 04D5T5DB04#C= fillin2 a 2ap created by suspendin2 automatic reaction. and Cinema 00. in the heart of a necessarily multiple or collecti/e assembla2e1 &pp. This process is also called 1#4T0PD%DHCT0%41 in #nti$%edipus. or of molecular pro!imity. )M'U'9M'@V. . interrupters1: Deleuze. pp. =ou become animal only molecularly. *9. into which they enter. =ou do not become a barkin2 molar do2. .1 (. ''. @'M@@ U(-M()V. pp.
see . The point where the copy ceases to be a copy in order to become the Deal and its artifice Ubecomin2otherV. 9@@ U<9(V+. See 7o2ic of Sense. p. Bolar personhood is a simulation to be2in with: 1P5DS%4S #D5 S0BH7#CD# deri/ed from a social a22re2ate whose code is in/ested for its own sake1 &ibid. <( U)'V. . >ecomin2 is a form of S0BH7#T0%4: 1Simulation must be understood in the same way we spoke of identification. . low$ le/el becomin2F an underco/er simulation. 0t carries the real U%edipal actualityV beyond its principle Umolar functionin2 2o/erned by whole attractorsV . '*. *?9M@@ U*(*M9-@V &1Plato and the Simulacrum""+F #nti$%edipus. Since no particular body can entirely coincide with the code &re2ularized functions+ en/eloped in its assi2ned cate2ory and in the /arious ima2es recapitulatin2 it. pp.) U'-<V. in a full deployment of the powers of the F#7S5.1 0t is not an illusion. pp. 0t is a declaration of bad will toward sameness. . but a real and potentially politically potent mo/e a2ainst dominatin2 forces: the forces of molarity &the powers of the 1true1F 2oodLcommon sense and the institutions that apply it+. p. 9*'M** U9.)M('. a molar person is always a bad copy of its model A an unacknowled2ed.' formulation &1The spontaneous ima2ination "as ori2inator of arbitrary forms of possible intuitions"1+. to the point where it is effecti/ely produced by the desirin2 machine Uin the /irtualV. p. . The difference between becomin2$other and becomin2$the$same is not the difference between a false copy and a true copy.1#nti$%edipus. . pp.ant. '..1 see Diff rence et r p tition.Pa2e '. 0t is a difference in de2ree of falsity &artifice+. so that it can no lon2er be said to be a copy in e/en appro!imate terms. %n ima2ination as 1PHD5 T:%HG:T..<VF and . >ecomin2$other is a simulation that o/erthrows the model once and for all.
'<. '@)M('. @?M@(V.U?<V &the 1STD#T#1 in 2eneral+. *<*. '?.. *<<. 9<?M<@ Pa2e '. p. '@. 9)' U<@-V+. <''M'*V &molar sub6ecti/ity as a 1>7#C. <*@M*)V &all e!pression as the product of 1collecti/e assembla2es of enunciation1F artistic e!pression. '*M'<. pp. 9@M9. pp.1 on the State+. not a 3uantitati/e one between rates of mo/ement &ibid. ?(-M('V &becomin2 as a ""becomin2$&of+$e/erybody1 Ule de/enir &de+ tout le mondeV+. %n S7%845SS as a possible strate2y of becomin2. <'(M**. or 1B04%D 70T5D#THD5.. U*)M*. '. @ 2enerally &1The Powers of the False1+. p.. see ..-. *''. ?@ U)9M)<V. see # Thousand Plateaus. or representati/e. <)*M)9 U'99M9<. %n the non/isual B#PP04G of becomin2 /ersus the static TD#C04G characteristic of analo2ical. ?. >ecomin2 in itself is 1absolute speed. 9<*M<<.afka.Cinema 00. '<M'?. <)-.afka.M?9V and # Thousand Plateaus. *--. *?@M?). <*<M )9 U?*. 999M9< U*-?M9<. Speakin2 in terms of SP55D or slowness can be misleadin2: the distinction is a 3ualitati/e one between kinds of mo/ement. '9.1 as a 2roup becomin2 anticipatin2 a future population+F '-?M'-@. 9<-M<*. %n the 04SHFF0C54C= %F >5C%B04G$#40B#7.M('V &1#pparatus of Capture. %n B%7#D0T= as an #PP#D#THS %F C#PTHD5. see # Thousand Plateaus. '<. see # Thousand Plateaus. '<)M?? U'(*$*-*V and ch. '<@M<) U*-M **. thou2ht.1 a 6ump from the 3uality of mo/ement or mode of composition of molarity to a radically different oneF but it always occurs relati/e to .9V. . :%751 suckin2 in ener2ies+. <. '). ')M'. *@'. 99)M9.* U<'@. p..? U9'M99. %n the C%775CT0Q5 4#THD5 %F #77 >5C%B04G.*M.. *)(M . pp. '(.. see .*M.
p. and . as measured a2ainst its own standards of mo/ement. *'. its difference in nature. '(. *9. The formula 1seemin2 to be what you are1 was su22ested by Bonte Cazazza"s definition of 1B0SD0D5CT0%41: 1makin2 somethin2 that isn"t seem to be what it is1 &0nter/iew. *<<V. pp. *. *(@ U9@9V. 9'. Pranks U'(. see # Thousand Plateaus. # B%T0%475SS Q%=#G5 may be a becomin2 &and many tra/els throu2h space are not: tourism+.* U9<<M<?V. Bolarity can only percei/e becomin2 as a chan2e in 3uantitati/e rate of mo/ement carryin2 somethin2 across one of its thresholds of tolerance A in other words. >HT C#44%T 4%T >5 P5DC50Q5D: althou2h its absoluteness..)V. )9+.-M. 1>5C%B04G$B04%D0T#D0#4 Uwhat is bein2 called here "becomin2other"V as the uni/ersal fi2ure of consciousness is called #HT%4%B=. it sees becomin2 only relati/e to itself.9 **. and #nti$%edipus. '(). Pa2e '. DeLSearch ''.1 &# Thousand Plateaus. see # Thousand Plateaus. the body$in$becomin2 is ne/ertheless ine/itably felt by molarity as an irritation. %n becomin2 as H4T0B57=.M'( U9. See # Thousand Plateaus.molar thresholds of perception. '. cannot be seen by molarity.'V. Deleuze and Guattari distin2uish between PD5C%4SC0%HS 04Q5STB54T or class interest.-M. '-@ U'9<V+. S0BH7#T5: #nti$%edipus. pp. *-. p. . >ecomin2 is T:#T 8:0C: 0S >= 4#THD5 0BP5DC5PT0>75. pp. p. %n motionless /oya2es. The precedin2 strate2y of camoufla2e and the followin2 one of inhabitin2 derelict spaces are ways of usin2 this semiblindness of molar formations to political ad/anta2e. as a perturbation in its circuits of re2ularized mo/ement. '(( U*<*. p.) U'-<V.
? &translated as 1Trans/ersality1 in Bolecular De/alution.1 7o2ic of Sense. pp.M*'. *?9M@? U*(*M9-@V. %n the PD%>75B as the ob6ecti/e condition of open$ ended becomin2. *')M 9* &the ori2inal of this essay. *'. and Guattari."" occurs in both French /ersions of 7a D /olution mol culaire: pp. *. 1Plato and the Simulacrum. The concept of TD#4SQ5DS#70T= was introduced by Guattari in his early in/esti2ations into the 1SH>C5CT$ GD%HP1 &defined in the precedin2 chapter A what 0 ha/e called a 1supermolecule1+. 1B0CD%F#SC0SB1 is the presence of fascisizin2 tendencies within a/owedly re/olutionary indi/iduals or 2roups. GH#D#4T%D %F T:5 G%%D: %n the se2re2ati/e operation of thou2ht as a moral imperati/e. 9??M?@ U'.H4C%4SC0%HS 04Q5STB54T or desire. <<M@) U'())V. pp.-. pp. pp. 1Bicro$politi3ue du fascisme. 1Three Group Problems. ?*M?) U@)M)9V. rather than a lo2ical in/esti2ation of bein2 leadin2 to the closure of a solution. *??M?. <9M <<.U'(. *-?M'9. *9(. ((M'-(+ U/iVF Proust.. *<. pp. See Guattari. pp. 999.@M.1 esp. . 17a Trans/ersalit 1 &'(@<+.M. '-M''. and 7o2ic of Sense.. *@.*. *?. pp. 1The Bicro$Politics of Fascism. *(*. ''-M'?.. *(@M(. )*M.-V+. '<(M?( U'?-M?). see Diff rence et r p tition. <'<M'?V. pp. pp.'M. Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit .1 Bolecular De/olution. @(M)-. *. 9@M?(. pp. *'-M''V &the last passa2e cited does not appear in the earlier edition. on which the 5n2lish translation is based+F #nti$%edipus.. . 9<'VF and # Thousand Plateaus. 9?M@. . pp. <''M*-V. ''M*?+. ?'M?*. see Deleuze. pp. See also: Deleuze"s preface to Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit . See #nti$%edipus. *-'M*-9. # person or or2anization with a 1re/olutionary1 or 1reactionary1 preconscious in/estment may be unconsciously dominated by the opposite /irtual pole of desire.) U<<M<). 9@9M@). 9<9M?' U9-9M9-).(.
*)@M)). See #nti$%edipus. 9<9M<<. <-. The soc!us &or 1full body1+ is the interaction between the limitati/e and nonlimitati/e >w%s functionin2 in a society &between >w%s 2o/ernin2 bodies mo/in2 toward the anarchist$schizophrenic pole /ersus >w%s 2o/ernin2 . '-*.V. This is the mechanism by which the distinction between identity$ undifferentiation and hyperdifferentiation &limitati/e and nonlimitati/e body without or2ans+ is translated into a distinction between identity and undifferentiation &normally functionin2 and abnormally functionin2 molarizecl body+. 9@9. *@-M@?.. <<)M<. esp. *)'M)*. *)9. 9)*M)9 U'*'. '9?. 9')M'. The emphasis on the 1thisness1 of thin2s is not to draw attention to their solidity or ob6ecthood. # terminolo2ical reminder: a >%D= 80T:%HT %DG#4S &>w%+ is a body from the point of /iew of its potential dynamism. '@'. 99*. ')?M)). '@?M@@. but on the contrary to their transitoriness. See # Thousand Plateaus. *-)M*-(. pp.< :#5CC50T=. 9@@. 99<. The 0D54T0F0C#T0%4 %F T:5 %HTS0D5 &others with a small 1o1+ as %ther &an enemy identity.. *@@M@). U9'-. the sin2ularity of their unfoldin2 in space$time &bein2 as flu!F metastability+. or its desire &the attractor states it in/ents for itself in response to its perceptions of deterministic constraintF the 1de2rees of freedom1 it claimsF its /irtuality+. 9). <@(. or ri/al sameness+ is a particular instance of what Deleuze and Guattari see as one of the fundamental operations of %edipus: the interiorization and D0SP7#C5B54T %F T:5 5B0TS of the socius. *9-M99. *?9. *)9M )). passim. *(@. 9-). '(?. *. ?-?V. 9'. pp.*).M*<. 0t is meant as a reference to Deleuze and Guattari"s concept of Pa2e '.. The >w% can be thou2ht of as the constellation of part$ob6ects 2o/ernin2 a 2i/en body"s tendencies in becomin2.
see #nti$%edipus. # socius has its own >w% &its potential dynamism in itself. The term 1socius1 occurs on pp.1 %n the socius as full body in relation to the >w%. The P7#45 %F TD#4SC54D54C5 &also called a 1P7#45 %F %DG#40N#T0%41+ is the dimension proper to the limitati/e >w%s 2o/ernin2 bodies$in$bein2 &bodies cau2ht in becomin2$the$same+.bodies mo/in2 toward the fascist$paranoid pole+. 0n # Thousand Plateaus.@. The >w% is an e!pression of indi/idual desire in its social dimension. pp. the term ""socius1 is all but replaced by 1plane of consistency. This is another way of sayin2 that all becomin2s &which consist in the in/ention of a >w%+ are fundamentally collecti/e: they are selecti/e e/aluations and translations of potentials en/eloped in society. The P7#45 %F 0BB#45C5 &also called a 1P7#45 %F C%4S0ST54C=1 or 1plane of composition1+ is the infinitely more encompassin2 dimension proper to the nonlimitati/e >w%s 2o/ernin2 bodies optin2 for a becomin2$other.? *(. '?-. Their indi/iduality is a deri/ation of a collecti/ity.+ Planes of transcendence are associated . 999 U'. &4onlimitati/e >w%s include the limitations of becomin2$the$same in the pool of potentials they draw upon and counteractualizeF they effect inclusi/e con6uncti/e syntheses rather than e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e ones. 9* U<-M<'V. rather than for a particular bodyF often called the P7#45 %F C%4S0ST54C= of a society: the sum total of a society"s >w%s+. 5ach >w% &whether the body it 2o/erns is a human indi/idual or an institution+ is a deterritorialization of the socius &superabstracted as pure functionF as 2rasped from the point of /iew of its potential dynamism A but from the necessarily limited perspecti/e of one of the bodies within it+. <''V of # Thousand Plateaus. Pa2e '.
with. 9-. 0B#G5 is used here broadly. sphere of operation A to another. an ima2e which acts like other ima2es. and paintin2s+. #n ima2e can be defined as the translation of a dynamism from one le/el of reality to another of different dimensionality &contraction+. this difference only.U'<V+. the manner in which it shall restore what it recei/es1 &>er2son. T:5 :HB#4 >%D= 0S #4 0B#G5 &a perceptual mechanism of contraction+: 10 see plainly how e!ternal ima2es influence the ima2e 0 call my body: they transmit mo/ement to it. *?<M ?@. then. the human body does not 6ust produce or consume ima2es: like all thin2s. This definition of the ima2e as surface of contraction is deri/ed from >er2son. '(M*. photo2raphs. '(<. within certain limits. to encompass words. pp. are themsel/es ima2es. *@?M)* U'('. Batter and Bemory. 0n no case does an ima2e e!ist in a body or a mind. perceptions and /isual 1representations1 &such as films. thou2hts. in the a22re2ate of the material world. #n ima2e is a center of dynamic e!chan2e whereby mo/ement steps up &is contracted+ or steps down &is redilated+ from one dimension of reality to another. that my body appears to choose. #ccordin2 to >er2son. 9*?M99V. For con/enience. with fields of e!teriority. perhaps. Binds are always . By body is.with bounded interioritiesF planes of immanence. '?@. #nd 0 also see how this body influences e!ternal ima2es: it 2i/es back mo/ement to them. pp. 9'-M'9. This always in/ol/es a transposition from one space or substance A medium. See # Thousand Plateaus. The world is the sum total of ima2es in reciprocal presupposition. '?<. recei/in2 and 2i/in2 back mo/ement. that transposition may be likened to the pro6ection of a /olume onto a surface. like the body they are associated with. Binds. and is therefore always in the middle &it is a site of passa2e and e!chan2e in a field of e!teriorityF it is a milieu+.
is impersonality at its lowest power &confined to . as for Deleuze and Guattari. of the sensori$motor phenomena1 &ibid. Bolarity. the site of e!chan2e where actuality 2i/es up its mo/ement to /irtuality. as o/ercodin2 &the o/erlay of a cate2ory+. The P5DS%4#7 is understood as the empty site of passa2e between the subpersonal &ner/e firin2s+ and the suprapersonal &0deas+ A compare the deri/ation of the person in :abit. constitutes at e/ery moment. outside any structure of interiority such as an identity or personality &which instead deri/e from them. the ideas and ima2es belon2in2 to a 2i/en body are fundamentally impersonal.. This special ima2e which persists in the midst of the others. in a word. '*? U'9(V+. secondarily.U. )(M(.M@(V.9M(@V. as a re2ularization of ideas and ima2es arri/in2 from outside: habit+. For >er2son. 0ma2es 1are not in the brainF it is the brain that is in them. 7an2ua2e is less a medium of communication than the milieu of 0deas. a connectin2 link between the thin2s which act upon me and the thin2s upon which 0 act A the seat. p. and on habit as autonomic sensorimotor response endowed with impersonality &ideality+ by an o/erlay of memory. a trans/ersal section of the uni/ersal becomin2. see pp. pp. which then sends it back translated &thou2ht and ima2ination as a /irtual$actual circuit+. 10ma2es can ne/er be anythin2 but thin2s1 &ibid. # body has 1free choice1 to the e!act de2ree to which it disposes of impersonality &can access a wide /ariety of 0deas for o/erlay on the habitual situations in which it finds itself+. '?'M?* U'@.@ outside the bodies that ha/e them. 0t is then the place of passa2e of the mo/ements recei/ed and thrown back. translation modified to restore the word 1trans/ersal1+.Pa2e '. in another dimension &the /irtual as 0dea+. and which 0 call my body.. %n the impersonality of ""memories1 &pure thou2ht+. a hyphen.
@. the incorporeal efficacy of all meanin2 is called 3uasicausalityF in the latter. (<. 0t is inaccurate. application. 99. '*<M*?. ''?. '(.1 # familiarity with >er2son"s theories of the ima2e are indispensable for understandin2 Deleuze"s Cinema 0 and Cinema 00 and their usefulness for media theory. The usa2e in 7o2ic of Sense differs from that of #nti$%edipus. ''M'*. ')*. *@(M)-V. '<(M?-.. descent. '@?.. Deleuze and Guattari"s notion of the 3uasicause in relation to political formations deri/es from Bar!"s analysis of the mystifyin2 powers of capital as F5T0S:.U'.. but necessary for purposes of presentation. pp. ele/ation. **) U')M'.weakly abstract 2eneral ideas+: the 1personal1 dimension of e!istence is the systematic limitation of the inhuman potential for de/iation contained in e/ery body. todi/ide the D%H>75 B%Q5B54T %F T:5 P7#45 %F TD#4SC54D54C5 into steps or moments: on the one hand. and 7o2ic of Sense. see #nti$%edipus. directed by Nhan2 =imou &China. think a thou2ht. and from a society 3uite distant from France"s. '. '@9M)). 0t all happens in the time it takes to percei/e an ima2e. '<). 0t is strikin2 that there is at least one other film..M*--V. . '<'. '@(M). *9-. '<<M<). . '<).1 like those of becomin2$other. 14ormality is the de2ree zero of monstrosity. '@(M)*. /ol. '--9M'--< &commodity as . are strictly simultaneous. 9'. %n the EH#S0C#HS5. 0n the former. See Capital. pp. '(.+. abstraction. pp. <@. 2eneralizationF and on the other reconcretization. '-@. where 8045 functions in almost identical fashion: Ded Sor2hum. 9*. or ha/e a desire. '(<. 99. the term is reser/ed for despotic meanin2 production. 0t is Pa2e '.) important to keep in mind that the two moments of this 1circuit.
The 7o2ic of 7ife. 0n order to replicate. emphasize that the 2enetic code has none of the essential 3ualities of a lan2ua2e: 1neither emitter. p. which is of the same nature as its contents. ima2e is a code: it contracts a reality of a hi2her dimension into a structurally inte2rated unity$effect which cannot function without steppin2 down to a molecular le/el. nor translation. '-*-M**. #ny transformations that occur as a result of D4#"s workin2s are not a function of the code itself. reproduction of the species. 9. D4# must lea/e its characteristic double$heli! shape. 0t unwinds and parts its strands: its functionin2 is linear. D4# is a protein molecule which works with protein molecules to produce protein molecules. pp. 0t has a sin2le substance of e!pression &D4#+. '-?@M?. . @* U.. 0ts unified three$ dimensional structure is in e!cess of its workin2s &it is an e/aporati/e surplus /alue effect+. reorders molecular components &see Cacob. pp. /ol. ?'?M'. 0t directly. *)9M)@+. 0t is crucial to distin2uish between C%D5 and 7#4GH#G5. This is true of all molar codes. 9<. /iral transfer. but of the successi/e syntheses its reorderin2s are taken up by &metabolism. and esp.1 it is not at all in the sense in which a lan2ua2e can translate. pp. This is the sense in which a cultural Pa2e '. The 2enetic code is ine!tricable from its territory &the chemical medium of the cell+. recei/er. Deleuze and Guattari.fetish+. D4# is a con/enient model for the functionin2 of a code. physically. and Capital. &capital itself as fetish+. comprehension. only redundancies and surplus$/alues1 &# Thousand Plateaus.'V+. followin2 Cacob. 0f this can be called 1translation. and so on+. natural selection.
0t is acti/eF it is transformationalF its actions straddle many le/elsF it is superlinear. a 2i/en lan2ua2e"s e/er$chan2in2 continuum of sounds can be abstracted into a static phonetic system which is then reapplied to the lan2ua2e in disciplinary fashion. The distinction between a code and a lan2ua2e is an important one that it is not often made in semiotics. For e!ample. howe/er subtly masked. Codes are always power mechanisms associated with molar or2anization. lan2ua2e itself can be coded. 8hat is lost when it is not made is the whole political dimension of lan2ua2e. 9?. in an attempt to rein in its ran2e of /ariation. The 15OC:#4G51 A all e!chan2e A is une3ual by nature. 0n addition. 4ot only is its form of e!pression alienable from its substance.7an2ua2e functions in a /ery different way. Such codin2s of lan2ua2e are always in the ser/ice of the institution of a standard lan2ua2e. 7an2ua2e is hi2hly deterritorialized and deterritorializin2. Further. it can retranslate those forms of content from its substance into other substances &incorporeal transformation+. but it can alienate the forms of its contents from their substances and translate them into its own substance &meanin2+. They are ne/er neutral or ob6ecti/e. 0ts form of e!pression can be translated into an almost infinite /ariety of substances &media+. The forced correspondence between parallel series of incommensurable 3uantities is imposed precisely for the purpose of assurin2 their une/en distribution: some bodies will be in a position to manipulate the differential between . To the e!tent that it does. 7an2ua2e may con/ey codes in the form of identity cate2ories or 2eneral ideas. #ny science of codes is a science of domination. it can be said to function ideolo2ically &lan2ua2e as a /ehicle for 2oodLcommon sense+. The 3uantities between which the 15EH0Q#754C51 is established &sufferin2 and surplus /alue+ are incommensurable: they operate on different le/els of reality.
0n 1primiti/e1 societies.the two series to their own ad/anta2e. &The capitalist miracle is most 2raphically illustrated in the institution of interest. althou2h both the sufferin2 and the surplus /alue take a different form. and they are not the ones who will collect the most compensation. the sufferin2 is personal and is implicit in one"s 1natural1 1ri2ht"" to workF surplus /alue takes the form of pri/ate capital &the ability to make money with money+. 0n capitalism. 5/eryone. where money seems to lie in the bank be2ettin2 itself in a bour2eois /ersion of immaculate . 0n 1primiti/e1 societies the arbitrary e3ui/alence between incommensurable le/els and the distribution of their respecti/e 3uantities is accomplished with the help of ma2ic &shamanistic leadershipF ma2ical kin2ship+. The e3uation established is 1wron2 committed G pain suffered. you must first pay upF if you don"t play by the rules.( chief. you pay anyway. The 3uasicause seems to function as a full cause. e/en the 12ood. or reli2ious$political elite. it happens as if by miracle: both the e3ui/alence and the distribution seem to be self$establishin2. without steppin2 clown to the le/el of its content A labor A which is percei/ed as an impediment to profit rather than a producer of /alue. the sufferin2 takes the form of e!plicit ritual torture.1 are placed in a posture of D5>T toward society: in order to 2et somethin2 from society.1 with the corollary 1pain suffered with no prior wron2 G credit a2ainst society1 &as in rites of passa2e after which an indi/idual has a ri2ht to a share of the social product+. others will notF some bodies will hurt more than others. dominant clan. This is as true of capitalism as it is of so$called primiti/e societies. and the surplus /alue is bestowed by the collecti/ity as presti2e accruin2 to a Pa2e '. 0n capitalism.
the position in the circuit of une3ual e!chan2e a body will hold is formally marked in its flesh &tattooin2. see 4ietzsche. 0n 1primiti/e1 societies.1 e/eryone must 1pay back her debt to society.04G also operates day to day. pp.1 play into the hands of mechanisms fa/orin2 the une/en distribution of surplus /alue. and so on+. on an informal and haphazard basis &work$related in6uries and disorders. if only by failin2 to challen2e the miraculous a2ency credited for all production &in other words. 0nstitutions of 1e3uality. or star/e. The Genealo2y of Borals. pp.+ Capitalism infinitizes a body"s debt to society: all but the richest must sla/e away bein2 1producti/e members of society. and so on+. The une3ual e3ui/alence that is set up operates on a continual basis rather than punctually &rites of passa2e+ or serially &punishments for particular crimes+: it is institutionalized as the e/eryday e3uation between habitual sufferin2 and re2ular paychecks &work+. access to fashion and presti2e commodities accordin2 to income. circumcision. Bechanisms of 1e!chan2e1 are apparatuses for capturin2 bodily ener2ies and their channelin2 them into a system of surplus$/alue creation fa/orin2 a minority. despair. see #nti$%edipus. neurosis. %n the 1wron2 committed G pain suffered1 e3uation and the 04F040T0N#T0%4 %F D5>T. the B#D. by failin2 to dismantle the dominant 3uasicause and shatter the sameness it nurtures+.conception. 0n capitalism. ?)M(@ &Second 5ssay+F on CDH57T= #4D D5>T in 1primiti/e1 societies as compared to capitalism.1 day in and day out. .1 as systems for the imposition of a social 1consen$ Pa2e '(sus. 0deolo2ies and philosophies that 2i/e pri/ile2ed status to concepts of e3ui/alence &1social e3uality1+ and e!chan2e &1social contract1+ mask a caste or class$stratified society.
M**V. ?.M9<. <@. 5ach rein/ention is a momentary transformation of the body producin2 the 2eneral idea or molar desire into a 1person. <9)M<.. Deleuze and Guattari. call the 1H4SP5C0F0D 545B=1 &ennemi 3uelcon3ue+: see # Thousand Plateaus. Speakin2 in terms of 1circuits1 and 1life cycles1 is a con/enient short$hand used to e!press the parado!ical ability of the plane of transcendence to spread and reproduce itself A parado!ical because it has no bein2 to reproduce and its /ery e!istence is a contradiction in terms. it is artificial to di/ide the functionin2 of the P7#45 %F TD#4SC54D54C5 into separate moments. in relation to capitalism.. The term H>0EH0T%HS 545B= is used here to desi2nate the fascist /ersion of what. The speed and fre3uency of the rein/ention of the plane of transcendence increases. *** U*'. *'). see #nti$%edipus. pp. . see # Thousand Plateaus. pp.@V.'. 8hen the rein/entions of the plane of transcendence ha/e spread to e/ery corner of society. pp. 9@. U*'. inspired by Paul Qirilio.9M. pp.nowled2e: its spread is a dissemination of e/ents that are empty in themsel/es. <*'M**. and # Thousand Plateaus. they con2re2ate in institutions obli2in2 others to identify themsel/es in like manner &channelization+. ?.<M.<M(.<. %nce a2ain. %n H45EH#7 5OC:#4G5 as a characteristic of 2lobal capitalism. U?<?M@-V. but ne/ertheless produce effects &it is a distribution of incorporeal transformations+. <)'M)* U?*<M*@. 9).(V. '. *?@M?).M@( U?.<M.1 # body can be said to ha/e an identity when it produces a steady stream of such thou2hts and desires. 0t is more accurate to think of it rein/entin2 itself each time a 2eneral idea is thou2ht or a molar desire produced. 0t is 1rare"" in Foucault"s sense in The #rchaeolo2y of . it can be said to ha/e become immanent. #s more bodies become identified. <@@M@(. *@9VF for the CD0T0EH5 %F 5OC:#4G5.
# Thousand Plateaus. <@*M@9 U*-'M*-*. passim. 9)<. pp. *)@M.*)9M. see # Thousand Plateaus. p. see #nti$%edipus. Deleuze and Guattari are more comfortable callin2 this the 1nomadic1 pole of desire rather than the 1anarchist1 pole. pp. ''(. %n the F#SC0ST$P#D#%0D P%75 of desire &the 1despotic body without or2ans1+. <-@M<-(V. U9-@M9-)V. althou2h both terms occur &they disassociate themsel/es from traditional anarchism. '<*M<( U'?(M(-VF Deleuze and Guattari. <<(V and # Thousand Plateaus. <(*M(( U<9<M?*).V. 9<. 9'<. '<?M<@. # Thousand Plateaus. 9-(M''. 9'. ?).. <*)M9' U<<?..1 pp. *'<M'?. '(*M **'. '?. %n 4%B#D0C D5S0D5.* U9*?M9@V. pp. ""#narchy1 as a synonym of 1nomadic desire1 usually comes up in connection with #rtaud: see for e!ample. 9*(M9@. *@'M@*.9V. %n the B0O0T= of all actual social formations. see # Thousand Plateaus. and #nti$%edipus. ''*M') U'<'M<)VF on F#SC0SB PD%P5D. . below+. <)<M)? U'<(.pp. *?)M?.U'*?. *(*.'M. '@9M@<. see Deleuze. pp. 9?'M<*9 &1Treatise on 4omadolo2y1+. pp.V.. *@-M@*. *')M**. 9(. %n the attractor state of the fascist$ paranoid pole as a /irtual absolute State.9. '.'M. the HDST##T &complete social stability and order+. pp. ?9*M9. see #nti$%edipus. esp. pp.9. 9<-M<' U**)M Pa2e '(' @*. %n #4#DC:=$SC:0N%P:D540# as a /irtual pole of collecti/e desire. @'<M*<VF and #nti$%edipus. pp. and &in relation to the 1si2nifyin2 re2ime1+. ?(9V. '-?. 9@-. see #nti$%edipus. 14omad Thou2ht. considerin2 themsel/es Bar!ist instead: see note ?9. 9. 9)< U*?)M@*. 99-. pp. *). # Thousand Plateaus. <-.M*. U'(@V.*.
. 99'M9. For an e!tended discussion of eros. see #nti$%edipus. The 1C%=1 of becomin2 is different in nature from 1pleasure. U'M (V. '?@M?) U'('M(*. pp. 9?. rather than a re2ressi/e satisfaction bound up with the death dri/e. libido &in Deleuze and Guattari"s /ocabulary. <*. ener2y dedicated to the connecti/e syntheses at the basis of becomin2+ and the death dri/e in 1schizoanalysis1 /ersus psychoanalysis. %n the F#SC0ST ST#T5 as a SH0C0D5 ST#T5. 4ietzsche and Philosophy. '9 U'(V. pp. howe/er. see Deleuze. pp. '(<VF on libido.M?( U'<M'?. )<. see # Thousand Plateaus. *9M?-. see # Thousand Plateaus. 0ts tendency is toward a hei2htenin2 of tension &complicationF the unstable e3uilibrium of supermolecularity+. The F#SC0ST$P#D#4%0D P%75 of desire can be correlated with Freud"s D5#T: DD0Q5F see #nti$%edipus. pp.<'. not the anarchist$schizophrenic one.'M. For Deleuze and Guattari. *9-M9' U*. not a dischar2e of it &reestablishment of an ideal stable e3uilibrium whose ultimate ima2e is death+.. %n Q#7H5 as a differential of force producti/e of meanin2. pp. Deleuze and Guattari"s concepts of 5D%S and 70>0D%. <9-V. 'M. see #nti$%edipus. Freud"s eros is part of the fascist$ paranoid pole.9V. @*M@9. pp. and Paul Qirilio. U9(@M<-<VF for the criti3ue of 1pleasure1 &and 6ouissance+. '?<M??. . <9. ha/e no counterpart in Freud. eros is the impulse behind becomin2.1 >ecomin2 is not in any way a Pa2e '(* P75#SHD5 PD04C0P75 &its 16oy1 can be as painful as the whip a2ainst the masochist"s skinF it is indeterminate in relation to the affecti/e cate2ories of molarity+. 7"0ns curit du territoire.
The B5C:#40C#7 refers to a structural interrelatin2 of discrete parts workin2 harmoniously to2ether to perform workF the %DG#40C is the same or2anizational model applied to a li/in2 body. as does representation. make a basic distinction between the 1machinic1 and the 1mechanical. # system of representation is a system of ima2e production whose elementary units are si2ns &arrested ima2esF ima2es as e/aporati/e meanin2 effects+ 2rasped as wholes composed of workin2 parts. '. or2anic or mechanical . %n becomin2 as 1C%=. Deleuze and Guattari reser/e the term 1concrete machine1 &as opposed to abstract machine+ for technolo2ical apparatuses ¬ all of which are mechanical. Deleuze and Guattari. alle2ory A any 1fi2urati/e1 meanin2 mechanism+. pp. D5PD5S54T#T0%4 is a mode of e!pression operatin2 in this same structural fashion. pp.<<. of course A anymore than all systems of ima2e production are representati/e+. '''M<@ U'*)M@.V. as the production of ob6ects or use /alues. >y B#C:040C they mean functionin2 immanently and pra2matically.-M(< U*-)M*@V. <?. is a special type of production+..1 or 1#FF0DB#T0%4. unsubordinated either to the laws of resemblance or utility. '@M*' U**M*(V. p. pp.1 ibid. howe/er. '?? U'(*V. synecdoche. #nti$%edipus. and # Thousand Plateaus. %n the D5#CT0Q0T= &1ressentiment1+ endemic to identity. between which analo2ical relations are established by rhetorical transference &metaphor. 7i/in2 bodies and technolo2ical apparatuses are machinic when they are in becomin2. Deleuze and Guattari"s fre3uent use of the terms 1machine1 and 1machinic1 &as in 1desirin2 machine1+ are often misinterpreted as a metaphor between the body as or2anism and the machine as technolo2ical apparatus. by conta2ion rather than by comparison. see 4ietzsche."" >oth the or2anic and the mechanical belon2 to the molar. >y PD%DHCT0%4 they mean the process of becomin2 &production in the usual sense.
''(M9'F # Thousand Plateaus. ?. '@9M@< U*-'M*-*V. pp. %nly one thin2 can ri/al the >%D5D%B of this endless reproduction of representations of the unrepresentable: endless deconstructions of them. and # Thousand Plateaus. <@. *('M(.2enerally &1>ecomin2$0ntense.. pp. pp. %n F#SC0SB$P#D#4%0# #S C#4C5D of the socius.1 1Binority1 or 1becomin2$minor"" is called here 1becomin2$other. and #nti$ %edipus. %n machinic Pa2e '(9 /ersus mechanical. (<M'-*. pp. >ecomin2$#nimal. Superpositions. p. *.when they are functionin2 in a state of stable e3uilibrium.( U99)M<<V. see ibid.@M('V and ch. ?-(M '*V. . <). but 3ualitati/e.M?( U'(@M()V. '))M9?+. see # Thousand Plateaus. see .@. pp. pp.1 %n >5C%B04G$B04%D... '.afka. <@(M)9 U'9'M9?. <. 9?@M@).9M. 9*?M*) U9. *?@ U9'9VF on the or2anic as a specific.) &translated separately as 1>alance$ Sheet Pro2ram for Desirin2 Bachines. a difference in mode of . pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. and the appendi!. <-(M'' U<('M?-*. >ecomin2$ 0mperceptible .1 pp. The 1B#C%D0T=1 is called here 1Bolar Ban1 or 1Standard Ban. 1+.(M(-VF on the 1machinic phylum1 as abstract machine of technolo2ical becomin2 &the in/enti/e and selecti/e a2ency for technical machines+.1 pp. *. 999M?'. '@M*) U*(M?-VF Deleuze. 1>ilan$Pro2ramme pour machines d sirantes. *)*M. 99. pp.1 in Deleuze and >ene. #nti$%edipus. '?.?. see #nti$%edipus. <@9M. limitati/e mode of bodily functionin2. 18hat 0s a Binor 7iterature. '-<M'-). Deleuze and Guattari often use the word B04%D0T#D0#4 to emphasize that the distinction is not numerical. 9(?M<-9. . <')M99. 1Hn Banifeste de moins. Semiote!t&e+.M?-.
composition: 1it is ob/ious that "man" holds the ma6ority. ?'. and so on. for Deleuze and Guattari. # B%D5 %F PD%DHCT0%4. pp. note '?. Deleuze and Guattari call the point of conta2ion at which becomin2$imperceptible destroys identity as such. These are actualized as interrelations of hetero2eneous components operatin2 on e/ery le/el. in the first or last instance. is not determinin2. #ctual formations are always mi!ed. #n economic system cannot be isolated from its /irtuality &the modes of desire it e!presses+ or from other actual formations with which it is reciprocal presupposition &its field of e!teriority+. $child. 1becomin2 e/erybodyLe/erythin21 &de/enir tout le monde+: see Bonstrosity. '-M''. 0t is codeterminin2. see # Thousand Plateaus. 9*@M*). $/e2etable. are /arieties of becomin2$ minoritarian. perceptions+.-V. from the most concrete to the most abstract &bodies.. >ecomin2$woman.U<-'M<-*. The principle of B0O0T= e!tends to the possibility of different formations of the same nature A e/en modes of production A coe!istin2 in the same social . sweepin2 the ma6ority itself into becomin2. note ?'. >5C%B04G$0BP5DC5PT0>75 is the process taken to its hi2hest power. %n the #TTD#CT0%4$D5PH7S0%4 between the nonlimitati/e and limitati/e bodies without or2ans. ?. e/en if he is less numerous than mos3uitoes1 &# Thousand Plateaus. %n >5C%B04G #S Q0D#7. $animal. abo/e. 99. thou2hts. like any other social formation. '-? U'99V+. see # Thousand Plateaus. Social formations are defined by /irtual modes of composition or consistency. <@? U')M'. see :abit. <(. ob6ects. $mineral.M?. p. ?-. abo/e. <'@M99V. words. pp. %n becom$ Pa2e '(< in2 as 1C%SB0C1 process.
.field &thou2h at different coordinates in it. U'<-M. They ha/e no lo2ical. or 1D5G0B5S %F S0G4S1+. pp. ?9. <-M<*. STD#T0F0C#T0%4S: statistical accumulations of re2ularized functions of many kinds which interlink to form a self$ reproducin2 mechanism preser/in2 and disseminatin2 certain balances of forces &an apparatus of capture+. ?@-M('V &on State and anti$State forms+ and '''M <. ?<*VF on stratification.M9'.(M(-. Deleuze and Guattari"s prime e!ample from earlier historical periods of a social formation at the anarchist$ schizophrenic e!treme Pa2e '(? . *-. Deleuze and Guattari 3uestion less their e!istence than their centrality. <9? U''9M'<. Bode of production. For the S%C0#7 T=P%7%G05S de/eloped by Deleuze and Guattari. deri/ations of more encompassin2 processes &of the process: becomin2 as dissipati/e structure A as captured by conser/ation$oriented structuration+. howe/er. There is fundamentally 450T:5D >#S5 4%D SHP5DSTDHCTHD5 in a society. see ibid. ?*. pp. see # Thousand Plateaus. They are end products. 7ike e/ery formation. There are. see # Thousand Plateaus. historical or teleolo2ical priority o/er any other type of actual formation. 9 2enerally &1The Geolo2y of Borals1+. <'9M'@V. and ch.<V &on molar or2anizations of e!pression. they are in between: sites of passa2e that 2ather up mo/ement and send it back translated. <<. base and superstructure.9.. base and superstructure are concepts which belon2 to the realm of stratification or institutionalized molar functionin2 &power+.M)9 U*?<M. @?M@@. pp. %n mode of production. 99?M9) U?<M?@. <(M?-. or actualized to different de2rees+.
For a Green perspecti/e on the German mo/ements of the early ei2hties. ?@(M)<. See # Thousand Plateaus. eds.#>%HT5DS. *'M9). pp. #s pre/iously mentioned. Semiote!t&e+ <.-+F #utonomy and the Crisis. The French Student Hprisin2: 4o/ember '(@)MCune '(@. *9*. see Dudolf >ahro...1 in Barshall S.1 =ale French Studies. see Pourparlers. Shatz. pp. >uildin2 the Green Bo/ementF for a broader ran2e of approaches. %n PD%Q%S #4D . The 5ssential 8orks of #narchism. For a 3uick account of the S0TH#T0%40STS and further references. is #lain Schnapp and Pierre Qidal$4a3uet. 1The Great Sideshow of the Situationist 0nternational. 1The . )9 &'(. For Deleuze"s most recent reaffirmation of his Bar!ism. see Burray >ookchin. they do not often use the term 1anarchy1 for this pole.. The classic collection of essays from the current within the F5B040ST B%Q5B54T closest to the perspecti/e bein2 ad/anced here &anticensorship feminists defendin2 1de/iant1 se!ualities+ is Carol S..9 &'(. Pleasure and Dan2er: 5!plorin2 Female Se!uality. There is an e!tensi/e and 2rowin2 literature on the Situationists and Bay '(@. Semiote!t&e+ 9. see 5dward >all. see Doel /an Duyn. p. 9?'M<*9 U<9<M?*)V &1Treatise on 4omadolo2y1+.. #n #nalytical Decord. preferrin2 1nomadism1 instead. see The German 0ssue. ed. Some 5n2lish and French sources on the too little$known #HT%4%B0ST B%Q5B54T in 0taly: #utonomia: Post$ Political Politics. ed. see 7es Trois colo2ies. # useful collection of documents from B#= '(@.*+F for Guattari on 5C%7%G=.are the 4%B#DS of the steppes. Qance. pp. %n the C#T#7%40#4 #4#DC:0STS. Deleuze and Guattari still characterize their own thou2ht as B#DO0ST &an assessment with which many Bar!ists disa2ree+. 0talian Bar!ist Te!ts of the Theory and Practice of a .)+.* &'(. The Spanish #narchists.abouters of :olland.
1Basses et minorit s X la recherche d"une nou/elle strat 2ie. 10nter/iew with Toni 4e2ri. # word of warnin2 on sla/ish dedication to any model of action: The con/iction that e/en recent e!amples of re/olutionary rupture &in particular Bay '(@. Toni 4e2ri. pp.Class Bo/ement: '(@<M'()(F #ntonio 4e2ri. libertarian communist position on politics in the ei2hties. sees the emer2ence of a new mode of collecti/e action for chan2e A one that is the radically anti$ideolo2ical and nonpolemical &e/en silent: the French students not only refused to dele2ate media spokespeople or ne2otiators.-+. but in their lar2est . '*'M*'9. Guattari and 4e2ri. @<M. respondin2 to certain patterns he sees emer2in2 from such disparate e/ents as the French student mo/ement of '(. ed.. Bar! >eyond Bar!: 7essons on the Grundrisse &contains a chronolo2ical summary of 4e2ri"s work by Bichael Dyan+F 4e2ri. Decherches 9. 7a D /olution mol culaire &'(.9F >rian Bassumi.(F 7es Hntorelli. pp.1 pp. and the uphea/als in 5astern 5urope in '(. 1:arbin2er or :iccupJ #utonomy in 5!ile. and #utonomy+ are obsolete and should not necessarily be taken as models for future acti/ism is 2rowin2 e/en amon2 e/en their most unrepentant /eterans.&4o/ember '())+ &contains an article by Guattari. post$autonomist.)+. #ctes du Pa2e '(@ collo3ue de Bontr alF Guattari. in Communists 7ike Hs. .1 both in Copyri2ht ' &Fall '(.. Tiananmen S3uare. Capitalist Crisis and 4ew Social Sub6ects: '(@)M. 7"0talie: 7e Philosophe et le 2endarme. 0talie ")): 7e 1Bou/ement1 et les intellectuelsF Barie$>lanche Tahon and #ndr Corten.1 and >rian Bassumi and #lice Cardine. sketch a 2reen$influenced.eynes. ''9M**+F Fabrizio Cal/i.(. eds. De/olution Detrie/ed: Selected 8ritin2s on Bar!.@.
.)M(-. . . in the same way that the limitati/e and nonlimitati/e poles 2o/ernin2 a /irtual A actual circuit are. pp. and #lliez and Feher. %n . .?M.@. Htopia is impossible. 0n a similar /ein. %nly the practice of the inconsistency of the social bond is capable of re/olution. Democracy as the constituent power of the multitude. . pp. see #2amben. and ha/e causal force. 7a 4ou/elle /a2ue: 4o/embreMd cembre '(. . Pure potential. 1. Tiananmen and >erlin represent masses of disa22re2ated indi/iduals assertin2 themsel/es. . 7a Communaut 3ui /ient. and Qirilio+. see Toni 4e2ri. on the sta2e of power. . They constitute a potential. ?<.1 despite the misleadin2 terminolo2y. %n S%C0#7 D5B%CD#C=. special supplement. .M*@. . ?M<*.1 None 'L* &'(.@. . presentin2 itself as a radical alternati/e.1 1Polizeiwissenschaft. Canuary '(. <@9M@< U?))M).1 in the sense that they are material. They ha/e nothin2 to say. .) &includes short articles by >audrillard. . ??.5=45S0#40SB and C%DP%D#T0SB. can define an alternati/e. pp. pp. 9'. . pp.1 De/olution Detrie/ed. actually occur.@.1 Future ant rieur ' &'((-+.demonstration carried no placards and shouted no slo2ans+: 1#ny reformist approach is impossible. in untimely fashion. %n the French student mo/ement of '(. >oth 1forced mo/ement1 and 1real mo/e$ Pa2e '() ment1 are 1real. the absolute lack of the social bond. .eynes and the Capitalist Theory of the State Post$ '(*(. %nly a /oid of determinations. ?@.V. 7ib ration. The distinction between F%DC5D B%Q5B54T and D5#7 B%Q5B54T is not the same as the opposition between 1illusory1 and 1real. >ourdieu. They are less in opposition than in tension. see # Thousand Plateaus. /oid of positi/e determinations. 1The 7uster of Capital.)+.
?.The forced mo/ement of democracy parodies the /irtual at a certain le/el of actuality. ?). pp. '. pp. The distinction between them mi2ht be better stated as that e!plained earlier between the mechanical &or2an$ized. '?<M ?@. F#SC0STS 04 T:5 GD#SS: For an account of these 2roups. '<'.-V+ is a different concept entirely. p. '<.1 and outlines them in The :istory of Se!uality 0: #n 0ntroduction. the 3uasicause is the 2eneral idea 1democracy. *9(M<. *--VF 7o2ic of Sense.. They are more anarchocapitalist than State$fascist. Foucault calls the mechanisms of the miniaturization of molarity and its application to the human body 1biopower. as were .U'@V. #rmed and Dan2erous: The Dise of the Sur/i/alist Di2ht. cyclic mo/ement contained in an artificial milieu of interiority and functionin2 primarily to preser/e or reproduce molar entities+ and the machinic &ha/in2 to do with the transformational potential of part$ob6ects in a field of e!teriority+. Bany of the 2roups ar2ue for political autonomy on the county le/el &as the name of one of the most notorious su22ests: the Posse Comitatus+. 0t is strikin2 that the fascist philosophy of the ei2hties and nineties is often localist in ideolo2y as well as in actual functionin2. This definition of 1forced mo/ement1 corresponds to what Deleuze and Guattari call the %>C5CT0Q5 #PP#D54T B%Q5B54T proper to the 3uasicause &in this case. limitin2 the perception of its potential and thereby keepin2 the amplitude of systemic chan2e to a minimum without riskin2 ci/il war. see Cames Coates. 9?@F Proust and Si2ns. Bichel Foucault describes the PD%70F5D#T0%4 %F B040D5SP%T0SBS in Discipline and Punish.1 as applied by nonfascist 2o/ernmental institutions+. U'('. 8hat Deleuze calls ""forced mo/ement1 &Diff rence et r p tition.U*)(M. They define ob6ecti/e apparent mo/ement as 1the true perception of a mo/ement produced on a recordin2 surface1 &as opposed to a 1false consciousness1+: see #nti$%edipus. pp.
Capital. *-9M**. @'. See 1#rchaeolo2y and Pro6ect: The Bass 8orker and the Social 8orker. pp. pp.1 which has apparently been compellin2 enou2h e/en to force fascism itself into hybridizin2 with it to form a peculiar miniaturization of the State$form that still defines itself in terms of political so/erei2nty but claims it as a ri2ht e!tendin2 o/er an area only a few miles in diameter. This is perhaps a reflection of the power of the 3uasicause 1democracy. >ut there is sub6ection when the hi2her unity constitutes the human bein2 as a sub6ect linked to a . pp.1 None 'L*. under the control and direction of a hi2her unity. see Bar!. Deleuze and Guattari describe real subsumption as a bipolar process of B#C:040C 54S7#Q5B54T and S%C0#7 SH>C5CT0%4.1 @-. /ol. %n F%DB#7 SH>SHBPT0%4 of labor to capital. Pa2e '(. Basochism. ?(. '-'(M*?. Dick point to the ubi3uity of fascism$paranoia in modern #merican 1democracy. 1The 7uster of Capital. 4o/elists such as Thomas Pynchon and Philip . /ersus the D5#7 SH>SHBPT0%4 of society to capital.1 in Deleuze and Sacher$Basoch. tools+. Deleuze"s most sustained pre$#nti$%edipus analyses of the #4%5D0P#7 F%DC5 %F S5OH#7 >5C%B04GS are 1Coldness and Cruelty..1 De/olution Detrie/ed. and Proust and Si2ns.:itler and Bussolini. which to2ether define capitalism"s mode of capture of bodily ener2ies: 1There is ensla/ement when human bein2s themsel/es are constituent pieces of a machine that they compose amon2 themsel/es and with other thin2s &animals. and #lliez and Feher.. '. 9<'M?-. 4e2ri"s analyses of the 1social worker1 are an in/esti2ation into the mechanisms of real subsumption.
a tool. 0n machinic ensla/ement. . 8e are now in the immanence of an a!iomatic. <?@M?. . "+F the technical machine is the medium between two sub6ects." feedback or recurrences that are no lon2er connected to the machine in such a way as to produce or use it. . there is nothin2 but transformations and e!chan2es of information. UTVhe modern State. . . . # small amount of sub6ectification took us away from machinic ensla/ement. others human. . Capital acts as a point of sub6ectification that constitutes all human bein2s as sub6ectsF but some. pp. "input" and Pa2e '(( "output. dear tele/ision /iewers. . Dather than sta2es. ." are sub6ects of the statement. U?)-M)9V+. @*. nor e/en sub6ects who supposedly "make" it. . the "capitalists. . sub6ection and ensla/ement constitute two coe!istant poles1 &# Thousand Plateaus. . in the /ery particular situation of a sub6ect of the statement that more or less mistakes itself for a sub6ect of enunciation &"you. . who make TQ what it is . one is sub6ected to TQ insofar as one uses and consumes it.now e!terior ob6ect. . This is 45%C%7%40#7 C%4TD%7 because the First 8orld nations do not attempt direct political so/erei2nty . which can be an animal. For e!ample. not under the transcendence of a formal Hnity. the "proletarians. . sub6ected to the technical machines in which capital is effectuated. but a lar2e amount brin2s us back. some of which are mechanical. has substituted an increasin2ly powerful social sub6ection for machinic ensla/ement. . . but intrinsic component pieces." are sub6ects of enunciation that form the pri/ate sub6ecti/ity of capital. . while the others. . or e/en a machine. >ut one is ensla/ed by TQ as a human machine insofar as the tele/ision /iewers are no lon2er consumers or users. throu2h technolo2ical de/elopment. .
Codin2. @<. '@'. pp. pp. pp. and their domestic economies do not ha/e to be fully subsumed ri2ht away &the world economy is not stron2 enou2h to accomplish this yet+. 1Peripheral1 countries may be ""polymorphous1 with respect to their internal social and political or2anization. )'. Deleuze and Guattari emphasize the hetero2eneity of the formations e!istin2 within capitalism on the world scale. ?'M@<. passim. 9)*M)@ U*('M(9. (?M((. @'M@*. see # Thousand Plateaus.(1 by the media is the sudden and total subsumption of the 1Second 8orld1 after se/enty years of relentless pressure to 6oin the center or be rele2ated to the periphery. # useful way of e!pressin2 the chan2e in the functionin2 of capitalism in the information a2e is that circulation of . see Paul Qirilio. '?. or The Cultural 7o2ic of 7ate Capitalism. D5SP%T0C %Q5DC%D04G functions by e!clusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis &applicationF se2re2ation+F 70>5D#7 D5C%D04G functions by inclusi/e dis6uncti/e synthesis &arbitrationF inte2ration+. @@. <?'M?@. pp. is characteristic of 1primiti/e1 societies &S5GB54T#D0T=+. 8hat ha/e been dubbed the 5ast 5uropean 1re/olutions of '(. functionin2 by connecti/e synthesis.1 4ew 7eft De/iew '<@ &CulyM#u2ust '(. '--. <??M?@ U?@(M)-V. @9.. <@-M)9 U?@9M)-. 7"0ns curit du territoire.<+. and #nti$%edipus. esp. %n 54D%C%7%40N#T0%4. and Qirilio and Syl/Ire 7otrin2er. pp. 1Postmodernism. 1Third 8orld1 countries are left wide latitude with re2ard to their social and political systems &as lon2 as they are not o/erly socialistF fascisms are 6ust fine. but must be 1isomorphic1 in their relations with the 1center1: see # Thousand Plateaus. Pure 8ar. 99?M9(. <<@M?'V. see Fredric Cameson. @?. %n the C#P0T#70ST #O0%B#T0C. pp. <--M<-@. %n the 8#404G %F #FF5CT in postmodernism. ?)?M('V. howe/er+.o/er the 1de/elopin21 nations. *<<M<).
See Capital.1 The chan2e in the nature of surplus$/alue can be e!plained as an e!tension of Bar!"s famous in/ersion of the commodity$money e3uation markin2 the birth of industrial capitalism. 1self$ impro/ement1+ and cycle of realization &ima2e accumulation .1 in other words production of a commodity. The commodity has become a form of capital with its own motor of e!chan2e &fashion. The e3uation be2ins as C$B$C" &1commodity$sum of money$second commodity1: 1sellin2 in order to buy. *<)M?). accordin2 to which surplus /alue can only be deri/ed by the direct e!ploitation of 1li/in2 labor. its sale. or rather to its ima2e &in the narrow sense of a coded ima2e or model+: C$0$C" &replication of a commodity$ob6ect that has use /alue on the basis of an ima2e or model of it: production of production+ becomes 0$C$0" &the elision of use /alue in the mo/ement from one commodity$ima2e to the ne!t: self$turno/er. pp.ob6ects replaces their production as the motor of the economy. 4ow a similar in/ersion has taken place in the relation of the commodity to itself. /ol. 0n other words 1use /alue1 Pa2e *-&the ability of an ima2e to be inserted into a molar apparatus and do work for it: reterritorialization+ has been subordinated to 1e!chan2e /alue1 &its ability to foster e!tramolar flow and transformation: deterritorialization+. That e3uation is in/erted to become B$C$B" &1sum of money$ commodity$second sum of money"": 1buyin2 in order to sell1F production of a commodity for turno/erF capital accumulation+. and the purchase of a second commodity$ob6ect with use /alue+. production of consumption for consumption"s sake+. This shift in capitalism"s center of 2ra/ity necessitates an o/erhaul of Bar!"s theory of SHDP7HS Q#7H5. style. '.
0ts /alue is now defined more by the desire it arouses than by the amount of labor that 2oes into it. 1cool. This G:%ST SHDP7HS Q#7H5 has a noncapital formF it is e/en reminiscent of precapitalist surplus /alue. This implies the e!istence. Deleuze and Guattari call this form of surplus /alue SHDP7HS Q#7H5 %F F7%8. in fact the predominance. of a kind of surplus /alue that is created in the process of circulation itself.1 the 2low of self$ worth. bodies. but where/er capital surplus /alue is e!tracted in an act of purchase. Sub6ecti/ity is the 0BB#T5D0#7 GD%SS PD%DHCT of the neoconser/ati/e state: the 2host in the a!iomatic machine of . 0t is more on the order of a presti2e. to encompass ob6ects.L ima2e sheddin2F . The /alue of commodity$ima2es &defined broadly this time. 1personality. an 1aura1 A style. correspondin2 to the consumerLcapitalist dense points of the capitalist relation: it continues to feed into capital accumulation in the hands of the capitalist. 0t has become the product of consumer e!chan2e. 0t has Pa2e *-' two aspects.ru2er"s 1buyin2 in order to be1+. representations and information: decoded sites of force con/ersion+ is attached more to their e!chan2e and inclusi/e dis6unction &the production of recordin2 accompanyin2 the sin2ular acts of consumption made possible by the inclusi/e con6unctions of the capitalist a!iomatic+ than to their material production."" Sub6ecti/ity itself has not simply been subordinated to the commodity relation. a deri/ati/e of decoded commodity$ima2es &as opposed to bein2 a product of o/ercodin2: the despotic application of a coded ima2e in a fundamentally political rather than economic operation+. an e/anescent double of what accrues to the capitalist is deposited in the hands of the consumer.
capital accumulation. :owe/er, the farther both forms of surplus$/alue production de/elop, the harder it is to tell which is 1deri/ati/e1 and which 1determinin2.1 The 2host surplus /alue of sub6ecti/ity, like capitalist surplus /alue as a means of in/estment, is reinserted into states of thin2s and be2ins to produce its own effects &it de/elops into a supplementary feedback le/el of causality, followin2 a process similar to the one described in the last chapter, but freed from molarity+. 0t 2ets to the point that it becomes necessary to speak of two interlockin2 a!iomatics, the capitalist and the sub6ectifyin2, both of which constitute transpersonal modes of desire &or abstract machines+ coe!tensi/e with the social field, and neither of which taken separately is determinin2 of anythin2. The two$sidedness of surplus /alue accounts for the 1schizophrenia1 of postmodernity: the flowerin2 of desire in play and e!perimentation, side by side with enormously widenin2 social ine3uality and constant reminders of economic e!ploitation of the 2rimmest sort &homelessness, the 1permanent underclass1 of the 2hettoes, hi2her infant mortality in some city centers than in the 1Third 8orld,1 and so on+. %n surplus /alue of flow /ersus surplus /alue of code &the sub6ecti/e presti2e /alue bestowed upon a body by the despotic 3uasicause in the process of o/ercodin2+, see #nti$ %edipus, pp. '?-, **,, *<,M<( U')@, *)-, *(?M(@V, and # Thousand Plateaus, p. <?' U?@9V. %n the obsolescence of Bar!"s theory of surplus /alue e!plained from a still Bar!ist perspecti/e, see
Pa2e *-* 4e2ri, De/olution Detrie/ed, pp. *'(M*-. The terms 12host surplus /alue1 and 1immaterial 2ross product1 are
e!trapolations that do not occur in Deleuze and Guattari or 4e2ri. @). %n S0BH7#T0%4 #S D5#7 mo/ement, see note '*, abo/e. @,. %n the D0SP7#C5B54T %F 70B0TS of capitalism, see #nti$%edipus, pp. *9-M99, *@@M@), 9)*M)9 U*)9M)), 9')M ',, <<)M<,V. @(. The trend in the nineties for 2o/ernment to contract out social ser/ices to pri/ate enterprise underlines the fact that e/en the unemployed now participate in the economy, if only as stimuli for the continued e!pansion of the tertiary sector, the capital for which is bein2 drawn in part from formerly 1unproducti/e1 ta! monies. 0n spite of the fact that ine3uality is e!acerbated under present$day capitalism, it cannot be said to be a class system. C7#SS is a molar concept. 0t is homolo2ous to indi/idual identity, only it applies to a 2roup of indi/iduals. For there to be class consciousness, there must be a population of indi/iduals in the same situation of e!ploitation, who ha/e, or ha/e the potential for, molar identity, and whose identities are or can be made to coincide with that e!ploitation, in other words are subsumable under that 2eneral idea &proletarian o/ercodin2: the despotic imposition of an anticapitalist countermolarity by the 1/an2uard1+. This is only possible in a capitalist system producin2 the form of surplus /alue described in note @@ as obsolete. 8hen this capital surplus /alue is doubled by a 12host surplus /alue1 takin2 the form of sub6ecti/e presti2e or 1aura,1 a second a!is of potential self$definition is introduced that escapes molar confines. # body can define itself by a mode of indi/idual desire absolutely particular to it &its specific way of inclusi/ely con6oinin2 ima2es, their consumption and production+, rather than definin2 itself by the e!ploitation it has in common with other bodies. >odies ha/e become radically sin2ularized. People no lon2er define themsel/es
primarily by what they do for a li/in2, but by what they lo/e, what they eat or wear and where they 2o. This is not simply a ruse of Power to pre/ent people from realizin2 their commonality &1false consciousness1+. 0t is a real production of difference as a real dimension of people"s li/es. Class no lon2er e!ists in anythin2 resemblin2 what it was in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. 8hich is not to say that disparities do not e!ist, or that e/eryone is now a capitalist. 5/ery body is still positioned in the social field accordin2
Pa2e *-9 to which dense point dominates their acti/ities &consumer, workerLcommodity, or capitalist+. >ut the situation is infinitely more complicated than it was, because e/en thou2h not e/ery body is a capitalist, e/ery body /isibly consumes A and in postmodernity that means that e/ery body accumulates surplus /alue, at least in its 2host form of sub6ecti/e 1presti2e.1 The poor are neither those who do not recei/e surplus /alue, nor necessarily those who ha/e less money to spend A in one month more money passes throu2h the hands of a small$time dru2 dealer of the inner city underclass than many a bour2eois makes in a year. # body"s relati/e social position is defined more by how money flows throu2h it, not how much money flows throu2h it, and by what kind of surplus /alue its flow allows the body to accumulate, not whether it accumulates any. The poor are those who are only in a position to recei/e surplus /alue predominantly in the form of sub6ecti/e presti2e /alue &the importance of style in the 2hetto+. The dense points of the capitalist relation do not define a contradiction or an opposition, but a differential &more or less surplus /alue, or this kind or that, with or without the
possibility of capital accumulation+. 8hen the capitalist relation is actualized, the particular content it recei/es displays an almost infinite /ariety of concrete forms. Dather than bein2 defined by its class, a body helps define a continuum of /ariation. 8orker and capitalist are two of the many /ariables enterin2 into the definition of this continuum. They constitute 6ust one of its a!es. They, like other constituent /ariables of the continuum, superabstract poles that do not e!ist in actuality in their pure forms. # body cannot be assi2ned a determinate class A only a position on a superabstract continuum. Since the continuum is in constant self$transformation, a body"s social position is more a /ector &an immanently determined direction and mode of mo/ement+ than an endurin2 state of bein2 correlated to an endurin2 consciousness &a transcendent 3uality belon2in2 to a self$same entity+. Class as such no lon2er e!ists because 1it is no lon2er possible to define 3uantities of e!ploitation. . . . UTVhe producti/e routes within society, the interactions amon2 laborin2 sub6ects, is by definition immeasurable. . . . UtVhe distinctions between "producti/e labor" and "unproducti/e labor," between "production" and "circulation," between "simple labor" and "comple! labor" are all toppled1 &Toni 4e2ri, 1Crisis of Class1+. 4e2ri is con/inced that politics can no lon2er be described as a dialectical process, 3uite simply
Pa2e *-< because C%4TD#D0CT0%4 :#S >554 #>%70S:5D: see De/olution Detrie/ed, pp. ***M*?. 0t follows that no anticapitalist politics whose 2oal is to re/i/e class consciousness will succeed. #ll such strate2ies can re/i/e is despotic o/ercodin2.
)-. #ccordin2 to Deleuze and Guattari, all social formations are D5F045D >= 8:#T 5SC#P5S T:5B A the 1lines of escape1 or becomin2s runnin2 throu2h them A not by their contradictions. 0n other words, they are defined by how they try to contain escape &their apparatuses of capture+. See # Thousand Plateaus, pp. (-, *'@M') U''<, *@9M@<V. From the perspecti/e of the present work, the closer a formation comes to the fascist$paranoid pole, the closer it comes to definin2 itself by its contradictions. )'. %n #DC:#0SBS 80T: # C%4T5BP%D#D= FH4CT0%4 within capitalism, see #nti$%edipus, pp. ')), *-,M*-(, *9*, *?)M?,, *@' U*-(, *<), *)@, 9-@M9-,, 9''V.
Pa2e *-< because C%4TD#D0CT0%4 :#S >554 #>%70S:5D: see De/olution Detrie/ed, pp. ***M*?. 0t follows that no anticapitalist politics whose 2oal is to re/i/e class consciousness will succeed. #ll such strate2ies can re/i/e is despotic o/ercodin2. )-. #ccordin2 to Deleuze and Guattari, all social formations are D5F045D >= 8:#T 5SC#P5S T:5B A the 1lines of escape1 or becomin2s runnin2 throu2h them A not by their contradictions. 0n other words, they are defined by how they try to contain escape &their apparatuses of capture+. See # Thousand Plateaus, pp. (-, *'@M') U''<, *@9M@<V. From the perspecti/e of the present work, the closer a formation comes to the fascist$paranoid pole, the closer it comes to definin2 itself by its contradictions. )'. %n #DC:#0SBS 80T: # C%4T5BP%D#D= FH4CT0%4 within capitalism, see #nti$%edipus, pp. ')), *-,M*-(, *9*, *?)M?,, *@' U*-(, *<), *)@, 9-@M9-,, 9''V.
Pa2e *-? 8orks Cited #2amben, Gior2io. 7a Communaut 3ui /ient: Th orie de la sin2ularit 3uelcon3ue. Paris: Seuil, '((-. #lliez, 5ric and Bichel Feher. 1The 7uster of Capital.1 None 'L* &'(,)+: 9',M*@. #ustin, C. 7. :ow To Do Thin2s with 8ords. Cambrid2e, Bass.: :ar/ard Hni/ersity Press, '(@*. #utonomia: Post$Political Politics, Semiote!t&e+ 9.9 &'(,-+. #utonomy and the Crisis: 0talian Bar!ist Te!ts of the Theory and Practice of a Class Bo/ement, '(@<M'()(. 7ondon: Ded 4otes and CS5 >ooks, '()(. >ahro, Dudolf. >uildin2 the Green Bo/ement. Philadelphia: 4ew Society Publishers, '(,@. >akhtin, Bikhail. See Qolosino/, Q. 4. >all, 5d. 1The Great Sideshow of the Situationist 0nternational.1 =ale French Studies )9 &'(,)+: *'M9). >eckett, Samuel. Proust. 4ew =ork: Gro/e Press, '(?). >en/eniste, 5mile. Problems in General 7in2uistics. Coral Gables, Fla.: Hni/ersity of Biami Press, '()'. >er2son, :enri. Batter and Bemory. Translated by 4. B. Paul and 8. S. Palmer. 4ew =ork: None >ooks, '(,,. French ed.: BatiIre et m moire. Paris: PHF, '(9(. >ookchin, Burray. The Spanish #narchists. 4ew =ork: Free 7ife >ooks, '()). >rans, C. P., 0. Sten2ers and P. Qincke, eds. Temps et de/enir: # Partir de l"oeu/re d"0lya Pri2o2ine. Gene/a: Pati^o, '(,,.
Pa2e *-@ Califia, Pat. 1Feminism and Sadomasochism.1 0n Ten =ears of Co$5/olution Euarterly: 4ew That Stayed 4ews, '()<M '(,<. San Francisco: 4orth Point Press, '(,@.
'(.@. Paris: PHF.: Cin ma 0: 7"0ma2e$mou/ement. Cazazza. '((-+.: 7e >er2sonisme. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. '(. Gilles. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. Translated by Bartin Cou2hin. French ed. '((-. Gilles. Can2uilhem. Translated by :u2h Tomlinson and >arbara :abber6am. 7"0ma2e$ temps. Paris: Binuit. #nti$%edipus &'())+.@. Deleuze.9. Deleuze. Paris: PHF. '(.). Gilles. Cames. Translated by Se\n :and.. Paris: Seuil. Translated by :u2h Tomlinson and Dobert Galeta. Deleuze.. '(@. French ed. ed. 0talie ")): 7e 1Bou/ement1 et les intellectuels. Deleuze. 5mpirisme et sub6ecti/it . >er2sonism. Gilles.: Spinoza et le problIme de l"e!pression. Translated by :u2h Tomlinson and >arbara :abber6am. Paris: Binuit.: Cin ma 00. 5!pressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza. Deleuze. French ed. '(. Deleuze. . '(@. Paris: Qrin. 4ew =ork: The 4oonday Press. Francis >acon: 7o2i3ue de la sensation. Fabrizio. Paris: PHF. Gilles. Cinema 0: The Bo/ement$0ma2e. 10 :a/e 4othin2 to #dmit.: Foucault. * /ols.(. Bonte. Semiote!t&e+ *. Deleuze. 4ew =ork: None >ooks. Diff rence et r p tition. DeLSearch ''. Foucault. 0nter/iew. Coates. 4ew =ork: None >ooks. Deleuze. Geor2es.Cal/i.@. '()). Gilles. '(. '(. French ed. '(@.)+: )*M )<. French ed. 7a Connaissance de la /ie. '(. '(. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. '(. French ed. Deleuze. Gilles. Paris: 5ditions de la Diff rence... *nd ed. #rmed and Dan2erous: The Dise of the Sur/i/alist Di2ht. Paris: Binuit. '(?9.: 17ettre X un criti3ue s /Ire1 in Pourparlers &Paris: Binuit. Paris: Binuit.. '(.1 Translated by Canis Forman. Gilles.'. Pranks &'(. Cinema 00: The Time$0ma2e. Gilles.9.-.?.
Gilles. %ri2inally published as 17a Pens e nomade1 in 4ietzsche au6ourd"huiJ /ol. Gilles. Translation forthcomin2 from Columia Hni/ersity Press. 4ew =ork: Columbia Hni/ersity Press. Deleuze. Translation forthcomin2 from Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. 7e Pli: 7eibniz et le >aro3ue. '(. The 4ew 4ietzsche. French ed. '(@9. Deleuze. '(@<. San Francisco: City 7i2hts. '()-. French ed..Pa2e *-) Deleuze. . '(. '((-. '(. Deleuze. #llison.?.: Proust et les si2nes. 14omad Thou2ht. #llison. Gilles.ant"s Critical Philosophy.<. Gilles. 4ew =ork: Columbia Hni/ersity Press. &Paris: '-L'.ant.. '(. Translated by :u2h Tomlinson and >arbara :abber6am. '()9+. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. Translated by Bark 7ester with Charles Sti/ale. Translated by :u2h Tomlinson.: B0T Press. *d ed. Cambrid2e. '()-. '. Deleuze. Proust and Si2ns. 4ietzsche and Philosophy. Gilles.1 Translated by Da/id >. 5dited by Constanin Q. '(. Paris: PHF. Gilles. 0n Donald >. Pourparlers: '()*M'((-. Gilles. French ed. *d e!panded ed.. ed. Bass. 4ew =ork: >raziller.: 7o2i3ue du sens. Translated by Dobert :urley. Deleuze. Paris: PHF. '(.: 7a Philosophie criti3ue de . Paris: Binuit.+ Deleuze. '(@*. French ed.. Paris: Binuit.: 4ietzsche et la philosophie. '((-. The second French edition contains a new conclusion and has different chapter di/isions. Deleuze. French ed. '()*..9. The 7o2ic of Sense. . Paris: PHF.'. >oundas. Paris: Binuit. Paris: Binuit. '(@(. Spinoza: Practical Philosophy.: Spinoza: Philosophie prati3ue. &The 5n2lish translation is of the first edition. Translated by Dichard :oward. Gilles.
Gilles and F li! Guattari. #nti$%edipus &'())+: '')M9?. Deleuze. Gilles and F li! Guattari. Superpositions. 1>alance$Sheet Pro2ram for Desirin2$Bachines. e!panded ed. 17es 0ntellectuels et le pou/oir. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. '(.afka: Toward a Binor 7iterature. Deleuze. #nti$%edipus &'())+: ((M '-(. Pour une litt rature mineure.9.: . 7an2ua2e. 0thaca.9.1 7"#rc <(: Gilles Deleuze &'()*F *d. 0n Semiote!t&e+. Gilles and Bichel Foucault. Translated by Dana Polan. Deleuze. Counter$Bemory.@. 4. '()<.?. #nti$%edipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. and :elen D. Bark Seem. *. Paris: Binuit. Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit &Paris: Baspero. '()?.=. %ri2inally published as 1Trois problImes de 2roupe. '()).1 a preface to Guattari. Paris: Binuit. &Paris: Binuit. 0n Bichel Foucault. 7ane.-+: 9M'-. Gilles and Carmelo >ene. 7"#nti$%edipe.1 Translated by Dobert :urley. French ed. . '()*. . ed. '()(. 10ntellectuals and Power. Donald >ouchard.: 7"#nti$%edipe: Capitalisme et schizophr nie. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. 1Three Group Problems. Practice. *d. Gilles. French ed. '()*+. %ri2inally published as Pa2e *-.afka. e!panded ed. Paris: Binuit.1 appendi! to Deleuze and Guattari. Deleuze.: Cornell Hni/ersity Press. '()<+. Semiote!t&e+.Deleuze. Gilles and F li! Guattari. '(. *d ed. Translated by Dobert :urley. *.1 Translated by Donald >ouchard and Sherry Simon. %ri2inally published as 1>ilan$Pro2ramme pour machine d sirantes. '(.1 Translated by Bark Seem. Deleuze.
4ew =ork: Pantheon. Bichel. Translated by #. '()). 4ew =ork: Qinta2e. Foucault. French ed.-. '()). Paris: Seuil. 1coldness and Cruelty1 and Sacher$Basoch.(. ed. Paris: Gallimard. Sheridan Smith. '(. Paris: Flammarion. 4ew =ork: None >ooks. Foucault. 7"%rdre du discours.1 Translated by Cean Bc4eil. Deprinted from 7"5spresso. Paris: Binuit. Deleuze. Ducrot. The #rchaeolo2y of . Hmberto. 1Soyez tran3uilles.: Dialo2ues. 6e ne me suiciderai pas.: Pr sentation de Sacher$Basoch. '(@). French ed. Gilles and F li! Guattari. '(). See #lliez. '()*. Gilles and 7eopold /on Sacher$Basoch. Translated by Dobert :urley. Translated by >rian Bassumi. Contains Deleuze. Fabrizio Cal/i. '(. Paris: Binuit. French ed.). Discipline and Punish.).nowled2e. '()*. Basochism. '()'.1 0n 0talie ")): 7e 1Bou/ement. Foucault. Deleuze. 5ric and Bichel Feher. '(. Gilles and Claire Parnet.1 les intellectuels.. %swald. Bichel and 5ric #lliez.: Bille Plateau!: Capitalisme et schizophr nie. Bichel. '(. Dire et ne pus dire: Principes de s manti3ue lin2uisti3ue. Dialo2ues. # Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. '()). '()(. Paris: :erman. Bay '. Translated by #lan Sheridan. 1The Qenus in Furs. Feher. Pa2e *-( Foucault. Translated by :u2h Tomlinson and >arbara :abber6am. 5co. The :istory of Se!uality 0: #n 0ntroduction. Bichel. .Deleuze. 4ew =ork: Columbia Hni/ersity Press. B. 4ew =ork: Pantheon. Bichel. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press.
Paris: Baspero. Gleick. c. Guattari.+ Guattari. 1The Thou2ht from %utside. The German 0ssue.<. Paris: >arrault.+ Guattari. F li!. Paris: 5ditions Decherches. 0n Baurice >lanchot and Bichel Foucault. '(. F li!. FoucaultL>lanchot. Paris: 5ditions Decherches. B tamorphoses du corps. Den .?. Guattari. 4ew =ork: Pen2uin.?. '(. '()*. 1SystIme du d lire. 7a r /olution mol culaire.). Cos . Carto2raphies schizoanalyti3ues.@. F li!. Chaos: Bakin2 a 4ew Science. The 5n2lish collection entitled Bolecular De/olution corresponds to neither. Psychanalyse et trans/ersalit .+.+ Guattari. '(. 7es Trois colo2ies. F li!. &# collection of essays drawn from Psychanalyse et politi3ue and the two editions of 7a D /olution mol culaire. Bichel. F li! and Gilles Deleuze.*+.1 Translated by >rian Bassumi. 4ew =ork: None >ooks. Guattari.+ Guattari. . '()(. Paris: Galil e. &5ssays '()'M'()).* &'(. Bolecular De/olution: Psychiatry and Politics. Gil.1 Criti3ue 9-@ &4o/ember '()*+: (?)M(@.(. Gilles and F li! Guattari. '(. Semiote!t&e+ <. Paris: 5ditions de la Diff rence. Paris: Galil e. Guattari. F li!. F li!. &5ssays '(@?M'()-. F li!. F li!.Foucault. Paris: Hnion G n rale d"5ditions &'-L'. '(.(. Guattari. '(. '(. '()). Girard. Cames. Translated by Dosemary Sheed. See Deleuze. &5ssays '()*M'()(.-M'(.). '(. 7"0nconscient machini3ue. The two collections of essays entitled 7a D /olution mol culaire differ substantially in content. 4ew =ork: Qikin2.-. 7a D /olution mol culaire. 7es #nn es d"hi/er: '(.
1 >yte '*. Syl/Ire and Paul Qirilio. Cac3ues.: 5crits. #lice. Cameson.*. Paris: Seuil. Cardine. 4ew =ork: Pantheon. 7uce. 4ew =ork: Semioe!t&e+.nowled2e. 7yotard..1 4ew 7eft De/iew '<@ &CulyM#u2ust '(. Technolo2ies of Gender: 5ssays on Theory. Paul and Syl/Ire 7otrin2er.: 7es 4ou/eau! espaces de libert . Teresa. :istoires de 7a >orde.<+: ?9M(*. 4ew 7ines of #lliance.: Cornell Hni/ersity Press. This Se! 8hich 0s 4ot %ne.?. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. &The 5n2lish translation is only a selection. 1Postmodernism. French ed. 7otrin2er.: 0ndiana Hni/ersity Press. =. Ser2e. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binnesota Press. *d ed '(.Pa2e *'Guattari. Spillmann. See Qirilio. Film. Translated by >etty 5.<.+ 7eclaire. 5crits. 4ew =ork: 4orton. Translated Geoff >ennin2ton and >rian Bassumi. '(@@. '()). forthcomin2. Fredric. Fran]ois. '(.1 0n The Politics of 5/eryday Fear. '((-. '(@. 1Bimickin2 Bountains. '()9. Translated by Bichael Dyan. Communists 7ike Hs: 4ew Spaces of 7iberty. The Postmodern Condition: # Deport on . Tom. or The Cultural 7o2ic of 7ate Capitalism. De 7auretis. The 7o2ic of 7ife.=. '< &December '(. 0nd. >loomin2ton. edited by >rian Bassumi. Gynesis.?. Paris: Seuil. F li! and Toni 4e2ri. 0ri2ary. Cacob. '(.).: Cornell Hni/ersity Press. 1Shoppin2 Disorders. 7acan. . 4. Paris: Domini3ue >edou. Translated by Catherine Porter.?. Ceffrey. Dhonda. Psychanalyser. Decherches *' &BarchM#pril '()@+. 7ieberman. 0thaca. '(. 4. French ed. '(. '(. 0thaca. Translated by #lan Sheridan. and Fiction.)+: 99)M9<<. Cean$Fran]ois.
Pa2e *'' Bassumi.eynes.arl. Translated by Da/id Fernbach. Dichard Gunn. 4ew =ork: Qinta2e. Bar!. Theory and Practice.aufmann. 4ew =ork: Qinta2e. 4ew =ork: #utonomedia.1 Copyri2ht ' &Fall '(. . and Baurizio Qiano. and .(.1 Copyri2ht ' &Fall '(. 4ew =ork: Qinta2e. Bar! >eyond Bar!: 7essons on the Grundrisse. Toni. forthcomin2. Bar!. Toni. Translated by 8alter . '(('. Feminine 5ndin2s: Busic. Translated by >en Fowkes.)+: @<M)9. 7ondon: Pluto Press. Toni and F li! Guattari. 4e2ri. Toni. and Dimension. Translated by :arry Clea/er.1 Future ant rieur ' &'((-+: ))M. /ol. 1Polizeiwissenschaft. Tania.. . 4e2ri. 4ietzsche. '(('. 10nter/iew with Toni 4e2ri. See Guattari. . /ol. '. '(. '()). /ol. 7ondon: Ded 4otes. '(. edited by 8erner >onefeld. 4e2ri. 4e2ri..osmas Psychopedis. '(@). Capital. F li! and Toni 4e2ri. Fractals: Form. "":arbin2er or :iccupJ #utonomy in 5!ile. Friedrich.)+: )<M..Bandelbrot.'.9. Toni. '(.new Too Buch: :itchcock and Feminist Theory. >enoit. '()).. Gender and Se!uality.1 0n %pen Bar!ism. 4e2ri. San Francisco: Freeman. Susan. 4e2ri.arl. The 8omen 8ho . Cim Flemin2. . >rian. Capital. Binneapolis: Hni/ersity of Binneapolis Press. 9. Capitalist Crisis and 4ew Social Sub6ects. 1Crisis of Class. The Genealo2y of Borals. Chance. BcClary. Bichael Dyan. ed. Toni. Bodleski.@. '(@)M. De/olution Detrie/ed: Selected 8ritin2s on Bar!. *. 4ew =ork: Bethuen.
.)+. 0lya and 0sabelle Sten2ers. Friedrich. . 7ondon: Pen2uin >ooks. forthcomin2. Schnapp. French ed. The Sub6ect of Semiotics. ed.@. >oston: 7ittle. *d.: %pen Court. Polkin2horne. #n #nalytical Decord. '(.<)<..<.. Palo #lto..: Cours de lin2uisti3ue 2 n rale. The 5ssential 8orks of #narchism. The French Student Hprisin2: 4o/ember '(@)MCune '(@. C. 4ew =ork: Qinta2e. 4ew =ork: >antam. >oston: >eacon. '(. >rown. 5ntre le temps et l" ternit . Barshall S. Pri2o2ine.4ietzsche. Pa2e *'* Pynchon. 7a Salle. '()'. >oston: #lyson. '((-. Paris: Gallimard. The 8ill to Power. Sil/erman.: Stanford Hni/ersity Press. '(. Shatz. Course in General 7in2uistics. Saussure. Paris: Fayard. '(.9. 9d. 1Dynamics of Fractal 4etworks. '()(.1 Science *9'. '()*.).&February *'. '(. The Cinematic >ody. 0lya and 0sabelle Sten2ers. Pri2o2ine. S#B%0S. '(. %rder out of Chaos. '(. Translated by Doy :arris.a6a. '(@. e!panded ed.@. #lain and Pierre Qidal$4a3uet. Paris: Payot.<. Comin2 to Power: 8ritin2 and Graphics on 7esbian SLB. Sha/iro. %rbach. Pri2o2ine. Cal. 7ib ration special supplement &Canuary '(. Ste/en. ed. 0lya and 0sabelle Sten2ers.. The Euantum 8orld. Ferdinand de.aufmann and D. 4ew =ork: >antam. C. '(.'<M'(. Translated by 8aiter . C. 7a 4ou/elle alliance. :ollin2dale. 0ll. '()'. 7a 4ou/elle /a2ue: 4o/embre$D cembre '(. ed. Qineland. %!ford: %!ford Hni/ersity Press.. Thomas.@+: . D.9.
@$.@. '-). '?*n9@ capital as. **. '(.9. >rans. '9'.. 4. Cambrid2e.: Hni/ersity of 0llinois Press. Paris: Stock. Qance.: >asil >lackwell. '(. and the Basochistic #esthetic. Hrbana. 7es Hntorelli. &Bikhail >akhtin+.. Bass. Bar!ism and the Philosophy of 7an2ua2e.Sten2ers. Q. '?(n@* . >oston: Doutled2e S . 0an. See Pri2o2ine. Trois milliards de per/ers. Does God Play DiceJ The Bathematics of Chaos. Stewart. '9? as pure function. '(.e2an Paul. Dietrich. Pure 8ar. Decherches 9. Cambrid2e. '99. '. <9. Translated by 7adisla/ Bate6ka and 0.<. ed.)n9' 1yet real. Barie$>lanche and #ndr Corten. Pa2e *'9 0nde! # abstract. 7"0talie: 7e Philosophe et le 2endarme. 4ew =ork: Semiote!t&e+. *@. 0lya and C. Gaylyn. #ctes du collo3ue de Bontr al. Carol S. 0sabelle.@. 0ll. Tahon. ''<. ed. Qirilio. ')-n<< redundancy and. Studlar. Decherches '* &Barch '()9+. '(. 0n the Dealm of Pleasure: Qon Sternber2. '(.: :ar/ard Hni/ersity Press. '()@. Paul and Syl/Ire 7otrin2er. *( socius and. Bontreal: Q7>. D. Qolosino/.&4o/ember '())+. << as superlinear. '(. Qirilio.1 ?9 abstract machine.(.. 7"0ns curit du territoire. Bass. '''$'*. Titunik. P. *). )? sub6ect as. Paul. Pleasure and Dan2er: 5!plorin2 Female Se!uality. <-.
?9. '-'. '(. )9. '('n9(. ?. '9? affirmation. '9'$9*. '. '(@n?9 #ion. ''( See also Thou2ht.n)9 amplification. @. bein2. '9-. '9<$9? deterritorialization of.n*alienation. '-. '@-n@( /s. See also Dia2ramF 53uation action free. )-. 9*.. ?? /irtual poles and.. '(<n?'. ''. <. ''@$*-. )9 . 9@.. '9? capital and. '@. '<. '@. 7ouis. '@)n<9. 5ric.. . '*(. ?*.<n*..1 99 anticipation. '*9.. circuit of with the actual affect. passi/e actual&ization+. '('n9( Catalonian '*' anarchy. ')(n)? #2amben. '). acti/e /s. '--. (9. ((. ?. analo2ical anarchism. '9<. ?@. @'. '99 as e!tension. 9) capital and. '*-$*' anarchy$schizophrenia. (. '?'n9'.?. '(@n??. '9. '9?. (9$(?..n@' #lthusser. '*-. '??n<?. @@ as translation. See also 5ssence.as synthesizer. )? See also Synthesis. See also 5!pression. /a2ue 1anonymous murmur. @. '(<$(?n?9 ane!actitude. )? analo2y forced. 9.. ''. 9). <) accumulation. alienation of in content #lliez. Gior2io. ')<n?@. See also CounteractualizationF Bi!ityF Qirtual.
. ')-$)'n<? Pa2e *'< attractor &continued+ as limit$state. '??n<?. @. )<.*. )<. '*'. ''<. '. anarchist$schizophrenic. ')<n@-. '9*. '??n<?. '?9$?<n<*. #ntonin. 9 . 7. )'$)<. @<$@@. '(9n?attractor. Franco. '.@$. '*.* attraction$repulsion. *(. '--. '--$'-'. ''@$*fractal &stran2e+. Doland. '?<n<?. '99. archaism. ')'n?'.antipsychiatry mo/ement. Dudolf. '-<$'-?. '9( art.. '(?$(@n?9 autonomic reaction.*. ')*n?9 capital and. 9(. '??n<?. C. '9? See also Qirtual. '(?n?9 >arthes. '9<.. ''@$'') whole. *-*n@( #ustin. ''. ((. )) #rtaud. neo$. ').-. '9'. '-'. '9'$9* fascist$paranoid /s.). Bikhail &Qolosino/+. '. autonomous zone. '?@n<) autonomia mo/ement.n)9 >asa2lia.. 9 application. defined. . @). ))$. a!iomatic. '''$'*.?.<n*. ''' autonomy. . (<. @-. (.n)9 >all. ''. 5dward. ?). . @<. poles attribute.*n'. '('n9( assembla2e. '(?n?9 >akhtin. ''(. '9?. '--$'-*. '). *-'n@@ > >ahro. . capitalist.. capitalist. '?*n9? aura.
. becomin2$consumer. . <9. '-@$'*becomin2$supermolecular. @@. '9@$9). '9) > nard instability. '<'. (@$() /s. '. <* thou2ht$in$. . )). ').(. '*<. '@'nl becomin2. '-@$'-. **. '. becomin2$other. . '9'. '.9. ')(n. Samuel. '-9. '@?n99 >en/eniste. (9$'-' becomin2$e/erybody. 9?.)n9'.-n'structure and.@$. imitation. )) becomin2$animal. ')?n@' becomin2$woman.. '. as directional. ')@n@. ) >audrillard. metaphor.'n'* becomin2$the$same. becomin2$man. '*'. '?(n@* as collecti/e. '-'. '--$'-*.). '9'. '(9n<. '*9$*< of plane of transcendence. ''@. '-*$'-9.(. '-(. ''9.. '. ''*. '(9n<. .<n*. 9) belief. '. '-9. '?*n9@ broken &6a22ed+ line of. '. '9).*n').>ateson. ''(. '.<. '(@n?9 >eckett. (9$'-@. 5mile. (. '-9 /s. (). '*@. '*@$*) bein2.?n*(. '*(. '9@ becomin2$do2. (9$'-@.$'-' becomin2$acti/e. ')($. imitation.*n'. Cean. (@$() as simulation. /s. '(-n9@ becomin2$imperceptible. becomin2$immanent democracy as. ')@n@(.$)(n)@. becomin2$minoritarian..-n. '(9n<. '.@$.*n'?. Gre2ory. '??n<? . . momentary suspension of.*n'. '<($?-n*(. <?. (?. 9). ''<..
Baurice.?$.. '. )-. ')*n?<. '-*$'-9 full. '-)$'-. )-$. '<<n').as te!t '))n)' transcendence and. '-See also Fra2mented bodyF %r2anF %r2anism body without or2ans. ?<.<n*. ')(n< on the ima2e. ''* o/ercodin2 and. @. '*( . '()n?) black hole..( See also Dualism biolo2y. (-$(' markin2 of. (9 capital as.. causal.?n9lan2ua2e and. '). '(*n<? as supermolecule. '.$)-n<<.n)< faciality. @*.(n9? Pa2e *'? as microcosm. '*( binarism. '*). ('$(*. @($)-. (9$'-9 as collecti/e. :enri. . ')@n)-. '). ')*$)9n?< lan2ua2e and. '?)n?@. ''( as or2anism. (@.'n'< >lanchot. ?* biopower. '?-n*(. **. '. as ima2e. *. ')'n?' affect and. '. '@. ?*.@n9on the /irtual. '?@n?9 bifurcation. ''. '. '--.>er2son. <?$<@ molarity and. ''* /irtual and. (. ')-n<< body $in$becomin2.n)9.
as attractor. ')?n@* defined. feminism and.-n'See also #ttraction$repulsion >ookchin.( /s. Pat. '9? actualization and. '(. '*. '*( capture and. . '*. or2ans without a body. ')<n?( socius and. Pierre. .<$. . '*(. ')-$)'n<? as ima2e. '.*n'). See also Bask cancer.$((n@' code and. ')9n?< C Califia. '99. '.9.<n*.<n*. '(9n?/s. '. human.). '99$9< as body without or2ans.. >ourdieu. )-$)' despotic. (*. and suspension of becomin2.. Cal/i.?n*(.. '(@n?9 brain. '@9n*breakdown. )<$. . '9-. ''( Can2uilhem. ''.@. Burray. nonlimitati/e. Geor2es. '99$9< .@$. '9'$9* application and. '(?n?9 camoufla2e.dan2ers of.@n9See also Synapse breakaway. (*.$*-.*. '. Pierre. ')(nl capital. '<<n'. '(?n?9 >oulez. ')@n@. '?(n@*. Fabrizio. '99 affect and. '. fra2mented body. '(-n9.$<' as abstract machine. )). '**. '-?$'-@. )).-. '9'. '. . ')<n@limitati/e /s. '9'$9* as a!iomatic. )(. . )?$)@. ?).
'?<n<* efficient. '*? capitalist relation. '-<.($(-n9? State.(n9? /irtual and. '(. ''<. @9$@<. *'. )<. '*) limits of. @).as desire. ?'. '9'. '. '9)$9. '?9$?<n<* co$. '*. '(. '*(. ''9. machinic ensla/ement and.'. *-'n@@ as 3uasicause.? cate2ory. '9-$9'.$<'. '*. misapplication of. '9* as field of e!teriority. ?'. 9. '-'. '. ''<. ?). '99 as fetish. '@*n. '9@. . <($?-. )<. )@$).. '-*. '*'.$((n@' e!pression and.)$. '(<n?'.)n99 as ima2eless. workin2 ima2es of. )(. '* molarization as. '9?. . '''. . **. . '9* as isomorphic to sub6ect. .$((n@'. '9* redefinition of. '*(. '*'$*@ See also #pplicationF 0dea. '. <(. '9?. 2eneralF 0dentity 2ridF Type cause asymptotic. @9. *@.n@' molecular and. <9$<<. '-. '@*n''.$9-. ??.. '*.'. . ?9$?<. operati/e. '9) late.'n'< castration. .. '9' e/aluation and. '(. '''..@$. 9?. *-<n)capitalism and. '9< pain and. . '9<. )9. '. .(. '). << final. '*?.(. '9-$9' See also SubsumptionF Surplus /alue capitalism e!pansionism of.*. '9.'. '-). *-9n@( capture.
.?. ''-. '@.n9< /s. ')<$)?n@' Chomsky. '-). 4oam.. .. ? class consciousness. 9'. . ?$@. causalF 5ffect. *-*$*-<n@( lo2ical. '?'n9' childhood. : lIne. lan2ua2e. << immanent. '99$9< defined. . ?(. '?'n9' See also >ifurcation. ''@. con/erted into a causeF Euasicause Cazazza. ')*$)9n?<. *9. '@.(. Bonte.9n** chance. )(. '.9n*9.). '. '') chaosmos.)n9< molar. @*$@<.. @).n9< plane of transcendence and. '9?.. ')9n?? circumstance. '*) Ci!ous. ?'$?* ima2e and.n<< code capital and. ')*n?< blocks. '(-n9@. See also Conte!t ci/il liberties.'. social.n<< channelization. ')*n?<. ?9. '((n@< . '. ?. '@*n. '@)n<'. ?. . ''<. *-*$*-<n@( clinamen. ''9$'<. '. ''. See also :abitF De2ularization chaos. ('. <' Christ.Pa2e *'@ cause &continued+ formal. '. )).)$.
?-. '9) See also Decodin2F Decodin2 Cold 8ar. <). '--. '9common sense. '9<. '<defined. '??n<? conscious&ness+ as double.. *. '?9n9( connotation. '99. '@'n*. '(. '. ). ('.)n9' infra$. 9<. concrete. . '9?. 9(. '-*..@$. 9(. coldness.. *. ')*$)9n?< conatus of capital. ''.$9( See also Counteractualization consummation &culmination+. @* computer.* concept.-n'complication.*n'? commodity relation. '9. '-) component of passa2e. '. '9<. '()n?@. 9<. of enunciation.n@collecti/e assembla2e. *. '99.sub$. <'. <9. '<)n'* as effect. 9<. '('n<9 /s. '*(. '@*n'- .. <) false. *-*n@( See also 0ntentionF 8ill consistency. ?9. *). ?<. '9. '?9n9( composition. ?$. ''*. '. '. ?. (<. 9. '*cornpossibility. 9'.@n9non$. See GoodLcommon sense communication. contradiction.$@'. (( connector. '. @9$@<. '9. (9. '(. )*. mode of. <. '*(.-n.. <'. <9. See Plane of consistency &immanence+ constraint.. of capitalism. @). '9(.
'(<n?counteractualization.. '). '9*. ''*.. )$. )*. '). content. Gilles . ?-. '@9n'@ deconstruction. 9-. '(-n9? international. '9@. '-). 9). *-. '@*n'conta2ion.?n9contradiction. (?. '?*n9@ 1horizontal. '*9. )9. '9) correlation. See Consummation cynicism.1 <? si2nified and. **. '(-n9? culmination. <* contraction. ''). @'. '--. '-'. #ndr .. '. '.. '*$'9.$@(n<<. @-. ??. '9. '?) toward society. '?'n9'. '?. (. '@. 99.'. . ''@ capitalism and. '(?n?9 Pa2e *') cosmos.9.n)? D dates. '-. 9(. <9 See also Form of content conte!t. '9@ Corten. '-*. '**.1 *). <?.n)< Deleuze. ''-. death. '(9n<. '*-. '<' cruelty.($(-n9? decodin2. *-9$*-<n@( corporatism. ')$'. '-. ''@. )*. '('n<9 debt infinitization of. in # Thousand Plateaus. ?'. (-. *'. '??n<? 1/ertical. @?$@@. . '@9n') dri/e.consumption.. *'. '9<. **.
<). ''(. ').n)9 desi2nation. )'. *-9n@( depletion. Cac3ues. ( . '*@. '@9n'@. '*- .*. '<. '('n9( # Thousand Plateaus.< /irtual and.n@capital as. *. @<$@). '(@n?9 fascism$paranoia and. '9)$9. '. *< Deleuze. ''(. '@)n<9. ')9n?? democracy as becomin2$immanent. '*9$*< direct. '('n9( shortcircuitin2 of. @$). <. '<?n*<. '. <) Foucault.. '(.n').n?( as 3uasicause. '. '@9n '@. ('. (<$(? nomadic..afka. '(?n?9. )). '?'n99 7o2ic of Sense. '@-n@( Guattari and. '. *< relation to Bar!ism. '@9n'@ on method. *9. *-. '<' Derrida. '*-$*'. *< Diff rence et r p tition. *9 Proust and Si2ns. *'. . and F li! Guattari #nti$%edipus.. ?. '?9n9(. ')9n??. '** dense points. (desire anoedipal. '9. *. ).Cinema 0. <. '*? See also 7iberal nation$state Democratic Party. *'. '. '*<. . '$<.)n99 Capitalism and Schizophrenia. .* force and. Gilles. '$<. .*. *. '@'n@( molarity as. <).. '(. '9*. '9' definition of.)n99 4ietzsche and Philosophy.
See also >ecomin2$otherF Per/ersion diachrony. (-. '*<. '*). <*$<9. *'. '9< See also %/ercodin2 determinacy. See also Contradiction Dick. 9'. )( deterritorialization. '@. of affect. 9<. ?(. '))n)'. '. '*?$*.?. '). ''.<n*. Philip .( reciprocal &oppositional+. differential. '?'n9' Pa2e *'. *-. '@9n'@. 9($<-.. . '?. @9. '-?. '9(. @. '. '<9n<. '@. ..n)< repetition and. *-9$*-<n@(. (-$(*. (9. (@$(). <de/iation. (' o/er$. '@)n<9. . (($'--. .. '-). '(. ?'. *(. 9). <9. . @( 1un$. '9? lan2ua2e and.n9< de/elopment. @-. See also ConstraintF 0ndeterminacy determination.n@-. ')@$))n)-.. 9). ' State and.* despotism mini$.<. @. ')9n?? and philosophy..$(*. '@)n<'.). .1 @@. '-($''.<. '?*n9@.n?( difference absolute. '*dia2ram. ?.. (@. ')*n?< dialect.. '<.desirin2$machine. ')$'. '()n?) of phallus. ''- . . '').. <'$<* dialectic. *-9n@( differentiation.. '*(.
**.* death. '*) dualism of content and e!pression. '<)n'? double articulation. *. @?$@@. '*.?$. '('n<9 transpersonal. .)n9< Doane. '? suppression of. '(?$(@n?9 effect con/erted into a cause. '(. See also Structure. ''. 9<. Guattari on.-n. @* dri/e.. . 9. '. '?<n<9. 9? See also >inarism Ducrot. See 0nstitution. *)$*.n)9 Duyn.$<discourse. )<. '@)n<' relation to unity and multiplicity. ?-$?'. *). '(?n?9 5 5co. 9? See also 5!cess e2o. <-. '?@n?' dissipation. double. *'$**. '@. )*. <<. ?'$?*. dru2 war. 9-. 9<.1 *-$*'. ')<n@ecolo2y. %swald. *). ?).. ?-$?'. '. '-- .See also :yperdifferentiation dilation. '<(n*@. <9. Hmberto. '-. '?'n9' discipline.$@(n<<. dissipati/e distinction. Doel /an.(. 9<. *-'n@@ consciousness and. ')?n@@ do2. '?<n<<. '). '<'. free indirect &3uasiindirect+. ''9. '<)n'*. real.. '<@n'D4#. Bary #nne. disciplinary discontinuity. '. '@@n9.. '??n<?.. ''..@n9Dionysus. '@(n<< 1e/aporati/e. '. <@. '<. (9$'-'. 9.)n9< optical.
*. '(-n9) entropy. . ''@.n@See also #ne!actitude eternal return. '??n<? alienation of in content...n<< ethics. ). ''?$'< . '?. '<($?-n*( enunciation. '*($9-. defined by what escapes it essence. '-?. '9? e/ent.<n*. )*. '. <9. '-?. '. morality. capital and. ?@. *. '<. '. collecti/e assembla2e of. '. '99. *(. '9) enemy ubi3uitous..n<<. ''@. e3uilibrium. (<. )<. ?@.n*-. )).?. '.$*-. *?. '(*$(9n<? e3ui/alence.. '*(. ''). ?-. '-. 1e/aporati/e1F Surplus /alue e!chan2e. '@. '*$'9. '?'n?9. 9. @-$@*. '9*$99. '?*n9@. @'. '(-n9) unspecified. '. *( /a2ue. ?. e!pression. '<. @. ''?$'@. *?. ')$'(. ')?n@*. '-?. See also Foldin2 e3uation. '9*.$@-.*n'? en/elopment. '<. )eros. '-(. '?. '99. '<' /s.. . '-*. 9..$(-n9? ero2enous zone. ''* e/aluation. '?*n9@ meanin2 and. '@. '?'n9'. @*. '-. une3ual.. '@. **. '-. ''-. @<$@?. @.$(-n9? e!pressed. See also 5ffect. *-<n)See also Structure. '**. *).n*-. ?)$?. '<-. 9<. '-@$'-).. '-).. '*'. '@'n@( e!cess. ''). '@(n<< si2n and. 99 non$Platonic. (*.n*redundancy of. '*@. '('$(*n<9 escape line of.endocolonization.
'*?. '*) fascism. '-@.)n99 Feuillade. 9'. '-9. '('n<9. *-'n@@ Feher. '*-. '*). '9-$9'. @(. '. Bichel. '99 See also De/elopmentF 5n/elopment ..$''9 Fichte.. Cohann. '9). '. . <(. 7ouis. . . open F faciality. '-?.<. ')?n@@ feminism.'. '@*n''. '()n?. ?'$?9. (. '*<. ''*. @@ e!teriority field of. '(@n??.. '*)..@$.. '?)n?@ foldin2. ')*$)9n?<. '9'. '(. unboundedF %utsideF System.'. ')*n?9 un$.9n** fascism$paranoia. ?. '*@. . )9.n?( feedback. '*'. ?. '*<. ''*. See 101 fiection. ''<. )<.. ')-n<< See also Bilieu. con/erted into a causeF Form of e!pressionF Batter Pa2e *'( of e!pressionF Substance of e!pression e!tension. '(.).'n'* family. )*. '. '*. capital as. ?*.<n*. *-<n)death dri/e and. '*@.See also 5ffect.( Guattari on. powers of the. '('n<9 and democracy. . (<.n@' feminine mas3uerade. '. ')9n?? false. < first person. ''<. '9(. '-. '(?n?9 and body without or2ans. ''@$*-..-. . '@9n'<. (. micro$. . ')@n@) fetish.
See also 0dea. '9<$9? Saussure on. )? freedom. . body without or2ans. . @9. Freud.. 9meanin2 and. ')-n<< relation to Deleuze and Guattari. '?. *( fractal. '@-$@'n@(. (<. *?$*@. *'. '). Den . '99.@$. '. '-'. '?*n9@. *?. '-9.@. '. ')<n@free action. <<. power. )*. ?' form of content.<n*. )<. '. '-$<-. '('$(*n<9 future$past.<$. Si2mund. ?<. . '()n?) on 1outside thou2ht. /s.*. '<?n*9. '?-n9fra2mented body. . '<<n'). )-. '<<n''. 9@.. ?. *'$*9. '9) form. '*(.'. '99. See also FeminismF Gay mo/ementF 7esbian mo/ement 2enerality. ')@n@.1 @. '?@n<(. '*). Bichel. '?*n9@. (<. ')<n@- . ''). 9?$9(.(. '*). 9* Foucault.(. 1pure1 G 2ay mo/ement.<. '??n<? /s. See also Past. '-*. '?<n<? alienation of in content. '?'n9<. '9$'<. ')@$))n)2ender politics. '. @. '<($?-n*(. '?)n??. '(-n9@ on minidespotism. <. @*$@9. '( thin2 and. ')?$)@n@). '-$'*..force illocutionary.n)9 on statement. 9@. 2ender commodification of. ('. '). '<9n@.. '?@n<).. '?-n*( Fordism. '<)n'*. *). '?<n<? form of e!pression '9. . '<($?-n*( Girard.n)?. (? de2ree of. 9?$9. . .. 2eneral Gil.. '?@n?-. '*<. Cos . .?. '?)n?@. '*$'<. <@n.
1 '*9$*?. See also Dialectic :eisenber2. See Borality 2oodLcommon sense.. ''9. '9'. 8erner. ')@n@( . '*). See 7ocal$2lobal Good. '-9. '(?$(@n?9 2ay mo/ement and. '(<n?'. Cames. )'$)(. and F li! Guattari : :abermas. (@. 9.). '.'n'*. *$9. '. ')9n?< :e2el. '?-n92lobal. )-. F. *. '''. '. G. ')@n@) heterose!uality. Gilles.Gleick. (($'--. '<<n'* See also Deleuze. '. F li! antipsychiatry and. '*' Guattari. '<<n( Trotskyism and. (($'-'. '<<n'- Pa2e **Guattari &continued+ Deleuze and. ''*$'<.<n*) hallucination. (?. '**. *'..$?(n@' heteroclite. See also 7iberal nation$ state Green mo/ement. (-$(' hetero2eneity.n9< 2o/ernment. '((n@* hetero2enesis. '*(. '<<n'? habit. (). . . CWr2en. '-< See also ChannelizationF De2ularizationF Type haecceity. 1democratic. '?.. '9? unhin2in2 of ((. '<-. ''. 8..@$. '-9. ?.(. '?. '<<n'' 7a >orde Clinic and. ?@. '?'n99 on ecolo2y.
. '9-$9' code and. illocutionary. See also #pplicationF Cate2ory ideolo2y. @. '??n<? :umboldt. '?<$??n<?. ('.<n*. '9?. '*<. ')*n?<. '@*n. '). #dolf. . 9-. @($)-. '()n?. '9@. '-($'?. '. '))n)' identification. '<..@n9-. '*. ?'. :6elmsle/. 9<. '. <) loss .?. '* history. '9). ''<. '<-. ob6ecti/e ima2e affect and. @@.n*-. ''9. :ifier. identity confusion. <9. ''<. <). '-)$'-. *-*n@( idealism. ('$(* See also Cate2oryF PersonF Type identity 2rid. <?.<n*.n@hyperdifferentiation. 9illusion. '. )@$)) 0dea. ''< as effect. )@ of capital. '?@n?<. )@. <'. '9? of attractors. '-<. 8ilhelm /on. ''-. )(. hypocrisy. ob6ecti/e apparentF Perspecti/e. '''. (9. '*-. . <<.. )*. '9@ 0 10. '*(. (?. '-'$'-*. (?. '.n9< commodification of.. '**. '-).< /s. '?.@n92eneral. < hun2er. (< :usserl. '-*. 5dmund. undifferentiation. @). '*). <(.1 99. '9(. 7ouis. ob6ecti/e. '. '-?. '. . )<.n)9.n9< capital and. ')<$)?n@'. ('$(*. (@$((.(. See also Bo/ement. ?).hierarchy.@$('. '9<. *--$*-*n@@ . '<@n(. 9(.
<). (' super$. <. '.. @*. '-<$'-? See also Differentiation. .$*(.@n9implicit presupposition.9n*@. *( free.). ?-. ?. 99.$<(... /s. ('. '?'n9' of capital. )(. '.. un$F 0dentity.@n9imitation.-$.'. )-. becomin2 (@$() See also Bimicry immanence.defined. ''*$'9 of unity. of molarity. ''(. ''@. ''?. 99 indi/idual. @*$@9. ?? ima2inary. '. '@. ?). ''@. '*. '@*n? .<. @.$*( indeterminacy ob6ecti/e. ''(. ?(. ''?. 9). ('. @'. <'. )). . 9(.. See also %rder$word imperialism. (?. @@. )( zone of. ''-.@n9identification and. '. .?.. <. <@. '. '-<. '-)$'-. confusion indirect discourse.*$. '9. '*(. )9. '. '@*n? supple.$<(. ')<n@ima2ination. @@. (.'n''. (($'-'. ?-$?'. See also Plane of consistency imperati/e. '. '9?. ?*. *. '--$'-'. See also 5ndocolonizationF 4eocolonialism irapersonality. <@ Pa2e **' incorporeal transformation. 9'.-n. '(-n9@ capital and. ''' territory and. 9*. (. . ?*. 9*$9<. ?<$??. )@. '9? of transcendence.n<< sub6ecti/e.?$. '-?.
'*'$*( intellectual.. '. )-. . )intention. See also Bilieu. ''<$'?. '**. )*. '?)n?? Ceffrey. (? interiority. '((n@? Cardine.$'(. Tom. Fredric. '99. '?-n96ouissance.n9< Cameson. '<?n*<. '.. '@<n*<. '(*n<9 6oy. #lice. *. '--. *.See also Person infiniti/e.)$.. '-<. @@. '@<n*9 political. ''. *?. . boundedF Sub6ectF System. )9. @-.. preconscious /s. '-9 insistence. ''?.n@inhibition. '-' disciplinary. '9. 7uce. '('n<9 6ud2ment. < . '. Fran]ois. '))n)'. . @. <'.1 @@. '(. '(?n?9 6ar2on. '?)n?@ intensity.$*-. *. unconscious. '@'n* intensity G -. '. '. ''. '*'. ?). in/estment. @(. <). '?'n9'. @<. <'. '. role of. ')?n@9. '9( See also DespotismF FascismF 7iberal nation$stateF %/ercodin2 institutional psychotherapy. * ""intension. 9 inte2ration. See Subsistence institution. '9@.<. '''. '?. '<. . '@9n') 6ustice. . ')?n@9 C Cacob. closed interpretation... ?<. '@9n'. '-'$'-*. @($)'. @).<n*. <($?'.. )zone of.-.(.9n** 0ri2aray. . ') in/ention. )@$)). ?. See also 8ill interference. *<$*@.. @(. (*. '9). '9). )$.. ?). **. @@. '*?$*@.'.
'). 9<. '??n<?. >arbara. '. *.n@. (standard.abouters. D.? 7ain2. 7acanian lack. '. '*. '). . . '. 9 lan2ua2e /s.n9< elementary unit of. See also Psychoanalysis. <as impulsion. '(?n?9 . <'$<* as deterritorializin2..n)9. '?. '?<$??n<? as prescripti/e. 9-$9' limits and. '.n)9 .afka.* as superlinear. ')'n?.n9< as structure... <@.hmer Dou2e.riste/a. <'. '. . . '@9n') .ant. '*'.. '<(n*9 power and. D.n)9 .och cur/e.n9< unity of. '?)n?@. Cac3ues.. Pierre.)n9< communication and. Culia.eynesianism. **$*9 . '*. *. (as reducti/e. Franz.<.@n9constants of.ru2er. '**. *--n@@ 7 7acan. 0mmanuel.lein. '-). Belanie.lossowski. '). (See also ConnotationF ContentF Pa2e *** . code.
'(9n<?. '-9.Conte!tF 0ndirect discourseF %rderwordF Si2nificationF Superlinearity lan2ue. <@. @(. <.<n*. 9@$<-. 8. 97otrin2er. '('$(*n<9 7ieberman. @). (. ?)$?.$((n@' /s. relati/e. @?$@@. See also Superlinearity local$2lobal. mechanical. '9< libido. ')@n@. '<of capitalism. ')(n)? limit. Teresa de. '()n?@ . 7auretis. *) ensla/ement.)n9<. G. '-). *. . '. '*@ See also Threshold linearity. '. <9 latitude.n<< 7yotard. '-@. '@@n9@ lo2os. . '9*.. '*). . '(. ''@$') absolute /s. '-( 7ucretius. Syl/Ire. ). '<'. '(*$(9n<?.. '<<n'< B machine concrete. <'. ? liberal nation$state. Ser2e.@. ')<n?) 7eibniz.$((n@' See also #bstract machineF BachinicF Bechanical machinic assembla2e. lan2ua2e and. '((n@9 lo/e. '(*n<? technical. '9) displacement of.(. '-. ')?n@9 7eclaire. <-. **. ()..). Cean$Fran]ois. @. '@-n@(. @*$@9. '@@n9) lesbian mo/ement. '<(n*9 of liberal nation$state. '*'$*). liberalism. '?@n?9. '9'. Dhonda. '@. '(..
@. '. '-'. . '-?.. ')*$)9n?< Bandelbrot. '(. '?*n9@ Bay '(@. *9. #ndr .)n99 on real subsumption. **. '.. ')$'(. StandardF Standard mall. '@($)-n<< matter of content. '@*n. of body. >rian. '('n9(. '?-n9mappin2. '@*n''. '99 Ballarm . *. See also BiddleF 7imit markin2. *--$*-*n@@ Bar!ism. '-$<@. See also Ban. '(?n?9 matter. 9. '-@. '(?n?9 Deleuze and Guattari and. *?$*@. '?'n9' Ban as 2eneral idea. See also Camoufla2e mass media. '@*n(.phylum. '9?. '.$((n@' Bassumi. >enoit. '??n<? .'n'9 mar2inality. 9*. '?9n9) Bar!. '(?n?9 mask. '9<. '**. '(9n<? ma6ority. . St phane. '-9. '*-$*'. *) force and. '(9n<.arl on fetishism. '.. 9($<' Bartinet. '(. 99 e/aluation and. 8hite. '?*n9@ matter of e!pression. '(9n<. ''9.(n9? marria2e. ''<. *-$**. ?@ as 1e/aporati/e1 effect.n@' on surplus /alue. 9. *.@n9-. ')?n@@ meanin2 essence and.$*(. Susan. *?. () Standard &Bolar+. ?*$??. '(@n?9 BcClary. *'. '*'$**.@. ')*n?<. <.
'n'*. (). *). '(9n<. . literature. ')9n?<. )9$)<.1implosion1 of. '@ separation and. See also Composition.*. '<. ')(n).@n9bounded. ''( middle &in$between+. . ''9. '(*$(9n<?.<. '9@. '. '. *@$*). in Spinoza. '(<n?' mode. '()n?@ memory. (as nonrelation. @?. <-. '9. '(<n?'.'.. ''9 as translation. of actual formations. *sub6ect of. 9-. '(*n<? Pa2e **9 metastability.. '. '. '9@ unbounded. '. <9.<. ''(.*$. '). '.@n9metaphor.. <(. /s.. See also Bilieu milieu. '') methodolo2y. <<$<?. '** misdirection. ?). ).n)? lin2uistic. . ''9 microcosm. '@-n@(. '). '<$') See also GoodLcommon sense mechanical. ')(n).. ''@.-. ?*. ?'. ?'.@n9-. '-'. ')($ . (. '(@n?9 .9.. '**. '. (. '@?n9minor&itarian+. '?)n?@. @<.?$. . (.-n.*n'? mirror sta2e. machinic. . ')<n?) political. *< metonymy.?n9mimicry.*n'. (@. ')(n)? body as. @'. 99. '@-n@(. )*$)?.'$. ?@. '('n<-. '. mode of model. .9n** mi!ity. '9'. <<$<?. '))n)'. ??.
'<-.9n*@ /s. '-< and binarism. *-'n@@ See also Ban. '*@$*. '.). ''* See also GoodLcommon senseF 0mperati/e mo/ement forced. )). Standard molecular capital and.. ''?.Bodleski. (9.'n'*. ''* class and. '9). See also Capital monism. *'. '-'. '-)$'-. 9). ?<$?? democratic 2o/ernment and. '<?n*<. () perception and. *-9n@(. '9< defined. <.)$. @* See also Supermolecular money. '@($)-n<< monstrosity. '9@. ')?n@@ molar. '. '-'. <.. ?). '*($9-. '9'. @9$@<. '(@$()n?@ ob6ecti/e apparent. ethics. '9?$9@. . See also Hnnatural couplin2s morality.threshold of &as limit+. imperialism of. .*n') as special case. '.. ?'. '*9. . )?. *-*n@( defined.. ?<$?? as limit. <.. '*. (<. '. '-). '*< e!tra$. ''( or2anism and.. <.n9< as apparatus of capture. *. (9. @*. '.(n9?. Tania. '()n?@ . '<local$2lobal and.. (<$(? %edipus and. ''( as mode of desire. '<-. **. '<2ender as..
n<< on 2ay science. '-? on /alue. '(*n<< on the untimely.*. *. '(?n?9 nomos. @ Pa2e **< nonlocalizable liaison. Friedrich on debt. . '(?$(@n?9 on class. 9). * on eternal return. '('n9(. '@. '(.n@4 nation$state. 9? on ressentiment. #ntonio autonomia and. *'$**. ')<n?@ noise. '9'$<neurosis. ?$@ nomadism. '<. ''. @ on ob6ecti/e perspecti/e. '-. 9). '(-n9? Deleuze and Guattari and. ')?n@) on real subsumption..nomad thou2ht. '?. '') on will to power. . @. '(@n?? on feminism. See 7iberal nation$stateF 4eoconser/ati/e transnation$state 4e2ri. '(@$()n?@ multiplicity. (* 4ew Di2ht. '9). *-'$*-*n@@ neocolonialism. @*.. '9(. '((n@* neoconser/ati/e transnation$state. '@@n9@ . <. *.n@' on surplus$/alue. '9*. '*) 4ietzsche.real. '(. *-9$*-<n@( on constituent power.
'?-n9orchid. )@.<n*. ''-$''. ''?.'. (). '. '9@.-. )(. '. (@. '. ''9.interiorization of. . <-$<'. '** See also ChannelizationF :abitF De2ularization % ob6ect. 9'$ 9<. '. (@.?. See also Part$ob6ect %edipus. '))n)' or2an. )'. See >inaristaF ContradictionF DialecticF Difference.. '?(n@9 opposition. '(*$(9n<? or2ans without a body.). '@9n'). '-?. '') .. outside and o/ercodin2. '*( or2anism. ''@. (<. << paradise. '((n@<.?.@n9neo$.whole attractors and. * outside. '. D.'$. )9.9. @(. 9@.norm&ality+. infoldin2 of. . ))$.(. '*' pure &absolute+. '??n<?. . ')<n?). '*'. @*. '*). '<?$<@n*< as application. *). ''(. ?. lost. (<. . ')<n?( other. (. field ofF Bilieu. '()n?@ of capital. . anti$. '9). 9(.@n9-. '-). '?)n?@. ''( 1one. *-'n@@ defined. '. '99. ''. '-'..($(-n9? paradi2m. ')9n?<.1 9<. '-.. reciprocalF Desistance %rbach. . ''(.<n*. See also %utside %ury. '@?n9order. . '*). ?' P pain. (@. <'.$((.. See CorrelationF DifferentiationF 5ntropyF 53uilibriumF BetastabilityF StructureF System order$word. unboundedF Thou2ht.<n*. Cean. )-. ')-n<< See also 5!teriority. .
'*). .*n') scientific. See also Future$past Peirce. '@(n<<. ?@.n'. ). @9$@<. '99.$<(. . (?$(@ super..'n'* sub$. '<@n'' perception.. ?. ob6ecti/e. ?*. '<. . '9).9. @.9. '*@.-$. ). '@*n. '.@. ''<. .'.< as despotic. ''(. '$*. (. ('. '?9$?<n<*. <(. '()n?@ parole. '-) parallelism. ''. )'. **. (*. ?9. ?' as simulacrum. <.. '?@n<) person. @-$@'. 9@. '). '9?. )9$)<. See also De/iation phallus. '<?n*<. (@ See also 0mpersonality personality.?. '(-n9@ defined.1 '@. '?@$?)n?? partiality. ')9n?? phase space.<.?. '*. *-. See also Cause. 1pure. @). '<9n* State and..$)-n<<. '9'$9* past. '?)n?@. ?<$??. 9<. '. <$? . )'.. *(. 9. '9(. <<$<? perturbation.?. ''*$'9. <9 part$ob6ect. '@'n* philosophy and the arts. . S. '. '. ')'n?defined. . (<.... '*@..*n') per/ersion. 9@. co$F DoubleF Separation$connection parody. ')'n<? phenomenolo2y. (' perspecti/e. @ despotism and. . ' rationalist.parado!. (?. '*9$*<. ''(. C. . .*$. '<?n*< as attractor.@n9-. (<. ?9 performati/e. 9?$9@.
See Qirtual. '. 9< physics.$?(n@' in Spinoza. '*@. See also 4eoconser/ati/e transnation$state potentia in #ristotle. *?. '*. '@9n*' porno2raphy. <. *-'n@@. '(-n9@ defined. '*)$*. . ''@. C.. <. ''?.. @).1 '))n)' See also Satisfaction point al atoire.n') pole.9n*@ pleasure criti3ue of. subatomic. )'. ''. '. (-. electoral.)n9'. '?@n?* . ''' ima2e of.. (.n*-.?n*( plane of transcendence becomin2$immanent &double mo/ement+ of. 9?. 9.$<'..@$. '. '9'.. '-($'?. ?* Pa2e **? plane of consistency &immanence+. '. '<. '<. '-@ Polkin2horne. poles politics cultural. *' Plato.See also 4omad thou2ht phoneme.<. '?. '99. mo/ement a2ainst. 9).?n*(. '('$(*n<9 1of the te!t. ). '.<n*. '?(n@'. '*) positi/ity.. <?. ). ''*$'9 plateau. '**$*@ oppositional. '.. <*$<9 postmodernity. C. (' possibility.
*-*$*-9n@( Pri2o2ine. <-. '.<. '@)$')'n<-$<?. '') Pound. ')<n?@ See also Potentia pra2matics.*. <?. '*. (@. '($*lan2ua2e and. ')9n?< commodification of. @?. '*?. '*<. ')*n?9 race. '(.$9(. '. . 9?.$<'. '?9n9.. '-9. '*presti2e. *?. '@@n9<$9@.(n9? ob6ecti/e apparent mo/ement and. '*'..-n'as defined by Deleuze and Guattari. '). '@'n@( constituent. '(?n?9 psychoanalysis. '?..potential. '<<n'*. '@9n'( Pro/os. '9*. '@<n**. <( Proust.. Thomas. 9@. .*$. '?(n@' 3uasicause.-$. 9. of recordin2. '@*n''. ')*$)9n?<. 9'. '. ('. '9($<' problematic. 0lya. '-9. @.. force. '(*n<9 7acanian.9n*? process. ')<n?) Pynchon. ')*n?< power. 9. )(. '(<n?' production anti$. . '. 5zra. and 0sabelle Sten2ers. '--. '-. '9*. @. (. '.@. '9< .. '()n?@ D rabattement. '?<$??n<? will to. '@?n9*. . '??n<?. *-9n@( mode of. '@@n9.)n99 capital as. Barcel. @-. '(<n?' of production /s. <*. '(*n<? as immeasurable. '<@n. ??.$(-n9?. '. '(@n?9 /s. '@?n9*$99. '-).n?( E 3uality. )-.. ''9.n)9 pri/ate. 9. '@9n*-.
*). . ?*.<. ?@. ''*. '(*n<? repression. ?@. *9. '@. ??. '-(. '@9n'@.. . <?.<. )*$)?.See also Faciality random walk. (-. ('. ((. )*. ??$?@. Decherches. '''. '(<n?' relation.. . '9@.). <@ .-. '?)n?? repetition$impulsion. '?'n99 unity as. ')*n?9 redundancy of essence. ().$. <@. '9<.-. 9?. '-(. '?)n?@ refrain.. ?'.9. '('n<9 re2ularization. ?@. '9recodin2. ''-.?. production of. )<$)?. <. 9' repetition$compulsion . )?. (-. 9'. '<<n(. re2ression. ?). . ''. '@<$@?n*) referent. ). ). '*<. <' metaphysical. '*. '((n@< reco2nition. (<. *). @*. ?9. '(*n<< autonomic. @@ rarety. . '. '<<n'' reciprocal presupposition. ?. <(..< sub6ecti/e. @. '9. '@. *( Pa2e **@ redundancy &continued+ of meanin2. '99. '**. )?. . .-. . ''. . ?9. <( Ded Sor2hum &Nhan2+. '?)n?? representation. non$. '(-n9@ reaction. ). ')9n?<. '))n)' reflection. **. 9<.9.)n9* reduction. '** recordin2.
*<$*@. '(<n?' repulsion. (9.n'). '(*n<9 schizophrenia as becomin2. '. '). '*9 capital and. '($*-. '-@. '99 natural. '*-$*'. . '@'n@( resonance. '-< Sacher$Basoch. ?@.n').n)9. @?. @9.. '@'n*. '(. #lain. '((n@< selection. reciprocalF Differentiation. ''<. ''-. '*?. @.. '). 7eopold /on. un$ satisfaction. '*) same. <(. Ferdinand de. ')(n)? clinical.*. <. ''?. @( . '-9. Friedrich. @'$@*. '-<. ?'. '(?n?9 schoolin2. 9*$99. )<. '99 sediment. <'$<9. ')@$))n)-. '@)$)-n<< firstname.lastname@example.org *-'n@@ Schleiermacher. . <. ')(n)? in 1postmodernity.'. '(*n<< reterritorialization. '?@n<) S sabota2e. '9@ permanent. . '') rhizome.$?* se2mentarity.n@sadomasochism. re/olution. '*?. See also Pleasure Saussure.). See #ttraction$repulsion resistance. '<)$<. @ ritual.reproduction. . *--n@@ re/aluation. '-?. See also Fractal schizoanalysis. < Schnapp. )<.n)? schema. )).$<(. (*. '<)$<. '@@n9@. .). . '?. '-@. (-. See >ecomin2$the$sameF Difference. '*-. 9*. )*.
'-. shoppin2. ')'n<( lar/al. )*. '<(n*( force and. '*. )?$)@. Ste/en. *9$*<. <9. ?-.'.*$. .9.'. . '9@. .<. (-. . ?<. '??n<? Pa2e **) si2nifier. '(<n?* si2nification. . '*. @-$@9. . . '@'n* sense. '))n)' content and. ')'n<( as minidespotism. ')@n@. . ?). '?)n?? content and. ?@. se!uality.9 passi/e. ')'n<( See also 101F 0dentity semiotics. '??n<? entropy and. (of si2nifiers. '9? se!. ').*. <9$<@. '?<n<?.$)(n)? si2n asi2nifyin2.self dissol/ed. ')'n<( fled2lin2. 9. '*@ o/er$. '(?n?9 Sha/iro.. '@$*'.? separation$connection. See GoodLcommon senseF Beanin2 sensiti/ity.* . '<($?-n*( re2ime of. nonhuman.'. @-$@'.. . '('n9. '9@. '. (*. ')@n@(. Barshall S. si2nified.. )9.$<-. ''9. <9$<@.n9< sensation. . <).9. '@<n*< seriality. '. '*. See Gay mo/ementF :eterose!ualityF 7esbian mo/ement Shatz.
n)9 simulation. '9< . Qladimir. '9@ Simondon. @(. soul. ''*$'9.* Deleuze and Guattari and. @ See also 4omos speed. <*. '?*n9? spontaneity.. Gilbert. '*socius defined. '*9$*<. ''*. >aruch on conatus.9$ . '. )?$)@. '. ')@n@). @. . @?. '-) lan2ua2e. @'. '-*. '-Standard. ('. (. '. . '@-n@(. '-9 See also Ban. striated. . )).n9< sub$. ((. *-*n@( Situationists.'n'<.. '. . ?. '. '('n9. '(<n?*.*n') Spinoza.. '??n<? similarity. '-. ')(n* slowness. '*' Slepian. . '9@. '<@n''. '*@ space derelict. '. @*. <. typolo2y of.*n') social formations. @9. Standard State. @).. '-<$'-? smooth /s.'. '?@n?9 on substance.Sil/erman. despotic. '-< absolute. @.a6a.)n)9 on ethics. on potentia. )? relation to body without or2ans. (@$((. '-'. '9). '.<n*). '@)n<9.. ').*. (). '.n@' absolute &Hrstaat+. '(. ''($*-. *. '. .<n*.'n'* sin2ularity. '-<.<.
-$. '') miniaturization of. '(<n?' lan2ua2e as. '()n?.9 as effect. 1e/aporati/e1 Stewart. <$? suicide.. <@ sterility. .1 . ?<. philosophy and. <-. *-'n@@ le2islatin2. . 0an.* dissipati/e. '-?. . . '-9 structuration. '*. '9) See also 7iberal nation$stateF 4eoconser/ati/e transnation$ state statement in Foucault.'n'<. '*@. @<. ''9 split. @9. See also Composition.9$. '<(n*). *@. '@9n').. '$*. <*$<9 society as. ''*$'9 1human.' as isomorphic to capital. . '**. '@?n9*. '@<n*9. '?*.?. *@$*). '@)n<*.$@(. <9. '(<n?' strate2y. '*@ of meanin2. *-<n)desire as.'. @. '(<n?' structure body as. '<(n*@. ). )<$)?. '?-n9Stoics. mode of sub6ect&i/ity+ as closed system. Gaylyn. See also 5ffect. '@(n<<. ?)$?. *( unsaid of. ')?n@@ style.-$. '*Studlar. '') welfare. 99.? See also 101F 0dentityF Self . '9?. ?9. '.fascist. ''@. '?*n9@ strata. '@<n*9. ?(. (@ defined by what escapes it.
*-9n@( Bar!"s theory of.$(-n9? of sensation. '9-$9*. '9<.n?) substance. '99 superlinearity. *?$*@.). (. '9(. ''9. *-*n@( of code.n@' Pa2e **. ?'$?*. '?(n@*. '@*$@9n'' of flow. ?? Deleuze and Guattari on. 9@.n@' superabstract. '').n9< supermolecular. )9.*. *--$*-*n@@ monopolization of. . '9.<. '*. <@.'.?. *--$*-'n@@ 2host. )-. . @*. '9@. ''-. '. *--n@@. '-*. subsumption &continued+ real. '(<n?' surface. ??.. *-. '(. )-. *). ?'. )*.. .9n*<. '('n<9 superposition.< sub6ectification. *-'$*-*n@@. '. ((. . '. '-<.$(-n9?. . '@*n''. *). '(. '?<n<? substance of content. '?.. 9)..)n9< capitalist. *?$*@. *-9n@( capital as. social. '9*. '9* superstructure.sub6ect$2roup. ('. . . @'.n9< subsumption formal. '. ?). '@@n9@. '@*$@9n''. ''(. '. )@. '.?. '(.$((n@' subsistence &insistence+. *-*n@(. '?*n9@. . '?*n9?. <-.'. @9. *-'n@@ defined. '. <surplus /alue.9n*< sub6ected 2roup. '*($9-.sub6ection. '?*n9@ substance of e!pression.)$. '-( in 1primiti/e1 societies.. @@. . '9'$9*. ?9. '@*n'' .
@*. '?-n9-. @. )-$)'. ?-. *-*n@( connecti/e. '. <*$<9... )<. none3uilibrium.See also 5ffect. @-. . *'.*. '?-n*( third person. @@. <(. e!clusi/e <(. @@ technolo2y. '((n@<.n<< symbolic. <.)n9< thermodynamics. See also Bachine. *-*n@( synapse. . '@. ?@$?). . passi/e. <)$?* acti/e /s. '((n@< consumpti/e.?. <<$<?. (force and.. )). '((n@< inclusi/e /s. concrete territory. '-@. . (9. << system closed. ')9m?< synthesis. '9).?. @@$@. '*@. '9*. 9@. '*) swer/e. '@9n'@. <($?*. . open. '-$'*. . '(9n<?. ?@. ?@$?).$?*. ().-. )-. Barie$>lanche. )@. )< con6uncti/e. . ?. '*synta2ma.$@.@. ''? sur/i/alism.*$... '(?n?9 Taoism. ?@$?). '-(.). '?)n?@ synchrony. '-<. @9. @-$@'. ?dis6uncti/e.9. @'. '@?n9-. )'. '9?. '((n@<. )-. 9. )'. '((n@* . . '*@ inte2rable. )'. . See 1%ne1 Third 8orld. @9. '-(. ?( See also BilieuF Structure T Tahon. )'$)9.@.*. con/erted into a cause sur/eillance. '9?. . ''( self$or2anizin2. ?@$?). '@?n9* thin2 actuality of. ?. ?'. 9) desi2nation and.
() $in$becomin2. (@$(. ()$((. '. See Future$pastF Past. (. (?$(@ meanin2 as. '.9n*<. 9(. '.. (($'-ima2e of. '. ??. @(. See also 7imitF Bolar.. stereo$. @(. ?$@ outside and. '. *.. '. '<)n'*. <-.@n9truth.-n. ?)$?. )(.. '-@.'n'9 transcendence. (. *. ''*. (( See also 0ma2ination threshold.thou2ht aborescent model of. <$?.-. '-) /irtual and. '<$') power and. '. 1pure1F HntimelyF Qirtual tracin2. 9@. 9@ 1pure.@n9substance and. '*H unconscious . '( trans/ersality. '?)n?@ synthetic.<n*. ?-. ') Pa2e **( double and. 9@.'n'*. . threshold of time. '(*n<? analytic.) typolo2y. See also Plane of transcendence translation. See also GoodLcommon sense type.'n''. '-). <@. '. '.$'-' nomad. @. (($'--. ? analo2ical.1 '. '*(. <. . '@(n<<.. of actual social formations.)n9< abstract machine and. )9. ''*.?n9-. '-'.
n@-.< in/estment. )-$. See also Future$pastF Qirtual Hrstaat.$9(. '??n<? of lan2ua2e. 9). ''@. '(($*--n@@ Qance. '?. as dissipati/e structure. '-. '@)$)-n<<. '-?.. <*. ?) untimely.-$. '@(n<< .-. '?(n@*.*$.. ''?. 9. '(@n?9. @' unified field. Pierre. Paul. (See also BonismF 8hole uni/erse. '-@. '@(n<< unity. '(?n?9 /ariation..@n9defined. '('n9. '. '-9. '-capital and. ''<$ '?. '9?. '9.$. body and. '@($)-n<< $in$mo/ement. . '9'. '9(.$''9 Qidal$4a3uet. <@ undecidability. *--n@@ force and. '. ''). *'$**. . '') e!chan2e$. '*( use$. '* numerical.'n''.9n*9 structural.( continuous 9. '('n<*. (. '*le/els of. Carol S. '(@n?9 Q /alue. 9'. '9<.$<-. '(-n9). 9<$<@ desire and. 9'. @-$@. absolute utopia.defined. '@@n9@. '(?n?9 Qirilio. (-$('. ??.. '-<. '((n@9 /irtual attractors and. See also State. '(. '--$'-'. '''. *-9n@( Qend miaire &Feuillade+. *(. '. @@ unnatural couplin2s. circuit &resonance+ of with the actual.
See >akhtin. ''( /oid. '.'. ?9 in thermodynamics. '@. ')*n?< whole.. '@?n9white wall. (?. '9'. '-. /irus. Q. . ')<n?@ wine.. '*' N Nhan2 =imou. motionless. @@. <-.@.*. @-$@. Bikhail /oya2e. '@<n*? will. '@. '. '<.)n9* woman. '9wasp.n<< Qolosino/. **. '('n9(. )?. <'.*n'( 8 wa2e relation. '-9 to power. '((n@' subatomic particles as.)n9* zombie. '-?$'-<. ??$?@. '.$*'. as apart from what it unifies. 9?. ''. . '*?.$'*. ''. ?9. ')'n?* . '. '?. . 4. See >ecomin2$woman = =ippies. 9@. ('. '($*-.<n*.poles. '9.