Deleuze’s The Logic of Sense

Deleuze, The Logic of Sense
Area: Rhetorical and Critical Theory
•    The reversal of Platonism
•    Virtual is primary over identity
o    Real contains Actual and Virtual
•    Baudrillard: simulacra; Deleuze: copy
•    Desire and pleasure
•    Disinterested in truth
•    Stimulations /simulations produce effects
•    What do the Sophists offer now?
o    Why the move to psychoanalysis?
•    Couldn’t be French and not do psychoanalysis
•    Move to Anti-Oedipus
•    Capitalism has made us neurotic
•    A-O: desiring products
•    More involved in shadows and surface
•    Some overlap with the Stoics
•    One is allowed to make the virtual more actual
o    Virtual is the spillover
•    Power of the false: Nietzsche, Deleuze
o    Enjoy your symptoms: Zizek
•    Aristocratic?
o    Leisure time?
o    Over-man?
•    Competitive version of subjectivity
o    Badiou: relative subjectivity available to all
Critical moments in the text
2: “It is a subterranean dualism between that which receives the action of the Idea and that which eludes the action.  It is not the distinction between the Model and the copy, but rather between copies and simulacra.  Pure becoming, the unlimited, is the matter of the simulacrum insofar as it eludes the action of the Idea and insofar as it contests both model and copy at once.”
7: “[Affairs, quantities, qualities] are contrasted with an extra-Being which constitutes the incorporeal as a nonexisting entity.  The highest term therefore is not Being, but Something, insofar as it subsumes being and non-being, existence and inherence.”
20-ish: Noema: the perceived as such
40: “It is a two-sided entity, equally present in the signifying and the signified series.  It is the mirror.  Thus, it is at once word and thing, name and object, sense and denotatum, expression and designation, etc.”
49: “The technocrat is the natural friend of the dictator—computers and dictatorship; by the revolutionary lives in the gap which separates technical progress from social totality, and inscribes there his dream of permanent revolution.  This dream, therefore, is itself action, reality, and an effective menace to all established order; it renders possible what it dreams about.”
53: “Events are ideal. […]  The distinction however is not between two sorts of events; rather, it is between the event, which is ideal by nature, and its spatio-temporal realization in a state of affairs.  The distinction is between event and accident.  Events are ideational singularities which communicate in one and the same Event.  They have therefore an eternal truth, and their time is never the present which realizes them and makes them exist.  Rather, it is the unlimited Aion, the Infinitive in which they subsist and insist.
61: Thus the time of the present is always a limited but infinite time; infinite because cyclical, animating a physical eternal return as the return of the Same.”
63: “What is going to happen? What has just happened? The agonizing aspect of the pure event is that it is always and at the same time something which has just happened and something about to happen; never something which is happening.”
110: “To be actualized is also to be expressed.”
144: “Cicero put it very well when he said that the passage of time is similar to the unraveling of a thread.  But events, to be precise, do not exist on the straight line of the unraveled thread (Aion), just as causes do not exist in the circumference of the wound-up thread (Chronos).
147: “Representation and its usage therefore intervene at this point.  Corporeal causes act and suffer through a cosmic mixture and a universal present which produces the incorporeal event.  But the quasi-cause operates by doubling this physical causality—it embodies the event in the most limited possible present which is the most precise and the most instantaneous, the pure instant grasped at the point at which it divides itself in to future and past, and no longer the present of the world which would gather into itself the past and the future.  The actor occupies the instant, while the character portrayed hopes or fears in the future and remembers or repents in the past: it is in this sense that the actor ‘represents.’”
Fave passage
88: “In this passion, a pure language-affect is substituted for the effect of language: “All writing is PIG SHIT” (that is to say, every fixed or written word is decomposed into noisy, alimentary, and excremental bits).”


0 Responses to “Deleuze’s The Logic of Sense”

  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

August 2008
« Jul   Sep »



%d bloggers like this: