Lewis Richardson

PHIL 409
December 16, 2021
Paper #3: Deleuze and Guattari’s Aesthetics & “Cello Suite No. 1 in G Major”
From the very onset, Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophy within A Thousand Plateaus is

grounded upon their grand ambition to think of ‘ontology artistically.’ This answer to the question

of ‘what is art?’ takes a familiar approach, positing that art (sound/music) is quite literally nature,

not an analogous structure. 1 This functionally means that Deleuze and Guattari’s aesthetical

ontology bears a structure sufficient for an adequate description of nature’s creative processes

broadly. At this, they attempt to establish several original concepts and art-based interpretations

of musical components to flesh out how creative functions occur. Throughout this article, I will

argue that Johann Sebastian Bach’s “Cello Suite No. 1 in G Major, BWV 1007, 1” effectively

actualizes Deleuze and Guattari’s ontological project by providing a glimpse at the process of

territorialization.

Within Deleuze and Guattari’s eleventh chapter of A Thousand Plateaus, the primary

structure that they pose to elucidate nature’s creative process is the refrain, which attempts to

descriptively answer how art (via sound) legitimately figures into life via a process of

“territorialization.” To grasp this, they establish and weigh heavily on the concept of a milieu,

which is correctly understood as a block or ‘node’ of space-time “constituted by the periodic

repetition of the component.” 2 Milieus are pre-qualitative ‘intensities’ that belong to all beings and

actualized/extended bodies and are individually and chaotically connected to all other milieus. 3

Because the ‘milieu of milieus’ is chaos itself, these constantly fluctuating intensities ought to be

1
P. 314
2
P. 313
3
Ibid.
grasped as an ‘image’ or ‘snapshot’ of the actual (as opposed to the virtual). They write: “Every

milieu is coded, a code being defined by periodic repetition; but each code is in a perpetual state

of transcoding or transduction.” 4 This process of transcoding or transduction describes the

interconnectedness of milieus. It describes a process wherein one milieu’s repetition is dependent

upon the repetition of other milieus, indicating that each milieu is founded ‘atop’ and ‘beneath’ an

infinite number of other milieus of varying intensities. 5 Accordingly, the interaction,

correspondence, and relationship of the “sensuous manifold” of milieus is “rhythm,” which exists

“on the fence” between two milieus. 6 Rhythm serves as milieus’ “answer to chaos.” 7

From this concept, the idea of territorialization is coupled with their notion of territories,

which they define as “…not a milieu, not even an additional milieu, nor a rhythm or passage

between milieus. The territory is in fact an act that affects milieus and rhythms, that ‘territorializes’

them. The territory is the product of a territorialization of milieus and rhythms.” 8 Simply put, what

defines a territory is “the emergence of matters of expression (qualities).” 9 This expressiveness

must be paired with a “temporal constancy and a spatial range,” or a recognizable descriptor of

sorts that defines the limits and boundaries of beings within space-time. 10 On the process of

territorialization then, they wrote: “Territorialization is an act of rhythm that has become

expressive, or of milieu components that have become qualitative…” 11 Accordingly, to

territorialize is to establish some understandable ‘assemblage,’ or emergent unity that joins

together heterogeneous (multi-faceted) beings, in a recognizable and practically describable form.

4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
6
P. 313-314.
7
P. 313
8
Ibid.
9
P. 315
10
Ibid.
11
P. 315
Territorialization, then, is a process of ordering the chaos of the world into assemblages; it is

marked by a process of becoming expressive, the emergence of form via rhythmic action.

Of course, such an ethereal ontology as that described ultimately sees its practical

application and most robust demonstration via art. Deleuze and Guattari effectively paint the

process of territorialization, the happening of already territorialized beings, and the process of de-

territorialization as the collective happening of art. This happening occurs within the structure of

the refrain (a territorial assemblage) across three unique, yet simultaneously occurring ‘instances,’

wherein Deleuze and Guattari typify their aesthetic ontological structure that is grounded in

concepts of return and difference. Within the refrain, which is defined as “…any aggregate of

matters of expression that draws a territory and develops into territorial motifs and landscapes,”

each of the three instances contain a simultaneously occurring point at which art (and by that

stretch, nature) creates a noticeable form distinct from chaos. 12

The first part of the territorial assemblage of the refrain, the “infra-refrain,” is that of the

ordering of chaos. Within this instance, we see the establishment of territory/territorialization from

the chaos and unrecognizable form of the earth. Within the infra-refrain we can find milieus and

rhythms which are effectively serving as the genesis of a process of territorialization, beginning

the process of ‘becoming expressive.’ The second instance, the “intra-refrain,” contains already

territorialized spaces or the territory itself. In this instance, one can begin to see recognizable forms

and qualities assigned to extended beings. Of course, in this second instance, we see the formation

of an identity (territorial assemblages), enabling the actual starting place for realizable artistic

creation. Finally, the third instance, the “inter-refrain,” contains the process of de-territorialization

or a “disjunctive synthesis” grounded in Deleuze’s concept of difference. This instance is critical

12
P. 323
to artistic creation and is immensely important to their aesthetic ontology, as it enables an

explanation of difference ‘as such’ and thus the establishment of novel and original forms. Within

this third instance exists an aspect within all assemblages they call a ‘machine,’ which acts as the

specific element of de-territorialization that serves as the productive or creative aspect allowing

something genuinely new to enter the scene. 13

As mentioned before, though the attributes of each instance of the refrain can be placed in

one category or another, the whole of the process is constantly ongoing and in flux. As such, each

component necessarily intersects with each of the others and works together to collectively

establish and provide something of an answer to how creation occurs from chaos. Despite this,

their application of the refrain to art bears categorical distinctions that are relevant enough to allow

them to classify specific instances of art as bearing qualitative similarities to each part of the

refrain. In this respect, they argue that three distinct phases of Classical music – namely the

Baroque, Romantic, and “Cosmic”/Modern – each bear qualitative differences that reflect various

aspects of the refrain being presented in pieces arising from each respective era. 14

For the sake of this article, I will focus on Johann Sebastian Bach’s piece from the Classical

Baroque, “Cello Suite No. 1 in G Major, BWV 1007, 1” (as performed by Yo-Yo Ma) which

ultimately serves as a clear demonstration of the initially territorializing infra-refrain. Given that

this instance of the refrain is tasked with providing some semblance of order and recognizable

form to an otherwise chaotic landscape, Bach’s piece seems to mimic this effect to a key. Though

I lack the music theory background to adequately put to words what he is achieving in the piece,

it is clear that his tactful intermingling of a repetitive, wave-like tune seems to be engaged in a tug-

of-war of sorts with a background of turmoil. Figuratively, it seems as if his progressive up-scaling

13
P. 333
14
P. 338
is always followed by a progressive down-scale that demonstrates an answer to the world’s

madness. Its rigidity and cleanliness promote the same answer to the chaos that intra-refrain hopes

to attain through a process of territorialization.

This song seems to introduce a wandering of sorts early on, almost as if it is searching for

some sort of metaphorical ‘needle in a haystack’ in hopes of providing listeners with something to

grasp onto. Despite this, the first minute of the piece wanders extensively, coming back to where

one started after seemingly making ‘progress’ just moments before. As the piece slows and lowers

its pitch at approximately the 1:10 mark, it seems that the chaos of the world is winning out. The

song seems to cast aside its repetitive form and begins to quickly scale downwards for the next

twenty to thirty seconds, evoking a submission of sorts to the overwhelming force of the world.

Throughout this portion, it felt as though one had given up their fight against the turmoil,

submitting to its overwhelming and inescapable wave of power.

While the first 120 seconds of this two-and-a-half-minute piece engage in a musical ‘battle’

of sorts between a calming spirit and a chaotic infiltrator, the final thirty seconds of the song seem

to fight back with the world around it by regaining a recognizable form. Amidst this marked

difference in form from the rest of the piece, it seems that the conclusion has come to achieve a

novel position of tranquility. The final 15 seconds are marked by a constant upscaling, almost as

if one is climbing a mountain with the end in sight. This process seems to define the limits of the

conflict that listeners observe; by the end of the final ‘climb,’ Bach provides us with a clear,

understandable ground that ends with a serene landing place. It is as if the 140 seconds leading up

to the end are engaging in a process of territorialization, weaving together a highly schematized

musical structure with a whimsical subject matter. Ultimately, this process seems to conclude with

our placement in a demarcated, understandable ‘territory’ bearing expressive qualities.

 All things considered, it bears repeating that this aesthetic ontology does not simply apply

to sound and music; it is more broadly understood as a valid means of describing creation as a

unique phenomenon. From this, Deleuze and Guattari’s work can be extended to all forms of

artistic expression, including the visual and pictorial arts, and is not strictly limited to sound.

Having said this, it is clear that the usefulness of the refrain can be recognized via its three distinct,

yet simultaneously occurring instances. Ultimately, their work exemplifies the undoubtable

connection between nature and music while also describing the larger nature of creation as such.