notes (complete)
The temptation is great to stand out in Anti-Oedipus what belongs to Deleuze and Guattari what belongs to. The readings of this common French have taken the habit of caricature underestimate or even ignore the contribution of Guattari ( for a balanced reading of this piece headed, cf. Dosse Francis and Manola Antonioli ). In doing so, we read the work without understanding that it is a process of writing that is not reducible to its outcome.
The Anti-Oedipus is a writing machine, the way It worked between the two authors, speech mixed with Deleuze and Guattari without one can not fault nor to unravel the whole. The text works well unless the connivance or complicity of the two authors by familiarity of both authors through a process of settling about and keying of entries. And relationships that can be made between the material provided by Guattari (see text notes) and the purge carried out by Deleuze: we see no mistaking that work of shaping both About Guattari are constantly contaminating heavy weapons from the philosophy grafted by Deleuze. The writing machine is thus a collective assemblage of enunciation demonstrating how the speech of Deleuze and Guattari's discourse are connected to one another to form a stream of writing that is neither one nor another. Also this book is any less a work with the function to bear the author said, but a production with statements that refer to themselves.
Perhaps one day, will be read Anti-Oedipus e without worrying about their authors as a function of copyright is a remnant of the writing machine . For if he meant "machine" in its literal meaning, then this book has something that escapes us. There is no denying that the reader unaccustomed to philosophical texts will probably be a machine-mad bond together, swear words and concepts, allusions and references, jokes and definitions ... As the reader wiser, it will be quickly lost in this machine which is not organized as a learned academic gadget. So the reader must also engineer it with the book, that is to say make cuts in the flow of writing the book, enroll in finding how it works not so much in the book that between the book and himself. Each reading is somehow invented the book, not so much by interpreting it in its own way but by doing that something happens between him and his work.
0 comments:
Post a Comment