8/13/2015

La promenade

La promenade du schizophrène: c'est un meilleur modèle
que le névrosé couché sur le divan. Un peu de grand air,
une relation avec le dehors. Par exemple la promenade
de Lenz reconstituée par Büchner. 1 C'est différent des
moments où Lenz se retrouve chez son bon pasteur, qui
le force à se repérer socialement, par rapport au Dieu de
la religion, par rapport au père, à la mère. Là au contraire,
il est dans les montagnes, sous la neige, avec d'autres dieux
ou sans dieu du tout, sans famille, sans père ni mère, avec


la nature. « Que veut mon père? Peut-il me donner mieux ?

Impossible. Laissez-moi en paix.» Tout fait machine.
Machines célestes, les étoiles ou l'arc en ciel, machines
alpestres, qui se couplent avec celles de son corps. Bruit
ininterrompu de machines. « Il pensait que ce devait être
un sentiment d'une infinie béatitude que d'être touché par
la vie profonde de toute forme, d'avoir une âme pour les
pierres, les métaux, l'eau et les plantes, d'accueillir en soi
tous les objets de la nature, rêveusement, comme les fleurs
absorbent l'air avec la croissance et la décroissance de la
lune. » Etre une machine chIorophyllique, ou de photosynthèse,
au moins glisser son corps comme une pièce dans
de pareilles machines. Lenz s'est mis avant la distinction
homme-nature, avant tous les repérages que cette distinction
conditionne. Il ne vit pas la nature comme nature, mais
comme processus de production. Il n'y a plus ni homme
ni nature, mais uniquement processus qui produit l'un dans
l'autre et couple les machines. Partout des machines pro­
ductrices ou désirantes, les machines schizophrènes, toute
la vie générique : moi et non-moi, extérieur et int��rieur
ne veulent plus rien dire.

----------------------

the two

 Rhizome
==========================
The two of us wrote
Anti-Oedipus
together. Since each of us was
several, there was already quite a crowd. Here we have made use of
everything came within range, what was closest as well as farthest
away. We assigned clever pseudonyms to prevent recognition. Why
have we kept own names? Out of habit, purely out of habit. To make
ourselves unrecognizable in turn. To render imperceptible, not
ourselves, but what makes us act, feel, and think. Also because it's
nice to talk like everybody else, to say the sun rises, when everybody
knows it's only a manner of speaking. To reach, not the point where
one no longer says I, but the point where it is no longer of any
importance whether one says I. We are no longer ourselves. Each will
know his own. We have been aided, inspired, multiplied.
A book has neither object nor subject; it is made of variously for
matters, and very different dates and speeds. To attribute the book
subject is to overlook this working of matters, and the exteriority of
their
relations. It is to fabricate a beneficent God to explain
geological movements. In a book, as in all things, there are lines of
articulation segmentarity, strata and territories; but also lines of
flight, movement deterritorialization and destratification.
Comparative rates of flow on

______________----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



4
these lines produce phenomena of relative slowness and viscosity, or,
on contrary, of acceleration and rupture. All this, lines and
measurable speeds, constitutes an
assemblage.
A book is an
assemblage of this kind, and as such is unattributable. It is a
multiplicity-but we don't know yet at the multiple entails when it is no
longer attributed, that is, after it has been elevated to the status of a
substantive. One side of a machinic assemblage faces the strata,
which doubtless make it a kind of organism, or signing totality, or
determination attributable to a subject; it also has a side facing a
body
without organs,
which is continually dismantling the organism,
causing asignifying particles or pure intensities to pass or circulate,
and attributing to itself subjects that it leaves with nothing more than
a name as the trace of an intensity. What is the body without organs
of a book? There are several, depending on the nature of the lines
considered, their particular grade or density, and the possibility of
their converging on "plane of consistency" assuring their selection.
Here, as elsewhere, the units of measure are what is essential:
quantify writing.
There is no difference between what a book talks
about and how it is made. Therefore a book has no object. As an
assemblage, a book has only itself, in connection with other
assemblages and in relation to other bodies without organs. We will
never ask what a book means, as signified or signifier; we will not
look for anything to understand in it. We will ask what it functions
with, in connection with what other things it does or does not transmit
intensities, in which other multiplicities its own are inserted and
metamorphosed, and with what bodies without organs it makes its
own converge. A book exists only through the outside and on the
outside. A book itself is a little machine; what is the relation (also
measurable) of this literary machine to a war machine, love machine,
revolutionary machine, etc.-and an
abstract machine
that sweeps
them along? We have been criticized for overquoting literary authors.
But when one writes, the only question is which other machine the
literary machine can be plugged into, must be plugged into in order to
work. Kleist and a mad war machine, Kafka and a most extraordinary
bureaucratic machine
...
(What if one became animal or plant through
literature, which certainly does not mean literarily? Is it not first
through the voice that one becomes animal?) Literature is an
assemblage. It has nothing to do with ideology. There is no ideology
and never has been.
All we talk about are multiplicities, lines, strata and
segmentarities, ines of flight and intensities, machinic assemblages
and their various ypes, bodies without organs and their construction
and selection, the )lane of consistency, and in each case the units of
measure.
Stratometers, teleometers, BwO units of density, BwO units
of convergence:
Not only do hese constitute a quantification of
writing, but they define writing as ilways the measure of something
else. Writing has nothing to do with

=====================================
Ça
fonctionne
partout,
tantôt
sans
arrêt,
tantôt
discon­
tinu.
Ça
respire,
ça
chauffe,
ça
mange.
Ça
chie,
ça
bcl.Ïse.
Quelle
erreur
d'avoir
dit
le
ça.
Partout
ce
sont
des
machines,
pas
du
tout
métaphoriquement
:
des
machines
de
machines,
avec
leurs
couplages,
leurs
connexions.
Une
machine-organe
est
branchée
sur
une
machine-source
:
l'une
émet
un
flux,
que
l'autre
coupe.
Le
sein
est
une
machine
qui
produit
du
lait,
et
la
bouche,
une
machine
couplée
sur
celle-là.
La
bouche
de
l'anorexique
hésite
entre
une
machine
à
manger,
une
machine
anale,
une
machine
à
parler,
une
machine
à
respirer
(crise
d'asthme).
C'est
ainsi
qu'on
est
tous
brico­
leurs;
chacun
ses
petites
machines.
Une
machine-organe
pour
une
machine-énergie,
toujours
des
flux
et
des
coupures.
Le
président
Schreber
a
les
rayons
du
ciel
dans
le
cul.
Anus
solaire.
Et
soyez
sûrs
que
ça
marche;
le
président
Schreber
sent
quelque
chose,
produit
quelque
chose,
et
peut
en
faire
la
théorie.
Quelque
chose
se
produit
:
des
effets
de
machine,
et
non
des
métaphores.
La
promenade
du
schizophrène
:
c'est
un
meilleur
modèle
que
le
névrosé
couché
sur
le
divan.
Un
peu
de
grand
air,
une
relation
avec
le
dehors.
Par
 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

6/02/2015

.. Henry Miller analysis... ... dig it ... there's no mystery ....


____________ Go back to the Hamlet letters all ______________ it's said there much to the point ___ _______________lest they forgoe/forget ________________________war is the shitty id gone banannas ________________________Love's the big machine keeping the world go round not black as in Dante ________________________last winter walking along the river you nearly died. __________________________________oedipus the god /each one of us/is your mother ____________________________________________________________

5/11/2015

Waiting for ... 'reason'

.




We do not use the terms ‘normal’ or 'abnormal.’

                All societies are rational and irrational at the same time. 

They are perforce rational in their mechanisms, their cogs and wheels, their connecting systems, and even by the place they assign to the irrational.

 Yet all this presupposes codes or axioms which are not the products of chance, but which are not intrinsically rational either.

 
 It’s like theology: everything about it is rational if you accept sin, immaculate conception,                      incarnation.


 Reason is always a region cut out of the irrational - not sheltered from the irrational at all, but a

region traversed by the irrational and defined only by a certain type of relation between irrational factors.

                                        Underneath all reason lies delirium, drift.”

 Chaosophy Félix Guattari

 .
 

4/20/2015

'Onty'

.



Onti-oedipus. cat. cata catacomb combing combing the earth &air a  fine fiddle care  ~  there ` music taking the easy out?  not music itself whatever thatmight be but it's projeuniteurs? n'est c'est pas? writing is always hard. er? is it ? are you not amusican.  Once if i remember I was a fine musican.

a   pyhrosis of bleeding.

 _____________

.... that's ...

_______________________________________

   that's how the machine works  .. it stops.. breaking down and it's not so fun when yr in it a ferris-wheel carriage coming to a halt
  a head-ache smacking you in the gob
    sniffing nose bleating heart
 a weird weather pulling stiff on its dogs

   mooring? no not mooring moiled but the unpleasant kind a disjunctive disjointed_
ness and the 'hurt of tears' paying out their hot scalding

 desire a broken puff on the dry tongue
  a weird page in the southern wind 
  not a tripping fancy page


   and the guilt that musicans make you feel provoking you with their never ceasing  promisicuity a nice game to play banging on  strings, keys, horns, blowers, blinkers, tom-toms day and night bin
  of it never ending
   metamorphosed into the car monster its nasty bright lights beaming on down

  for the wander-schizo it's harder peregrinating            round and round

     so the question becomes how to find new lines/&times to cut
  


|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

love

||||||||||||||||||||||||



"People don’t like love, they like that flittery flirty feeling. They don’t love love - love is sacrificial, love is ferocious, it’s not emotive. Our culture doesn’t love love, it loves the idea of love. It wants the emotion without paying anything for it."
- Matt Chandler 
(via 5000letters)(Source: wnq-writers, via 5000letters)

40,228 notes

_______________________

12/25/2014

Intervenant "Raluca Arsenie-Zamfir' "Pourquoi le corps sans organes est-il "plein" ?"



Observé du dehors, le corps apparaît comme un dispositif biologique complexe, objet de connaissance positive, d’observation et d’expérimentation. Néanmoins, la philosophie parle du "corps vécu", du "vivre incarné" ou du "corps sans organes", faisant ainsi référence à ce qui se trouve derrière les régularités visibles du corps, que la science inventorie avec tellement d’élan. La question que nous aborderons est de savoir pourquoi le corps sans organes est conçu comme "plein" et ce que cette plénitude signifie. La réponse jaillit presque toute seule, puisque Deleuze et Guattari, tout en parlant du "corps plein sans organes", ont plusieurs fois affirmé son contenu essentiellement intensif. Dès le début il faut souligner que le corps sans organes ne conteste pas la réalité de la matérialité tangible. Pourtant, si nous y restions, cette matérialité pourrait altérer et désincarner le corps vivant, tout en le réduisant à une somme des fonctions physiologiques, alors qu’il inclut plus que le mécanisme biologique et qu’il s’en différencie précisément par sa texture intensive.

Raluca Arsenie-Zamfir"
Raluca Arsenie-Zamfir   texte complets>   Pourquoi le corps sans organes est-il "plein






______________________  

"Territoires du capitalisme"

Territoires du capitalisme ou un niveau territoire conquis, la subjectivité… par Ciprian Mihali, Université de Cluj, Roumanie







L'anti-oedipe, Deleuze-Guattari

Le Département de Philosophie organise dans le cadre des activités communes du master du Sud-Ouest de la France un workshop sur l'Anti-Oedipe de Deleuze et Guattari (avec François Zourabichvili, Anne Sauvagnargues, François Dosse, Stéphane Nadaud, Charles Ramond, Pierre Montebello, Jean-Christophe Goddard).
- See more at: http://uptv.univ-poitiers.fr/program/l-anti-oedipe-deleuze-guattari/video/1054/territoires-du-capitalisme/index.html#video_extra

9/07/2014

Desiring-machines work only when they break down, and by


continually breaking down. Judge Schreber "lived for a long time
 


without a stomach, without intestines, almost without lungs, with a torn


oesophagus, without a bladder, and with shattered ribs; he used sometimes
to swallow part of his own larynx with his food, etc."7 The body
without organs is nonproductive; nonetheless it is produced, at a certain
place and a certain time in the connective synthesis, as the identity of
producing and the product: the schizophrenic table is a body without
organs. The body without organs is not the proof of an original
nothingness, nor is it what remains of a lost totality.

Above all, it is not a
projection; it has nothing whatsoever to do with the body itself, or with
an image of the body. It is the body without an image. This imageless,
organless body, the nonproductive, exists right there where it is produced,
 



in the third stage of the binary-linear series. It is perpetually
reinserted into the process of production. The catatonic body is produced
in the water of the hydrotherapy tub. The full body without
organs belongs to the realm of antiproduction; but yet another characteristic
of the connective or productive synthesis is the fact that it
couples production with antiproduction, with an element of antiproduction.






2 The Body without Organs
An apparent conflict arises between desiring-machines and the
body without organs. Every coupling of machines, every production of a
machine, every sound of a machine running, becomes unbearable to the body
without organs. Beneath its organs it senses there are larvae and loathsome
worms, and a God at work messing it all up or strangling it by organizing it. "The
body is the body/it is all by i
tself/and has no need of organs/the body is never an
organism/ organisms are the enemies of the body."* Merely so many nails
piercing the flesh, so many forms of torture. In order to resist organ-machines,
the body without organs presents its smooth, slippery, opaque, taut surface as a
barrier. In order to resist linked, connected, and interrupted flows, it sets up a
counterflow of amorphous, undifferentiated fluid. In order to resist using words
composed of articulated phonetic units, it utters only gasps and cries that are



sheer unarticulated blocks of sound. We are of the opinion that what is ordinarily
referred to as "primary repression" means precisely that: it is not a
"countercathexis," but rather this repulsion of desiring-machines by the body
without organs. This is the real meaning of the paranoiac machine: the
desiring-machines attempt to break into the body without organs, and the body
                                   without organs repels them, since it experiences them as an over-all persecution
apparatus. Thus we cannot agree with Victor Tausk when he regards the
paranoiac machine as a mere projection of "a person's own body" and the genital
organs.8 The genesis of the machine lies precisely here: in the opposition of the
process of production of the desiring-machines and the nonproductive stasis of
the body without organs.


                                                 The anonymous nature of the machine and the
nondifferentiated nature of its surface are proof of this. Projection enters the
picture only secondarily, as does counter-investment,t as the body without organs
invests a counterinside or a counteroutside, in the form of
a persecuting organ or
some exterior agent of persecution.



But in and of itself the paranoiac machine is
merely an avatar of the desiring-machines: it is a result of the relationship
between the desiring-machines and the body without organs, and occurs when the
latter can no longer tolerate these machines.
 


*Antonin Artaud, in 84, nos. 5-6 (1948). The French text reads: "Le corps est !e co




*Antonin Artaud, in 84, nos. 5-6 (1948). The French text reads: "Le corps est !e corps/il est seul/et n'a pas
besoin d'organe/le corps n'est jamais un organisme/les organismes sont les ennemis du corps." {Translators'
note.) (Throughout, all English translations of works cited in the text are by the translators, unless otherwise
noted.)
■fWe have adopted this term throughout, except when quoting directly from psychoanalytic literature,
because it renders more faithfully the meaning of Investlssement, which in French does service in libidinal
as well as political economy. We have likewise chosen to translate investir as "to invest" instead of "to
cathect." (Translators'note.)

 


THE DESIRING-MACHINES 8

speaks for himself .. its delightful and interesting to see how Celine sits|

his hands/ weigh heavy downward ( i cld. go on about this in related ways but ill leave it fr another time/ which rhymes with time/}


_________

The schizophrenic... is





The schizophrenic is the universal producer. There is no need to   (and this matches him with the universal capitalist yes, this is good) 

distinguish here between producing and its product. We need merely
note that the pure "thisness" of the object produced is carried over into a
new act of producing. The table continues to "go about its business." The
surface of the table, however, is eaten up by the supporting framework.

The nontermination of the table is a necessary consequence of its mode
of production. When Claude Levi-Strauss defines bricolage* he does so
in terms of a set of closely related characteristics: the possession of a
stock of materials or of rules of thumb that are fairly extensive, though
more or less a hodgepodge—multiple and at the same time limited; the
ability to rearrange fragments continually in new and different patterns
or configurations; and as a consequence,


an indifference toward the act
of producing and toward the product,
(this is not dissimilar to indifference the artist/ the artist producer schizo a fine line a dilation, a dialectic hovering between betwix the two of them? celine's reputed indifference to his manuscripts once he handed them over to his secretary... this is in Erika Ostrovoksy's books about Celine) (yes but Celine was nuts~ hahah a delire racial and nowawe!days it's delire religieux) (yes he was nuts but not like the nut who can't ever anything done because their delire confounds them to paralysis and or death catatonia just like the alcoholic's psychosis prevents her eventually from achieving anything)


but the chaos of the artist is not identical to that of the nervous neurotic.

i knew apainter once he was neurotic! like crazy. to the pointwhereit was replusive . it was impossible to spend time with after alwhile and because he'd been a bit succesful he was terribly self conscious and even precious....
i forgot all about him..
the spoken word people and company are all populist delires or let me coin a phrase populist delirists!
hahahahah

toward the set of instruments to be
used and toward the over-all result to be achieved.t The satisfaction the
handyman experiences when he plugs something into an electric socket
or diverts a stream of water can scarcely be explained in terms of
"playing mommy and daddy," or by the pleasure of violating a taboo.
The rule of continually producing production, of grafting producing onto
the product, is a characteristic of desiring-machines or of primary
production: the production of production. A painting by Richard
Lindner, "Boy with Machine," shows a huge, pudgy, bloated boy
working one of his little desiring-machines, after having hooked it up to
a vast technical social machine—which, as we shall see, is what even the
very young child does.
Producing, a product: a producing/product identity. It is this identity
that constitutes a third term in the linear series



______________  this little  piecy ripped out from page 7 of the book by Mona's Aunty and Unclly Jill Deleuze and Franny Guattarietti. Now this sentence or two is fiction. So the above was anecdotal verging on fiction. and life is anecdotal verging  on the   r         e              a                  l


as when some die they will see their ruins

 and walk among the fiery asseddead eating berries an picking shit in purgatory  of fart, belch, gas and reappearing meals

and the vomit spew from the gas main

and this too will seem a mercy as the days and hour and hour after repeat repeat and no change
no difference of a moment a nano second's terminal eternal transferring transcendence 



Everything stops dead for a moment, everything
freezes in place—and then the whole process will begin all over again.
From a certain point of view it would be much better if nothing worked,
if nothing functioned.

 Never being born, escaping the wheel of continual
 
birth and rebirth, no mouth to suck with, no anus to shit through. Will
 

*bricolage: The tinkering about of the bricoleur, or amateur handyman. The art of making do with what's at{Translators' note.)
tCIaude Levi-Strauss, The Savage Mind (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966), p. 17: "The 'bricoleur'
is adept at performing a large number of diverse (divers) tasks; but unlike the engineer, he does not subordinate each
of them to the availability of raw materials and tools conceived and procured for the purpose of the project.
His universe of instruments is closed and the rules of his game are always to make do with 'whatever is at
hand,' that is to say with a set of tools and materials which is always finite and is also heterogeneous because
what it contains bears no relation to the current project, or indeed to any particular project, but is the
contingent result of all the occasions there have been to renew or enrich the stock or to maintain it with the
remains of previous constructions or destructions."



                                        THE DESIRING-MACHINES 7


the machines run so badly, their component pieces fall apart to such a
point that they will return to nothingness and thus allow us to return to
nothingness? It would seem, however, that the flows of energy are still
too closely connected, the partial objects still too organic, for this to
happen. What would be required is a pure fluid in a free state, flowing
without interruption, streaming over the surface of a full body.
Desiring-machines make us an organism; but at the very heart of this
production, within the very production of this production, the body
suffers from being organized in this way, from not having some other
sort of organization, or no organization at all. "An incomprehensible,
absolutely rigid stasis" in the very midst of process, as a third stage: 



"No

mouth. 


No tongue.

 No teeth.
 No larynx. 
No esophagus.
 No belly.

 No
anus." 



The automata stop dead and set free the unorganized mass they

once served to articulate. The full body without organs is the
unproductive, the sterile, the unengendered, the unconsumable. Antonin

Artaud discovered this one day, finding himself with no shape or form
whatsoever, right there where he was at that moment. The death
instinct: that is its name, and death is not without a model. For desire
desires death also, because the full body of death is its motor, just as it
desires life, because the organs of life are the working machine. We shall
not inquire how all this fits together so that the machine will run: the
question itself is the result of a process of abstraction.
Desiring-machines work only when they break down, and by
continually breaking down. Judge Schreber "lived for a long time
without a stomach, without intestines, almost without lungs, with a torn
oesophagus, without a bladder, and with shattered ribs; he used sometimes

to swallow part of his own larynx with his food, etc."7 






8 ANTI-OED!PUS

_______________________

3/22/2014

and .............BwO






-----------------------------------------------------------------------------



   Académie d'été de l'Ecole de philosophie d'Epineuil le Fleuriel














__________________________________________________________________________________________

















12/24/2013

11/12/2013

'there's


.

there's nothing worse than the neurotics of 'creativity' that , those that, without wanting to be bad  ,, haunt the community   or haunt,  or hang on   and out at the nervous edge of the imaginative ... these are the literal aliens whose creationcapaacity's been swlamped by the .
  harsh critical machine of the paranoids  . those that them from the other fanet.


----------------what cacophony rings at their ears~ heralds to the death sound~


_______________What hooey~ and malarkey~

__________________________

'antioedipus 2nd part[e]



                                                                                .
Seconde part(E)
.