Showing posts with label Blake. Terence Blake. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blake. Terence Blake. Show all posts

17 Apr 2018

Terence Blake. BADIOU’S MATHEMATICAL SEMINARS: a list

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

BADIOU’S MATHEMATICAL SEMINARS: a list

(published 17-Apr-2018)

 

 

Terence Blake has published a list of Badiou’s seminars on mathematics, with a link to many transcriptions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Blake, Terence. “BADIOU’S MATHEMATICAL SEMINARS: a list.” Web. Published 17-Apr-2018. Accessed 17-Apr-2018.

https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/04/17/badious-mathematical-seminars-a-list/

 

 

 

 

.

4 Mar 2018

Terence Blake’s ‘ON THE INCIPIT TO DELEUZE’S LOGIC OF SENSE’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

ON THE INCIPIT TO DELEUZE’S LOGIC OF SENSE

(published 28-Feb-2018)

 

(published also on academia.edu:

https://www.academia.edu/35601180/ON_THE_INCIPIT_TO_ANTI-OEDIPUS )

 

 

 

Terence Blake does some very important close commentary and retranslation of the first lines of Deleuze’s Logic of Sense, at this post. Here is his translation, which I find quite useful and close to the original:

Alice and Through the Looking-Glass deal with a category of very special things: events, pure events. When I say “Alice grows,” I mean that she becomes bigger than she was. But by the same token too, she becomes smaller than she is now. Certainly, she is not bigger and smaller at the same time. But it is at the same time that she becomes both. She is bigger now; she was smaller before. But it is at the same time, in the same stroke, that one becomes bigger than one was and one is made smaller than one becomes. This is the simultaneity of a becoming whose characteristic is to elude the present (translation modified).

(Blake, “ON THE INCIPIT ”)

 

There are some subtle yet critical points he brings to light.

 

{1} As we see from the first sentence, Deleuze’s project here is “an investigation of categories, of logical grammar. In particular, it is an investigation into the grammar of events” (Blake, “ON THE INCIPIT ”).

 

{2} The use of “mais”/“but” forms paradoxical movements:

It is noteworthy that three of first seven sentences in the chapter begin with “but” (in French “mais”, in each case). In each case we have a common sense, doxic, affirmation not contradicted, but completed by and contrasted with a more paradoxical statement. The interplay between the two signals at the level of grammar that we are engaged in a series of paradoxes.

(Blake, “ON THE INCIPIT ”)

 

{3} Blake comments on the parts “en même temps, du même coup” in the line, “Mais c’est en même temps, du même coup, qu’on devient plus grand qu’on n’était, et qu’on se fait plus petit qu’on ne devient” (Blake’s translation: “But it is at the same time, in the same stroke, that one becomes bigger than one was and one is made smaller than one becomes”), especially with respect to the temporal aspects and the relation to moves in a game:

The expression “at the same time” seems to suggest something composite happening, when it is really a case of undetermined time, that of the event, Aion. Determined time, Chronos, is the time of the composite, of mixtures. Aion is the time of the pure event. So “at the same time” is a categorically ambiguous expression, between Chronos and Aion.

As Aion, Deleuze treats the expression “en même temps” as synonymous with “par là-même” (“by the same token”) and “du même coup”. One could translate this last as “in the same stroke”, but “coup” also evokes the “move” in a game (for example chess) and the “throw” of the dice. This second expression (“in the same stroke/move/throw” is omitted in the published translation).

By leaving this expression out the published translation blurs the distinction between chronological time (Chronos, time of composites) and evental time (Aion, time of the pure event, of pure becoming, of eluding the present) that is already being foreshadowed at the level of the vocabulary.

(Blake, “ON THE INCIPIT ”)

 

 

 

 

 

Blake, Terence. “ON THE INCIPIT TO DELEUZE’S LOGIC OF SENSE.” Web. Published 28-Feb-2018. Accessed 04-Mar-2018.

https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/02/28/on-the-incipit-to-deleuzes-logic-of-sense/

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake on Foucault (Translations and Commentary) entry directory

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Entry Directory for

 

Terence Blake’s

 

Translation and Commentary of Michel Foucault

 

 

 

 

Michel Foucault’s History of Sexuality Volume 4 – Les Aveux de la Chair: Contents

 

LES AVEUX DE LA CHAIR AND THE MUTABILITY OF EXPERIENCE

 

FOUCAULT AND THE FOUR CAUSES

 

FOUCAULT AND THE ONTOLOGICAL TURN: realism, materiality and the outside

.

.

14 Jan 2018

Melville (2) The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade, ch.2 ‘Showing That Many Men Have Many Minds’, summary in brief

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Literature, Poetry, Drama, entry directory]

[Herman Melville, entry directory]

[Melville’s Confidence-Man, entry directory]

 

[The following summarizes parts of the text, with my commentary in brackets. Boldface is my own. Proofreading is incomplete, so I apologize for my typos.]

 

 

Summary (in Brief) of

 

Herman Melville

 

The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade

 

2

Showing That Many Men Have Many Minds

 

 

Brief summary:

The steamer is like a passageway (as a point of confluence and distribution) for a flow of remarkably diverse types of people from very scattered origins. Quite possibly the deaf and mute man in cream-colored clothes disembarks in that flow.

 

 

Summary (in brief)

 

[Previously there was a crowd around a wanted sign for a mysterious impostor who may be aboard the steamer ship. A strange, deaf and mute, deck-passenger dressed in cream-colored clothes first tries to convince a crowd of passengers to have charity and trust, and later he falls asleep on the deck. Now] a new crowd of passengers witness the sleeping man in cream-colored clothes and say distrustful and critical things about him, like “Beware of him,” “Trying to enlist interst,” and “Escaped convict, worn out with dodging” (7).

 

The steamer Fidèle has a variety of rooms, shops, and people:

Merchants on ‘change seem the passengers that buzz on her decks, while, from quarters unseen, comes a murmur as of bees in the comb. Fine promenades, domed saloons, long galleries, sunny balconies, confidential passages, bridal chambers, state-rooms plenty as pigeon-holes, and out-of-the-way retreats like secret drawers in an escritoire, present like facilities for publicity or privacy. Auctioneer or coiner, with equal ease, might somewhere here drive his trade.

Though her voyage of twelve hundred miles extends from apple to orange, from clime to clime, yet, like any small ferry-boat, to right and left, at every landing, the huge Fidèle still receives additional passengers in exchange for those that disembark; so that, though always full of strangers, she continually, in some degree, adds to, or replaces them with strangers still more strange; like Rio Janeiro fountain, fed from the Cocovarde mountains, which is ever overflowing with strange waters, but never with the same strange particles in every part.

(8-9, boldface and underlining my own)

 

[The idea here is quite important, but I am not at all knowledgeable of the reference. I wish I did know. There is apparently a fountain (called the “Fountain of the Muses”) at the Botanical Garden of Rio de Janeiro. The garden is at the foot of the Corcovado Mountain. I am not sure if we are to take that to be what Melville calls the “Cocovarde mountains”. (I could not find mountains under that spelling by search.) And if so, I do not know what the water source is for the fountain, so I do not know if it is fed from waters coming from the mountain. All this does not seem impossible, but I cannot say what is really being described here.] [What is most interesting for  me here however is the notion that there is a flow of people from a variety of different sources that are channeled through the steamer. We might think of our own life as being like a vessel through which the different variations of ourself flow through, or maybe as the nexus where little particles of our selfhood merge and diverge as they pass through us.]

 

[It then seems that the man in cream-colored clothes has disembarked, but maybe not. It says it is not unlikely that he did, seemingly leaving open the possibility that he did not.]

By-and-by—two or three random stoppages having been made, and the last transient memory of the slumberer vanished, and he himself, not unlikely, waked up and landed ere now—the crowd, as is usual, began in all parts to break up from a concourse into various clusters or squads, which in some cases disintegrated again into quartettes, trios, and couples, or even solitaires; involuntarily submitting to that natural law which ordains dissolution equally to the mass, as in time to the member.

(9)

 

We then are given a discription of the various different people passing through the steamer. [Thes passages are remarkable.]

As among Chaucer's Canterbury pilgrims, or those oriental ones crossing the Red Sea towards Mecca in the festival month, there was no lack of variety. Natives of all sorts, and foreigners; men of business and men of pleasure; parlor men and backwoodsmen; farm-hunters and fame-hunters; heiress-hunters, gold-hunters, buffalo-hunters, bee-hunters, happiness-hunters, truth-hunters, and still keener hunters after all these hunters. Fine ladies in slippers, and moccasined squaws; Northern speculators and Eastern philosophers; English, Irish, German, Scotch, Danes; Santa Fé traders in striped blankets, and Broadway bucks in cravats of cloth of gold; fine-looking Kentucky boatmen, and Japanese-looking Mississippi cotton-planters; Quakers in full drab, and United States soldiers in full regimentals; slaves, black, mulatto, quadroon; modish young Spanish Creoles, and old-fashioned French Jews; Mormons and Papists Dives and Lazarus; jesters and mourners, teetotalers and convivialists, deacons and blacklegs; hard-shell Baptists and clay-eaters; grinning negroes, and Sioux chiefs solemn as high-priests. In short, a piebald parliament, an Anacharsis Cloots congress of all kinds of that multiform pilgrim species, man.

As pine, beech, birch, ash, hackmatack, hemlock, spruce, bass-wood, maple, interweave their foliage in the natural wood, so these mortals blended their varieties of visage and garb. A Tartar-like picturesqueness; a sort of pagan abandonment and assurance. Here reigned the dashing and all-fusing spirit | of the West, whose type is the Mississippi itself, which, uniting the streams of the most distant and opposite zones, pours them along, helter-skelter, in one cosmopolitan and confident tide.

(10-11)

[I note also a possible sense here that might correspond to the sense of “outlandish” in those uses of Melville that interested Deleuze (see Terence Blake’s comment to this post). Here we have many outlandish sorts of people who have come together. But also, the steamer itself is something offland, being in the river, while at the same it is something that channels the strange, outlandish things from the land. In their homeland, they are probably not so strange at all. But it is when they move out from that context that they become outlandish; but here we might think furthermore that being outlandish or deterritorializing more specifically may necessarily involve not simply being foreign but as well forming a mélange with other outlanded things.]

 

 

Chapter text [copied from Project Gutenburg]:

 

CHAPTER II.
SHOWING THAT MANY MEN HAVE MANY MINDS.

"Odd fish!"

"Poor fellow!"

"Who can he be?"

"Casper Hauser."

"Bless my soul!"

"Uncommon countenance."

"Green prophet from Utah."

"Humbug!"

"Singular innocence."

"Means something."

"Spirit-rapper."

"Moon-calf."

"Piteous."

"Trying to enlist interest."

"Beware of him."

"Fast asleep here, and, doubtless, pick-pockets on board."

"Kind of daylight Endymion."

"Escaped convict, worn out with dodging."

"Jacob dreaming at Luz."

Such the epitaphic comments, conflictingly spoken or thought, of a miscellaneous company, who, assembled [8] on the overlooking, cross-wise balcony at the forward end of the upper deck near by, had not witnessed preceding occurrences.

Meantime, like some enchanted man in his grave, happily oblivious of all gossip, whether chiseled or chatted, the deaf and dumb stranger still tranquilly slept, while now the boat started on her voyage.

The great ship-canal of Ving-King-Ching, in the Flowery Kingdom, seems the Mississippi in parts, where, amply flowing between low, vine-tangled banks, flat as tow-paths, it bears the huge toppling steamers, bedizened and lacquered within like imperial junks.

Pierced along its great white bulk with two tiers of small embrasure-like windows, well above the waterline, the Fiddle, though, might at distance have been taken by strangers for some whitewashed fort on a floating isle.

Merchants on 'change seem the passengers that buzz on her decks, while, from quarters unseen, comes a murmur as of bees in the comb. Fine promenades, domed saloons, long galleries, sunny balconies, confidential passages, bridal chambers, state-rooms plenty as pigeon-holes, and out-of-the-way retreats like secret drawers in an escritoire, present like facilities for publicity or privacy. Auctioneer or coiner, with equal ease, might somewhere here drive his trade.

Though her voyage of twelve hundred miles extends from apple to orange, from clime to clime, yet, like any small ferry-boat, to right and left, at every landing, [9] the huge Fidèle still receives additional passengers in exchange for those that disembark; so that, though always full of strangers, she continually, in some degree, adds to, or replaces them with strangers still more strange; like Rio Janeiro fountain, fed from the Cocovarde mountains, which is ever overflowing with strange waters, but never with the same strange particles in every part.

Though hitherto, as has been seen, the man in cream-colors had by no means passed unobserved, yet by stealing into retirement, and there going asleep and continuing so, he seemed to have courted oblivion, a boon not often withheld from so humble an applicant as he. Those staring crowds on the shore were now left far behind, seen dimly clustering like swallows on eaves; while the passengers' attention was soon drawn away to the rapidly shooting high bluffs and shot-towers on the Missouri shore, or the bluff-looking Missourians and towering Kentuckians among the throngs on the decks.

By-and-by—two or three random stoppages having been made, and the last transient memory of the slumberer vanished, and he himself, not unlikely, waked up and landed ere now—the crowd, as is usual, began in all parts to break up from a concourse into various clusters or squads, which in some cases disintegrated again into quartettes, trios, and couples, or even solitaires; involuntarily submitting to that natural law which ordains dissolution equally to the mass, as in time to the member. [10]

As among Chaucer's Canterbury pilgrims, or those oriental ones crossing the Red Sea towards Mecca in the festival month, there was no lack of variety. Natives of all sorts, and foreigners; men of business and men of pleasure; parlor men and backwoodsmen; farm-hunters and fame-hunters; heiress-hunters, gold-hunters, buffalo-hunters, bee-hunters, happiness-hunters, truth-hunters, and still keener hunters after all these hunters. Fine ladies in slippers, and moccasined squaws; Northern speculators and Eastern philosophers; English, Irish, German, Scotch, Danes; Santa Fé traders in striped blankets, and Broadway bucks in cravats of cloth of gold; fine-looking Kentucky boatmen, and Japanese-looking Mississippi cotton-planters; Quakers in full drab, and United States soldiers in full regimentals; slaves, black, mulatto, quadroon; modish young Spanish Creoles, and old-fashioned French Jews; Mormons and Papists Dives and Lazarus; jesters and mourners, teetotalers and convivialists, deacons and blacklegs; hard-shell Baptists and clay-eaters; grinning negroes, and Sioux chiefs solemn as high-priests. In short, a piebald parliament, an Anacharsis Cloots congress of all kinds of that multiform pilgrim species, man.

As pine, beech, birch, ash, hackmatack, hemlock, spruce, bass-wood, maple, interweave their foliage in the natural wood, so these mortals blended their varieties of visage and garb. A Tartar-like picturesqueness; a sort of pagan abandonment and assurance. Here reigned the dashing and all-fusing spirit [11] of the West, whose type is the Mississippi itself, which, uniting the streams of the most distant and opposite zones, pours them along, helter-skelter, in one cosmopolitan and confident tide.

 

 

 

 

Melville, Herman. 1857. The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade. New York: Dix, Edwards.

PDF at:

https://archive.org/details/confidencemanhis00melvrich

Online text at:

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/21816

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/21816/21816-h/21816-h.htm

 

 

 

.

9 Jan 2018

Terence Blake’s ‘DELEUZE, BLADE RUNNER 2049, LOVECRAFT, OOO, DIGITAL PHILOSOPHY: some papers in Continental Philosophy’, [Handy Links]

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Some handy links in:

 

Terence Blake

 

DELEUZE, BLADE RUNNER 2049, LOVECRAFT, OOO, DIGITAL PHILOSOPHY: some papers in Continental Philosophy

 

In this post, Blake links to six of his notable works, made available on his academia.edu page:

 

NOTES ON THE INCIPIT TO ANTI-OEDIPUS

 

LOVECRAFT NOETIC DREAMER: from horrorism to cosmicism

 

REVIEW OF BLADE RUNNER 2049: on the ontology of replication

 

TWENTY TRAITS OF CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY

 

BEST INTRODUCTION TO OBJECT-ORIENTED ONTOLOGY some advice and references

 

LIVED DIGITAL PHILOSOPHY: an experiment in pluralism

 

 

 

 

Blake, Terrence. 2018. “DELEUZE, BLADE RUNNER 2049, LOVECRAFT, OOO, DIGITAL PHILOSOPHY: some papers in Continental Philosophy”. Web.

https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/01/08/deleuze-blade-runner-2049-lovecraft-ooo-digital-philosophy-some-papers-in-continental-philosophy/

 

 

 

 

.

4 Jan 2018

Terence Blake’s ‘ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: translation’ ‘... commentary’ ‘...evaluation’ and ‘...perspectives

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: translation

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: commentary

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: evaluation

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: perspectives

 

Terence Blake provides a new translation, a probing and insightful commentary, an interesting evaluative commentary, and additional notes regarding certain psychoanalytic sorts of themes of the first paragraph of Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus. It is a fantastic resource as it sheds much light on the passages.

 

 

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: translation
https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/anti-oedipus-paragraph-1-translation/

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: commentary
https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/anti-oedipus-paragraph-1-commentary/

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: evaluation
https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/01/03/anti-oedipus-paragraph-1-evaluation/

 

ANTI-OEDIPUS PARAGRAPH 1: perspectives
https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2018/01/07/anti-oedipus-paragraph-1-perspectives/

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘EXPLAINING A SENTENCE BY GUATTARI’ and ‘OBSTACLES TO UNDERSTANDING RECENT FRENCH PHILOSOPHY’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

EXPLAINING A SENTENCE BY GUATTARI

 

This post by Blake is a particularly interesting one, and it is tied to another very interesting one [mentioned below]. Here he explains a difficult passage by Guattari, and not only does he explain its meaning, he also gives an account of why non-French people would have trouble with it, given certain differences in the French education system and styles of academic writing.

Let’s begin with Dawkin’s first quote, taken from Guattari’s late work CHAOSMOSIS:

We can clearly see that there is no bi-univocal correspondence between linear signifying links or archi-writing, depending on the author, and this multireferential, multi-dimensional machinic catalysis.

[...]

This quote seems rather obscure. First, as I discussed in the previous post, there is the erroneous translation of the expression one-to-one correspondence as “bi-univocal correspondence”, at the beginning. Then he goes on to talk about “linear signifying links” [implicitly referring to Lacan] or “archi-writing” [referring to Derrida]. Thus, here Guattari is criticising both Lacan and Derrida, so Dawkins should be happy about their agreement rather than treating Guattari’s prose as nonsense.

Guattari says that there is no mapping of Lacan’s and Derrida’s ideas of language onto his own idea of the “machine”. This is a key concept in all of Guattari’s work, alone and in collaboration with Deleuze. We must note that the use of the word machine as a metaphor is far more common in French than it is in English. People compare the State, or a company, or school to a machine quite readily, in ordinary conversation. Guattari took up this popular metaphor and gave it a new sense in his attempt to free himself from the linguistic metaphors favoured by structuralism, and also by Lacan and by Derrida.

“Machinic” used as an adjective seems quite abstract and ugly in English, but not as much in French, which quite likes Latinate words ending in the suffix “-ique”(“-ic” in English). On a historical note, we should keep in mind that Lacan dominated the intellectual scene in France for a long time, and Guattari began to break free of that influence in 1969 in a little text called “Machine and Structure”, that Deleuze found quite important. Dawkins’ quote (1992) contains a late reaffirmation by Guattari of the same point, in a far more mature intellectual framework.

We may note also that French favours the use of abstract adjectives, where English would use a noun phrase (“machinic” instead of “of machines”).

Guattari’s conception of language is different from the Anglophone, not aiming so much at semantic transparency as at a pragmatic freeing from clichés. Hence the expression “machinic catalysis”, which is awkward in English, but not incomprehensible in context. It’s machinic because the language is interpreted and evaluated in terms of its function in a particular context, and it’s a “catalysis” because it makes ideas and interventions possible that would not otherwisehave been possible without great effort and special preparation.

“Machinic catalysis” alludes to Austin’s “How to do things with words”, in opposition to Lacan’s “linear signifying links” and to Derrida’s “archi-writing”. This sentence is the declaration of Guattari’s  (and of Deleuze’s) pluralist theory of desire, and of their siding against Lacan’s and Derrida’s one-dimensional linguistic paradigms. This is something that Dawkins should should favour, even if he feels uncomfortable about the style.

This is a very compact sentence, condensing a number of theoretical allusions: signifying chain- Lacan, archi-writing – Derrida, machinic – Guattari and Deleuze, catalysis – Austin. My argument against Dawkins is that one needs a lot of background to understand and to unpack the allusive density and to see its beauty. Dawkins sees none of this, he just blindly trusts Sokal’s opinion that it is nonsense, strings together unrelated quotes, and laughs. Dawkins’ argument is “I don’t know anything about the subject, but I can easily see this is nonsense”.

Far from being needlessly obfuscating, allusive density is one of the principles of good style in French, and it is not easy to carry off well. However, if you can follow the allusions it makes for great clarity. Guattari’s allusions are not at all obscure here. He alludes to the work of Lacan, of Derrida, and of Austin, and to his own work with Deleuze, whch everyone reading Guattari in French would have read. Even the mathematical allusion to bi-univocal mapping or “one-to-one correspondence” is high school maths, nothing abstruse.

(Terence Blake, boldface mine)

 

A related post, also highly recommended:

OBSTACLES TO UNDERSTANDING RECENT FRENCH PHILOSOPHY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘ANTI-PLATONISM: horizontal movement and actualising powers’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

ANTI-PLATONISM: horizontal movement and actualising powers

 

In this post Blake discusses false movements and the witch’s flight in relation to passages from Deleuze and Guattari’s What Is Philosophy?:

The state of “indifference” that I discussed earlier, in particular the state of indifference to thinking, is the state of servitude (in Spinozian terms). It is a state of passivity that is subjected to the “false movements” dictated by a transcendence (extrinsic values or goals, divine commands, objectivised political necessities) and which dictate a trajectory constructed out of straight lines. (Note: here I am paraphrasing Deleuze’s marvelous little book PERICLES AND VERDI). Thinking involves breaking with that servitude and passivity and becoming-active, actualising one’s powers. This is what Deleuze calls the “natural movement”, and it traces and follows the curved and zigzag lines of sorcery.

One can modify the translation of the sentence “To think is always to follow the witch’s flight”. In French this reads “Penser, c’est toujours suivre une ligne de sorcière”. Literally: “To think is always to follow a sorceress’s line”. It is useful to recall the literal translation, as one of the allusions here is to Carlos Castaneda’s initiation into sorcery. One of the degrees of the initiation was learning to “stop the world” (stop the false movement, break with the general indifference). According to Deleuze, in his comments on the cinema and elsewhere, this allows one to see the “lines of the universe” or the lines of becoming, and to pass through the wall that cuts us off from running to the horizon and actualising our powers .

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘BLOODSHOT EYES AND VISION CONCEPTS: from indifference to disapproval of thinking’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

BLOODSHOT EYES AND VISION CONCEPTS: from indifference to disapproval of thinking

 

In this post Blake discusses the notions of horizon and the infinite in Deleuze and Guattari’s What Is Philosophy? Here he offers a useful translation and explanation of a particular passage:

The thinkers are unreasonable and head for the horizon. We know that in science the horizon is only relative: “What is primary in science is relative light or the relative horizon” (WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY?, 42, translation modified by me to bring out the idea that the light of science is relative too, and not just the horizon). The philosopher “heads for the horizon”, that is to say “plunges into the infinite”., his or her horizon is absolute, as is the light. This movement is both physical and mental (“in this respect chaos has as much a mental as a physical existence”, 42). If we “return with bloodshot eyes” it is not only because of an excess of alcohol or of light (this is the physical side of the “unreasonable”, pathological or esoteric measures) but also because of our vision of a power that is almost too strong for us. I say “almost too strong”, because in this text the thinker comes back, only changed, with “bloodshot eyes” and with new vision and new concepts. The eyes of the mind have been opened and strained to their limits.

Both these movements (heading out to, and coming back from ,the infinite) are necessary to thinking. Heading out unreasonably, dangerously and coming back bearing the mark (bloodshot eyes, or in some cases worse) of the voyage towards (which is “inner” only in the sense of being noetic or intensive), or of the encounter with, the horizon, but bearing also the vision, the percepts and the concepts. This double movement is what gives consistency to our philosophical territory: a territory is constituted by the movement of leaving it, which also means exposing oneself to risk, and also by the movement of returning back with a new song or a new colour, a new posture, or a new scent.

Already by heading off outside we risk indifference turning into “disapproval” (42), because the danger becomes obvious. Academic philosophy is not usually very perilous , but there is the danger to one’s career and to that of one’s friends or allies. This is what Deleuze and Guattari call “obvious” danger, easily recognizable. The disapproval is redoubled when one brings back “outlandish” concepts (according to Deleuze in the ABC PRIMER “outlandish” is a good synonym for deterritorialised).

(Terence Blake)

 

Note: I still have not found Melville’s use of this term, at least in a way that would seem to correspond to deterritorialization. But I also do not know where to look.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘DIFFERENCE, EVENT, INTENSITY, AND IMMOBILE VOYAGE in a short text by Deleuze and Guattari’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

DIFFERENCE, EVENT, INTENSITY, AND IMMOBILE VOYAGE in a short text by Deleuze and Guattari

 

In this post Blake discusses some passages from chapter two of Deleuze & Guattari’s What Is Philosophy? (See p.41 of the English and p.44 of the French). The part at the end about Deleuze and Guattari’s notion of the fourth person singular is especially interesting:

I think it may be useful to pay attention to the particular words used. The passage begins:

Thinking provokes general indifference.

This “indifference” is a sort of de-differentiated doxa, that just after the passage cited, in the same paragraph, Deleuze and Guattari call “opinion”. “Difference” is a key word for Deleuze, and we know that each intensity envelops an internal difference. So indifference means also without intensity, without affect, what Badiou calls the a-tonal world of democratic materialism. “Thinking” renders what in the French text is called “penser”, i.e. the infinitive “to think” (Note: I am not criticising the translation, but merely pointing out other conceptual latencies contained in the original French). The infinitive is associated by Deleuze and Guattari with the event. Here they are talking about the event of thinking, as a rupture with the doxa and a departure on an immobile voyage. This is echoed later when they say “We head for the horizon”. In French the text reads “On court à l’horizon”. The subject is not “we” (nous), but “one” (on), what Deleuze and Guattari call the fourth person singular, and which they propose as the impersonal subject of the event. The verb is not “head for”, a fairly neutral moving in a particular direction, but “run”. So the notion of speed, of more than normal intensity of movement, is present in the French.

(Terence Blake, boldface is mine)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘ON THE “OBSCURITY” OF CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY: the case of Foucault’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

ON THE “OBSCURITY” OF CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY: the case of Foucault

 

In Blake’s post ‘DELEUZE ON DIALOGUE: DISCUSSION vs CONVERSATION’ (mentioned here), he offers some useful translations from Deleuze’s Two Regimes of Madness on the topic of discussion and conversation. In this post, ON THE “OBSCURITY” OF CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY: the case of Foucault, he adds another translation from that text:

Deleuze was quite adamant that the work of philosophy has nothing to do with “conversations” of this sort, that he called “discussions”:

Discussion is a narcissistic exercise, where each person takes turns showing off: very quickly, no one knows what they are talking about (TWO REGIMES OF MADNESS, p 380, translation modified by me).

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘No Cuts!: Deleuze and Hillman on Alterity’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

No Cuts!: Deleuze and Hillman on Alterity

 

In this post Blake discusses problems of Zizek’s reading of Deleuze’s “Letter to a Harsh Critic”, in the context of James Hillman’s ideas. Here is an interesting part regarding how Deleuze’s pluralism takes his philosophy beyond simple and straightforward dichotomies like the “cut” between self and world (and note the useful translation at the end):

We must reply with James Hillman: “Nothing is repressed, in fact, nothing can be repressed” (RE-VISIONING PSYCHOLOGY, ix). Zizek’s biggest mistake is literalism, a malady that Hillman attributes to, amongst many others, Freud and his followers. Deleuze likewise condemns “a deplorable belief in exactitude and truth”, and revendicates the right to express his individuation with its immobile voyages in oblique and circuitous ways. This indirect expression, or “power of the false”, is a type of language that eschews the “unidimensional literal report by and about a fiction called “me”” (RVP, xi), or indeed about any dogmatically imposed interpretation treated as self-evident “reality”. “What’s so great about your version of “reality”?, asks Deleuze, Your realism is unimaginative.”

This unimaginative realism confines itself to a world divided into stereotyped categories by “signifying cuts”. This is the realm of the great divide between self and world. Deleuze’s pluralism evokes on the contrary a metaphysical “rupture” where you are no longer a conforming or transgressive identity (let’s face it, all identities are transgressive, you don’t and can’t really conform to the Norm), but where

“You have become like everyone, but in fact you have turned “everyone” [and we must add “everything”] into a becoming“. (DIALOGUES, p127, translation slightly modified).

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘LARUELLE’S BLINDSPOTS: Deleuze on style, heuristics, and the topography of thought’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

LARUELLE’S BLINDSPOTS: Deleuze on style, heuristics, and the topography of thought

 

In this post Blake discusses Laurelle’s classification of Deleuze as a philosopher of difference, which Blake says applies to Difference and Repetition but not to books coming after it, beginning with Logic of Sense. Here are some of Blake’s translations from Logic of Sense and its related parts.

This sketchy analysis of the pivotal role of LOGIC OF SENSE in Deleuze’s path of research is borne out by his remarks in the “Author’s Note for the Italian Edition of Logic of Sense“, published in the collection of essays, Two Regimes of Madness. Deleuze explicitly draws attention to the change in style inaugurated with this book, and affirms that it is part and parcel of a more encompassing conceptual change:

“I like this Logic of Sense because for me it continues to mark a rupture: it was the first time I tried to search for a form other than that of traditional philosophy” (my translation).

[...]

In contrast, there is still too much of the “depths” in Laruelle’s movements. His concept of the “One-in-One” is vertically abyssal rather than superficial, and his determination in the last instance reinstates the verticality of a determination that plays with the surface of multiple causalities (overdetermination) only to collapse them all vertically in the “final” instance.

In LOGIC OF SENSE Deleuze breaks with this vertical axis:

Even if I myself was no longer satisfied with the history of philosophy, my book DIFFERENCE AND REPETITION still aspired to a sort of classical height and even to an archaic depth (my translation).

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘NOTES ON DELEUZE’S “LETTER TO A SEVERE CRITIC” (1): against Zizek’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

NOTES ON DELEUZE’S “LETTER TO A SEVERE CRITIC” (1): against Zizek

 

In this post Blake critiques Zizek’s misreading of Deleuze’s “Letter to a Harsh Critic”, or as Blake translates it, “Letter To A Severe Critic”. Here is Blake’s useful retranslation of the famous “buggery” passages:

As it plays a crucial role in his imagination of his “refutation” of Deleuze, I would like to retranslate the famous buggery quote to bring out some neglected aspects:

“But, above all, my way of coping at that time was, I am inclined to believe, to conceive of the history of philosophy as a sort of buggery or, which amounts to the same thing, a sort of immaculate conception. I imagined myself as arriving in the back of an author and giving him a child, which would be his and which nevertheless would be monstruous. That it really be his is very important, because the author had to really say everything that I made him say. But it was also necessary that the child be monstruous, because it was necessary to go through all sorts of decenterings, slippage, breakage [NB: the slang meaning of burglary, breaking and entering, is also relevant], secret emissions that gave me a lot of pleasure” (NEGOTIATIONS, page 6, retranslated by me).

(Terence Blake)

  And there are other useful retranslations in the article.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘DELEUZE AND THE REDUCTION TO THE ANIMAL: the problem of “dogs”’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

DELEUZE AND THE REDUCTION TO THE ANIMAL: the problem of “dogs”

 

In this post Blake discusses the notion of becoming-animal in Deleuze (in the context of James Hillman’s writings). I want to note some useful parts. Blake translates what I assume is “zone d’indiscernabilité” (and maybe as well “zone d’indécidabilité” which is often paired with it) as “zone of indistinction”:

As Deleuze aged he found it increasingly hard to have an animal relation with himself. He was unable to breathe properly without medical assistance, which he compared to a leash for a dog:

“the winter was very difficult in terms of my health: long suffocations, tied like a dog to my oxygen tank” (François Dosse, “Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari: Intersecting Lives”).

This “complaint” as Deleuze calls it, expresses sympathy for the dog and a desire for “unleashment”. We know now that this desire for unleashment eventually led to Deleuze’s suicide, and so Deleuze’s concept of a “zone of indistinction”, of a feeling of commonality with the dog, is quite moving here.

(Terence Blake)

And for a passage reading: “... tout homme qui souffre est de la viande. La viande est la zone commune de l’homme et de la bête, leur zone d’indiscernabilité...” (p.29-30), Blake renders the first part in the following passages:

With Deleuze’s complaint about being “attached like a dog” to his oxygen tank, and being “treated like a dog” by his doctors, we can see that dogs are used by Deleuze as what Hillman calls “emblems of sadness”. There is sadness and depression in the dog attached and mistreated. According to Deleuze, this feeling of identity with the dog is not the expression of a relation of resemblance or of “sentimental identification”, but of a deep sympathy and identity

“every man that suffers is meat. Meat is the common zone between man and beast” (FRANCIS BACON, 23, my translation).

(Terence Blake)

See the article for other useful translations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘Deleuze and Shining’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

Deleuze and Shining

 

In this post (also published at OnScenes) Blake discusses the themes of light, thought, and the constitution of things in Deleuze’s philosophy:

One of the most interesting aspects of Deleuze’s cinema books is his break with any notion of consciousness as a light that illuminates objects otherwise relegated to darkness. L’IMAGE-MOUVEMENT is quite clear on this point:

“It is things that are shining in themselves, without anything to illuminate them.” (p89, my translation).

[...]

Things are always shining, but the important thing is how they shine, what in his book on Foucault Deleuze calls the different régimes of visibility.

“Visibilities are not forms of objects, nor even forms that would show up under light, but rather forms of luminosity which are created by the light itself and allow a thing or object to exist only as a flash, sparkle or shimmer”. (FOUCAULT, p45)

Things are more or less congealed or stratified assemblages of light (or matter or movement or force), but the regimes of saying and showing, of visibility and sayability are historically variable.

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘OLD AGE A TRANSCENDENTAL REALITY: Notes on Deleuze and Guattari’s WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY (6)’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

[Terence Blake’s Translations and Commentary on Deleuze/Guattari, entry directory]

 

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

OLD AGE A TRANSCENDENTAL REALITY: Notes on Deleuze and Guattari’s WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY (6)

 

In this post Blake discusses the theme of old age in Deleuze & Guattari’s What Is Philosophy? and he cautions that we should understand the shift of pronouns from “one” to “I” not as a move to one’s own personal lived experience but rather to transcendental lived reality of a conceptual character:

This illusion of empiricism crops up again in the middle of the first paragraph when they pass from the question “what is philosophy?” to “what is it I have been doing all my life?” This passage from one question to another is accompanied by a change of pronouns, by the transition from “one” to “I”. As already noted, the very first line, literally translated, begins: “Perhaps one can only ask the question”. The pronoun “one” is used twelve times before the passage to “I”, and then the text continues with “one”:

Perhaps one can pose the question What is philosophy? only late in life, with the arrival of old age and the time for speaking concretely. In fact, the bibliography on the nature of philosophy is very limited. It is a question one poses in a moment of quiet restlessness, at midnight, when one no longer anything to ask for. One asked it before; one asked it ceaselessly, but too indirectly or obliquely; the question was too artificial, too abstract. One was not seized by it, rather one set it out and dominated it in passing. One was not sober enough. One had too much desire to do philosophy, one did not wonder what it was, except as a stylistic exercise. One had not reached that point of non-style where one can finally say, “What is it I have been doing all my life?”

I have modified the published translation to bring out the contrast between “one” and “I”, which is quite striking in this passage. It would be a mistake to see the second question as a direct appeal to lived experience, the “I” in question is a conceptual character and as such is not a lived experience but a “transcendental lived reality”, in the same way that the authors tell us, that the “friend” as it

appears in philosophy no longer stands for an extrinsic persona, an example or empirical circumstance, but rather for a presence that is intrinsic to thought, a condition of possibility of thought itself, a living category, a transcendental lived reality [un vécu transcendental] (WIP?, 3).

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Terence Blake’s ‘NOTES TOWARDS A DIVINATIONIST MANIFESTO: Noesis and Becoming in Deleuze and Stiegler’

 

by Corry Shores

 

[Search Blog Here. Index tabs are found at the bottom of the left column.]

 

[Central Entry Directory]

[Stoicism, entry directory]

[Terence Blake, entry directory]

 

 

 

Terence Blake

 

NOTES TOWARDS A DIVINATIONIST MANIFESTO: Noesis and Becoming in Deleuze and Stiegler

 

The notion of divination is very important for Deleuze’s metaphysical and ethical thinking in The Logic of Sense. Terrence Blake gives an excellent treatment of the topic of divination at this entry. Let me quote some parts that I find to be very well formulated and also very useful:

1) Divination is not concerned with predicting causally a certain or probable future.

2) Divination is not concerned with knowledge of causes but performance of quasi-causes

3) Divination is the putting oneself in relation with the virtual powers and meanings (gods, demons, becomings) at work now that are shaping the future by their struggle towards actualisation

4) The principle of divination is synchronicity or meaningful contingency, meaningful encounter

5) Divination is performative in that it actively contributes to the production of the future that it envisions or to its avoidance: divination is active performance not passive reception

6) Divination is not conformist but transgressive: in performing the future it de-solidifies an existing state of affairs, making both it and its constitutive rules more fluid

[...]

10) Divinationism has traversed the nihilist collapse of instituted significations: it is a surnihilist hermeneutics of contingency

[...]

14) Divination is the noetic leap at moments of bifurcation, small and large, perceiving the forces and comprehending their meaning, choosing the individuating path

(Terence Blake)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.