antonin artaud

Taken: 19 September 2006Location: France

Antonin Artaud was prompt at rejecting floating abstractions, beliefs, common-sense and the glorified gobbledygook that passes for mental sanity among ordinary citizens. He was a threat to "normal" people, although less as an eccentric or a drug addict (like many visionary artists) than in his way of unsettling the communicative functions of language.

Ah, these states that are never named, these eminent positions of the soul, ah, these intermissions of the mind, ah, these minuscule failures which are the nourishment of my hours, ah, this population teeming with facts -- I always use the same words and really I don't seem to advance very much in my thinking, but actually I am advancing more than you, bearded asses, pertinent pigs, masters of the false word, wrappers of portraits, serial writers, groundlings, cattle raisers, entomologists, plague of my speech.

From 1937 to 1946 Artaud was detained in psychiatric hospitals. He was administered insulin therapy and nearly fifty electric shocks provoking states of coma (and even causing the fracture of a dorsal vertebra). His case adds to a notorious list of achievements of "scientific" mental cure, with Vaslav Nijinsky, Camille Claudel, Vincent van Gogh, Friedrich Nietzsche, Soren Kierkegaard, Wilhelm Reich, Freud's patient Daniel Paul Schreiber, etc. Indeed, none of these cases occurred in a totalitarian state. Yet they did not prompt significant reactions from the intelligentsia their victims belonged to. There was (and still is) a tacit consensus regarding the logical end of a deviant, disturbing and unpredictable behaviour, and psychiatry appeared (appears) the inevitable and dependable solution. In 1939, Jacques Lacan had examined Artaud and told Roger Blin:

He's fixed, he will live up till eighty years of age, he won't write a line any more, he's fixed.

Artaud (1947):

So, society has strangled in its asylums all those it wanted to get rid of or protect itself from, because they refused to become its accomplices in certain great nastiness.

(...) And this is how modern life maintains its old atmosphere of debauchery, anarchy, disorder, delirium, derangement, chronic insanity, bourgeois inertia, psychic anomaly (for it is not man but the world which has become abnormal), deliberate dishonesty and notorious hypocrisy, stingy contempt for everything that shows breeding, (...) in short, of organised crime.

Artaud's argument with his physician in Rodez (who was combining electroconvulsive therapy with "art-therapy") is revealed in the account:

I reminded Dr. Ferdière that I had been in Mexico, and I had climbed up a mountain on horseback during six days to meet a race of indian sorcerers living at the altitude of six thousand meters, that I had found them but had endured numberless spells during 28 days, the impressions of which I had consigned in my little book "A Voyage to the Land of the Tarahumara." (...)

He answered: No, you were not bewitched by those indians, it is delirium to believe it, and since your delirium still makes you believe it I am going to write to your friend Jean Paulhan that I intend to administer you a new series of electric shocks.

-- I told him, come on, you've read this book, you've put it into your library as one of the best writings ever done in French since long, so you said, and now you are telling me you are going to treat me for having written it...

-- Indeed, he replied, because I am here to straighten out your poetry.

Artaud saw in Vincent van Gogh a faithful replica of his own torment. After the painter's suicide he wrote:

Dr. Gachet would not tell van Gogh that he was there to straighten out his painting (...) but he used to send him to paint from nature, and bury himself in a landscape to escape the pain of thinking.

Except that, as soon as van Gogh had turned his back, Dr. Gachet turned off the switch of his mind.

(...) I myself spent nine years in an insane asylum and I never had the obsession of suicide, but I know that each conversation with a psychiatrist, every morning at the time of his visit, made me want to hang myself, realising that I would not be able to cut his throat.

In Artaud's view, van Gogh had been "suicided by society" (the "executioners"):

Besides, one does not commit suicide by oneself.

No one has ever been born by oneself.

No one dies by oneself either.

This may be related to the (late) awakening of psychiatrists acknowledging an ineluctable relationship between presumed psychic disorders and social rejection or submission. In 1986, Prof. Edouard Zarifian stated:

Delirium requires at least two persons, as it arises from the other's judgement, and that judgement is based on the socio-cultural norm. At first there is no fundamental difference between the normal and the pathological. Now that I have been around a long time in the practice, I no longer think that one is allowed to say there are mad and normal people: there exist states, that is all.

Nonetheless it is hard to take the popular belief for granted that mental cure has evolved "radically" during the past decades, for the same renovation myth has been proclaimed since the early days of psychiatry. During our animation work in one of the most "advanced" mental cure hospitals in France, in 1992, patients told us the humiliations and punishments they were still enduring.

Neither Heaven nor Hell, if they exist, can do anything against this brutality which they have imposed on me, perhaps so that I may serve them... Who knows?

In any case, in order to lacerate me.

When exorcism had lost credibility, alienated people were thrown to jail, or chained and beaten up in mental asylums. Straitjackets, lobotomy and electric shock treatment were in vogue in Artaud's time (and are occasionally used nowadays). Devices change, but the "executioners" are still around using the ones modern society deems acceptable. Today, the clean and invisible "chemical camisole" of suppressants takes care of preserving cultural and social norms.

When I believed that I was denying this world, I know now that I was denying the Void.

For I know that this world does not exist and I know how it does not exist.

What I have suffered from until now is having denied the Void.

The Void which was already within me.


Its really too bad Artaud didn't meet Laing, or Guattari say. and so many others, lost in psychiatrese captivity, its double swindler blackmail.

some links to alternatives to usual idiotic approach human suffering.

Thomas Szasz has worked tirelessly for 40 years to demystify misleading and restrictive ideas of psychiatric theory and practice_


as did Joe Berkes and Mary Barnes: Berkes was a colleague of R.D.Laing and Mary Barnes his most celebrated patient.

R.D. Laing




Finally Artaud

detherapeutize d : is what we wish and in A/O Guattari et Deleuze on fait ca ~ .

Systematic Disorganisation

'When I was a child, I was, so to speak, in pieces; really a little schizo around the edges. I spent years trying to put myself back together again. My only thing was, I would pull myself along different pieces of realities in doing it.'
Felix Guattari (1995), Chaosophy, ed. Sylvere Lotringer, New York: Semiotext[e].

Felix Guattari

Les agencements d'observation

"Il n'y a pas un observateur, mais des agencements d'observation, des agencements qui relèvent chacun de leur propre système cartographique"

"Agencement" means organisation

Felix Guattari, "La thérapie familiale en changement" à paraître aux éditions E.S.F. sous la direction de Mony ELKAIM.



review of the antioedipus paper...s at

Felix Guattari 's

The devil has no name and no shape . . . the sign of thecross is the infinitive of deterritorialization . . . noise and the dog's fury ...

This review of The Antioedipus Papers

Book Review--how do you 'know' Mona "knew?"
Mona knew Pierre-Felix de Guattari was the knight of the red cross crisscrossing the allegory of symbol snake and signifiance ~ the expression con - The Anti-Oedipus Papersby

Felix GuattariSemiotext(e), 2006Review by Charles T. Wolfe, Ph.D.Aug 28th 2007

tent dance of despot repot and complot. Love was all. Roitournelle de jour ~ .


cyberrepublic » Blog Archive » Internet protocol, decentralization, rhizome

as wonder to wonder her rose to decoompose roiling text where foun d her heart's self broken broken broken in the spoken in spoken spoken spoken
spoken for heart's jade ?

what'll Jill see as her saviour?

cyberrepublic » Blog Archive » Internet protocol, decentralization, rhizome

struggles with philosophy: hmm

Visit here Mona: see struggle to think. Thinking become de regeur? what sign of thought is this working the knighting day. We are fictions to our flictions. Cutting brief on the gully of high spending.

struggles with philosophy: Paul Patton's Deleuzian freedom (Part 2)

'Here is the second section of Patton's Deleuzian concept of freedom....

Patton on the concept of freedom and V for Vendetta:

Freedom, in terms of life, for Patton is considering life as a series of points at which decisions are made or events are experienced, where critical points are the ‘events’ that ultimately determine the shape of a life. Following Deleuze and Guattari, Patton argues these ‘events’ can be considered in terms of different lines, which produce identity, and are relational to the concept of freedom (or actualisations of freedom). These lines are molar lines, corresponding to rigid segmentation (e.g. man/female), molecular lines, corresponding to fluid overlapping forms of division, and lines of flight, that are paths where things change and become transformed. Rather than use Patton’s example of F. Scott Fitzgerald to illustrate the different lines and critical points (events) of experience, I shall describe them using the film V for Vendetta and the main character V, and then relate them to critical freedom.
In the film V for Vendetta the United Kingdom is ruled by a fascist and totalitarian state, which has gained power through the use of politics of fear. This, mainly, has been achieved through releasing poisonous chemicals on the population, which the government only has the cure for, and then blaming these attacks on terrorists. However, the previous war on terror (in reference to the present one in the ‘real’ world,) is also linked into how the party gain governmental power. They therefore create the sensation of fear within in the state, and claim they can offer security against this terror. This is done through more politics of fear and the curtailing of civil liberties. Those thought to terror the UK are basically regarded as anything non-white, non-heterosexual, and non-British. This describes the molar lines, which represents the segmentation found in bureaucratic and hierarchical institution, ‘creating’ molar identities such as the binary ‘terror threat’ and ‘non-terror threat’, which affirm molar freedoms through molar identity. It also demonstrates that molar lines of segmentation are not fixed, but rather transform through challenges and events, even if this occurs in a reactionary manner.
The character V, who starts/brings the downfall of this government, is a victim of government testing in their attempt to find a cure to the poisonous chemical. These people are some of those rounded up in the reformation and regarded as terror threats. V is the only one to build up a resistance to the poisonous chemical and from him the cure is created. However as a side effect V gains super-human strength, and (more importantly) undergoes other experiences that change him and represent the second line of experience (the molecular line). Now this should be taken at the literal level. The body of V, which holds his mind, goes through physical alterations, through a mixture of the testing and a fire that breaks out at the lab. There are also the other (molecular) transformations of V, where V is changed as a person from reading notes given by the women in the next-door cell. As a culminate effect all the molecular changes that happen to V in the testing facility create a different person, and importantly, a new person emerges that finds new things to care about. This leads onto the third line – the line of flight. "

Flight and yer Murphy kite. Poetry is spelled between the words.

Verdana Mona lived between phonetic G ~ and high sounding J if L to F was her name.

Lit Readings: Deleuze & Guattari and and and ....

Lit Readings: Deleuze & Guattari

what quell? what'll be these names. she nursed cussed . sank her fulcrum right through the engine. her lambast of thought . the muckering tree of fandom. started the wilt of its willow frolick.

Cahiers (d') étrangers - Philo-fiction : non-philosophie, Ethique de la discussion et Schizo-analyse

Cahiers (d') étrangers - Philo-fiction : non-philosophie, Ethique de la discussion et Schizo-analyse

Yes tehre is more. as cupped to fictionalization 1st personafication and seconde et troisieme. tu a oublee ton francais. ta francais? comme majeur de D. O! que c'est beau ca! et and all the absent accents grave and otherwise. Wise.

Philo-fiction : non-philosophie, Ethique de la discussion et Schizo-analyse

"Voici la première partie d’un texte écrit dans un cadre universitaire.
Il concerne notre conjoncture, que nous nous apprêtons à traiter elle aussi.

Sylvain Létoffé

Philo-fiction : non-philosophie, éthique de la discussion et schizo-analyse

Dans ce travail, je voudrais tracer l’ébauche d’un traitement théorique comprenant les pensées de Deleuze/Guattari et Habermas. Il s’agit de proposer ici, plutôt qu’un schéma de leurs éventuels antagonismes, un travail de philo-fiction, thème principalement abordé et construit par François Laruelle. D’où peut-être l’esquisse d’un traitement non-philosophique des deux dispositifs contemporains ci-dessus précités. Cette philo-fiction, comme opération théorique, aurait pour but de montrer comment les théories de Deleuze/Guattari et Habermas peuvent être conjointes dans un dispositif où elles trouvent toutes deux le statut de matériau de pensée, et comme matériau, subissent un certain nombre d’opérations. Subir des opérations, ce vocabulaire peut laisser entendre que nos théories seront passablement défigurées par le traitement en cours, traitement qui peut faire penser à une déconstruction. Elles le seront peut-être, mais dans un cadre expérimental, l’évolution du matériau nous aidant à en révéler la structure. Tout laisse penser que nous approchons d’un travail de la pensée proche de la dialectique, d’où doit sortir une vérité peut-être plus aboutie que les deux positions initiales que nous prenions pour point de départ. Mais dans la visée non-philosophique qui est la nôtre, il est préférable d’avancer le terme de dualyse, plutôt que celui de dialectique. Philo-fiction et dualyse, seront les deux termes clefs de ce travail.
Pourquoi Deleuze/ Guattari et Habermas ? Nous les traiterons ensemble dans la mesure où tous deux avancent au moins un concept de l’expérience : l’expérience schizophrénique pour les uns, l’expérience communicationnelle pour l’autre. On peut déjà même entendre la possibilité théorique d’une expérience schizophrénique de la discussion. Sans entrer tout de suite dans ce cas de figure, on peut déjà dire qu’ayant traité d’une expérience, ces penseurs nous enjoignent de la faire. A cet égard, le cas de Deleuze et Guattari semble d’un premier abord plus problématique que celui d’Habermas : l’expérience schizophrénique. On rappellera ici brièvement que dans ce contexte d’idées, l’expérience en question est celle de tout processus de production, et que la visée des philosophes dits du désir consistait, notamment, à indiquer les moyens d’éviter, dans le cours de l’expérience dudit processus de production ( que nous sommes tous, pour eux), l’effondrement qu’il peut rencontrer par moment, dont le symbole est peut-être le schizophrène. Pour ce qui est d’Habermas, les risques rencontrés pour l’expérience discursive qu’il propose semblent moindre ; ils semblent moins effleurer la folie. Notre objet n’est point de comparer puis de proposer au final ce qu’il convient de choisir, l’expérience de la schizophrénie ou la discussion. Conjoindre les deux pensées, peut montrer qu’une fusion est possible. Mais la fusion n’indique pas qu’on va, à nouveau être en mesure de supplanter les deux positions initiales ; les supplanter ou les dépasser. On peut déjà tenter d’esquisser une série de textes où cette fusion est à l’œuvre, tout en se gardant de proposer une troisième position philosophique. Ce qui est en question, alors, c’est la nécessité d’expliquer les décisions qu’au terme de cette forme d’écriture nous aurons prises, pour montrer peut-être qu’à l’égard du réel, cette-fois-ci, qui n’est plus entendu de manière philosophique, c’est-à-dire décidé, la décision constitue une prétention sur (lui), et qu’à cet égard, elle constitue une illusion.
Autre fait important à noter : il est notable que les deux postures initiales sont aussi des propositions politiques. Elles sont des positions politiques dont les adversaires se connaissent, ou commencent à se connaître. Deleuze/Guattari, par certains partisans d’Habermas, se voient même endosser le qualificatif peu enviable de « néofascistes ». Quoiqu’il en soit, ici, il ne s’agit plus de défendre l’un contre l’autre, la schizo-analyse contre l’éthique de la discussion, mais de les prendre identiquement au sérieux, voire très au sérieux, pour un travail de la pensée qui à l’heure actuelle ressort pour une part encore, de la marge philosophique, celui de la philo-fiction. On dira dans un premier temps que la philo-fiction est une mise en rapport de deux pensées distinctes. Comme mise en rapport, elle, s’explique comme résultant d’une machinerie philosophique. La machine philosophique est chargée de mettre en rapport les deux théories, pour produire autre chose (thème de la schizo-analyse). Mais qui est la machine philosophique ? C’est à cette question que nous devrons répondre nécessairement, et à celle-ci nous répondrons certainement qu’il ne s’agit pas de l’Humain. Il est peut-être le nom d’un anthropoïde, d’un modèle philosophique humain qui doit avoir son corrélat dans l’éthique de la discussion, mais certainement pas de l’Identité qu’(est) l’Humain.
Une remarque importante doit ici être établie : nous présentons ici des ébauches de textes expérimentaux, et comme tels ils comportent des formulations susceptibles de n’être point reçues habituellement du point de vue d’une certaine norme. Nous expliquons en conclusion l’intérêts d’avoir utilisé ces textes dont certains contiennent des formules provocantes, et qui le moins qu’on puisse dire, font plutôt penser à des dérapages."

And there is more... & interesting connecting disconnectin' as it go went to see

hum & hence ~ .


star strata ~ .

Professing Deleuze say and Minority Guattari : "This is how it should be done: Lodge yourself on a stratum, experiment with the opportunities it offers, find an advantageous place on it, find potential movements of deterritorialization, possible lines of flight, experience them, produce flow conjunctions here and there, try out continuums of intensities segment by segment, have a small plot of new land at all times… Connect, conjugate, continue. . . "


the e..... ~

" The artist stores up his treasures so as to create an immediate explosion

, and that is why, to his way of thinking, destructions can never take place as rapidly as they ought to."

- Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, 'Anti-Oedipus'

These ideas remind me of Tristan Tzara in the 1918 manfesto of Dada Yes. store let unfold suddenly...

I like part of this idea but I am not sure of the whole thing, the thing about destructions. I see destructions as a moment , but let that be. let that be let that become creation/destruction reconstruction ~


Events At The Fatal Party: From the Guts of Bin Bags Pt. 2

Over here __ found __ alerted astute.....
interesting observations as flood to flow desire marks

Events At The Fatal Party: From the Guts of Bin Bags Pt. 2



between two books a line of flight. a way an entre de choses. as mast to boat,

ding ding ding.

when does a character stop?? when is a light rain? Antioedipus took off his rain coat knowing the rays were sun. as a lurch halts a truck in its track were the salted sea of the niveaus his pleasure. and dawn the ready fix. as between the escaped organ and the how to make a body without organs her knees were raw and feather.



axecross the blogs machining... lIteary

apparetnly becomings literary.....

dont know what anyone knows except the unknowings of becomings. denials river runs mighty deep.


Kamaal Haque


"A curious omission from the discussion of Kleist and the war machine, however, is Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. In Mille Plateaux, Deleuze and Guattari repeatedly contrast Goethe negatively in light of Kleist’s work. For example, they state, »Tout l’oeuvre de Kleist est parcourue par une machine de guerre invoquée contre l’Etat, par une machine musicale invoquée contre la peinture ou le ›tableau‹. C’est curieux comme Goethe, et Hegel, ont la haine de cette nouvelle écriture«. 6 Several chapters later, they return to the subject, declaring »Lenz et Kleist affrontaient Goethe, génie grandiose, veritable homme d’Etat parmi tous les hommes de lettres«. 7 Finally, when discussing different types of space, they postulate »Pour le moment, il faudrait seulement dire qu’il y a deux sortes de voyage, qui se distinguent par le role respectif du point, de la ligne et de l’espace. Voyage-Goethe et voyage-Kleist?«. 8 In the above examples, Deleuze and Guattari are clearly thinking of such works as Wilhelms Meisters Lehrjahre and, perhaps, the Italienische Reise when they make this distinction between Kleist and Goethe. The distinction is less tenable when one considers more ›minor‹ Goethean masterpieces, such as the West-östlicher Divan and, even, Faust II. It would have been interesting to read Bogue’s analysis of this passage, which is of prime importance for the discussion of literature and space in Mille Plateaux."


if when

if when Mona has a query she go to Guattari, what does she go Daddy? if her balance sheet lack proper accounting she passiver her rhyme to indents her ____ . then she ho ho her willy-nilly balance programme to heft her weeds by the oaten calender . then loves shall come .