Deleuze not only believes that he is outside ideology, he does away with
ideology altogether (everyone and everything is outside idelogy). The quote
Jon gave from page 4 of ATP pointed this out. Like Jon noted, D&G reject
ideology because it implies some sort of error or transcendence. One could
also look at it (ideology) as an attempt to bring back the mind/matter
distinction. Deleuze and D&G emphasize that what we call "consciousness"
is an epiphenomena. This could be seen as an extension of Deleuze's ontology
of Univocal Being as well, discussed most notably in SPINOZA: EXPRESSIONISM
IN PHILOSOPHY, DIFFERENCE & REPETITION, and THE LOGIC OF SENSE, and
comparable to Nietzsche's monism of will to power. Deleuze attempts to
take transcendence out of the picture in this stuff on the brain in the
volumes on CINEMA, and in the conclusion to WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY?. I would
also suggest that Deleuze's ontology of Univocal Being leads him to reject
metaphor too. Finally, this can be seen a nother distinction between
Deleuzian difference and Derridean difference-differance. Derrida's is
semiotic and relates sign to sign. Deleuzian difference does not relate
but breaks apart. It is ontological. For Deleuze, difference is said
of becoming itself.
Deleuze on the Univocity of Being on page 37 of DIFFERENCE & REPETITION:
...univocal Being: equal being is immediately present in everything,
without mediation or intermediary, even though things reside unequally in
this equal being. There, however, where they are borne by hubris, all things
are in absolute proximity, and whether they are large or small, inferior
or superior, none of them participates more or less in being, nor receives
it by analogy. Univocity of being thus also signifies equality of being.
Univocal Being is at one and the same time nomadic distribution and
crowned anarchy.
chris dacus
------------------