Time, Space, Forced Movement and the Death-Drive Reading Proust with Deleuze Keith Ansell Pearson Proust

does not in the least conceive change as a Bergsonian duration, but as a defection, a race to the grave (Deleuze, Proust and Signs 27; 18 ! Sub specie aeterni! A" #$ou are %oving a&a' faster and faster fro% the living; soon the' &ill stri(e 'our na%e fro% their rolls#! B" #)hat is the onl' &a' to *artici*ate in the *rivilege of the dead#! A" #+hat *rivilege is that,# B" #)o die no %ore#! (-ietzsche, The Gay Science, section 2.2, 1882 ! Introduction Deleuze#s reading of Proust#s novel la recherche du temps perdu in Proust and Signs (1/.0 is &ell1(no&n for its clai% that &hat constitutes its unit' is not %e%or', including involuntar' %e%or'! 2n this res*ect he diverges fro% so%e *ro%inent *revious readings of the novel, such as those offered b' Bataille, Bec(ett, and Blanchot! )his de%otion of %e%or' is, in fact, *revalent throughout the e3traordinar' s*an of Deleuze#s &or(! 2n What is Philosophy? (1//1 , for e3a%*le, Deleuze insists that %e%or' *la's onl' a s%all *art in art, adding #even and es*eciall' in Proust# (4La mmoire intervient peu dans l'art5# (QP *! 168; WP? *! 1.7 ! 7e cites D8sor%i9re#s *hrase #2 hate %e%or'#! 2n his 1/8. essa' on the co%*oser Pierre Boulez and Proust, &here the *hrase of D8sor%i9re is credited as such, he states that the finalit' of art resides, in a *hrase he borro&s fro% Bergson, in an #enlarged *erce*tion# &here this *erce*tion is enlarged #to the li%its of the universe# and &hich re:uires creating art in such a &a' that #*erce*tion brea(s &ith the identit' to &hich %e%or' rivets it#!1 2n Thousand Plateaus he s*ea(s of the #redundanc'# of the #%adeleine# and the dangers of falling into the blac! hole of involuntar' %e%or' ("P 228; TP 18. ! ;f course, &e %ust recognise Deleuze#s *osition on %e%or' is an a%biguous one and he %ust be read carefull' on the issue! )he a%biguit' consists in the fact that Deleuze thin(s that &henever art a**eals to %e%or' it is, in fact, a**ealing to so%ething else (in What is Philosophy? he calls this #fabulation#, another *hrase he borro&s fro% Bergson , and &henever &e thin( &e are *roducing %e%ories &e are, in fact, engaged in #beco%ings#! -evertheless, it is :uite clear, and it is abundantl' clear in his various readings of Proust, that Deleuze &ishes to de%ote %e%or' and &ith res*ect to both a thin(ing of art and of ti%e! ;n art, for e3a%*le, Deleuze &rites in his essa' on Boulez and Proust" #According to Proust, even involuntar' %e%or' occu*ies a ver' restricted zone, &hich art e3ceeds on all sides, and &hich has
1

#Boulez, Proust, and )i%e" <;ccu*'ing &ithout =ounting<#, ngela!i, >" 2 (1//8 , **! ./170, *! 71! ?or Bergson see #)he Perce*tion of =hange# (1/11 , in #uvres (Paris" P@?, 1/6/ , **! 1>.611>/2; The $reative "ind, trans! A! B! Andison ()oto&a, -e& Cerse'" Bittlefield, Ada%s, D =o!, 1/76 , **! 1>E16/!

onl' a conductive role#!2 ?or Deleuze it is the *resent, not the *ast, that is at sta(e" #+e &rite not &ith childhood %e%ories but through blocs of childhood that are the beco%ing1 child of the *resent# (QP? *! 168; WP? *! 1.8 ! 7e begins the reading in Proust and Signs b' clai%ing that #)he Fearch is oriented to the future, not to the *ast# (PS 1E; 0 ! Deleuze#s reading of Proust is develo*ed in concise for% in his Proust and Signs, a te3t that he revised and e3tended in 1/7E and continued to resha*e after this *oint! 2n the original edition of this te3t one could clai% that he is being largel' faithful to &hat he ta(es to be the %eaning of the a**renticeshi* of the narrator that lies at the heart of the novel! 7e regards this as an a**renticeshi* in #signs# and the *rogression of the novel consists in the realization that it is onl' in the su*erior signs of the &or( of art that non1 Platonic #essences# can be seen to be &or(ing on a full' individualizing level!> 7o&ever, Proust is also *ut to &or( in the second cha*ter on #Ge*etition for 2tself# in %i&&erence and 'epetition (1/.8 , in &hich Proust#s great achieve%ent is said to consist in having sho&n ho& it is *ossible to gain access to the *ure *ast and to save it for ourselves (Bergson, Deleuze clai%s, %erel' de%onstrated its e3istence ! But &e also (no& that in Deleuze this second s'nthesis of ti%e is %ade to give &a' to a third s'nthesis of ti%e, the *ure e%*t' for% of ti%e or ti%e out of Hoint, &hich is associated &ith -ietzsche#s doctrine of eternal return! )he funda%ental conce*t at &or( here, ho&ever, is that of the death1instinct or drive and its i%*lication in &hat Deleuze calls #forced %ove%ent# (mouvement &orc !0 )his is also &hat is at sta(e in Deleuze#s reading of Proust in the second edition of Proust and Signs *ublished in 1/7E! )he ai% of this *a*er is not to interrogate the nature of the different s'ntheses of ti%e and the %ove%ent fro% the one
2

Deleuze, #Boulez, Proust, and )i%e#, *! 71!

>

2n Proust and Signs Deleuze defines an essence as #a difference, the absolute and ulti%ate Difference# (*! 6>; *! 01 ! Fuch a difference, ho&ever, does not na%e a si%*le e%*irical difference bet&een t&o things or obHects since this is to subordinate difference to that &hich is al&a's e3trinsic and contingent! B' definition for Deleuze #internal# or #i%%anent# difference, as unfolded in Proust#s novel, es*eciall' in its thin(ing on art, %ust belong to a #s*iritual# order or real%! )here is a connection &ith Platonis% insofar as Proustian essences are %ore #revealed# than the' are #created#! Fee also **! 12210; **! 1EE12! 2t is not until the later 1/7E edition that Deleuze %a(es a concerted effort to distinguish the Proustian #search# fro% Platonis%, see PS, **! 1>1ff!; **! 1E8ff! Issence for Deleuze is not so%ething individual but rather a principle o& individuation" #Issence, according to Proust, as &e have tried to sho&5 is not so%ething seen but a (ind of su*erior vie(point, an irreducible vie&*oint that signifies at once the birth of the &orld and the original character of a &orld# (*! 1>>; *! 11E !
0

?reud#s der Todestrieb &as translated into Inglish b' Ca%es Ftrache' not as #death1drive# but as #death1instinct#! 2n %i&&erence and 'epetition Deleuze refers to the #?reudian conce*tion o& de l'instinct de mort#! Kristeva uses 'pulsion de mort# and states that it is #the %ost instinctual of all the drives#, Time and Sense, *! 66.; *! >2.! )he clue to Deleuze#s choice is to be found in his definition of drives as bound e3citations; this suggests that for hi% the death1instinct is the *ri%ar' %ove%ent of life because it denotes unbound energ'! ?or further insight into this issue see the stud' b' Gichard Boothb', %eath and %esire) psychoanalytic theory in Lacan's return to *reud (-e& $or( D Bondon" Goutledge, 1//1 , note 1, *! 22/ D **! 2/1>E, ./17E, 7112, 8>10! ;n Boothb'#s reading the *ri%ar' function of the death1drive in ?reud is not biological" #As a radical force of unbinding, the death drive %ust be inter*reted *s'chologicall'! )he death drive designates the &a' the bound organization of the ego is trau%atized b' the *ressure on it of unbound instinctual energies# (*! 80 ! 2n the inde3 of na%es and te3ts that a**ears at the bac( of %' Deleuze %a(es reference to BacanJs +crits (*ublished 1/.. &ith the entr'" 4difference and re*etition in the unconscious, the death1instinctJ! )his should not be ta(en to %ean, ho&ever, that Deleuze has ado*ted a Bacanian reading of ?reud!

to the other, but rather to focus on this :uestion of the erotic character of %e%or' and Deleuze#s clai% that in Proust the forced %ove%ent of thanatos serves to effect a brea( &ith eros! 2n e3*loring the figuration of a death1drive or instinct in Proust several arresting %o%ents or e*isodes in the boo( are i%*ortant" the celebrated =o%bra' e3*erience; the involuntar' %e%or' of the grand%other and the sudden realization that she is actuall' dead and &hich brings &ith it the ,dea of death;6 and the strange revelation of, and encounter &ith, the #little *iece of ti%e in its *ure state#! Deleuze on Proust and the Virtual 2n his boo( of 1/.>, *rovocativel' entitled Proustian Space, the Belgian critic Keorges Poulet sought to %ount a serious challenge to the co%%on and &ides*read reading of Proust#s novel as a boo( &hose subHect is ta(en to be )i%e and nothing but )i%e! +e (no& that Proust al&a's too( u%brage at atte%*ts to label hi% a #Bergsonian# novelist! . Poulet begins his boo( b' *ositioning Proust as *rofoundl' un1 or even anti1Bergson" #2f the thought of Bergson denounces and reHects the %eta%or*hosis of ti%e into s*ace, Proust not onl' acco%odates hi%self to it, but installs hi%self in it, carries it to e3tre%es,

)he death of Albertine is also i%*ortant but cannot be treated here! )his death assu%es %uch %ore *ro%inence in Kristeva#s reading than it does in Deleuze#s! ?or a hel*ful and incisive overvie& of the figuration of death in Proust#s novel see Aalcol% Bo&ie, Proust mong the Stars (Bondon" ?ontana, 1//8 , cha*ter L22, **! 2.71>1/! ?or his deft treat%ent of the death of Albertine see **! 2/7ff! 2n this cha*ter Bo&ie %a(es a nu%ber of astute observations" not onl' is death ever'&here on dis*la' in the final stages of the boo(, an e:uall' dee*er and %ore elusive terror constitutes the boo(#s o*ening" #)he narrator#s 'ounger self hovers bet&een slee* and &a(ing, desiring dar(ness and recoiling fro% it too! 7is candle is alread' out, but he is &o(en fro% the slee* into &hich he has alread' fallen b' the thought that it is ti%e to blo& out his light! Filence, loss, e%*tiness, de*arture, abandon%ent5 these are the ideas that are (indled b' the surrounding dar(ness! And the narrative voice itself, *la'ing u*on these 'outhful %e%ories, hovers bet&een utterance and e3tinction5)his is consciousness feeding on the thought of its o&n destruction# (*! 2./ ! ?urther on, Bo&ie notes that the novel #5cons*ires &ith violence and death; for long *aragra*hs, it has suffering, dread, outrage and, 'es, *anic running through it! )he narrator schools hi%self in cruelt', and is *re*ared, &hen it co%es to the effects of death1a&areness u*on the %ind, and of illness and ageing u*on the bod', to cultivate e3cess#! )he narrator of the novel #5is ca*able of *hiloso*hic cal%, 'et has a %ania for e%ble%s and %e%entoes of death# (**! >E81/ !
.

?or the necessar' infor%ation see Cean1$ves )adie, "arcel Proust) Li&e, trans! I! =a%eron (Bondon" Penguin, 2EE1 , **! 1271/! )he difference bet&een Proust and Bergson cannot be said to revolve around the issue of involuntar' %e%or' since, as Goger Fhattuc( has recentl' argued, #Des*ite Proust#s state%ents to the contrar', the distinction bet&een voluntar' and involuntar' %e%ories is basic to Bergson#s argu%ent#! Fee G! Fhattuc(, Proust's Way (Aiddlese3" Penguin, 2EEE , *! 116! F*ontaneous %e%or' is e3*licitl' na%ed as #involuntar'# b' Bergson in "atter and "emory! ;n this issue see also David Kross, #Bergson, Proust, and the Gevaluation of Ae%or'#, ,nternational Philosophical Quarterly (1/86 , 26" 0, **! >./18E! Adorno s*ea(s of Bergson as #Proust#s (ins%an in %ore than s*irit# and locates the ra**ort bet&een the t&o in ter%s of a shared #reaction to read'1%ade thought, to the *re1given and established clich8#! Fee )! +! Adorno, #Fhort =o%%entaries on Proust#, in -otes to Literature) volume one, trans! F! +! -icholson (-e& $or(" =olu%bia @niversit' Press, 1//1 , **! 170180, **! 1761.! ?or instructive insight see also Kristeva, Time and Sense, *! 6>0; *! >1>" #5the Bergsonian i%agination is si%ilar to Proust#s *roHect because it dee%*hasizes <:uantitative ti%e< and favours a <:ualitative ti%e< that is e3*erienced and felt, a *ure interiorit' that is nonetheless transcendental! Iven so, Proust#s &or( can never be reduced to Bergson#!

and %a(es of it finall' one of the *rinci*les of his art#! 7 2n short, Poulet is contesting the legiti%ac' of Bergson#s t&o %ulti*licities, the continuous and the discrete or the virtual and actual (or duration and s*ace , a %ove &hich has %ore recentl' been ta(en u* b' Kristeva in her stud' of 1//0 entitled Time and Sense!8 ;f course, Poulet does not %ean b' s*ace #intellectual s*ace# but a distinctl' and uni:uel' aesthetic (ind of s*ace! ?or Poulet, the narrator or hero of Proust#s novel %a' &ell find hi%self lost in ti%e, but he is also, e:uall' *rofoundl', lost in s*ace and the novel is as %uch a search for lost s*ace as it is for lost ti%e! Poulet is able to e3tract so%e highl' instructive insights fro% this stress on the %atter of s*ace in Proust, and echoes of so%e of the %oves he %a(es can be found in Deleuze#s reading, es*eciall' the later edition of the boo( and the section on #)he Biterar' Aachine#! )his is &hat &e %ight call the Proust of the frag%ent, the Proustian universe conceived as a non1organis%ic universe of frag%ents &ithout unification or totalit'" #)he Proustian universe is a universe in *ieces, of &hich the *ieces contain other *ieces, those also, in their turn, other *ieces#! / ?or e3a%*le, and as Poulet dra&s our attention to, there is the &orld of the *ainter Ilstir, &hich a**ears at intervals in the novel and never in a continuous fashion and &hich e3ists in the for% of a series of &or(s scattered in his studio, in galleries, in *articular collections, &hile the universe of the %usician Linteuil subsists, Proust &rites, onl' in #disHointed frag%ents, bursts of the scarlet fractures of an un(no&n festival of colour#!1E Poulet locates in the novel onl' a
7

K! Poulet, Proustian Space, trans! I! =ole%an (Balti%ore" Cohn 7o*(ins @niversit' Press, 1/77 ,

*reface!
8

Kristeva, Time and Sense, *! 6>/; *! >1." #<Discrete %ulti*licities< are the essential co%*onents of %e%or'#!
/

K! Poulet, Proustian Space, *! >/!

1E

2bid!, Poulet is citing fro% the length' discussion of Linteuil#s %usic 1 the #little *hrase# of the sonata first encountered in the earl' *art of the novel and no& the ne& revelation of the se*tet 1 in #)he =a*tive#, 'TP >, **! 208ff!; SLT >, **! 26Eff! )he a**eal to the narrator of an Ilstir (a *ainter or a Linteuil (a %usician is that the' are artists &ho are able to disclose to us individuating &orlds of essences 1 essences that onl' art can create! -e& and other &orlds cannot be discovered and e3*lored si%*l' b' ac:uiring a *air of &ings or a different res*irator' s'ste%, for even if &e did visit a Aars or a Lenus &e &ould still ta(e &ith us the sa%e senses and so clothe all that &e &ould see in the sa%e as*ect as the things on Iarth" #)he onl' true vo'age of discover', the onl' reall' reHuvenating e3*erience, &ould be not to visit strange lands but to *ossess other e'es, to see the universe through the e'es of another, of a hundred others, to see the hundred universes that each of the% sees, that each of the% is; and this &e can do &ith an Ilstir, &ith a Linteuil; &ith %en li(e these &e do reall' fl' fro% star to star# (ibid!, 268; 26/1.E ! Bi(e other readers of the novel, Deleuze is intrigued b' the role *la'ed in the novel b' Linteuil#s #little *hrase# and the %ove fro% the sonata to the se*tet! 2n Proust and Signs he refers to the% as conve'ing the %ove%ent of a difference and re*etition, as &hen the narrator sa's" #Aean&hile the se*tet, &hich had begun again, &as %oving to&ards its close; again and again one *hrase or another fro% the sonata recurred, but altered each ti%e, its rh'th% and har%on' different, the sa%e and 'et so%ething else, as things recur in life5# (ibid!, 26/; 2.1; see Deleuze PS, 6112, .21>, 1>8; >/10E, 081/, 110 ! ?or Deleuze#s later treat%ent of %usic in Proust, including an innovative re&or(ing of the significance of the %ove fro% the sonata to the se*tet, see the essa' entitled #Boulez, Proust, and )i%e#, ngela!i, >" 2 (1//8 , **! ./170; see also K! Deleuze and ?! Kuattari, "P, **! >>21>, *! >/2; TP, **! 27112, *! >1/, and QP?, *! 17/; WP?, **! 18818/! ;n the nature of the *rogression involved in the narrator#s a**reciation of Linteuil#s %usic see the discussion in Gichard Bales# essa', #Proust and the ?ine Arts#, in G! Bales (ed! , The $ambridge $ompanion to Proust (=a%bridge" =a%bridge @niversit' Press, 2EE1 , **! 18>12EE, es*eciall' **! 1881/.! Fee also Kristeva, Time and Sense, **! >7718E, 070ff!; **! 21011., 272 ff!; and, of course, the ins*ired treat%ent in Aerleau1

discontinuity o& essences, a non1F*inozist &orld that affir%s onl' the :ualitative and the heterogeneous (a &orld &ithout the unit' of substance ! 2t is also said to be a non1 Bergsonian &orld of discontinuit'" #As soon as a thing %anifests itself in its o&n :ualit', in its <essence<, it reveals itself as different fro% all other things (and their essences ! ?ro% it to the others there is no *assage#!11 2f Proust#s universe rese%bles a *hiloso*hical universe it is that of Beibniz#s %onadolog'! )here is a great deal in this reading that finds an echo in, and a resonance &ith, Deleuze" the a**reciation of the frag%ent, the construal of difference as internal difference, and reading the *assages, tunnels, %ove%ents, and beco%ings of the novel in ter%s of a net&or( of transversal co%%unication! And there is also, of course, Deleuze#s a**reciation of a Beibnizianis% in Proust 1 a Beibniz, ho&ever, &ithout a *receding totalit' and *re1established har%on' (PS 6>10, 1/61.; 0112, 1.>10 ! )he difference, ho&ever, is that in addition to this :uasi1Beibnizian reading of the novel Deleuze is (een to hold on to a reading of Proust as a novelist of ti%e! ?or Deleuze if &e do not grant an i%*ortant role to ti%e in the architectural construction of the novel &e lose all sense of the a**renticeshi* undergone b' the narrator or the hero! 12 )his is an a**renticeshi* that in si%*le, but vital, ter%s ta(es ti%e! As Deleuze &rites concerning the a**renticeshi* in the boo(, #+hat is i%*ortant is that the hero does not (no& certain things at the start, graduall' learns the%, and finall' receives an ulti%ate revelation# ( PS >.; 2. ! 2t is an a**renticeshi* *unctuated b' a set of disa**oint%ents" the hero #believes# certain things (such as the *hantas%s that surround love and he suffers under illusions (that the %eaning of a sign resides in its obHect, for e3a%*le ! )he *rogression in the novel, ho&ever, is neither a logical or teleological one, there are regressions and oscillations ever'&here, *artial revelations are acco%*anied b' laziness and anguish! ?or Deleuze the novel is best a**roached in ter%s of a co%*le3 series, and the #funda%ental idea# is that #ti%e for%s different series and contains %ore di%ensions than s*ace#! )he Fearch ac:uires its distinct rh'th%s not si%*l' through #the contributions and sedi%entations of %e%or', but b' a series of discontinuous disa**oint%ents and also b' the %eans e%*lo'ed to overco%e the% &ithin each series# (ibid!; see also 1E.17; 8.1 7 ! And 'et, Deleuze is as (een to sho& that the novel is not si%*l' about ti%e as he is to sho& that it is not a novel about %e%or'; rather, both are *laced in the service of the a**renticeshi* &hich is one in the revelations of art, &hich are revelations of true essences! Bet us begin to read for ourselves the encounter &ith #*ure ti%e# that is unfolded and dra%atised in the novel! )he dra%atic treat%ent in the novel of the shoc! of the *ast e%erging in a ne& and brilliant &a' ta(es *lace in the conte3t of the narrator#s realization that the sensations afforded b' sensuous signs, such as the uneven *aving1stones, the stiffness of the na*(in, and the taste of the %adeleine, have no connection &ith &hat he had atte%*ted to recall, &ith the aid of an undifferentiated %e%or', of the *laces attached
Pont', The .isible and the ,nvisible, trans! A! Bingis (Ivanston" -orth&estern @niversit' Press, 1/.8 , **! 10/166!
11

2bid!, *! 0E!

12

?or Deleuze it is i%*ortant to a**reciate that the #Fearch# is not si%*l' bound u* &ith an effort of recall but, as recherche/ is to be ta(en in the strong sense of the ter%, as one &ould s*ea( of #the search for truth# (PS, *! /; *! > ! )his *oint has recentl' been e%*hasized b' Goger Fhattuc(, in *art as a criti:ue of Poulet#s reading! Fee Fhattuc(, Proust's Way, *! 2E/!

to the%, such as Lenice, Balbec, and =o%bra'! 7e co%es to understand the reason &h' life is Hudged to be trivial although at certain %o%ents or singular *oints it a**ears to us as beautiful! )he reason is that &e Hudge ordinaril' #on the evidence not of life itself but of those :uite different i%ages &hich *reserve nothing of life 1 and therefore &e Hudge it dis*aragingl'# ('TP >, 8./; SLT >, /E2; co%*are also the initial rea&a(ening of the *ast in 'TP 1, 0016; SLT 1, 0718 ! )he narrator is struc(, through this involuntar' return of the *ast, b' the fact that life is not trul' lived in the %o%ents of its *assing &here &e find ourselves too i%%ersed in i%%ediate enHo'%ents and social rituals and activities! )he unantici*ated e3*eriences afforded b' involuntar' %e%or' go be'ond the real% of egotistical *leasures and cause us to doubt the realit' and e3istence of our nor%al self! )he conte%*lation of these #frag%ents of e3istence &ithdra&n fro% )i%e#, although fugitive, *rovides the narrator &ith the onl' genuine *leasures he has (no&n and &hich are dee%ed b' hi% to be far su*erior to social *leasures or the *leasures of friendshi*! )he narrator s*ea(s of i%%obilizing ti%e, of liberating frag%ents of ti%e fro% their i%*lication in a ceaseless flo&, so as to have this co%*rehension of #eternit'# and the #essence of things# (>, 87.; /E/ ! 7e co%es to realize the nature of his vocation" to beco%e a &riter and *roduce literature! )he fortuitous fashion of our encounter &ith the i%ages &hich the sensations of involuntar' %e%or' bring into being vouchsafes for hi% their authenticit'! )he #trueness of the *ast# that is brought bac( to life &ill never be found through either conscious *erce*tion or conscious recollection! )he #boo(# of realit' &ill be %ade u* of such #i%*ressions# and &ill devote itself to the tas( of e3tracting the #truth# of each i%*ression, #ho&ever trivial its %aterial, ho&ever faint its traces# (>, 88E; /10 ! )hrough this *rocess the %ind &ill be led to #a state of greater *erfection and given a *ure Ho'#! )he #i%*ression# serves the &riter in the sa%e &a' the e3*eri%ent serves the scientist! )he difference bet&een the &riter and the scientist, ho&ever, is that &hereas intelligence al&a's *recedes the e3*eri%ent, for the &riter intelligence al&a's co%es after the i%*ression! ?or the narrator this %eans that the #ideas for%ed b' the *ure intelligence have no %ore than a logical, a *ossible truth, the' are arbitraril' chosen! )he boo( &hose hierogl'*hs are *atterns not traced b' us is the onl' boo( that reall' belongs to us!# (ibid! ! ?or Deleuze the sign of an involuntar' %e%or' is necessaril' an a%biguous sign of life, it has one foot in the *ure *ast and one foot in the future, a future that can onl' be created through the death1instinct and the destruction of eros! Bet us no& read the *resentation in the novel of a #%o%ent# and #frag%ent# of the *ast! )his ta(es *lace at al%ost %id&a'1*oint in the final *art of the novel, #)i%e Gegained#" A %o%ent of the *ast, did 2 sa', ( 'ien 0u'un moment du pass? +as it not *erha*s ver' %uch %ore" so%ething that, co%%on both to the *ast and the *resent, is %uch %ore essential than either of the%, Fo often, in the course of %' life, realit' had disa**ointed %e because at the instant (moment &hen %' senses *erceived it %' i%agination, &hich &as the onl' organ that 2 *ossessed for the enHo'%ent of beaut', could not a**l' itself to it, in virtue of that ineluctable la& &hich ordains that &e can onl' i%agine &hat is absent! And no&, suddenl', the effect of this harsh la& had been neutralised, te%*oraril' annulled, b' a %arvellous e3*edient of nature &hich had caused a sensation 1 the noise %ade both b' the s*oon and b' the ha%%er, for instance 1 to be %irrored ( miroiter at

one and the sa%e ti%e in the *ast, so that %' i%agination &as *er%itted to savour it, and in the *resent, &here the actual shoc( to %' senses of the noise, the touch of the linen na*(in, or &hatever it %ight be, had added to the drea%s of the i%agination the conce*t of #e3istence# &hich the' usuall' lac(, and through this subterfuge (et gr1ce 2 ce subter&uge had %ade it *ossible for %' being to secure, to isolate, to i%%obilise for the duration of a lightning flash (la dure d'un clair 1 &hat it nor%all' never a**rehends" a frag%ent of ti%e in the *ure state ( un peu de temps 2 l'tat pur ! )he being &hich had been reborn in %e &hen &ith a sudden shudder of ha**iness 2 had heard the noise that &as co%%on to the s*oon touching the *late and the ha%%er stri(ing the &heel, or had felt, beneath %' feet, the unevenness that &as co%%on to the *aving1stones of the Kuer%antes court'ard and to those of the ba*tistr' of Ft Aar(#s, this being is nourished onl' b' the essence of things, in these alone does it find its sustenance and delight! 2n the observation of the *resent, &here the senses cannot feed it &ith this food, it languishes, as it does in the consideration of a *ast %ade arid b' the intellect or in the antici*ation of a future &hich the &ill constructs &ith frag%ents of the *resent and the *ast, frag%ents &hose realit' it still further reduces b' *reserving of the% onl' &hat is suitable for the utilitarian, narro&l' hu%an *ur*ose for &hich it intends the%! But let a noise or a scent, once heard or s%elt, be heard or s%elt again in the *resent and at the sa%e ti%e in the *ast, real &ithout being actual, ideal &ithout being abstract, and i%%ediatel' the *er%anent and habituall' concealed essence of things is liberated and our true self &hich see%ed 1 had *erha*s for long 'ears see%ed 1 to be dead but &as not altogether dead, is a&a(ened and reani%ated as it receives the celestial nourish%ent that is brought to it! A %inute freed fro% the order of ti%e has re1created in us, to feel it, the %an freed fro% the order of ti%e! And one can understand that this %an should have confidence in his Ho', even if the si%*le taste of a %adeleine does not see% logicall' to contain &ithin it the reasons for this Ho', one can understand that the &ord #death# should have no %eaning for hi%; situated outside ti%e, &h' should he fear the future, But this s*ecies of o*tical illusion ( ce trompe3l'oeil , &hich *laced beside %e a %o%ent of the *ast that &as inco%*atible &ith the *resent, could not last for long5 ('TP >, 8721>; SLT >, /E61. (translation slightl' %odified !1> +e have to deter%ine the nature of the e3*erience that is being unfolded here" it is neither #of# the *ast nor #of# the *resent in an' si%*le sense! 2t is an e3*erience of ti%e (in its *ure state that is outside of the e%*irical order of ti%e and 'et it is full' de*endent on the *assing and *assage of ti%e for its being! )here is also the encounter &ith the virtual
1>

Goger Fhattuc( translates the verb miroiter as #flashes bac( and forth# and notes that it also %eans #to glisten# and #to shi%%er#! 7e describes this *assage as the %ost i%*ortant one in the novel on %e%or', and e3*lains the e3*erience the narrator is describing, &hich is a(in, Fhattuc( sa's, to a #tric(# or #subterfuge#, li(e having #t&o *robes in ti%e the &a' &e have t&o feet on the ground and t&o e'es &atching s*ace#! Aoreover, &hat #&ould other&ise be a %eticulous anal'tic e3*lanation is suddenl' set in %otion and brought to life b' the verb miroiter5#, so that the sensation of ti%e #beco%es iridescent, li(e a soa* bubble, li(e the *lu%age of certain birds, li(e an oil fil% on &ater! )his enlarged double vision of the &orld *roHected in ti%e e%bodies a *aralla3 vie&" it *rovides a sense of de*th resulting fro% a dis*lace%ent of the observer#! Fee Fhattuc(, Proust's Way, *! 120!

as that &hich is said to be #real &ithout being actual, ideal &ithout being abstract# and &hich is ta(en b' Deleuze to denote the being of the *ast in itself! +hat does the virtual reveal to us, +hat is its #sense# or #%eaning#, +hat does it %ean to be #freed fro% the order of ti%e#, )he discover' of lost ti%e enables the artist to give a #ne& truth# to the ti%es of life, including ti%e *ast, and to find for ever' sign e%bedded in %aterialit' a #s*iritual e:uivalent# (>, 8781/; /12 ! )he order of ti%e the narrator refers to is clearl' &hat &e ta(e to be nor%al e%*irical ti%e, ti%e that is linear and successive! 10 ?or Deleuze this order conceals a %ore co%*licated transcendental for% of ti%e (the s*litting of ti%e in t&o directions , &hich, in turn, %ust also give &a' to a *ure, e%*t' for% of ti%e! Bet us (ee* in %ind the fact that Deleuze re%ains &edded to t&o %ain Proustian insights &hich he &ill *ursue, %ore often than not, through a set of Bergsonian theses (as in the t&o volu%es on cine%a, or the essa' on Boulez and Proust ! ?irst, that ti%e 1 the force of ti%e 1 is not ordinaril' visible or *erce*tible (see 'TP 1, 082; SLT 1, 62E ! )he transcendental for% of ti%e is not ordinaril' visible to us, &hich is &h' Deleuze co%es u* &ith an #i%age# of ti%e to %a(e it thin(able (the cr'stal1i%age ! 16 Fecond, and dra&ing on the closing lines of the novel, that hu%an beings occu*' in ti%e a %ore considerable *lace than the restricted one that is allotted to the% in s*ace (>, 1E08; 11E7 !1.
10

As Blanchot observes, it is the concentration on the #essential i%*ressions# &hich *lace the #*ure and original# order of ti%e at Proust#s dis*osal, #this distended, enor%ous, %onstrous e3istence that ti%e %a(es for ever'one5#! 7e %a(es a further crucial observation" #5&e see t&o co%*li%entar' conse:uences 1 and not, as *reviousl' believed, contradictor' 1 that Proust dra&s fro% his e3*erience! 7e finds in it the assurance that the being &ho endures survives the a**arent death that each instant of ti%e gives hi%, since the fortuitous %eeting of the *resent &ith an analogous *ast establishes the necessit' for a lin( (that is &hat Proust understands &hen he s*ea(s of being <outside of ti%e<, <freed fro% the order of ti%e<, that is to sa' freed fro% the death of ti%e ! Aoreover, since the duration of the being in ti%e is not a definitive loss, *ure and si%*le, but e3istence, he for%s the ai% of finding this e3istence again as the irreducible i%*ressions he &as *rivileged to receive no& allo& hi% to i%agine! ()hus he s*ea(s of <isolating, i%%obilizing 1 for the length of ti%e of a lightning1flash 1 &hat the being never a**rehends" a little ti%e in its *ure state< #! Fee A! Blanchot, #)he I3*erience of Proust#, in Blanchot, *au4 Pas, trans! =! Aandell (=alifornia" Ftanford @niversit' Press, 2EE1; original d!o!*! 1/0> , **! 0217, 06! Fee also the essa' ##)i%e and the -ovel# in the sa%e volu%e, **! 208162, &here he outlines a reading of Lirginia +oolf#s novel The Waves in ter%s of ti%e, &ith #)i%e# constituting the novel#s #substance#! )his is #ti%e# conceived not si%*l' as a *heno%enon that sho&s itself to hu%an consciousness but as that &hich is #the basis of all consciousness#! Iach of the si3 characters of the novel *rovide an #i%age of ti%e#; it is the character of Ghoda, &ho, notes Blanchot, is li(e a #slee*&al(er of terror#, and co%es closest to &hat he calls the #greatest realit' of ti%e#, &hich for hi% is #*ure ti%e# and #e%*t' ti%e# (it is the ti%e of the ab'ss !
16

Fee K! Deleuze, $inema 5) L',mage3Temps (Paris" Bes Mditions de Ainuit, 1/86 , **! 1E81/; $inema 5) The Time ,mage (Bondon" Athlone Press 1/8/ , *! 81" #+hat constitutes the cr'stal1i%age is the %ost funda%ental o*eration of ti%e" since the *ast is constituted not after the *resent that it &as but at the sa%e ti%e, ti%e has to s*lit itself in t&o at each %o%ent as *resent and *ast, &hich differ fro% each other in nature, or, &hat a%ounts to the sa%e thing, it has to s*lit the *resent in t&o heterogeneous directions, one of &hich is launched to&ards the future &hile the other falls into the *ast#! Deleuze goes on to note that it is Bergson &ho sho&s us that this s*litting of ti%e never goes right to the end, &hich accounts for the strange and be&ildering e3change that ta(es *lace in the #cr'stal# bet&een the virtual and the actual (the virtual i%age of the *ast and the actual i%age of the *resent ! )he (e' Bergsonian insight for Deleuze is that ti%e is not the interior in us but rather the o**osite, it is the interiorit' in &hich &e %ove, live, and change! ;n ti%e that is neither e%*irical nor %eta*h'sical but transcendental, see *! >66; *! 271!
1.

Fee K! Deleuze, $inema 5, *! 6.; *! >/; and!, K! Deleuze, #Boulez, Proust, and )i%e#, *! 7>!

2n the case of Proust#s narrator &e can refer to his criticis% of the cine%atogra*h" #Fo%e critics no& li(ed to regard the novel as a sort of *rocession of things u*on the screen of the cine%atogra*h! )his co%*arison &as absurd! -othing is further fro% &hat &e have reall' *erceived than the vision that the cine%atogra*h *resents# (>, 8821>; /17 ! 2t is a fe& *ages later in this final *art of the novel that the narrator e3*lains the nature of his obHection" An hour is not %erel' an hour, it is a vase full of scents and sounds and *roHects and cli%ates, and &hat &e call realit' is a certain conne3ion bet&een these i%%ediate sensations and the %e%ories &hich envelo* us si%ultaneousl' &ith the% 1 a conne3ion that is su**ressed in a si%*le cine%atogra*hic vision, &hich Hust because it *rofesses to confine itself to the truth in fact de*arts &idel' fro% it5 (ibid!, 88/; /20 ! )he cine%atogra*h si%*l' records realit' and does so in accordance &ith the dictates of a li%ited e%*iricis% or realis%! )he tas( of the &riter b' contrast is to translate realit'! )he tas( is to *roduce orders of truth through the ac:uisition of insight into the di%ensions of ti%e! ;n occasion &e are a*t to envisage and relate to *eo*le as *u**ets and entertain the thought that life is a grand *u**et1sho&! )he tas( of the &riter, ho&ever, is to gain access to, and to e3*ose, the %ulti*le *lanes that lie behind the visible as*ects of this *u**et &orld, to (no& &hat gives #force and de*th# to it, and for this one %ust #%a(e a strenuous intellectual effort#, to learn to stud' #&ith one#s e'es and &ith one#s %e%or'#! ?or the narrator the effort %ust be %ade to free ourselves fro% the #illusions *roduced in us b' the a**arent sa%eness of s*ace# (ibid!, /2.; /.. ! Bife %oves, contracts, gro&s, ages, and dies, and ti%e is an #ab'ss#, but little of this is ordinaril' *erceived si%*l' because the %ove%ents and forces of ti%e are i%*erce*tible and the' cannot be *enetrated b' logical reasoning! +e si%*l' do not observe the di%ension in &hich &e %ove, live, die, act, and beco%e! Fo%e (e' *oints are &orth enu%erating before &e turn to e3a%ining Deleuze#s treat%ent of the significance of the *assage in the novel on the #*iece of ti%e in its *ure state#! Gegarding the virtual" it is never for Deleuze a :uestion of si%*l' %a(ing an e*iste%ological or ontological choice bet&een the virtual and the actual, but rather of understanding the conditions under &hich the virtual is *roduced! 2n this case it is the *roduction of a forced encounter &ith a *articular %ove%ent of ti%e, an encounter that necessaril' forces thought to thin( as it encounters a curious o*tical effect! Bet %e no& outline ho& Deleuze reads the e3*erience of =o%bra' and the %adeleine! +e %ust not lose sight of the fact that Deleuze#s first reading of this e*isode 1 he &ill read it again in %i&&erence and 'epetition and then the refrain of =o%bra' &ill continue to %a(e its a**earance, as the sign of a dis1a**earance or an event, in his later &or(s right u* to What is Philosophy?67 1 ta(es *lace in a cha*ter of Proust and Signs entitled #)he Fecondar' Gole of Ae%or'#! Ae%or' is Hudged to be *la'ing a secondar' role in relation to the narrator#s discover' of the su*erior nature of the signs of art! )his for Deleuze is the %eaning of the a**renticeshi*" it ta(es ti%e but it is not an
17

Fee K! Deleuze, %', **! 110116, 1.E; **! 8016, *! 122; K! Deleuze D ?! Kuattari, QP?, **! 1681/; WP?, **! 1.718!

a**renticeshi* devoted to ti%e; it is about the slo& beco%ing of his vocation and the discover' of the revelations of art! Deleuze begins &ith a :uestion" #At &hat level does the fa%ous involuntary Ae%or' intervene,# (PS .7; 6> ! 2t is clear for Deleuze that it intervenes in ter%s of a s*ecific and s*ecial t'*e of sign, na%el' a sensuous sign (such as the %adeleine ! A sensuous :ualit' is a**rehended as a sign and &e undergo an i%*erative that forces us to see( its #%eaning#! 2t is involuntar' %e%or', the %e%or' solicited b' the sign, &hich 'ields for us the %eaning" thus =o%bra' for the %adeleine, Lenice for the cobblestones, and so on! ;f course not all sensuous signs are bound u* &ith involuntar' %e%or', so%e are connected &ith desire and i%agination! 7ere, ho&ever, our focus is on involuntar' %e%or' and the truth of ti%e it %ust ulti%atel' reveal or give rise to! -o&, ho& do &e e3*lain that &hich so intrigues Proust#s narrator, na%el', the e3*erience in &hich the *ast encroaches on the *resent and in such a %anner that one is %ade to doubt &hether &e are in one or the other, )he %adeleine e3*erience is i%*licated in a re%iniscence that cannot be resolved b' the association of ideas or b' the resources of voluntar' %e%or', si%*l' because it is an e3*erience of a *ast that is not si%*l' the *ast of a for%er *resent or of a *ast that is %erel' *ast in relation to our current *resent! 2t is trul' disorientating! Deleuze *oses a set of :uestions! ?irstl', &hat is the source of the e3traordinar' Ho' that &e feel in the *resent sensation (of the *ast co%ing bac( to life , )his is a Ho' that is so *o&erful it %a(es us indifferent to death! )he e*isode of the grand%other is so i%*ortant because here &e have an e3*erience of involuntar' %e%or' that does not bring Ho' 1 the Ho' of ti%e lost or &asted being regained 1 but of terrible anguish and *aral'sis! Fo death cannot, ulti%atel', be a %atter of indifference, but has to %eet &ith a resolution! Fecondl', ho& do &e e3*lain the lac( of rese%blance bet&een the t&o sensations that are *ast and *resent, )hat is, ho& can &e account for the fact that =o%bra' rises u* in this e3*erience not as it &as e3*erienced in contiguit' &ith a *ast sensation (the %adeleine , but in a s*lendour and &ith a #truth# that has no e:uivalent in e%*irical realit', )he e3*erience cannot be e3*lained on the level of voluntar' %e%or', si%*l' because this %e%or' *roceeds fro% an actual *resent to one that #has been# (a *resent that once &as *resent but &hich no longer is ! )he *ast of voluntar' %e%or' is doubl' relative" relative to the *resent it has been and also to the *resent &ith regard to &hich it is no& held or Hudged to be *ast! Loluntar' %e%or' can onl' reco%*ose the *ast &ith a set of different *resents! Loluntar' %e%or' *roceeds b' sna*shots and gives us an e3*erience of the *ast that is as #shoc(ing# and as tedious at loo(ing at *hotogra*hs! 2t is an e3*erience of the *ast devoid of ani%ating life! +hat esca*es voluntar' %e%or', therefore, is #the *ast#s being as past# (l'8tre en soi du pass (PS 72; 67 ! )he *roble% &ith this as a %odel of ti%e is that it cannot e3*lain its obHect, na%el', ti%e" 5if the *resent &as not *ast at the sa%e ti%e as *resent, if the sa%e %o%ent did not coe3ist &ith itself as *resent and *ast, it &ould never *ass, a ne& *resent &ould never could to re*lace this one! )he *ast as it is in itself coe3ists &ith, and does not succeed, the *resent it has been (ibid!, 7>; 68 ! 2n short, the *ast is for%ed at the sa%e ti%e as the *resent as in a virtual co1e3istence of the t&o! )his is Bergson#s insight into the e3*erience of the for%ation of ti%e as

involving the co1e3istence of *erce*tion and %e%or' and serves to e3*lain a range of *heno%ena fro% e3*eriences of d92 vu or *ara%nesia to the fugitive e3istence of our %e%ories! Bergson#s funda%ental clai% is that %e%or' does not co%e after a *erce*tion but is for%ed coter%inousl' &ith it!18 )his account of ti%e is co%*licated and difficult to gras* but it is essential &e do so since it e3*lains the ver' *assing of ti%e, of ho& ti%e *asses for us! 2t e3*lains ti%e be'ond the horizon of *resentis% but also gives an account of the *resent in its *resentness, and at the sa%e ti%e e3*lains ho& it is *ossible for the *ast to e3ist on %ore than one level (as both a relative *ast and an absolute *ast; of course, the *ast is al&a's *s'chological 1 the *oint of the idea of an ontological or non1e%*irical and virtual *ast is to sho& us the co%*licated and co%*le3 character of this *s'cholog' and to account for its actual o*erations ! 1/ ;n one level, therefore, the de%ands of conscious *erce*tion and voluntar' %e%or' establish a real succession; on another level, ho&ever, there is virtual coe3istence! )he *ast is e3*erienced on %ore than one level, as both the *assing of ti%e and as that &hich is outside nor%al successive ti%e, a little *iece of ti%e in its *ure state! But this #*ure state# is also a co%*licated sign of life, it enHo's a double e3istence, half outside of ti%e (neither of the *ast nor of the *resent and half in death (and hence in life ! )he e3*erience of =o%bra' can be and %ust be further co%*licated" &hat is the *ast of =o%bra' the narrator e3*eriences, 2t is *roduced as that &hich is neither of the *ast nor of the *resent, that is, it e3ists onl' in this co%*licated state &here virtual ti%e is contingentl' and accidentall' brought into e3istence! 2E 7o& could the e3*erience of a *ure *ast (&e have to understand this as *recisel' as *ossible be an'thing else but a *arado3ical e3*erience of so%ething ne& but &hich is in, or of, the *ast, An e*isode of
18

Fee 7! Bergson, #Ae%or' of the Present and ?alse Gecognition#, #uvres, **! 8/71/>E; "ind3 +nergy, trans! 7! +ildon =arr (-e& $or(" 7enr' 7olt, 1/2E , **! 1>018.!
1/

7ere 2 a% referring to the %ove Deleuze argues that it is necessar' to %a(e in cha*ter three of :ergsonism, #Ae%or' as Lirtual =oe3istence#, &ith regard to the *ast fro% *s'cholog' to ontolog'! 7e s*ea(s of #*ure recollection# as having no *s'chological e3istence (since it is virtual, inactive, and unconscious and of the need to %a(e an ontological lea* into the *ure *ast so as to have the e3*erience of the *ast in1itself and gain insight into ho& the virtual gets actualized! )his entire %ove is *oorl' understood if it is thought that Deleuze is suggesting that there is an ethereal real% of virtualit' e3isting in another di%ension that is alien to, or divorced fro%, the *s'chological! )he ai% is rather to e3*and our understanding of *s'cholog' and to sho& that the virtual has s*ecific conditions of *roduction, genesis, and e%ergence (and destruction ! ?or Deleuze, Bergson#s great achieve%ent lies *recisel' in de%onstrating the inde*endent e3istence of %e%or' and the *rocess of its actualization; in this &a' &e are better able to co%*rehend the *ractical nature of the #attention to life# that is necessar' to &ard off useless and dangerous %e%ories! An' other conce*tion of %e%or' si%*l' rests on an untenable conce*tion of both the self and ti%e, one in &hich the self &ould be at all ti%es *erfectl' trans*arent to itself and identical &ith itself! Fee K! Deleuze, Le :ergsonisme (Paris" P@?, 1/.. , **! 0617E; :ergsonism, trans! 7! )o%linson D B! 7abberHa% (-e& $or(" None Boo(s, 1//1 , **! 6117>!
2E

7ere &e can refer to the descri*tion given in the novel ( 'TP 1, 00; SLT 1, 0718 ! )he narrator has Hust %ade reference to the =eltic belief that the souls &ho% &e have lost and left behind are held ca*tive in an inferior being such as an ani%al, a *lant, or so%e inani%ate obHect! +hen the' are #delivered b' us, the' have overco%e death and return to share our life#! 7e continues" #And so it is &ith our o&n *ast! 2t is a labour in vain to atte%*t to reca*ture it" all the efforts of our intellect %ust *rove futile! )he *ast is hidden so%e&here outside the real%, be'ond the reach of intellect, in so%e %aterial obHect (in the sensation &hich that %aterial obHect &ill give us of &hich &e have no in(ling! And it de*ends on chance &hether or not &e co%e u*on this obHect before &e ourselves %ust die#!

involuntar' %e%or' see%s to be based u*on the rese%blance bet&een t&o sensations and t&o %o%ents! But this &ould give us *ure and si%*le identit'! 2t &ould not give us the strange e3*erience of ti%e that is undergone in such cases! Deleuze &rites" 5%ore *rofoundl', the rese%blance refers us to a strict identity of a :ualit' co%%on to the t&o sensations or of a sensation co%%on to the t&o %o%ents, the *resent and the *ast! )hus the flavor" it see%s that it contains a volu%e of duration that e3tends it through t&o %o%ents at once! But, in its turn, the sensation, the identical :ualit', i%*lies a relation &ith so%ething di&&erent! )he flavor of the %adeleine has, in its volu%e, i%*risoned and envelo*ed =o%bra'! Fo long as &e re%ain on the level of conscious *erce*tion, the %adeleine has onl' an entirel' e3ternal relation of contiguit' &ith =o%bra'! Fo long as &e re%ain on the level of voluntar' %e%or', =o%bra' re%ains e3ternal to the %adeleine, as the se*arable conte3t of the *ast sensation! But this is characteristic of involuntar' %e%or'" it internalizes the conte3t, it %a(es the *ast conte3t inse*arable fro% the *resent sensation (PS 7016; 6/1.E ! @lti%atel', of course, the e3*erience is one of *rofound difference and not identit' through relations of rese%blance and contiguit'" #=o%bra' rises u* again in the *resent sensation in &hich its difference fro% the *ast sensation is internalized# (ibid!, 76; .E ! 2t is an internalized difference that has beco%e immanent (or i%%anence *roduced ! )he reason &h' =o%bra' rises u* in a ne& for% is because it is a *ast that is not relative to either the *resent that it once &as or to a *resent in relation to &hich it is no& held to be *ast! Deleuze calls this an e3*erience of =o%bra' #not in its realit', but in its truth# and in its #internalized difference# (it is a =o%bra' %ade to a**ear not si%*l' in ter%s of its e3ternal or contingent relations ! 7o&ever, the truth and essence of =o%bra' are li%ited! )his is because &e get onl' the differential truth of a *lace or a %o%ent, a local essence (such as =o%bra', Balbec, Lenice, etc! as o**osed to a full' individualized one! 2nvoluntar' %e%or' serves as a *rinci*le of localization and not individuation (and &hich ta(es *lace onl' on the level of artistic essence !21 2t gives us an e3*erience of ti%e regained but in a li%ited for% (the ti%e &e regain in it is the ti%e &e have lost or that &e &asted ! 2t gives us an #instantaneous i%age of eternit'# (ibid!, 7/; .> ! )he %ore *rofound ti%e regained can onl' be realized in art since here &e find s*iritual life co%*letel' e%anci*ated fro% a de*endence on %atter (ibid!, 1E.; 87 ! )he e3*erience of the %adeleine gives us an ideal realit' that is not abstract (or is Hudged such onl' fro% the *ers*ective of conscious *erce*tion and the needs of utilitarian1governed action , and this ideal realit' is necessaril' #virtualit'# and #essence# incarnated in a for% of %e%or'! As such, it re%ains on the level of erotic invest%ent and attach%ent! 2t is this &hich %ust be e3*osed and
21

)here are a nu%ber of reasons &h' Deleuze holds the essences of art to be su*erior to those found in the sensuous signs, such as the signs of involuntar' %e%or'! Fee Deleuze, Proust and Signs, **! 7.182; **! .11.! 2n essence, Deleuze#s argu%ent is that sensuous signs, unli(e the signs of art, cannot se*arate the%selves fro% e3ternal and contingent deter%inations! As such, the' #re*resent onl' the effort of life to *re*are us for art and for the final revelation of art# (*! 81; *! .6 ! Fee also cha*ter four of the te3t, #Issences and the Figns of Art#, **! 611.6; **! >/161!

con:uered! )ransfor%ing the %e%or' of =o%bra' into the event of =o%bra' is one &a' in &hich Deleuze locates a #beco%ing# in &hat &e ta(e to be e3*eriences of %e%or'! 22 )he e3*erience of an involuntar' %e%or' *roduces a curious effect, the effect of the virtual" is it real, 2s it a hallucination, 7o& is the effect *roduced, 2s it significant that the narrator goes on to s*ea( of it as a s*ecies of #o*tical illusion#, ?ro% &hat *ers*ective, fro% &hat *lane of e3istence, is it to be regarded as an o*tical illusion, 2t is vital &e a**reciate a (e' *oint &ith regard to Deleuze#s configuration of the virtual, including virtual %e%or'! 2t is this" for Deleuze the virtual is not an illusion! ;n the contrar', he see(s to give a realit' to the virtual and argues that the virtual is not an illusion so long as it remains the virtualO Bet us ta(e the e3a%*le of the *ure *ast to de%onstrate this *oint! )he *ure *ast is a *ast that #*er*etuall' differs fro% itself and &hose universal %obilit'5causes the *resent to *ass# (%' 1>6; 1E2 ! )a(e, for e3a%*le, a virtual obHect (a *art of a *erson or a *lace, a fetish or an obHect of love " this is never *ast either in relation to a ne& *resent or in relation to a *resent it once &as! Gather, it #is *ast as the conte%*orar' of the *resent &hich it is, in a frozen *resent5# (ibid! ! Lirtual obHects can onl' e3ist as frag%ents 1 as, %oreover, frag%ents of the%selves 1 because the' are found only as lost and e3ist onl' as recovered! As Deleuze stresses, #Boss or forgetting here are not deter%inations &hich %ust be overco%e; rather, the' refer to the obHective nature of that &hich &e recover, as lost, at the heart of forgetting# (ibid! ! ?or Deleuze this *rovides the (e' to develo*ing an ade:uate conce*tion of re*etition! Ge*etition does not o*erate fro% one *resent to another in a real series, sa' fro% a *resent to a for%er *resent &hich &ould assu%e the role of an ulti%ate or original ter% and that &ould al&a's re%ain in *lace, so acting as a *oint and *o&er of attraction! )his &ould give us a brute or bare, %aterial %odel of re*etition &ith so%ething li(e fi3ation, regression, trau%a, or the *ri%al scene, serving as the original ele%ent! ?or Deleuze, in contrast, re*etition (no&s only *er*etual disguise and dis*lace%ent! )his is &h' he &ill ta(e issue &ith ?reud#s figuration of the death1drive conceived as an involutionar' return to inani%ate %atter (*ure regression ! Deleuze develo*s a co%*letel' different %odel of the #real#" the real is inse*arable fro% the virtual! 7e as(s us to consider a ver' si%*le :uestion" conceive of t&o *resents or t&o events, call the% infantile and adult, and then as(, #ho& can the for%er *resent act at a distance u*on the *resent one and *rovide a %odel for it &hen all effectiveness is received retros*ectivel' fro% the later *resent,# ( %' 1>8; 1E0 ! +ould not re*etition co%e to subsist on this %odel solel' as the illusor' *o&er of a soli*sistic subHect, 7is *ro*osal is that &e thin( of the beco%ing of the real, the succession of *resents, and the %ove%ent fro% current *resents to a for%er *resents, as i%*licated in a virtual co1 e3istence of *erce*tion and %e%or'" #Ge*etition is constituted not fro% one *resent to another, but bet&een the t&o coe3istent series that these *resents for% in function of the virtual obHect (obHect P 3 # (ibid!, 1>8; 1E6 ! 7e ends u* overturning the %odel of regression b' arguing that disguise and dis*lace%ent cannot be e3*lained b' re*ression because re*ression is not *ri%ar'; rather, death, forgetting, and re*etition are &hat is
22

;n the event in Deleuze see What is Philosophy?" #)he event is i%%aterial, incor*oreal, unlivable" *ure reserve5it is the event that is a %ean&hile Q un entre3temp; " the %ean&hile is not *art of the eternal, but neither is it *art of ti%e 1 it belongs to beco%ing! )he %ean&hile, the event, is al&a's a dead ti%e; it is there &here nothing ta(es *lace, an infinite a&aiting that is alread' infinitel' *ast, a&aiting and reserve#, QP?, *! 108, *! 10/; WP?, *! 16., *! 168!

*ri%ar'" #+e do not re*eat because &e re*ress, &e re*ress because &e re*eat# (ibid! ! 2t not difficult to understand ho& all of this gets confused in %uch theorizing on re*etition 1 as &ell as in our o&n heads 1 o&ing to the fact that the *ro*erl' transcendental for% of ti%e is not nor%all' *erce*tible to us! But it is this confusion &hich generates the erroneous vie& that the virtual can si%*l' be dis%issed as an #illusion#; in truth, the contrar' is the case and it is the *ure *ast that denounces the illusion (of a *er*etual or self1sa%e *resent ! )he *ure *ast assu%es the for% of an illusion onl' and *recisel' &hen it is conceived as a %'thical for%er *resent (ibid!, 106; 1E/ ! 2t is for this reason that Deleuze *osits thanatos l'ing at the base of %e%or'" it is o**osed not to the #truth# of the essences and events of involuntar' %e%or' but rather to their illusor' erotic for% (=o%bra' treated as a for%er *resent, for e3a%*le ! )he :uestion continues to *ersist, ho&ever" %ight there still be too %uch eros in the discoveries and revelations of involuntar' %e%or', ?ro% &hat *lace &ould &e %a(e such a Hudge%ent or a**raisal, 2n the original edition of Proust and Signs (1/.0 the ti%e of involuntar' %e%or', the ti%e of the virtual or the *ure *ast, is sacrificed in favour of the creation of true essences and &hich can onl' be *roduced in art (ever'thing, Deleuze clai%s, is *re*arator' in Proust in relation to the ulti%ate revelations of art ! 2 do not &ish to *ursue this here since %' focus in this *a*er is not on Deleuze#s doctrine of essences, &hich is at the heart of the boo( and deter%ines the reading of the various signs 1 of the &orld, of sense, of love, of art 1 but rather on ti%e! 2n the later edition of the boo( (1/7E Deleuze dra%atizes this beco%ing of ti%e in a section entitled #)he )hree Aachines#! 2> 2t is here &e find the reasons for conceiving ti%e as the forced %ove%ent of a certain death1instinct! )his beco%es full' clear &hen cou*led &ith the *resentation of the three s'ntheses of ti%e and the re1&or(ing of the death1instinct carried out in %i&&erence and 'epetition (1/.8 ! Interlude Bet us *ause at this *oint in the investigation, ho&ever, to reflect on so%e of the hard lessons to be learned in the a**renticeshi* that is undergone b' the narrator! )he easiest lessons to be learned are those bound u* &ith the &orldl' signs! )his is o&ing to their shallo&ness or vacuit'" for e3a%*le, friendshi* (the hollo&ness of its conversations and the fashions and habits of societ' and their fli**ant and constantl' changing nature! 7arder lessons co%e fro% e3*eriences of love and death! Fuch sensuous signs contain an
2>

Deleuze#s Proust and Signs &as first *ublished in 1/.0 and then re*ublished several ti%es throughout the 1/7Es! 2t is the 1/7E e3*anded edition that first includes the added seg%ent on #)he Biterar' Aachine#! A further edition of the te3t &as *ublished in 1/7. &hich included at the ver' end the *iece &ritten in 1/7> and entitled #Presence and ?unction of Aadness" )he F*ider#! )he co%%on vie& of the successive revisions and additions of the te3t is that it beco%es an increasingl' *ost%odern reading of Proust &ith the :ildungsroman hero of the first 1/.0 edition beco%ing an absent character b' the ti%e of the te3t that is *ublished in 1/7.! Perha*s the a**ellation of #structuralist and *oststructuralist# to the later re&or(ings of the te3t &ould be %ore accurate" &itness, for e3a%*le, the role *la'ed in the 1/7E %aterial b' Ico#s se%iotics on the one hand and Kuattari#s notion of #transversalit'# on the other! 2t is i%*ortant to a**reciate &ith regard to the first reading, ho&ever, and as Duncan Barge has astutel' *ointed out, that he :ildungsroman of the Proustian *rotagonist and narrator is not that of Wilhelm "eister! Barge suggests that Deleuze %a' have had in %ind Thus Spo!e <arathustra and dra&s our attention to the fact that -ietzsche#s literar'1*hiloso*hical *uzzle ends &ith a discourse entitled #Das Neichen# (#)he Fign# ! Fee D! Barge, -iet=sche and Proust) $omparative Study (;3ford" ;3ford @niversit' Press, 2EE1 , *! 67!

essential a%bivalence since the' so%eti%es bring Ho' and at other ti%es onl' great *ain! 2n the case of love its %ost *ainful signs are connected to re*etitions! -ot onl' do &e re*eat our *ast loves, it is also the case that an' *resent love re*eats the %o%ent of the dissolution and antici*ates its o&n end (on the serialit' and re*etition of love see Proust, 'TP 1, >72, .2.17, 8>2, 8/0; SLT 1, 0E0, .70, 8/E, /66 ! 2t is a *s'choanal'tic error to su**ose that the narrator si%*l' re*eats in his series of loves his initial or original love for his %other" #it is true that our loves re*eat our feelings for the %other, but the latter alread' re*eats other loves, &hich &e have not ourselves e3*erienced# (PS 8/; 72 ! )he error is to su**ose that the obHect can be treated as an ulti%ate or an original ter% and that it can be assigned a fi3ed *lace! But this is to lose sight of the fact that the obHect e3ists onl' as a virtual obHect!20 )his e3*lains &h' our loves do not refer bac( in an' si%*le or straightfor&ard sense to our %other" #it is si%*l' that the %other occu*ies a certain *lace in relation to the virtual obHect in the series &hich constitute our *resent#, and the obHect is subHect to *er*etual dis*lace%ent and disguise (%' 1>/; 1E6 ! )here is si%*l' the #obHect P 3#! Bove is not e3*licated b' the ones &e love or b' the e*he%eral states that govern the %o%ents of being in love (Proust 'TP >, 8/7; SLT >, />>1>0 ! Iach love in our series of successive loves contributes a difference but one that is alread' contained #in a *ri%ordial i%age that &e unceasingl' re*roduce at different levels and re*eat as the intelligible la& of all our loves# ( PS 86; .8 ! )he transitions bet&een our different loves find their la& not in %e%or' but in forgetting (Proust 'TP >, /E0; SLT >, /0E ! )he identit' of the beloved is governed b' contingenc'! ;ur loves %iscarr' &hen the' %ight *erfectl' &ell have succeeded had there been onl' the slightest difference in circu%stances; the loves that are realized de*end on e3trinsic factors, occasions and circu%stances (PS />10; 7. ! I:uall' i%*ortant are the lessons to be learned fro% giving u* on a s*urious obHectivist inter*retation of things in the &orld (*eo*le and *laces " #5 the reasons for loving never inhere in the *erson loved but refer to ghosts, to )hird Parties, to )he%es that are incarnated5 according to co%*le3 la&s# ( PS 02; >1 ! )he narrator %ust learn that avo&al is not essential to love, since all our freedo% &ill be lost #if &e give the obHect the benefit of the signs and significations that transcend it# (ibid! ! )o be faithful to love it is necessar' to be harsh, cruel, and dece*tive &ith those &e love! )he lover conceals the beloved" #5the lover lies no less than the beloved; he se:uesters her, and also is careful not to avo& his love to her, in order to re%ain a better guardian, a better Hailer# (ibid!, /7; 7/ ! Fensuous signs *resent so %an' tra*s for us, inviting us to see( their %eaning in the obHect that bears or e%its the%, in &hich #the *ossibilit' of failure, the abandon%ent of inter*retation, is li(e the &or% in the fruit# (ibid!, 0>; >2 ! Co' can be had fro% all of this, fro% the lessons of life, love, and death, and it is a Ho' that resides in co%*rehension"
20

;n the #virtual obHect#, see the i%*ortant and *recise treat%ent in Deleuze, %i&&erence and 'epetition, **! 1>E1>.; **! /811E>! A nu%ber of *oints are &orth noting" first, that virtual obHects are incor*orated in real obHects and can corres*ond to *art#s of a subHect#s bod', to another *erson, and to s*ecial obHects such as to's and fetishes; second, that virtual obHects belong essentiall' to the *ast, in *articular the for%ation of the *ure *ast (so virtual obHects e3ist, sa's Deleuze, as #shreds of *ure *ast# ; third, that these *eculiar (inds of obHects e3ist onl' as frag%ents of the%selves in &hich the' are #found# onl' as #lost# and the' e3ist onl' as recovered; fourth, and *erha*s %ost decisivel', the' are i%*licated in the a%orous ga%e and *la' of re*etition! )his %eans that thanatos or the death1drive is thoroughl' immanent to the %ove%ents of re*etition and to the dis*lace%ent and disguise of the virtual obHect!

5the *heno%ena are al&a's unha**' and *articular, but the idea e3tracted fro% the% is general and Ho'ous! ?or love#s re*etition is not be se*arated fro% a la& of *rogression b' &hich &e accede to a consciousness that trans%utes our sufferings into Ho'! +e realize that our sufferings do not de*end on their obHect! )he' &ere #tric(s# or #dece*tions# &e *ractised on ourselves, or better still, snares and co:uetries of the 2dea, gaities of Issence! )here is so%ething tragic about &hat is re*eated but so%ething co%ic in the re*etition itself, and %ore *rofoundl', a Ho' of re*etition understood or of the co%*rehension of its la&! (ibid!, /1; 70 !26 But &hat of the shattering realization of the brute fact of death in an e3*erience of involuntar' %e%or', 7o& can this be trans%uted or %ade the subHect of *hiloso*hical &or(, =an death be *ut to &or( li(e life and love, Bet us no& return to and recall the grand%other e*isode! Deleuze on Death and Forced Movement @*heaval of %' entire being! ;n the first night, as 2 &as suffering fro% cardiac fatigue, 2 bent do&n slo&l' and cautiousl' to ta(e off %' boots, tr'ing to %aster %' *ain! But scarcel' had 2 touched the to*%ost button than %' chest s&elled, filled &ith an un(no&n, a divine *resence, 2 &as sha(en &ith sobs, tears strea%ed fro% %' e'es! )he being &ho had co%e to %' rescue, saving %e fro% barrenness of s*irit, &as the sa%e, &ho, 'ears before, in a %o%ent of identical distress and loneliness, in a %o%ent of &hen 2 had nothing left of %'self, had co%e in and had restored %e to %'self, for that being &as %'self and so%ething %ore than %e (the container that is greater than the contained and &as bringing it to %e ! 2 had Hust *erceived, in %' %e%or', stoo*ing over %' fatigue, the tender, *reoccu*ied, disa**ointed face of %' grand%other, as she had been on the first evening of our arrival, the face not of that grand%other &ho% 2 had been astonished and re%orseful at having so little %issed, and &ho had nothing in co%%on &ith her save her na%e, but of %' real grand%other, of &ho%, for the first ti%e since the afternoon of her stro(e in the =ha%*s1Il'see, 2 no& reca*tured the living realit' in a co%*lete and involuntar' recollection5it &as onl' at that %o%ent 1 %ore than a 'ear after her burial, because of the anachronis% &hich so often *revents the calendar of facts fro% corres*onding to the calendar of feelings 1 that 2 beca%e conscious that she &as dead! 2 had often s*o(en about her since then, and thought of her also, but behind %' &ords and thoughts, those of an ungrateful, selfish, cruel 'oung %an, there had never been an'thing that rese%bled %' grand%other, because, in %' frivolit', %' love of *leasure, %' fa%iliarit' &ith the s*ectacle of her ill1health, 2 retained &ithin %e onl' in a *otential state the %e%or' of &hat she had been! At an' given %o%ent, our total soul has onl' a %ore or less fictitious value, in s*ite of the rich inventor' of its assets, for no& so%e, no& others are unrealizable, &hether the' are real
26

)he narrator of the Fearch hi%self &rites of #the *erce*tion of truths# resulting in Ho'! Fo%e of these truths co%e about as a result of :uite trivial *leasures, and so%e of the% can onl' be discovered in suffering (>, 8//; />6 ! 7e also notes at one *oint that #5brief though our life %a' be, it is onl' &hile &e are suffering that &e see certain things &hich are at ti%es hidden fro% us# (>, 8/7; />> !

riches or those of the i%agination 1 in %' o&n case, for e3a%*le, not onl' of the ancient na%e of Kuer%antes but those, i%%easurabl' graver, of the true %e%or' of %' grand%other! ?or &ith the *erturbations of %e%or' are lin(ed the inter%ittences of the heart! 2t is, no doubt, the e3istence of our bod', &hich &e %a' co%*are to a vase enclosing our s*iritual nature, that induces us to su**ose that all our inner &ealth, our *ast Ho's, all our sorro&s, are *er*etuall' in our *ossession! Perha*s it is e:uall' ine3act to su**ose that the' esca*e or return! 2n an' case if the' re%ain &ithin us, for %ost of the ti%e it is in an un(no&n region &here the' are of no use to us, and &here even the %ost ordinar' are cro&ded out b' %e%ories of a different (ind, &hich *reclude an' si%ultaneous occurrence of the% in our consciousness! But if the conte3t of sensations in &hich the' are *reserved is reca*tured, the' ac:uire in turn the sa%e *o&er of e3*elling ever'thing that is inco%*atible &ith the%, of installing alone in us the self that originall' lived the%! -o&, inas%uch as the self that 2 had Hust suddenl' beco%e once again had not e3isted since that evening long ago &hen %' grand%other had undressed %e after %' arrival at Balbec, it &as :uite naturall', not at the end of the da' that had Hust *assed, of &hich that self (ne& nothing, but 1 as though )i%e &ere to consist of a series of different and *arallel lines 1 &ithout an' solution of continuit', i%%ediatel' after the first evening at Balbec long ago, that 2 clung to the %inute in &hich %' grand%other had stoo*ed over %e! )he self that 2 then &as, that had disa**eared for so long, &as once again so close to %e that 2 see%ed still to hear the &ords that had Hust been s*o(en, although the' &ere no& no %ore than a *hantas%, as a %an &ho is half a&a(e thin(s that he can still %a(e out close b' the sound of his receding drea%! 2 &as no& solel' the *erson &ho had sought a refuge in his grand%other#s ar%s, had sought to obliterate the traces of his sorro& b' s%othering her &ith (isses, the *erson &ho% 2 had should have had as %uch difficult' in i%agining &hen 2 &as one or other of those that for so%e ti%e *ast 2 had successivel' been as no& 2 should have had in %a(ing the sterile effort to e3*erience the desires and Ho's of one of those that for a ti%e at least 2 no longer &as! 2 re%e%bered ho&, an hour before the %o%ent &hen %' grand%other had stoo*ed in her dressing1go&n to unfasten %' boots, as 2 &andered along the stiflingl' hot street, *ast the *astr'1coo(#s, 2 had felt that 2 could never, in %' need to feel her ar%s round %e, live through the hour that 2 had still to s*end &ithout her! And no& that this sa%e need had rea&a(ened, 2 (ne& that 2 %ight &ait hour after hour, that she &ould never again be b' %' side! 2 had onl' Hust discovered this because 2 had onl' Hust, on feeling her for the first alive, real, %a(ing %' heart s&ell to brea(ing1*oint, on finding her at last, learned that 2 had lost her for ever! Bost for ever" 2 could not understand, and 2 struggled to endure the anguish of this contradiction5as soon as 2 had relived that bliss, as though it &ere *resent, feeling it shot through b' the certaint', throbbing li(e a recurrent *ain, of an annihilation that had effaced %' i%age of that tenderness, had destro'ed that e3istence, retros*ectivel' abolished our %utual *redestination, %ade of %' grand%other, at the %o%ent &hen 2 had found her again as in a %irror, a %ere stranger &ho% chance had allo&ed to s*end a fe& 'ears &ith %e, as she %ight have done &ith an'one else, but to &ho%, before and after those 'ears, 2 &as and &ould be nothing! ('TP 2, 76618; SLT 2, 78>16 !

)he *ainful realization of the full force of the grand%other#s being1dead gives rise to an encounter &ith the ,dea of death! )his death see%s to haunt life, to highlight the contingent nature of our affections and attach%ents, our loves, and to rob life of an' enduring %eaning or sense! 7o& can thought &or( the 2dea of death, su**osing it can, )here is no doubt that this e*isode *resents the narrator of Proust#s novel &ith a serious challenge! ;n the ne3t *age &e read" 52 &as deter%ined not %erel' to suffer, but to res*ect the original for% of %' suffering as it had suddenl' co%e u*on %e una&ares, and 2 &anted to continue to feel it, follo&ing its o&n la&s, &hatever that contradiction of survival and annihilation, so strangel' intert&ined &ithin %e, returned! 2 did not (no& &hether 2 should one da' distil a grain of truth fro% this *ainful and for the %o%ent inco%*rehensible i%*ression, but 2 (ne& that if 2 ever did e3tract so%e truth fro% life, it could onl' be fro% such an i%*ression and fro% none other, an i%*ression at once so *articular and so s*ontaneous, &hich had neither been traced b' %' intelligence nor attenuated b' %' *usillani%it', but &hich death itself, the sudden revelation of death, stri(ing li(e a thunderbolt, had carved &ithin %e, along a su*ernatural and inhu%an gra*h, in a double and %'sterious furro&! (As for the state of forgetfulness of %' grand%other in &hich 2 had been living until that %o%ent, 2 could not even thin( of clinging to it to find so%e truth; since in itself it &as nothing but a negation, a &ea(ening of the facult' of thought inca*able of recreating a real %o%ent of life and obliged to substitute for it conventional and neutral i%ages (ibid!; 76/1.E; 78.17 ! ?or Deleuze the (e' to *roducing an effective reading of this seg%ent of the novel is to connect it &ith the *hrase #a little *iece of ti%e in its *ure state#! 2n %i&&erence and 'epetition he *ro*oses that the Proustian for%ula has a double referent" on one level it refers to the *ure *ast, in the in1itself of ti%e (*assive nou%enal s'nthesis, &hich still re%ains attached to eros , but on another level it refers to the #*ure and e%*t' for% of ti%e#, or the s'nthesis of the death1instinct (%' 1.E; 122 ! )he encounter &ith, and e3*loration of, the *ure *ast is erotic because it finds its basis in our need for attach%ent (to %aterialit', for e3a%*le, such as a face or a *lace ! As a *o&er and a desire it holds the #secret of an insistence in all our e3istence# (ibid!, 116; 86 ! But it is not the last &ord or the final s'nthesis of ti%e! 2n the #note on the Proustian e3*eriences# the clai% that the frag%ent of ti%e in its *ure state refers to both the *ure *ast and the e%*t' for% of ti%e co%es at the end of a long *aragra*h that connects the in1itself of =o%bra', an e3a%*le of #the obHect P 3#, &ith the an(le1boot and %e%or' of the grand%other! Deleuze &rites" #Iros is constituted b' the resonance, but overco%es itself in the direction of the death instinct &hich is constituted b' the amplitude o& a &orced movement# (ibid!, 1.E; 122, %' e%*hasis ! +hat is this #forced %ove%ent#,2. ?or insight into this %ode of %ove%ent &e need to turn to the later edition of Proust and Signs &ith its added essa' on the literar' %achine, es*eciall' the cha*ter on #)he )hree Aachines#! 2n the first edition of the boo( the grand%other e*isode is
2.

)he categor' of #forced %ove%ent# co%es fro% Aristotle and features in his discussion of different (inds of %ove%ent, natural and unnatural! Fee Aristotle, #)he Ph'sics#, 2L! 8 D L222! 0!

discussed but the challenge it *oses to the :uestion of #Proust and *hiloso*h'# is not confronted! 2t ta(es *lace in the boo(#s second cha*ter on #Figns and )ruth# at the *oint &hen Deleuze recognizes that sensuous signs can be both signs of alteration and disa**earance" there is not onl' *lenitude but also absence, the void of ti%e lost forever! )he e*isode of the boots and the %e%or' of the grand%other is in principle no different fro% the %adeleine or the cobblestones ( PS 2/1>E; 1/12E ! And 'et the e3*erience of the for%er is shattering and *uts the Proustian vision of the rede%*tion of ti%e to the test! 7o& can the e3*erience of irre*arable loss be done *hiloso*hical Hustice, 7o& can death be *ut to &or(, Furel' there is onl' the certaint' of death and nothingness, But it is here 1 the *oint in the boo( that haunts and hovers over Bec(ett#s reading of the novel 1 that ti%e &ill reveal one of its %ost essential truths, if not its actual truth! )his is onl' %ade clear b' Deleuze in his second reading of the e*isode in the later edition of the boo(! )i%e &ill be sho&n to be the #truth# of this e*isode, the ti%e of life as the ti%e of the death1instinct and overco%ing of the erotic effect of %e%or'! 2n the cha*ter entitled #)he )hree Aachines# Deleuze see(s to sho& that in Proust#s novel there are onl' #orders of truth# and no si%*le or single truth! )he first t&o orders have alread' been touched u*on! )hese are the orders of re%iniscences and essences, of ti%e regained through the production of lost ti%e (for it is a *arado3 of lost ti%e that it is *roduced as lost , and of general la&s e3tracted fro% the encounter &ith the sensuous signs (signs of love, for e3a%*le, &hich give &a' to the 2dea of love ! )he third order is the order of universal alteration of death, including the 2dea of death and the *roduction of catastro*he! )his is the order that constitutes the long denoue%ent of the boo(, the ageing of the guests of A%e de Kuer%antes#s salon, &here &e encounter subli%e disguises and subli%e senilities, the distortion of ti%e in %atter (distortion of features, the frag%entation of gestures, the loss of co1ordination of %uscles, the for%ation of %oss, lichen, and *atches of %old on bodies, etc! ! 27 All that e3ists is corroded and distorted b' ti%e! )i%e gives life and ti%e gives death at one and the sa%e ti%e! 2n his essa' on Proust, Bec(ett, &rites a**ro*riatel' of ti%e as #that double1headed %onster of da%nation and salvation#,28 and of the role *la'ed b' ti%e#s #*oisonous ingenuit'# in the #science of affliction#!2/ )his final order, &hich is alread' encountered in the %e%or' of the grand%other, *resents an acute *roble% for the narrator and for readers of the novel! )his final order fits into the other t&o orders and &ould see% to negate an' *rinci*le of %eaning or value! 2s not death lur(ing a&a' in each and ever' %o%ent, +hen the narrator leans do&n to unbutton his boot ever'thing begins e3actl' as in ecstas', the e3*ectation of the strange return &ith the *resent %o%ent set in resonance &ith an earlier one! But ver' :uic(l' this Ho' turns into an intolerable anguish as the *airing of the t&o %o%ents brea(s do&n and 'ields to a disa**earance of the earlier one #in a certaint' of death and nothingness# (PS 18/; 167 ! A reconciliation %ust be found and a contradiction solved bet&een the third and the first t&o orders! 2t is insufficient to a**eal to the narrator#s
27

Proust#s account of death in the closing stages of the novel finds an effective treat%ent in Bo&ie#s cha*ter on #Death# in his Proust mong the Stars, **! 287ff!
28

F! Bec(ett, Proust (Bondon" Cohn =alder, 1///; first *ublished 1/>1 , *! 11! 2bid!, *! 16!

2/

recognition of the fact that he has in his life alread' died %an' ti%es (on the duration of a life as a se:uence of %ulti*le #Hu3ta*osed but distinct# #2#s# see Proust, 'TP >, /0>; SLT >, /72 , or the serialit' of his loves &hich contain their o&n little deaths (the deaths bet&een *artial or virtual obHects ! ?or here in the third order &e are *resented &ith an #idea of death# as that &hich #unifor%l' i%bues all frag%ents# and carries the% #to&ard a universal end# (ibid! ! +e see% to be confronted &ith the e3istential truis% that death robs life of all %eaning! But this insight or clai% has to be sho&n to derive fro% an o*tical illusion or effect, Hust li(e the o*tical illusion and effect of the *ure *ast! )he contradiction is not resolved in the %e%or' of the grand%other (and it is noticeable that Bec(ett *roduces no reading of this e*isode; he si%*l' tells us his vie& that the section in &hich the e*isode ta(es *lace, the #2nter%ittences of the 7eart#, is *erha*s the greatest *assage Proust ever &rote and then recounts it !>E +hereas the first t&o orders ulti%atel' *rove *roductive in the a**renticeshi* of ti%e and truth, the latter &ould see% to be absolutel' catastro*hic and un*roductive! 7ence Deleuze#s :uestion" #=an &e conceive a %achine ca*able of e3tracting so%ething fro% this (ind of *ainful i%*ression and of *roducing certain truths,# As long as &e cannot, he sa's, then the &or( of art encounters the gravest obHections! Deleuze no& see(s to sho& that this idea of death consists of a certain e&&ect o& time! )he idea of death %ust lead to a truth of ti%e being disclosed! +hat is the s*ecific effect of ti%e that *roduces the idea of death, Deleuze argues as follo&s! +ith t&o given states of the sa%e *erson 1 the earlier that &e re%e%ber, the *resent that &e e3*erience 1 the i%*ression of ageing fro% one to the other has the effect of *ushing the earlier %o%ent into a re%ote, i%*robable *ast! 2t feels as if geological *eriods have intervened! )he %ove%ent of ti%e, fro% *ast to *resent, is #doubled b' a &orced movement o& greater amplitude #, it s&ee*s a&a' the t&o %o%ents, stresses the ga* bet&een the%, and *ushes the *ast far bac( in ti%e! 2t is :uite different to the echo of resonance *roduced in the %adeleine e3*erience, because in this e3*erience &e are *resented &ith an infinite dilation of ti%e and not a contraction of it to a %a3i%u% degree as is the case &ith the for%er e3*erience! )his leads Deleuze to *ro*ose that the idea of death be treated #less as a severance than an effect of %i3ture or confusion# in &hich the #a%*litude of the forced %ove%ent is as %uch ta(en u* b' the living as b' the dead; all are d'ing, half dead, or racing to the grave# ( PS 1/1; 16/ ! )his half1death, ho&ever, is also of significance in an une3*ected &a', a &a' that the narrator cannot understand and a**reciate at the ti%e of the e3*erience of the involuntar' %e%or' of the grand%other and the shoc(ing confrontation &ith the event of her death" #5at the heart of the e3cessive a%*litude of the %ove%ent, &e can describe %en as %onstrous beings#, that is, as those &ho occu*' in ti%e a %uch %ore considerable *lace than the one reserved for the% in s*ace! +hen vie&ed under the o*tics of )i%e 1 a *lace of occu*ation &ithout counting or %easuring 1 hu%an beings are transfor%ed into giants, *lunged into the 'ears and *eriods re%ote fro% one another in ti%e! Bec(ett &as a**osite in holding that &ith regard to the ti%e of this life of hu%an beings there is no other science than that of the science of affliction! 7e o*ened his essa' b' stating that Proust #&ill refuse to %easure the length and &eight of %an in ter%s of his bod' instead

>E

2bid!, *! >/

of in ter%s of his 'ears#! >1 But ho& is it *ossible to sur%ount the obHection or contradiction of death, Deleuze argues that death ceases to be an obHection to the e3tent that it can be integrated into an #order of *roduction, thus giving it its *lace in the &or( of art# (PS 1/2; 1.E ! Aore s*ecificall', he &rites" #)he forced %ove%ent of great a%*litude is a %achine that *roduces the effect of &ithdra&al or the idea of death#! )he encounter &ith death is another &a' in &hich the force and sensation of ti%e are disclosed and felt! )he idea of death, therefore, necessaril' re:uires, and relies u*on, an o*tics and a *ers*ectivis%! 2t occu*ies a *lace &ithin life! 2t is *art of the delay or the #%ean&hile# that constitutes the #event# that belongs neither to ti%e nor to eternit'! 2n this dela' and #%ean&hile# &e have already died and &ill die innu%erable ti%es! 2t is not, therefore, so %uch that the dead beco%e distant fro% us as ti%e goes b', but rather that &e beco%e distant fro% the%" the dead die for us through our occu*'ing a *lace &ithin the forced %ove%ent of ti%e! )his %ight e3*lain &h' at one *oint in %i&&erence and 'epetition Deleuze sa's that this dela' is the *ure for% of ti%e (%' 1.>; 120 ! )he idea of death is *roduced, it is *roduced b' ti%e and as an effect of ti%e and, as such, it belongs to life, or to the ti%e of life! 2n %i&&erence and 'epetition Deleuze &rites" #5so the second s'nthesis of ti%e Qthe *ure *astR *oints be'ond itself in the direction of a third s'nthesis &hich denounces the illusion of the in1itself as still a correlate of re*resentation! )he in1itself of the *ast and the re*etition in re%iniscence constitute a (ind of <effect<, li(e an o*tical effect, or rather the erotic effect of %e%or' itself# (%' 11/; 88 ! 2t is not necessar' here to e3*lore in detail the nature of this third s'nthesis, the *ure e%*t' for% of ti%e; &e si%*l' note Deleuze#s ac(no&ledge%ent of the curious #effect# of %e%or'! +hat is relevant to our investigation in this essa' is the configuration Deleuze gives to the *la' bet&een eros and thanatos! At one *oint Deleuze *ro*oses to read #ti%e e%*t' and out of Hoint# (ti%e stri**ed of contents or inde*endent of e%*irical deter%ination as #*recisel' the death instinct#, &hich, further%ore, does not #enter into a c'cle &ith Iros, but testifies to a co%*letel' different s'nthesis# (ibid!, 107; 111 ! )he correlation bet&een eros and %e%or' is re*laced b' one bet&een #a great a%nesiac# and a #death instinct dese3ualised and &ithout love# (ibid! ! Deleuze ta(es issue &ith ?reud#s *ositing of a death instinct e3isting *rior to this dese3ualized energ'! ?reud did this for t&o reasons, according to Deleuze" first, because he allo&ed a dualistic and conflictual %odel to *reside over his theor' of drives, and second, he relied on a %aterial %odel for his theor' of re*etition" #5deter%ined as the5return of the living to inani%ate %atter, death has onl' an e3trinsic, scientific, and obHective definition# (ibid! ! 2n contrast to this Deleuze *ro*oses a ver' different conce*tion of death, for e3a%*le, as #the last for% of the *roble%atic, the source of *roble%s and :uestions# and as the #non1 being &here ever' affir%ation is nourished# (ibid!, 108; 112 ! )his %eans that death cannot #a**ear in the obHective %odel of an indifferent inani%ate %atter to &hich the living &ould <return<; it is present in the living in the &orm o& a sub9ective and di&&erenciated e4perience endo(ed (ith its prototype> ,t is not a material state? on the contrary/ having renounced all matter/ it corresponds to a pure &orm 3 the empty &orm o& time# (ibid!; %' e%*hasis Gecall" for Deleuze there is no original ter% in the %ove%ent of difference and re*etition! )his is the error of the ?reudian %odel" it reduces death to an obHective deter%ination of %atter in &hich re*etition finds its ulti%ate *rinci*le in an
>1

2bid!, *! 12!

undifferentiated %aterial %odel #be'ond the dis*lace%ents and disguises of a secondar' or o**osed difference# (ibid!, 10718; 111112 ! )he structure of the unconscious is not conflictual or o**ositional but rather #:uestioning and *roble%atizing#! And re*etition is not a bare and brute *o&er but &oven fro% disguise and dis*lace%ent and does not e3ist a*art fro% its constitutive ele%ents! Deleuze *ro*oses, therefore, that &e do not *osit a death instinct that is distinguishable fro% eros either in ter%s of a difference in (ind bet&een t&o forces or b' a difference in rh'th% or a%*litude bet&een t&o %ove%ents! 2f this &as the case then it &ould %ean that difference &ould si%*l' be given, and so &ould life! )hanatos is indistinguishable fro% the dese3ualization of eros, and #there is no anal'tic difference bet&een# the t&o! There is, ho&ever, a difference bet&een the t&o and this difference is to be conceived as a difference in the s'nthesis of ti%e" 4)hanatos stands for a s'nthesis of ti%e :uite unli(e that of IrosJ (ibid!, 10/; 11> ! )he s'nthesis of ti%e at *la' in the death1instinct is that of the e%*t' for% of ti%e in &hich the libido 4loses all %ne%ic contentJ (ibid! and, as such, it is built u*on the re%ains and ruins of Iros! Proust and the Death-Drive 2 have sought to illu%inate ho& Deleuze reads t&o (e' seg%ents in Proust#s novel, the little *iece or frag%ent of ti%e in its *ure state and the grand%other e*isode! 2 have also sought to clarif' the &or( that a notion li(e the virtual is doing in Deleuze#s reading and to dra& attention to his dra%atic re1&or(ing of the death1drive! 2n his subse:uent &or( Deleuze &ill continue to *ut to &or( this %atri3 of *roble%s and conce*ts and to re1 fashion the (e' e*isodes of Proust#s novel! )hus, for e3a%*le, the virtual, the death1 drive, and the grand%other e*isode are all to be found at &or( in nti3@edipus (1/72 , and ne& &a's of reading Proust are develo*ed in Thousand Plateaus (1/8E ! 2n the latter Deleuze and Kuattari insist that Proust#s *roHect &as not to regain ti%e or to force bac( %e%ories but rather one of beco%ing a #%aster of s*eeds to the rh'th% of his asth%a# ("P >>>; TP 272 ! 2n the for%er Proust#s novel is read as a #schizoid &or( *ar e3cellence# ( @ 61; 0> and as a #great enter*rise in schizoanal'sis# (ibid!, >8E; >18 ! )he ;edi*us co%*le3 is said to be virtual; it is a #reactional for%ation5a reaction to desiring1 *roduction# (ibid!, 160; 12/ ! 2n o**osition to the *roble%atic *ositing of a death1instinct or drive Deleuze and Kuattari offer the (%aterial unconscious as both the %odel and the e3*erience of death" #Death then is *art of the desiring1%achine, a *art that %ust itself be Hudged, evaluated in the functioning of the %achine and the s'ste% of its energetic conversions, and not as an abstract *rinci*le# (ibid!, >/7; >>2 ! ?reud#s death1drive is ta(en to be a transcendent *rinci*le caught u* in a subHective s'ste% of re*resentation of the ego, in &hich the essence of life is conceived in the for% of death itself" #5this turning against life, is also the last &a' in &hich a de*ressive and e3hausted libido can go on surviving, and drea% that it is surviving# (ibid!, >/8; >>> ! 2n contrast to this, Deleuze and Kuattari a**roach death as the %ost co%%on of occurrences in the unconscious, ta(ing *lace si%*l' because #it occurs in life and for life, in ever' *assage or beco%ing, in ever' intensit' as *assage or beco%ing# (ibid!, >/0; >>E ! 2t is *ossible to s*ea( of a #%odel# of death because all the deaths that ta(e *lace in the unconscious are e3*licable in

ter%s of the #c'cle of desiring1%achines#!>2 )his *la' &e find in nti3@edipus, involving a virtual ;edi*us and a %ove%ent of libidinal (transversal beco%ing, re*licates the %ove%ent 2 have traced in Proust and Signs and %i&&erence and 'epetition fro% the virtualit' of the *ast to the destruction of our erotic attach%ent to %e%or' through the forced %ove%ent of the death1drive and the higher s'nthesis of ti%e! Deleuze#s use and abuse of Proust for life thus differs %ar(edl' fro% an entire ?rench (and not onl' ?rench tradition of reading Proust that tra*s hi% e3clusivel' in a de*ressive c'cle of nostalgia and %u%%ification, s*inning in the vertigo of the virtual and see(ing refuge in the %elancholia of lost ti%e! ?or Bec(ett Proust#s science of that of #affliction#, not schizoanal'sis; for Bataille the *roHect is one of attaining a state of total and *ure dissatisfaction;>> for Kristeva the *roHect is one of a %orbid (and eroticall' *erverse attach%ent to death and to the *ast, it is not a *roHect that is concerned &ith #life# or the future! )he readings of both Deleuze and Kristeva, in fact, %a(e the death1 drive crucial to an encounter &ith Proust but the' configure its role in stri(ingl' different &a's! ?or Deleuze it *rovides the %eans b' &hich &e can a**reciate the e3tent to &hich the s'nthesis of ti%e in Proust#s novel is, ulti%atel', to be conceived as an atte%*t to overco%e the erotic effect of %e%or'! ?or Kristeva, b' contrast, the tas( is to reveal the e3tent to &hich the erotic invest%ent in the *ast is infor%ed b' and grounded in the death1drive! Bi(e Deleuze, Kristeva a**reciates the e3tent to &hich ti%e, in one sense, creates death or that death is an effect of ti%e! 2t is ti%e that #<*rolongs< the dead b' *lacing the% in the gigantic s*ace &here the' lived, a s*ace that aug%ents the%, dee*ens the%, even subsu%es the%! 7ence the' rese%ble %onsters 1 dee* %onsters# ( TS 161; 82 ! 2t is death 1 be it that of Albertine or the grand%other 1 that is al&a's #transfor%ed into a %e%or', a trace, an i%*ression, an act of &riting# (ibid!, 10/; 81 ! Affects or sensations frozen in the *ast re%ain free of change and e3ist inde*endentl' of the #feeling, degraded &orld of the *resent# (ibid!, >>E; 188 ! 2t is these frozen i%ages and sensations that feed the soul of the narrator! 2t is for these reasons that Kristeva reads Proust as a &riter of s*ace and not ti%e" +hen faced &ith t&o ine3orable for%s of te%*oralit' 1 death (Albertine dies, desire dies and change (inflicted on the bod', li(e aging, or on societ', li(e &ar 1 and &ith the illusor' rebirth of 'outh, the novel goes be'ond the vagaries of linear ti%e and recovers a sort of te%*oral anteriorit'! 7ence, b' avoiding ti%e#s t&o i%*lacable i%*eratives 1 death and change, &hich are also i%*eratives of desire5&hat &e %ight call a #ti%eless ti%e# locates a series of sensations on the %argins of ti%e, that is, in s*ace! )he recollection1sensation does a&a' &ith ti%e and re*laces it &ith an eternit' 1 the s*atial eternit' of a literar' &or( that Proust co%*ares to a cathedral (ibid!, >>2; 18/ !

>2

)he eternal return is read as #the deterritorialized circuit of all the c'cles of desire# ( @ *! >/.; *!

>>1 !
>>

K! Bataille, #Digression of Aarcel Proust and Poetr'#, ,nner +4perience, trans! B! A! Boldt (-e& $or(" F@-$ Press, 1/88 , *! 106!

?or Kristeva the search for ti%e is a search for #volu%e# in &hich the dra%a of selves, their birth and death, creation and annihilation, can be transfigured and transfor%ed! )he narrator#s desire is to slo& ti%e do&n to the *oint of co%*lete arrest, to render ti%e gigantic and %onstrous, and this re:uires an aesthetic reversal of self1sur*assing ti%e and the con:uest of i%*ersonal and inhu%an duration" #7e slo&s do&n the i%*atience of <Being1in1advance1of1itself< b' turning this achieved advance in the other direction! Proust#s desire is a desire for the *ast! 7e covets not &hat is to co%e but &hat has alread' occurred and slo&ed do&n# (ibid!, 6>E; >1E ! )hin( of the &a' in &hich the narrator lingers over his re%ar(s on an' *resent, al&a's interru*ting and e3*anding it, so #*reventing it fro% running ahead and refor%ulating itself as a *roHect# (ibid! ! 2t is not the case, ho&ever, that the Proustian narrator &ould si%*l' subscribe to the +hiteheadian *osition that ti%e as #*er*etuall' *erishing# is the ulti%ate evil, >0 si%*l' because the narrator is full' cognisant of the fact that the rede%*tion of ti%e fro% ti%e is de*endent on the ver' being, or beco%ing, of ti%e itself! Kristeva ac(no&ledges that #*ure ti%e# 1 the enHo'%ent of the essence of things through living outside ti%e 1 is so%ething contingent on nu%erical and linear ti%e (ibid!, 60E; >1. ! Aoreover, she sho&s the e3tent to &hich Proust challenges and overturns the stress on ti%e as a *roHect and ti%e as care or concern (as in 7eidegger, of course " +hen being is understood as #te%*oralit'# and #concern#, the loss o& time has a *eHorative connotation! 2n the narrative e3*erience of te%*oralit', ho&ever, lost ti%e beco%es the sine :ua non condition for attaining the dis*ersion caused b' the grace of the sense of ti%e! )he %ore ti%e the narrative or i%aginar' , has to lose, the less it finds ti%e to be *recious in itself, for the , uses involuntar' %e%or' to re*resent te%*oralit' through st'le and characters! (ibid!, 6>2; >12; %' e%*hasis !>6 2n other &ords, the i%aginar' en9oys losing ti%e, #dis*ersing it, and redoing it &ithin a discourse in for%ation#! Kristeva %a(es an i%*ortant *oint about the autono%ous nature of the ti%e that is being created (through being lost, &asted, regained " #Des*ite &hat one %ight thin(, the <i%age< that constitutes the i%aginar' is not a co*' of an e3ternal obHect! )he i%age5is a discourse representing the construction! 2t is a <vision< (ibid!, 6>>; >12 ! +hat the novel see(s to bring about and to effect is the re%oval of the narrative fro% te%*oral duration in order to *ut in its *lace the #e3hilaration of *ure ti%e#" 2n this sense, Proust does not subscribe to the o**osition Bergson sets u* bet&een *ure subHective duration and an obHective ti%e that can be %easured in s*atio1 te%*oral ter%s! 2n Proust#s novel, lost ti%e is i%%ediatel' #searched for# &ithin a s*atial i%aginar' and &ithin the discontinuit' of language, so that s*atio1te%*oral continuit' and its frag%entation are not an antithesis to *ure ti%e but its servant, the *referred %eans for attaining ti%e regained (ibid!, >0E; 1/0 !
>0

Fee A! -! +hitehead, Process and 'eality (Bondon" )he ?ree Press, 1/78 , *! >0E!

>6

)his #grace# is na%ed as such b' Proust in the *assage fro% #)i%e Gegained# on #a *iece of ti%e in its *ure state# but it is not ca*tured as such in the translation of Fcott Aoncrieff et al!

)he ulti%ate #i%aginar'#, therefore, is at &or( in Proust#s novel and this i%aginar' is the destin' of the narrator#s vocation" it is nothing other than ti%e regained! Proust is not a %'stic (&ho &ould consider the e3*erience to be real , he is not a scholar (&ho &ould si%*l' brush aside the e3*erience , and he is not a *hiloso*her (&ho &ould atte%*t to e3*lain the e3*erience a&a' or to to&er over it ! )his s*ecific sense of this ti%e regained Kristeva e3*licates as follo&s" #)i%e regained is a *roliferation of signs that graze that blinding region of fleeting, overabundant, and unbearable sensations and %ove to&ard the %ute %e%or' of cells that feel suffering and bliss# (ibid!, >0>; 1/. ! 2t is not that the narrator does not have a #concern# &ith ti%e or does not #care# about it; it is rather that this concern is for hi% a 9ouissance or *assion! +hen this #*oint# is reached in the novel and the narrator#s a**renticeshi*, then" 5the the%e of an3iet', along &ith care, its counter*art, is hardened into violence that is both inflicted and e3*erienced! Death is not a final destination, but a death drive inherent in :eing (une pulsion de mort intrieure a l'Atre , its constitutive inter%ittence, its indis*ensable lifeblood! 2n this sense sado%asochis% is the inevitable counter*art to the i%aginar', the hidden and necessar' face of delicac'! 2n this res*ect, Fade &as one of Proust#s *recursors (ibid!, 6>>; >1> ! ;n this reading, then, the death1drive is at one &ith the erotic invest%ent of the *o&ers of %e%or', it is *laced in its service! Iros does not need to be overco%e b' the su*erior *o&er of thanatos or a higher s'nthesis of ti%e! )he erotic attach%ents and invest%ents of the Proustian narrator re:uire death %ore than the' re:uire an'thing else! +e %ight add" if in the construction of a &or( devoted to eternit' the narrator is ca*able of attaining an #indifference# to&ards death this is because death has been incorporated, it has been %ade the subHect of control and regulation, even %aster'! Cealous', desire, %adness, love, death, and so on, all find their authentic and eternal e3istence and #truth# in the &or( of art! 2t &ould a**ear that &e are confronted &ith a straightfor&ard clash bet&een a *s'choanal'tic reading of Proust and a #%achinic# one! Deleuze#s reading al&a's stresses the %ove%ents at &or( in Proust#s novel" a serial %ove%ent, a %ove%ent of ti%e, >. a %ove%ent of transversals, a %ove%ent of beco%ings (ani%al, &o%an, %olecule, i%*erce*tible ! Aove%ent here is %achinic not si%*l' because so%ething is al&a's being *roduced but rather because the *rocesses of *roduction that are at *la' in Proust#s novel are ones governed b' the absence of unit'! +hat %a(es Proust a su*re%el' %odernist &riter for Deleuze is the fact that he constructs an individuating &orld fro% out of frag%ents, in &hich its *arts are *roduced as as'%%etrical sections and e3ist as #her%eticall' sealed bo3es, nonco%%unicating vessels!!!in &hich there are ga*s even bet&een things that are contiguous, ga*s that are affir%ations, *ieces of a *uzzle belonging not to an' one *uzzle but to %an'5# ( @ 61; 021> ! )he #&hole# of the novel is itself a *roduction but it too is *roduced as a *art alongside other *arts, it does not serve to unif' or totalize these *arts! )he *s'choanal'sis1ins*ired reading &ould refuse
>.

)i%e itself is a transversal" #)i%e is *recisel' the transversal of all *ossible s*aces, including the s*ace of ti%e# (PS, *! 167; *! 1>E !

to see #beco%ings# ta(ing *lace in the novel and stress onl' the closed s'ste% of a su*ra1 egotistical self!>7 )his is a self that has full' incor*orated itself and that feeds not onl' on the idea of death but on the deaths the narrator stages, antici*ates, and e3ecutes! >8 ;ne can ac(no&ledge that the *s'choanal'tic reading re%ains %ore faithful to Proust#s *roHect than the schizoanal'tic reading and that it succeeds in dra&ing attention to the disturbing as*ects of the narrator, including the de*ressive and %elancholic attach%ent to lost ti%e! ?or Deleuze, ho&ever, the ai% of one#s reading and creation of conce*ts is to re%ain faithful to, and beco%e e:ual to, the event of life! ?or hi% *hiloso*h' cannot be restricted to the territor' of subHectivit' since subHectivit' is a blac( hole! Deleuze too, then, but in a different &a' to Kristeva, is al&a's a faithful reader of Proust! 2t is no longer a %atter of sa'ing" to create is to re%e%ber 1 but rather, to re%e%ber is to create, is to reach that point (here the associative chain brea!s/ leaps over the constituted individual/ is trans&erred to the birth o& an individuating (orld (PS 1>0; 111 !

ist o! "##reviations $sed

>7

)he follo&ing *assage *rovides a%*le evidence of such a closed s'ste% at &or( in the novel" #I3*erience had taught %e onl' too &ell the i%*ossibilit' of attaining in the real &orld to &hat la' dee* &ithin %'self; 2 (ne& that Bost )i%e &as not to be found again on the *iazza of Ft Aar(#s an' %ore than 2 had found it again on %' second visit to Balbec52 did not intend, then, to %a(e 'et another e3*eri%ent in a direction &hich 2 had long (no&n could lead no&here! 2%*ressions such as those to &hich 2 &ished to give *er%anence could not but vanish at the touch of a direct enHo'%ent &hich had been *o&erless to engender the%! )he onl' &a' to savour the% %ore full' &as to tr' to get to (no& the% %ore co%*letel' in the %ediu% in &hich the' e3isted, that is to sa' &ithin %'self52 had not (no&n *leasure at Balbec an' %ore than 2 had (no&n *leasure &hen 2 lived &ith Albertine, for the *leasure of living &ith her had been *erce*tible to %e onl' in retros*ect! +hen 2 reca*itulated the disa**oint%ents of %' life as a lived life, disa**oint%ents &hich %ade %e believe that its realit' %ust reside else&here than in action, &hat 2 &as doing &as not %erel' to lin( different disa**oint%ents together in a *urel' fortuitous %anner and in follo&ing the circu%stances of %' *ersonal e3istence! 2 sa& clearl' that the disa**oint%ent of travel and the disa**oint%ent of love &ere not different disa**oint%ents at all but the varied as*ects &hich are assu%ed, according to the *articular circu%stances &hich bring it into *la', b' our inherent *o&erlessness to realize ourselves in %aterial enHo'%ent or in effective action# (Proust, 'TP >, *! 877; SLT >, **! /1E111 !
>8

As Bo&ie notes &ith res*ect to Albertine, #Albertine is becal%ed in the te3t, e%bal%ed b' it, lost beneath the glistening gaze of its abstractions! -othing can ha**en, and no stor' can be told, as the %ortician1narrator %oves to and fro#, Proust mong the Stars, *! 2/7! Fee also Kristeva, Time and Sense, **! >2.ff!; 18.ff! )he difference bet&een the Deleuzo1Kuattarian and Kristevian readings *erha*s cr'stallizes on the :uestion of Albertine! 2n Thousand Plateaus Deleuze and Kuattari consider it stu*id to as( the :uestion" &h' did Proust %a(e Albert Albertine, 2t is #stu*id# because it fails to see that there is a #beco%ing1&o%an# (P a girl , as &ell as a #beco%ing1child#, ever'&here in the novel, "P, *! >0E; TP! *! 277! Kristeva, b' contrast, holds to the vie& that" #Albertine is not Albert! Albertine can onl' be one %an 1 the %an &ho cannot esca*e hi%self, &ho (no&s other *eo*le onl' in hi%self, and &ho can reveal hi%self onl' if he %erges &ith others 1 &ith %en as &ell as &o%en! )his %an is a flo&er in a bunch of a%aranths, a gull in a floc( of birds, a Ko%orrhean, a budding girl5 +ho is this %an, )he narrator#! Time and Sense, *! 161; **! 821>!

Proust G)P la recherche du temps perdu (Bibliothe:ue de la Pleiade" Kalli%ard, 1/60 , in three volu%es! FB) 'emembrance o& Things Past, trans! =! K! Fcott Aoncrieff D )! Kil%artin (Bondon" Penguin, 1/8> , in three volu%es! 2 have favoured the %ore literal translation ,n Search o& Lost Time! Deleuze PF Proust et les signes (Paris" SuadrigeTP@?, 1//8 ; Proust and Signs, trans! G! 7o&ard (Bondon" Athlone Press, 2EEE ! DG %i&&rence et rptition (Paris" P@?, 1/.8 ; %i&&erence and 'epetition, trans! P! Patton (Bondon" Athlone Press, 1//0 ! Deleuze and Kuattari A; L' nti3@edipe (Paris" Bes Iditions de Ainuit, 1/72T1/7> ; nti3@edipus, trans! G! 7urle' et! al (Bondon" Athlone Press, 1/80 ! AP A)P SP, +P, "ille plateau4 (Paris" Bes Mditions de Ainuit, 1/8E ! Thousand Plateaus, trans! B! Aassu%i (Bondon" Athlone Press, 1/88 Qu'est3ce 0ue la philosophie? (Paris" Bes Mditions de Ainuit, 1//1 ! What is Philosophy?, trans! K! Burchell D 7! )o%linson (Bondon" Lerso, 1//0 !

Kristeva )F Le temps sensible) Proust et l'e4prience littraire (Kalli%ard, 1//0 ; Time and Sense) Proust and the +4perience o& Literature, trans! G! Kuber%an (-e& $or(" =olu%bia @niversit' Press, 1//. !