On Wed. 13 Nov. , Greg Hainge wrote:
> i feel like i'm cracking up, an
>effect i'm sure d + g would welcome wholeheartedly. the problem is
this whole body without organs business.
>some of my ideas on the bwo started to crumble around me.
>i guess i
>can't really see why there is this constant halting in the processes
>of desire and why the bwo is therefore a model of death in the
>unconscious. can anyone try and clear this up for me, i feel like i'm
>losing it totally at the moment.
But you've got it! The experience of death in the unconscious!
How could you possibly think and desire and love if you understand? (I
certainly don't - and neither, evidently, do DandG.) Where, then, would the
problems be? When can you learn anything or become anything - apart from
when the world falls apart?
How can a drive (or desiring-machine) be a drive (what is the driving of the
drive?) - without constituting its own principle, its own immobile motor,
its own driving, not as a lost object of desire or governing idea, but as a
'surface effect' (a transcendental field, a life)?
Without the continual crossing of categories -
body/drive/phantasy/thought/production/antiproduction etc.
- immanence is restratified into a representation of reality.
The image of life as a set of interconnected machines is a crude
metaphysical image. It is only when these images break down that DandG's
thought starts to work, live, think.
Phil