Is Deleuze "outside" ideology?
I think that Adrian, Malgosia and others have been a little quick on the
draw by saying immediately "no, no, how could he be?" Deleuze (and
Guattari) definitely downplay ideology, even to the extent of considering
it unimportant ("There is no ideology and there never has been"--"Rhizome").
Ideology generally depends upon transcendence; they, of course, insist
upon immanence (hence the argument against Metz and thus against suture
etc.).
At the very least, their conception of ideology might be best compared
with Zizek's comments on Sloterdijk (in _Sublime Object of Ideology_)
where he considers ideology (immanently) in the act itself.
I would appreciate other thoughts on this--and on the role of ideology in
D&G in general. I did just read a note on this in ATP, and will go and
have a look for it sometime.
Jon
Jon Beasley-Murray
Literature Program
Duke University
jpb8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------
I think that Adrian, Malgosia and others have been a little quick on the
draw by saying immediately "no, no, how could he be?" Deleuze (and
Guattari) definitely downplay ideology, even to the extent of considering
it unimportant ("There is no ideology and there never has been"--"Rhizome").
Ideology generally depends upon transcendence; they, of course, insist
upon immanence (hence the argument against Metz and thus against suture
etc.).
At the very least, their conception of ideology might be best compared
with Zizek's comments on Sloterdijk (in _Sublime Object of Ideology_)
where he considers ideology (immanently) in the act itself.
I would appreciate other thoughts on this--and on the role of ideology in
D&G in general. I did just read a note on this in ATP, and will go and
have a look for it sometime.
Jon
Jon Beasley-Murray
Literature Program
Duke University
jpb8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------