Deleuze & Guattari

Okay, so the current political and economic climate already pushed me towards mental illness and now I need philosophy to legitimize my schizo episodes. Who do I need to read before I start with Deleuze & Guattari and, later, Nick Land and other accelerationists? Books, essays, even interviews or movies.

From what I understand, Marx and Nietzsche would be good places to start, right?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=5EHnrE3j9kg
youtube.com/watch?v=lajsoQJ0V6A
youtube.com/channel/UC4CtHPqv6eKr8pYqe8qEoEA/videos?disable_polymer=1
youtube.com/results?search_query=manuel delanda
youtube.com/watch?v=O7l7ZAKZZZU
youtube.com/watch?v=oFFxnf92XqY
youtube.com/watch?v=GS35vUMhww4
youtube.com/watch?v=I_r-gr3ccik
webdeleuze.com/
immanentterrain.wordpress.com/biblio/
eipcp.net/transversal/0507/weizman/en/
youtube.com/watch?v=EmyZoFChDOQ
libgen.pw/view.php?id=1322029
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

People should read more Nietzsche. Read Nietzsche.

Depends on how far you want to go with it and what you already know. Off the top of my head, a bit of Kant, Saussure, Freud and Lacan wouldn't hurt aside from what you mentioned. D&G kinda explain their literary references, albeit far too succintly (for example it saddens me that they don't go more in-depth about D.H. Lawrence's dirty little secret since it is a mindblowing and at the same time incredibly simple cultural critique), but they expect you to understand the philosophical ones. So without knowing about Saussurian semiology Signifier-Signified and Lacan's "famous" reversal or Kantian syntheses as constituting experience or the "non-Oedipal" (or pre-Oedipal) Freudian concepts (drive, pleasure and reality principle, eros and thanatos, etc.) you may not get much out of it. Knowing about Bergson's concept of time (the virtual past vs the old present, etc.) or Spinoza's ethical concepts also helps. Deleuze develops this stuff on his own, but with Guattari they just jump in directly and you may miss out on the details.

I really should make a copypasta for this stuff as I'm bored of posting the same advice again and again.

>I really should make a copypasta for this stuff as I'm bored of posting the same advice again and again.
I'm sure that many anons would appreciate that, friend. Thank you for the primer.

> Books, essays, even interviews or movies.
I hadn't noticed this part. I'll give you some links.

Here is the first draft of it, if I think of anything else I'll update it.

A decent short summary / intro to D&G:
youtube.com/watch?v=5EHnrE3j9kg

youtube.com/watch?v=lajsoQJ0V6A

A lot of the stuff here:
youtube.com/channel/UC4CtHPqv6eKr8pYqe8qEoEA/videos?disable_polymer=1

Some of the stuff here:
youtube.com/channel/UC4CtHPqv6eKr8pYqe8qEoEA/videos?disable_polymer=1

Everything by Manuel DeLanda:
youtube.com/results?search_query=manuel delanda

A bit more on the Nietzsche-Deleuze relation through Klossowski (who dedicated his book about Nietzsche to Deleuze):
youtube.com/watch?v=O7l7ZAKZZZU

More on the Deleuze-Nietzsche relation (the entire series is fascinating if you're into Nietzsche):
youtube.com/watch?v=oFFxnf92XqY


The Deleuze for the Desperate series:
youtube.com/watch?v=GS35vUMhww4

Derrida's lecture about Deleuze (mistitled, it's about Stupidity not Forgiveness):
youtube.com/watch?v=I_r-gr3ccik

There's probably a lot more, there are Vimeo videos as well which don't feature on Youtube.

Pirate Deleuze's Abecedaire (it should have English subtitles) as I can't find it streamed in full online anywhere.

As for the books, start with the essay and interview collections (in no particular order): Dialogues, Negotiations, Desert Islands, Two Regimes of Madness, Essays Critical and Clinical. "Letter to a Harsh Critic" in Negotiations is short (about 7 pages) and tells you how to read his texts. As for the books, start with Nietzsche and Philosophy (read the intro to the English translation by Michael Hardt even if you don't read the book in English). Deleuze's courses are also pretty accessible and translated in several languages: webdeleuze.com/


A decent bibliography:
immanentterrain.wordpress.com/biblio/

>Okay, so the current political and economic climate already pushed me towards mental illness

But user, this view is completely anti-scientific. The prequisites for mental illness are laid at a very young age, when humans are not yet capable of processing anything political and/or economic.

Oops, I posted the same link twice. Basically the Virtual / Actual Journal Youtube channel. Just search it for what you find interesting, the presentations vary both in sound and textual quality.

I'm not mentally ill, it was a rather heavy-handed joke.

>and now I need philosophy to legitimize my schizo episodes

D&G aren't referring to actual schizos. A schizophrenic for D&G is a baby boomer (yuppie) artist. Real schizophrenics are deemed autistic by D&G and the enemy of their ontology.

Yeah, R.D Liang might be more your speed, OP.

> D&G aren't referring to actual schizos. A schizophrenic for D&G is a baby boomer (yuppie) artist. Real schizophrenics are deemed autistic by D&G and the enemy of their ontology.

t. literal autist attempting to troll

See this shit? Read it. Now.

It is the closest to the current political and economic climate, it's a short read but covering a lot of topics, particularly the one in the subtitle, which should be of your immediate concern.

Then you can read all the Marx and Nietzsche and Baudrillard and Deleuze you want.

Other user here. Can confirm, Bifo is based. Even Deleuze & Guattari mention him in A Thousand Plateaus. They were friends with other Italian Leftists such as Toni Negri (who works with Michael Hardt).

Bifo also has quite a few English Youtube lectures if you're into that, including on the book user mentioned.

Do the writings of Deleuze have any consequence or application in the real World? Or even for self-understanding?

Because I get the impression he is constructing a theory for theory’s sake, as many French psychoanalysts love to do

>Do the writings of Deleuze have any consequence or application in the real World?
eipcp.net/transversal/0507/weizman/en/

> Do the writings of Deleuze have any consequence or application in the real World? Or even for self-understanding?

Yes and yes. Although the complexity of the works might make it seem otherwise. From Letter to a Harsh Critic (better translated as Severe Critic, to keep the severus latin meaning of Harsh):

> But I'm struck by the way it's the people who've read lots of other books, and psychoanalytic books in particular, who find our book really difficult. They say: What exactly is a body without organs? What exactly do you mean by "desiring machines"? Those, on the other hand, who don't know much, who haven't been addled by psychoanalysis, have less of a problem and happily pass over what they don't understand. That's why we said that, in principle at least, the book was written for fifteen- to twenty- year-olds. There are, you see, two ways of reading a book: you either see it as a box with something inside and start looking for what it signifies, and then if you're even more perverse or depraved you set off after signifiers. And you treat the next book like a box contained in the first or containing it. And you annotate and interpret and question, and write a book about the book, and so on and on. Or there's the other way:you see the book as a little non-signifying machine, and the only question is "Does it work, and how does it work?" How does it work for you? If it doesn't work, if nothing comes through, you try another book. This second way of reading's intensive: something comes through or it doesn't. There's nothing to explain, nothing to understand, nothing to interpret. It's like plugging in to an electric circuit. I know people who've read nothing who immediately sawwhat bodies without organs were, given their own "habits," their own way of being one. This second way of reading's quite different from the fIrst, because it relates a book directly to what's Outside. A book is a little cog in much more complicated external machinery. Writing is one flow among others, with no special place in relation to the others, that comes into relations of current, countercurrent, and eddy with other flows-flows of shit, sperm, words, action, eroticism, money, politics, and so on.

> This intensive way .of reading, in contact with what's outside the book, as a flow meeting other flows, one machine among others, as a series of experiments for each reader in the midst of events that have nothing to do with books, as tearing the book into pieces, getting it to interact with other things, absolutely anything. . . is reading with love.

I really liked this book and it helped me a lot with an article I was writing back when it dropped but I really feel it should be a bigger and more in depth analysis of a lot of shit which I'm not sure Bifo, as a 60 something italian leftist, probably isn't aware of.

read more Guattari, I'm not wrong

I actually like Bifo. He's a smart dude and has a good eye for the coming counter cultures but he's weighed down by influence of D&G so it ends up kinda pointless. Okay, chaosmic spasm.

Yes. It helps spread the ideology of late capitalism, as Zizek and Clouscard noted. D&G's philosophy helps create permissive consumerism.

> I'm not wrong

You're not interested in being right or wrong, you're interested in repeating the same crap over and over.

>40 dollars for 200 pages
Could someone hook me up with a pdf of that? Please?

You can find it on libgen. The dot io kind.

>Zizek
He's just buttblasted because they btfo'd Lacan

>D.H. Lawrence's dirty little secret
basic gestalt?

Not sure what you're asking, but tl;dr the dirty little secret refers to the way in which a culture can have both sexual purity and obscenity/pornography go together and reinforce each other. Basically two sides of the same coin, making sexuality transcendent (infinitely mysterious) but also base and vile (or at least animalic) at the same time in the same movement of forbidding it. It's no wonder D&G use it against psychoanalysis.

>but also base and vile (or at least animalic)
I love how people tie their sexual acts to animals when animals are the least creatures interested in sex

>starting with the final bosses of philosophy

well, dolphins and bonobos are horny motherfuckers

>self-understanding
That's the kind of thing D&G deride, desu.

Well it depends what you mean by it. It could just mean primal in the sense of basic and unsophisticated / not involving the intellect and "human" faculties. Or it could be something intense. Or both at the same time, but these things differ from context to context.

And animals do go batshit during mating season. Supposedly some researchers from the previous two centuries were too embarrassed to publish their findings on penguin sexuality because of how "unnatural" the penguins behaved, despite some penguin species being associated with familial ties, monogamy, etc. Or mallards: youtube.com/watch?v=EmyZoFChDOQ


If anything, many, including some psychoanalysts, consider animals to be self-regulated and simple in their sexuality. They may be simple, but things can get very messy and dangerous either way for the individual.

Only in the sense of searching for profound truths through introspection. There's nothing wrong with being more aware of your assemblages and becomings.

Yes, the nuance could not be more appropriate. I was being blunt.

>Just like, be weird, man!

Shoo, shoo, back to your royal cave King Autist!

Damn, that's one name I've never heard before. Thanks for the rec. LibGen link for the lazy, epub format (so Kindle-friendly): libgen.pw/view.php?id=1322029