Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari: Intersecting Lives (European Perspectives: A Series in Social Thought and Cultural Criticism)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
In May 1968, Gilles Deleuze was an established philosopher teaching at the innovative Vincennes University, just outside of Paris. Félix Guattari was a political militant and the director of an unusual psychiatric clinic at La Borde. Their meeting was quite unlikely, yet the two were introduced in an arranged encounter of epic consequence. From that moment on, Deleuze and Guattari engaged in a surprising, productive partnership, collaborating on several groundbreaking works, including Anti-Oedipus, What Is Philosophy? and A Thousand Plateaus.
François Dosse, a prominent French intellectual known for his work on the Annales School, structuralism, and biographies of the pivotal intellectuals Paul Ricoeur, Pierre Chaunu, and Michel de Certeau, examines the prolific if improbable relationship between two men of distinct and differing sensibilities. Drawing on unpublished archives and hundreds of personal interviews, Dosse elucidates a collaboration that lasted more than two decades, underscoring the role that family and history—particularly the turbulent time of May 1968—play in their monumental work. He also takes the measure of Deleuze and Guattari's posthumous fortunes and the impact of their thought on intellectual, academic, and professional circles.
he wrote them and he would work on them; that’s how it went.”29 Their common endeavor relied far more on epistolary exchange than on dialogue, although they did meet at Deleuze’s house every Tuesday afternoon, the day that Deleuze taught his morning course at Vincennes. On good days, Deleuze came to Guattari, but he avoided the unbearable madness at La Borde. “One day, Félix, Arlette Donati, Gilles, and I were eating at Dhuizon and we got a call from La Borde saying that a guy had set ﬁre to the
proposed solutions but instead should be dealt with at the level of the questions being asked. However, posing the right problem depends not on the ability to reveal what is but on the ability to invent. One of Bergson’s major rules follows from the imperative of discerning true articulations among inherently diﬀerent categories. Bergson and later Deleuze constantly used dualisms not because they preferred a binary philosophical system, as Bergson’s doctrine and Deleuze’s are resolutely monist.
manner of Nietzsche. “Diﬀerence must be shown diﬀering.”14 The eternal return would thus be the “for itself” of difference, not a return of the same but of the diﬀerent. Yet aren’t we inevitably led to the Same or to some mediations that can reduce diﬀerences in order to think them? Deleuze uses the example of lightning, which explodes when intensities in the air become too great. Before the lightning, a precursor indicates its direction in the sky, which would be the “in itself” of diﬀerence.
committees that had formed in workplaces and neighborhoods during the mobilization. The March 22 group “should claim the right for the committees of the base to remain independent of all the structures claiming to represent them.”14 For Guattari, the March 22 group was what he had called for ever since he had created the Left Opposition. “The March 22 group is exceptional not because it has remained true to its discourse as a free association but because it could be an ‘analyzer’ of a large mass
planned after the lecture. There, the psychoanalyst Henri Vermorel told Lacan that the lecture had confused him and that he found it incoherent. Unused to such impertinence, Lacan’s face reddened with anger. “I felt my Lacan was getting worse and worse. Not even alcohol had any eﬀect. But Lacan himself found the solution to the tensions of the moment: ‘I want to ﬁnish the evening at Deleuze’s house.’ I sent someone to ﬁnd Deleuze who, as a good disciple, agreed.”15 At 11 p.m., the diva demanded a