Currently going through Anti-Oedipus, I just have the last section left. Most of it reads as drivel that could have been written more clearly, but every 20 pages or so there's a prophetic paragraph. It's also my first Deleuze book and maybe it wasn't the best to start with. However, it's leaving me with a sense of curiosity for the rest of his work.My question: what are some good research to understand Deleuze and Deleuze-Guattari better? I'm talking about secondary literature, scholarship, papers, etc. I have a solid knowledge of continental philosophy up to him, but if there was some "skeleton key" book to sort of navigate him with a bit more ease it would help a lot.Also Deleuze thread I guess.
>>25265433>what are some good research to understand Deleuze and Deleuze-Guattari better?there's a series on youtube called 'deleuze for the desperate' by a retired academic. they're solid videos, but personally i'm not a fan: i think it misses the deleuzogauttarian spirit.i would instead recommend reading nick land's fanged noumena essays. you don't have to be an ai-worshipping technofascist to find them fun and well-written. essays like 'spirit and teeth', 'making it with death', 'machinic desire', 'meat' - they show you someone who's really deep into the d+g way of thinking, making really productive use of it.a thousand plateaus is also deleuze and guattari's attempt to apply the ideas they came up with in anti-oedipus, so maybe check that out. you can get a lot out of deleuze even when reading him quick and jumping around.>Also Deleuze thread I guess.one aspect of d+g i'm interested in is their emphasis on caution, sobriety, self-restraint, which seems at odds with the usual image of them as chaos-loving hedonists. in the kafka book, they talk about his story 'the hunger artist' and how the mouth has to be unlinked from its normal hungering/eating/digesting circuit in order to enter into a more interesting speaking/communicating/singing circuit. and in a thousand plateaus they have a really interesting discussion of drugs, saying that drugs are too uncontrollable to really help you achieve a body without organs, that they can shatter you apart instead of freeing you. 'to learn to get drunk, but on pure water' they quote approvingly. just thought this was an interesting overlooked aspect of their work: the sober deleuze.
>>25265465i also recommend the artaud radio play from which they took the concept of the BwO - helped me see what they were getting at.
>>25265465appreciate, but fuck youtube shit and this nick cunt mother fucker. GROSS.post some page numbers. caution sobriety self restraint arent against hedonism. the idea of the 'unlinked' mouth is basic BwO, no? not really a pro-sobriety moment? and you cant get drunk on water, you can be as delirious as you like, but youre not drunk. they can proclaim some non-acephalectic state. why not? thats its own hedonism. not caution nor self restraint, though why cant that exist exist as well? i find D+G is simply forms of refusal, and this path is an acceptable form of refusal.
>>25265465Thanks for the effortpost anon. I got to D&G through Land actually - I got halfway through Fanged Noumena and decided to read Anti-Oedipus before getting to the end. Land gave me the feeling that there was a lot to discover in this book and I haven't been disappointed - although I believe Land is a much better writer, at least in the first essays (if you have a good grounding in continental philosophy, that is); once he starts with the cyber stuff it feels like he's trying too hard to implement an aesthetic into the writing - he has some good points, but it's weaker compared to the early stuff. It also sounds a lot like he was starting from genuine leftwing positions - and one of my current takes (superficial) on Anti-Oedipus at the moment is that it is precisely the kind of book that could spawn extremes in both directions, politically speaking. There is a genuine call to a kind of philosophical anarchy that seems to be metaphysically grounded in one of the few solid attempts to overthrow platonic metaphysics that I have read up to now. At the same time, it also lay the basis to interpret capital as a living/sentient or post-human entity of some sort, from which maybe you get some of the late Land stuff.
