Gilles Deleuze 1925-1995
French philosopher and critic.
Deleuze is noted for his influential critical writings. He is considered by many to have been a philosopher whose writing reached beyond the realm of philosophy, delving into the fields of linguistics, sociology, literary criticism, and cinematic studies. His complex theories have had implications in several disciplines and dramatically impacted the work of other acclaimed philosophers, such as Michel Foucault. In recent years, his publications have garnered increasing critical attention.
Deleuze was born in 1925. He attended the Lycée Carnot in Paris, and he began to study philosophy at the Sorbonne in 1944. It was there that he formed friendships with such thinkers as Michel Butor, Michel Tournier, and François Châtelet. After receiving his degree in philosophy in 1948, Deleuze taught philosophy for several years. In 1957 he began to teach the history of philosophy at the Sorbonne, and in 1960 he took a job as a researcher with the Centre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS). Four years later he began teaching at the University of Lyon. In the 1960s he formed a friendship with the French philosopher Foucault, and the relationship influenced the work of both men. In 1969, at the behest of Foucault, he was appointed professor of philosophy at Vincennes. He retired from teaching in 1987. Deleuze committed suicide in 1995 after suffering for several years from a respiratory illness.
Some of Deleuze's most famous work was done in collaboration with Felix Guattari, including their groundbreaking two-volume study, Capitalisme et schizophrénie (Capitalism and Schizophrenia). The first volume, L'Anti-Oedipe (1972; Anti-Oedipus), is considered an attack on capitalism and the theories of Sigmund Freud. In the study, Deleuze and Guattari argue that psychoanalysis and capitalism are closely related. They reject the Oedipal myth and assert that the Oedipal triangle reflects the structure of capitalism. According to this theory, labor plays the same role in the political economy as desire does in psychoanalysis. As a replacement for Oedipal psychoanalysis, the authors offer what they call “schizoanalysis.” Mille plateaux (1980; A Thousand Plateaus), the second volume of Capitalism and Schizophrenia, includes several new concepts intended for use by other disciplines. Deleuze explored the world of film in his two-volume study Cinéma. The first volume, L'image-mouvement (1983; The Movement-Image), investigates the movement theories of Henri Bergson and the semiotics of C. S. Pierce. L'image-temps (1985; The Time-Image) challenges the notion that all images in the cinema are necessarily in the present. Qu'est-ce que la philosophie? (1991; What Is Philosophy?), also written with Guattari, posits their belief that philosophy is the art of developing concepts which are not mere subjective images of an objective reality, but exist as realities in their own right. Those concepts then must be able to interact with other disciplines, including politics, culture, and science.
Critics have traced the development of Deleuze's writing from his early histories of philosophy to his later works in critical philosophy and unconventional literary criticism. His disparate interests and writings have prompted many commentators to praise the creativity of his thinking. Yet many scholars have trouble summarizing or classifying his oeuvre. Although Deleuze's utilization of a wide array of resources and references in his work has been cited, most argue that it also can make his theories complicated and difficult to understand. Along with Jacques Derrida and Foucault, Deleuze is regarded as one of the most influential and cited French thinkers in recent years.
Empirisme et subjectivité: Essai sur la Nature humaine selon Hume [Empiricism and Subjectivity: An Essay on Hume's Theory of Human Nature] (essay) 1953
Nietzsche et la philosophie [Nietzsche and Philosophy] (nonfiction) 1962
La philosophie critique de Kant [Kant's Critical Philosophy] (nonfiction) 1963
Marcel Proust et les signes [Proust and Signs] (nonfiction) 1964
Le Bergsonisme [Bergsonism] (nonfiction) 1966
Présentation de Sacher-Masoch [Masochism: An Interpretation of Coldness and Cruelty] (nonfiction) 1967
Différence et répétition [Difference and Repetition] (nonfiction) 1968
Spinoza et le probléme de l'expression [Expression in Philosophy: Spinoza] (nonfiction) 1968
Logique du sens [The Logic of Sense] (nonfiction) 1969
Capitalisme et schizophrénie: L'Anti-Oedipe and Mille plateaux [Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus] 2 vols. [with Félix Guattari] (nonfiction) 1972, 1980
Kafka: pour une littérature mineure [Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature] [with Félix Guattari] (nonfiction) 1975
Francis Bacon: Logique de la sensation (nonfiction) 1981...
(The entire section is 200 words.)
Show us the love and view this for free! Use the facebook like button, or any other share button on this page, and get this content free!free!
SOURCE: A review of Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, in New Republic, Vol. 177, Nos. 26 & 27, December 24-31, 1977, pp. 36-37.
[In the following unfavorable review of Anti-Oedipus, Cantor asserts that the book lacks concreteness and is “an extraordinary failure.”]
There is—by definition—no tradition that can include utopian speculations; there are only works. And some of the works are famous: Marcuse's Eros and Civilization, N. O. Brown's Love's Body, R. D. Laing's The Politics of Experience were popular this last decade (a time so unsure of its own traditions as to have a profound taste for such things). But despite their popularity these works appear to take place on the margin, to speak to rather than from the traditional disciplines. Laing, an anti-psychiatrist psychiatrist, left the profession to study meditation in Ceylon. Marcuse was denounced as “petit bourgeois” by every established Communist party. Brown, according to Harold Bloom, is a false prophet of the return of the repressed. (The repressed Bloom assures us—or condemns us—never returns. There are only more or less graceful shoulderings of our burden of heritage and guilt. The Oedipal drama is the way that the authentic tradition is constructed.)
This sense of being excluded from the tradition is to everyone's taste. We've made it a sign of authenticity of...
(The entire section is 1792 words.)
Show us the love and view this for free! Use the facebook like button, or any other share button on this page, and get this content free!free!
SOURCE: “Woman in Limbo: Deleuze and His Br(others)1,” in Substance, Vol. XIII, Nos. 3-4, 1984, pp. 46-60.
[In the following essay, Jardine explores Deleuze and Guattari's relationship with the contemporary feminist movement as evinced in their work.]
Responding to the appearance of Deleuze and Guattari's (D + G) Mille Plateaux in 1980, Catherine Clément pointed out what could be said about most of Deleuze's books, whether or not his is the only signature: it is a book of history, economy, ethnology, politics, aesthetics, linguistics. And a book of philosophy? “It's philosophy. Or maybe not. It's writing and thinking. Chagrined people—those with thin skin you know?—will sit worrying in their corner, smaller and smaller. The others, philosophers or not, will amuse themselves. And even seriously.”2
Seriously. For some, especially in the United States, this adverb is irrelevant to D + G. That judgement, in my opinion, is, however, simple and unfortunate. First, because D + G are very “serious”—perhaps not in the French sense (grave, without laughter, reasonable) because their work is also frivolous, gay, light (and perhaps even futile). But they are most certainly not joking. This is clear if only because of the wide impact they have had on contemporary thought and, most especially, on its students everywhere. In the U.S., where theory...
(The entire section is 7594 words.)
Show us the love and view this for free! Use the facebook like button, or any other share button on this page, and get this content free!free!
SOURCE: “As Time Goes By and By,” in New Statesman, Vol. 112, No. 2889, August 8, 1986, pp. 27-28.
[In the following favorable review, Gordon perceives Cinema I as an “essay in the classification of filmic signs and images.”]
Of all the famous French intellectuals of the last generation, Gilles Deleuze is probably the most underappreciated in this country and the most engaging. His international celebrity derives almost entirely from one book, The Anti-Oedipus (1972), an eccentric and gargantuan essay-pamphlet on ethics, politics and psychiatry which became a gauchiste bestseller in France and earned Deleuze and his co-author Félix Guattari a durable status as bogey figures of the older Marxist-Freudian new Left.
In France, where Deleuze is widely seen as, with Michel Foucault, the outstanding philosopher of his generation, his reputation has had a rather broader footing in an output of some 20 books including a series of studies of past thinkers which are deservedly used as textbooks. Among these are two immensely lively introductions to Nietzsche and Kant which have recently appeared here in translation.
Read as a whole, Deleuze's work makes an impression of admirable consistency. Characteristically, in his preface to Cinema I, Deleuze makes a plausible connection from a tribute to Hitchcock, seen as the artist of the ‘mental...
(The entire section is 1142 words.)
SOURCE: “Deleuze's Nietzsche and Post-Structuralist Thought,” in Substance, Vol. XIV, No. 3, 1986, pp. 34-50.
[In the following essay, Pecora analyzes Deleuze's interpretation of Nietzsche's philosophy and its relation to post-structuralist thought.]
We have now had roughly a quarter century of “post-structuralism”—if, that is, one can decide that something called “structuralism” ever happened, if one uses the earliest work of Derrida, Deleuze, and Foucault as some sort of historical marker, and if (perhaps most of all) one is interested in calculating such things in the first place. It is clearly possible now to take stock of this situation and explain post-structuralism to a wider audience—for example, by reading it against the current of other competing theoretical positions, as Terry Eagleton has most recently done. Yet, in many ways, the philosophical, cultural, and political density of any mode of thought that might be called post-structuralist is still weirdly difficult to articulate—or to hear articulated—in America; it is as if we had engaged countless tutors and adopted a wide variety of points of view—in the truest sense of a democratic pluralism—and had remained somehow in the dark, groping for an intellectual wall to follow. “Post-structuralism” becomes “deconstruction” becomes “free play,” and largely what this means is a style of literary...
(The entire section is 8759 words.)
SOURCE: A review of Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature, in Criticism, Vol. XXIX, No. 4, Fall, 1987, pp. 552-54.
[In the following favorable review, Barnett lauds Deleuze and Guattari's treatment of Kafka's work and his place within modern literature.]
Deleuze and Guattari's Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature is an admirable addition to the University of Minnesota's Theory and History of Literature Series. A brief but dense text, this book has had to wait eleven years to be translated into English. Both the University of Minnesota Press and translator Dana Polan are to be commended for offering us a translation that captures much of the verve and daring of the original text. This edition comes with a helpful foreward by Réda Bensmaïa and a translator's introduction by Dana Polan. A thorough index has made the English edition more accessible. This will prove extremely helpful to both those interested in the various readings of Kafka's works and those interested in the theoretical concepts employed by Deleuze and Guattari.
The importance of this book for literary scholars is, simply put, that it offers a sustained analysis of a major literary figure by two of the most significant theorists writing today. Deleuze and Guattari's Kafka is likely to become as important a text for literary studies as their earlier Anti-Oedipus. Perhaps the greatest significance of the...
(The entire section is 1442 words.)
SOURCE: A review of Cinéma 2: L'Image-temps, in French Review, Vol. 61, No. 5, April, 1988, pp. 821-22.
[In the following review, Thiher maintains that The Time-Image “is to be highly recommended to anyone wanting to see how a very intelligent viewer tries to frame a theory of modern cinema covering films from neo-realism to Straub, Duras, and Pasolini.”]
In the first volume of this study, L'Image-mouvement, philosopher Gilles Deleuze offered the reader a study of the grammar of classical film couched in terms drawn from Bergson and Pierce. That volume concluded with some comments on Italian neo-realism and the crisis that it inaugurated in classical cinematography, or the “crise de l'image-mouvement.” In the present study [L' Image-temps], Deleuze takes up his discussion of the development of Italian neo-realism as a prelude to the end of classical cinematography and the development of cinematic modernity in which the “image-temps” replaces the “image-mouvement.” Perhaps it is not surprising that a philosopher who has written a book on Proust should find the essence of modern cinema in its rejection of action in favor of the seizure of time. In any case Deleuze's description of the changes initiated by neo-realism is far more interesting than anything he wrote in the first volume. He succeeds in persuading this reader that cinema can give an image of time,...
(The entire section is 786 words.)
SOURCE: A review of The Logic of Sense, in Canadian Philosophical Reviews, Vol. XI, No. 5, October, 1991, pp. 307-09.
[In the following review, Flynn summarizes Deleuze's conceptual apparatus in The Logic of Sense.]
In The Logic of Sense, originally published in France in 1969, Deleuze establishes a systematic opposition between sense and meaning. He does this in large measure by presenting commentaries on both the writings of Lewis Carroll and the works of the Stoic philosophers; and also by making interesting digressions on the writings of Malcolm Lowry, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Antonin Artaud and Plato. This brief review will attempt to outline the parameters of Deleuze's conceptual apparatus (these words being used advisedly) while, as much as possible, abstracting from the details of his commentaries.
Meaning or ‘good sense’, ‘common sense’, sets up enclosures and is ‘inseparable from the agrarian problem’ (76). It moves from the singular to the regular, from the extraordinary to the ordinary; it assigns to time the unique dimensionality of from the past to the future. It constitutes the domain of the Same, the signification of the Lebenswelt. Meaning identifies and recognizes; it excludes non-sense as its radical other and proceeds from identity to difference. Ultimately, it is thought under the form of God or Subjectivity—the supreme principle of...
(The entire section is 1524 words.)
SOURCE: “A Thousand Trails to Work with Deleuze,” in SubStance, Vol. XX, No. 3, 1991, pp. 10-23.
[In the following review, Colombat traces the critical reaction to A Thousand Plateaus and regards the book as a continuation of Deleuze's earlier work.]
Gilles Deleuze, like Michel Foucault, has often described theory as a “tool box,” the tools being the concepts a philosophy creates and makes available to others in different fields of research. Despite the many new concepts it develops, A Thousand Plateaus comprises a rather unwieldy tool box, since both Deleuze and Guattari refuse to offer their readers a closed system or “recipe” to work from.
As soon as it was published in 1980, A Thousand Plateaus appeared to be just as unclassifiable as the Anti-Oedipus had been eight years earlier. It was seen by Anquetil and Deligeorges as an “Unidentified Theoretical Object.”1 After a first reading, many critics remained “flabbergasted, amazed, puzzled,”2 or even “stricken with astonishment, stunned.”3 The same critics, however, recognized that while this book “generates irritation,” it constitutes, with the Anti-Oedipus, “a philosophical body without equal in contemporary production” (Delacampagne), “a passport for the imagination,” or a “fully positive book” (Deligeorges).
(The entire section is 5057 words.)
SOURCE: A review of Critique et clinique, in World Literature Today, Vol. 68, No. 3, Summer, 1994, pp. 526-27.
[In the following favorable review of Clinique et critique, Evenson contends that the book “serves as an intriguing and varied introduction to Deleuze's ideas, providing a broad picture of his current modes of thought.”]
The French philosopher and literary critic Gilles Deleuze's latest book is a collection of seventeen essays, about half of which have been previously published: The majority of the essays treat of language and literature, with a few focusing on psychological issues. Many of the essays return to those authors and theorists whom Deleuze often favors—Nietzsche, Sacher-Masoch, Lewis Carroll, Samuel Beckett—but whom he rethinks, redefining his previous opinions about them. “Re-présentation de Masoch,” for instance, reworks the ideas in Deleuze's Présentation de Sacher-Masoch, published more than twenty years ago. “Bégaya-t-il” clarifies the ideas of Deleuze and Félix Guattari's co-written Kafka, extending their theory of “minor literature” even further.
Although there are essays on several topics, the strength of Critique et clinique lies in its discussion of language and literature. Most notable are the effective and intriguing (decidedly poststructuralist and French) discussions of American and English...
(The entire section is 525 words.)
SOURCE: A review of Difference and Repetition, in Canadian Philosophical Reviews, Vol. XV, No. 4, August, 1995, pp. 233-35.
[In the following review, Williams explicates the major issues in Difference and Repetition.]
This book [Difference and Repetition] is essential for any sustained study of Deleuze's work. Here, the exegesis and interpretation of classic texts from the history of philosophy, allied to a reflection upon a series of scientific and philosophical problems, leads into a well-argued and complex exposition of an original position: a new philosophy of difference. Deleuze's early and influential research on Bergson, Hume, Nietzsche and Spinoza becomes the basis for an attack upon a mistaken and dangerous conception of difference in classical and modern thought. An affirmative philosophy of difference comes out of this encounter and guides his later works, in particular, the work with Félix Guattari in Anti-Oedipus (trans. R. Hurley, M. Seem and H. Lane [New York: Viking Press 1977]) and A Thousand Plateaus (trans. B. Massumi [Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press 1987]) and the series of enactments of difference in The Logic of Sense (trans. M. Lester and C. Stivale [New York: Columbia University Press 1990]). The careful move from interpretation to creation is always latent in the earlier works and presupposed in the later. Inevitably, this has lead...
(The entire section is 1048 words.)
SOURCE: “Literary History and Criticism,” in French Review, Vol. 69, No. 5, April, 1996, pp. 793-94.
[In the following positive assessment of Difference and Repetition, Williams considers the significance of Deleuze's concept and treatment of difference in his work.]
In his new preface to this English edition of Différence et répétition (originally published in France in 1968), Deleuze argues that the book's fundamental aim of thinking difference “in itself” (xv) is central to all his subsequent work and lays the ground for major ideas such as the “rhizome” developed in L'Anti-Œdipe (1972). Why, then, we have had to wait so long for it to become available to a wider audience is a mystery, although Derrida's cornering of the difference market is certainly a factor, as is the complex nature of the study itself. For Difference and Repetition not only offers a critique of Western philosophy and metaphysics (in particular, Plato, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Freud, Althusser, and Nietzsche), it also engages in the same breath with art, literature, mathematics, and the sciences to produce a comprehensive and multi-perspective account of difference liberated from the four “illusions” of identity, resemblance, opposition, and analogy. In a systematic dismantling of the very foundations of representation, Deleuze reinvents familiar concepts such as the “eternal return”...
(The entire section is 823 words.)
SOURCE: “Marxism and Dualism in Deleuze,” in South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 96, No. 3, Summer, 1997, pp. 393-416.
[In the following essay, Jameson investigates the impact of Marxism on Deleuze's philosophy.]
We begin, as one so often does, without necessarily wanting to, with Hegel (heaven only knows if we will also end up in the same place). The motto will be Hegel's prescient analysis of the situation of thought in modern times, which he contrasts to the situation of nascent philosophy in ancient Greece:
The manner of study in ancient times differed from that of the modern age in that the former was the proper and complete formation of the natural consciousness. Putting itself to the test at every point of its existence, and philosophizing about everything it came across, it made itself into a universality that was active through and through. In modern times, however, the individual finds the abstract form ready-made; the effort to grasp and appropriate it is more the direct driving forth of what is within and the truncated generation of the universal than it is the emergence of the latter from the concrete variety of existence. Hence the task nowadays consists not so much in purging the individual of an immediate, sensuous mode of apprehension, and making him into a substance that is an object of thought and that thinks, but rather in just the opposite, in...
(The entire section is 9704 words.)
SOURCE: “Deleuze and the Three Powers of Literature and Philosophy: To Demystify, to Experiment, to Create,” in South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 96, No. 3, Summer, 1997, pp. 579-97.
[In the following essay, Colombat finds a parallel between Deleuze's philosophy and Malcolm Lowry's novel Under the Volcano and considers what Deleuze perceives as the aim of literature and philosophy.]
The “economy” of literature sometimes seems to me more powerful than that of other types of discourse: such as, for example, historical or philosophical discourse. Sometimes: it depends on singularities and contexts. Literature would be potentially more potent.
—Jacques Derrida, “This Strange Institution Called Literature”
Here's food for thought, had Ahab time to think; but Ahab never thinks; he only feels, feels, feels; that's tingling enough for mortal man! to think's audacity. God only has that right and privilege. Thinking is, or ought to be, a coolness and a calmness; and our poor hearts throb, and our poor brains beat too much for that.
—Herman Melville, Moby-Dick
Two mountain chains traverse the republic roughly from north to south, forming between them a number of valleys and plateaus.1 The first sentence of...
(The entire section is 7574 words.)
SOURCE: “From Ontological Difference to Ontological Holism: Gilles Deleuze,” in Reconsidering Difference: Nancy, Derrida, Levinas, and Deleuze, The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997, pp. 165-201.
[In the following essay, May assesses Deleuze's ontological claims about the concept of difference and discusses the juxtaposition of unity and difference in his work.]
The final study I want to undertake here concerns the ontological reflections on difference offered by Gilles Deleuze. In an important sense, Deleuze's considerations upon difference diverge from those of the previous three thinkers. As we have seen, for Nancy, Derrida, and Levinas, difference has been conceived in terms of absence, on the assumption that to conceive it otherwise is to reduce it to categories of the same. Deleuze, in contrast, wants to articulate a difference in terms other than those of absence. He wants to articulate a “positive” difference that, while similar to Nancy's and Derrida's in being both constitutive and internal to that which it constitutes, is conceived other than by means of the negativity of absence.1
Although this difference about difference exists between Deleuze and the other thinkers I have discussed, my argumentative strategy is characterized by sameness. I argue that difference cannot be conceived in the way Deleuze wants to do so—at least at certain points in his...
(The entire section is 15727 words.)
SOURCE: “I'm Going to Have to Wander All Alone,” in Philosophy Today, Vol. 42, No. 1, Spring, 1998, pp. 3-5.
[In the following review, Derrida reflects on his friendship with Deleuze and offers an appreciation of his accomplishments.]
So much to say, and I don't have the heart for it today. So much to say about what has happened to us, about what has happened to me too, with the death of Gilles Deleuze; so much to say about what happens with a death that was undoubtedly feared—we knew he was very ill—but yet so much to say about what happens with this death, this unimaginable image which in any event would still hollow out, if it were possible, the sad infinity of another event. More than anything else, Deleuze the thinker is the thinker of the event and always of this event in particular. From beginning to end, he remained a thinker of this event I reread what he said concerning the event, already in 1969, in one of his greatest books, The Logic of Sense. He quotes Jos Bousquet, who says, “For my inclination toward death which was a failure of the will I substituted a longing for dying which is the apotheosis of the will.” Then Deleuze adds, “From this inclination to this longing there is. in a certain respect, no change except a change of the will, a sort of a leap in place of the whole body which exchanges its organic will for a spiritual will. It wills now not exactly what...
(The entire section is 1637 words.)
SOURCE: “The Uses of Anachronism: Deleuze's History of the Subject,” in Philosophy Today, Vol. 42, No. 4, Winter, 1998, pp. 418-31.
[In the following essay, Neil traces Deleuze's philosophical development by discussing important influences on his work.]
Even the history of philosophy is completely without interest if it does not undertake to awaken a dormant concept and to play it again on a new stage, even if this comes at the price of turning it against itself.1
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY: RECOUNTING IMAGINARY BOOKS
Gilles Deleuze observes a distinction between writing history of philosophy and “doing” philosophy. We are interested here in how this distinction is set up. How does Deleuze conceive of the relation between history of philosophy and doing philosophy? What is the use of historiography and how can it be brought to bear on the present? In the preface to the English edition of Difference and Repetition Deleuze writes this:
There is a great difference between writing history of philosophy and writing philosophy. In the one case we study the arrows or the tools of a great thinker, the trophies and the prey, the continents discovered. In the other case we trim our own arrows, or gather those which seem to us the finest in order to try and send them in other...
(The entire section is 10335 words.)
SOURCE: “Edmund Burke, Gilles Deleuze, and the Subversive Masochism of the Image,” in ELH, Vol. 66, No. 2, Summer, 1999, pp. 405-37.
[In the following essay, Cosgrove uses Edmund Burke's Philosophical Enquiry into the Origins of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful to explore the connection between the beautiful and masochistic.]
The category of the sublime has not escaped the suspicion of concealing a sadistic component, though the category of the beautiful, tied to the sublime as a complement and an antithesis ever since Burke's decisive intervention in the history of aesthetics, has never been considered in the light of the masochistic. These hidden links are what the following paper sets out to explore through the medium of Gilles Deleuze's remarkable philosophical meditation on masochism, “Le Froid et le Cruel.”1 While my larger goal is to speculate broadly on the ties of these aesthetic and psychological categories to each other and to the social imaginary of Western culture over the past two centuries, a careful analysis of Burke's Philosophical Enquiry into the Origins of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, seemed to be the first priority for two reasons. Burke was the first to introduce the lexicon of terror into definitions of the sublime, and though the sublime has since gone through numerous permutations, it has never quite...
(The entire section is 14452 words.)
SOURCE: “Can a Feminist Read Deleuze and Guattari?”, in Gilles Deleuze and the Ruin of Representation, University of California Press, 1999, pp. 32-58.
[In the following essay, Olkowski elucidates the reasons why Deleuze and Guattari's work has not garnered much commentary from feminist critics.]
In a text that introduced many American feminists to the work of Gilles Deleuze, Alice Jardine forcefully lays out her view of the status of Deleuze and his sometime collaborator Félix Guattari in contemporary philosophy and linguistic and literary studies.1 Largely ignored in the early 1980s by most academics, Deleuze and Guattari had found an American audience consisting, she claims, chiefly of a “vocal [male] student minority.”2 The largely male character of this audience extended, not surprisingly, to France, to the point that, even in France, where Deleuze and Guattari publicly supported the feminist movement, by the mid 1980s only one feminist made extensive use of their work.3 In the intervening years, Deleuze and Guattari had ceased to be ignored or dismissed by American academics and were beginning to be not merely read but also celebrated in France.4 However, their audience continued to be chiefly male, and Jardine argues that it should remain so.5 Let me begin by examining her arguments...
(The entire section is 14457 words.)
SOURCE: “Escape from the Image: Deleuze's Image-Ontology,” in The Brain Is the Screen: Deleuze and the Philosophy of Cinema, edited by Gregory Flaxman, University of Minnesota Press, 2000, pp. 109-39.
[In the following essay, Schwab proposes modifications to Deleuze's image-ontology theory and applies it to the genre of cinema.]
In his two cinema books, The Movement-Image and The Time-Image, Gilles Deleuze offers an aesthetic and historical account of the cinema based on an unfamiliar and intriguing ontology—an ontology of images. Objects, qualities, processes, actions, even the brain: all are images in a dynamic universe of images. In this “image-world,” art—specifically, the cinema—emerges as something not ontologically distinct from the rest of the world. Indeed, Deleuze's theory amounts to the simultaneous dynamization and de-Platonization of the cinema. Deleuzian “image-art” is neither semblance (Schein), nor the coming to the fore of a separate and “artificial” world, nor the becoming sensible of the idea or of the forms, nor a fabric of marks engaged in a constant process of destabilization. Such views imply that art is ontologically distinct and functionally privileged, whereas Deleuze privileges art over other phenomena of the image-world because, quite simply, it shows more clearly and more overtly the depth or even surface dynamics of the...
(The entire section is 14060 words.)
Baker, Lang. “The Cry of the Identicals: The Problem of Inclusion in Deleuze's Reading of Leibniz.” Philosophy Today 39, No. 2 (Summer 1995): 198-211.
Examines Deleuze's reading of Gottfried Leibniz's work.
Brusseau, James. Isolated Experiences: Gilles Deleuze and the Solitudes of Reversed Platonism. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998, 223 p.
Outlines the defining characteristics of Deleuze's philosophy.
Chisholm, Dianne. “Feminist Deleuzions: James Joyce and the Politics of ‘Becoming-Woman’.” Canadian Review of Comparative Literature 19, Nos. 1-2 (March-June 1992): 201-24.
Reads the work of James Joyce utilizing the theories of Deleuze and Guattari.
Davis, Erik. “Professor of Desire: Gilles Deleuze at Work and Play.” Village Voice Literary Supplement (March 1989): 19-20.
Overview of Deleuze's life and work.
Flaxman, Gregory, ed. The Brain Is the Screen: Deleuze and the Philosophy of Cinema. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000, 395 p.
Collection of critical essays examining Deleuze's cinematic philosophy.
Goodchild, Philip. Gilles Deleuze and the Question of Philosophy. Madison, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press,...
(The entire section is 370 words.)