Get PDF Deleuze and Space (Deleuze Connections)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Deleuze and Space (Deleuze Connections) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Deleuze and Space (Deleuze Connections) book. Happy reading Deleuze and Space (Deleuze Connections) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Deleuze and Space (Deleuze Connections) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Deleuze and Space (Deleuze Connections) Pocket Guide.

Footnote 5 In contrast to identities that are indivisible, multiplicities are composed of heterogeneous elements. Furthermore, they are intensities, as being opposed to extensive unities. Extensive unities have the property of being partes extra partes , they are the sum of subentities that are all of the same nature.

An extensive unity is cardinal. A crate of beer is the collection of 24 identical bottles of beer.

About the Author

An intensity, by contrast, cannot be subdivided into homogeneous elements. A temperature or a speed, for instance, is not composed of other temperatures or speeds.

  1. Becoming a Manager.
  2. Front matter.
  3. African Americans Doing Feminism: Putting Theory Into Everyday Practice.

An intensity is determined by an asymmetrical relation between heterogeneous elements: the absence of wind and a high humidity level are decisive for how warm it feels. Moreover, the composition of an intensity cannot be changed without the nature of the intensity changing. When I take away half of the bottles in a crate of beer, the quantity has diminished but the quality has remained the same.

Thus, a multiplicity consists of different qualities folded into one another, while simultaneously being irreducible to one another. Whether Deleuze and Guattari describe living organisms in terms of affects, becomings or multiplicities, what remains constant in these notions is the movement of breaking interiorities and opening them onto other forces, elements or aspects. The ultimate aim of Deleuze and Guattari seems to be the making of connections in such a way that what is connected does not form a unity in which differences are annihilated.

So far, the difference between the thinking of Deleuze and Guattari, on the one hand, and Sloterdijk, on the other, appears to be the following: whereas the first believe in the generative qualities of the encounter with the exterior, the latter focuses more on the importance of closing off and selectively refusing participation.

Instead of experimenting with all sorts of possible connections with what does not belong to an identity, Sloterdijk starts from the immunitary interests of particular beings. They are interested in how bubbles will morph into other bubbles and generate new functional relations and immune systems. They are interested in the expressive qualities of bubbles, rather than in their possessive ones. Footnote 6. However, despite this difference in focus, each of the aforementioned philosophies also contains ideas and notions that link with their so-called opposite.

In Deleuze and Guattari, we can find elements that reveal an interest in closure and, vice versa, there are also poststructuralist elements of breaking down identities to be found in Sloterdijk. Deleuze claims that every painting by Bacon contains three elements: first, the Figure—which he also calls the body or the head—, second, the armature—also known as the field aplat or material structure—, and finally the ring la piste —also described as the round area le rond or the contour.

The Figure refers not to the main character of the representation, but to the part of the body presented: Bacon wants to break narration and representation and create a non-resembling resemblance with reality, a presence. The Figure is a subject without identity and without a place in the story. It always escapes itself. It is always free falling. However, to prevent the Figure from actually disappearing, it is contained first by a small ring or round area, then by a larger monochrome field. This field or armature cannot be considered the background of the Figure: Bacon exchanges a classical relation of figure and ground—of depth, in other words—for a haptic or shallow depth.

The field surrounds the Figure, rather than being placed behind the Figure. The contour is the membrane through which armature and Figure communicate.

Go to Page

According to Deleuze, the armature has a structuring and spatializing function. It divides the space, creates sections and regions, for example, by varying the intensity or saturation of the coloured field and by introducing bars or ribbons. The goal of the armature is to prevent the destabilizing forces of the Figure from spreading out to the whole painting, to prevent colours from mixing into a dead grey and planes from stumbling over one another.

See a Problem?

When making his paintings, Bacon cannot only rely upon sensations or the ways in which his nervous system is directly affected by colours and forms. To give them a structure that can hold them and force them to take shape, he needs the frame. The frame alone, however, is useless because it is too abstract. The sensations allow the frame to be concrete, to be felt Deleuze, : In What is Philosophy?

The logic of sensation , it is the territorializing force. Despite Deleuze and Guattari clearly indicating that an art work requires both forces, the fact that they claim that architecture is the first of the arts Deleuze and Guattari, : testifies how important they consider the territorializing force to be. They also refer to the care and respect that is implied in the reterritorializing activity Deleuze and Guattari, : : one recognizes a great artist not by the violence with which he destroys and opens up existing structures, but by the care he gives to structuring what has been deterritorialized.

According to Sloterdijk, every sphere—that is: every construction as a shield against the outside—consists of at least two poles. An example of a bipolar sphere is the unity of mother and child in utero , but there are also multi-poled bubbles like the intimate group sessions of animal magnetism that Sloterdijk describes in his novel The Magic Tree.

This observation implies, first, that the inner space is never pure; it is always the conjunction of the proper or the interior with the non-proper or the exterior Sloterdijk, : — A sphere is always heterogeneous; it is a multiplicity without a first or primary pole. Second, it means that the attacks from the outside not only threaten the inner space, but also strengthen it and even form its condition of possibility Sloterdijk, : 45— A bubble is what it is capable of becoming, insofar as it is already the other that it becomes in the mutually constitutive relation.

Moreover, although bubbles are shielded from the outside, they are always communicating with it. They are not self-concealed and isolated but reach out for accompaniment and overlap. Sloterdijk proposes that we think of this communication in terms of foam. In a physical way, foam refers to the product achieved when inserting air into liquid as in beer foam or into firm matter as in lava rock. This entity, halfway between a liquid and a solid, is constituted by multiple cells, each separated by membranous partitions.

Deleuze and Space

The cells can invade their neighbours and transmit their volume to them. Foam is stable—that is, cells stop invading one another—when the tension is well spread among all the bubbles, when the different bubbles have reached an optimal interdependency. In contrast to classical entities, the unity of the foam is thus not determined by something identical or indivisible, but by a difference in tension or in intensity.

This is clearly a very Deleuzian idea. In sum, with his notion of foam, Sloterdijk gives the volatile, the insignificant and the secondary, the attention that used to be preserved for the ever-being, the substantial and the primary.

Deleuze Space by Gregg Lambert Ian Buchanan

Then one will understand that the floating can serve as a special kind of foundation, that the hollow can be described as an autonomous fullness, that the fragile can be considered the place and mode of the most real, that the unrepeatable is a phenomenon of a higher order than the serial. The hypothesis of a contradiction can be discarded, not only because there is textual proof that connects each position with its opposite, but also, and more importantly, because a closer look indicates that these positions do not necessarily present opposite ends of one and the same line.

To explain this, we must examine the nature of the communication with the outside in each of the positions. It is a by-product of the way bubbles are constituted.

Deleuze and Space - Google книги

In foam, one and the same partition does not only mark the end of one bubble but also the beginning of the next. Bubbles are at the same time separated from and connected to each other.

If one bubble expands, this will make the neighbouring bubbles shrink, except if these neighbours also swell and force their neighbours to shrink. Foam, then, is the result of this indirect communication between bubbles. In Deleuze and Guattari, on the contrary, the communication with the outside is not a by-product but a mission. It is not an unintended consequence but a goal we must aim at. We have to tear down the tired ideas of what it is to be human and allow ourselves to let animal traits trickle into our self-image the so-called becoming-animal or becoming-molecular.

We have to leave the known paths of how things are being said and start stammering Deleuze and Guattari, : Or as Isabelle Stengers has pointed out, Anti-Oedipus contains an accelerationist categorical imperative to deterritorialize and destroy everything that reeks of sedentariness Stengers, : — In other words, we should be open to any kind of exterior that shakes the boundaries and layers of territories. Since Deleuze and Guattari do not accept any authority, they cannot prescribe any kind of behaviour. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This article is about a concept in Deleuzian philosophy. For its use in botany and dendrology, see rhizome. This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. As a result of its connective and generative power, corporate and State entities seek to control digital space. These controlling institutions stratify, segment, and claim ownership over the flat, smooth space.

The second section, then, shows how the Internet becomes striated through corporate and State interests. As a remedy, the third section advocates for hacktivism as a form of nomadic action. In this section, I focus on the Distributed Denial of Service attack as a form of deterritorialization that redistributes the flow of information. Acting as a digital machine de guerre engaging in online direct action, and against the legal apparatus of the State, hacktivists create a rupture in the rhizomatic structure and form smooth spaces within a striated network.

In the final section, I advocate for sustained smooth digital spaces that allow for new modes of association that radiate outward from the digital to the physical world. Skip to Main Content. Search in: This Journal Anywhere. Advanced search.