In what order do you recommend one reads this hellish beast?

In what order do you recommend one reads this hellish beast?

Attached: Thousand-Plateaus-SDL990230714-1-a78fe.jpg (850x995, 72K)

Other urls found in this thread:

imgur.com/a/ZtLDYJT
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Read Rhizome first. Then, you can either go back and read Anti-Oedipus, or start reading whatever plateaus seem interesting to you.

I've been reading 1, 2 & 6'th Plateau i just get stuck sometimes with 3 and 11- should I just go to another plateau when it turns into gibberish and then get back to it later or should I force it through? I have a hard time figuring out which method is suitable.
Also I sometimes wonder if I should have read Anti-Oedipus or On Nietzsche first - both of which I possess.

Every half a dozen pages or so, stop and unpack a bit. I find it helpful to write any thoughts and observations I had before moving forward.

I don't think you should force through, the text is really rich and dense with a wide diversity of associations. So, the target isn't to "finish the book" but to glean value from the richness of the text.

Anti-Oedipus is useful in that many of the concepts began there. It has more of a linear format, so you can read it through and you'll have a good background on what D&G are up to.

Just keep reading and making connections, trust the process

Attached: rhizome.jpg (800x395, 125K)

Thanks mate, you are the machine elf of my D&G trip that tells me that I'm on the right path and that what I'm already doing is great and that I should just belieb in muhself - unironically I appreciate it.

So, it's more poetry than philosophy?

I haven't read enough to understand Anti-Oedipus so I just pretend it was written by Raymond Roussel

It is philosophy, that embraces hyper-connected nature, as opposed to rigid hierarchical order

> hyper-connected nature
Literally or as a metaphore?

Without any hierarchy there is only feeling and subjective association. If that is all there is, or all we can know of what is, then all that remains is poetry.

In other words, to embrace 'hyper-connected nature' - whatever that means- might be a philosophical statement, it is an approach to philosophy the products of which aren't.

Deleuze's project is not abandoning ontology like most pomos do but creating an ontology of connection in networks of relationships instead of some higher ideal like God.
On top of this the book is written on the idea that books are always about themselves, in the sense that the way a book is structured always informs what it can be about and that what a book is about always informs how it is structured. Thus the book is written itself as a network with no goal oriented order and only a middle (like a map and not a tracing). In gaming terms; it's an open world book.

>On top of this the book is written on the idea that books are always about themselves, in the sense that the way a book is structured always informs what it can be about and that what a book is about always informs how it is structured. Thus the book is written itself as a network with no goal oriented order and only a middle (like a map and not a tracing). In gaming terms; it's an open world book.
That does sounds very interesting - in the same way an experimental novel can be. Forgive me for being traditional, but I still hope that philosophy, at least to a certain extent, should help us make sense of the world, reality, and thus should also address that which is outside of a book. Maybe Deleuze isn't interested in that, but I have seen his work being used as a method, an epistemological tool, to make sense of the world.

Do you think that is misguided then?

I'm the guy who has only read three plateaus (slow enough for me to actually kinda understand it) and I really think Deleuze & GUATTARI's philosophy is really useful for understanding the world. In Deleuzes opinion the philosophical project is creative instead of explorative - we create new ways of seeing and understanding the world with philosophy, we don't discover the world as much as we create the world in a certain sense.

What'd be an advisable order to read Deleuze?

>we create the world in a certain sense.
I agree with the 'in a certain sense'. I'm not some simplistic positivist. All our perception is value laden, fair enough, but that is not enough reason though to think there is no reality AT ALL outside of our perception. If there isn't such a thing, then how can a 'philosophy be useful for understanding the world'? As in, you like the created world, as you see it, that Deleuze and Guattari created - fair enough - but how is that different from liking a well written novel or poetry?

Start with Marx, Lacan, Freud, Nietzsche, Spinoza, Artaud, Carlos Castaneda, James Joyce, Samuel Beckett, William S. Burroughs, the Bible, music theory, Marcel Duchamp, Paul Klee and a thorough understanding of biology and chemistry: once you are through this you will probably get 75% of the references - now you just need to understand their philosophy.

My point is that there's nowhere to start but the middle.

I forgot all the linguists too and Kafka

If you're looking for a philosopher is the more "traditional" style that explores similar terrain as Deleuze, try Alfred North Whitehead. He was one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century, and his philosophical investigations grew out of his mathematical adventures. Like Deleuze he saw nature as hyper-connected and relational. Here's part of an introduction to his work that should help you decide if it interests you: imgur.com/a/ZtLDYJT

forgot Roussel, Borges, computer engineering and AI theory

>imgur.com/a/ZtLDYJT
thanks, will explore later

it's utter nonsense

Find a word that interests you in the index (e.g. "rhizome") and jump to the corresponding locations in the book, reading forwards and backwards around the terms. Not joking, this is ACTUALLY the way they wanted you to read this thing

No u

Isn't that more Land, Plant an Fisher?

This desu

just follow the instructions

go through the table of contents and look for an interesting chapter title on a topic you like and read it till you get bored

Bum