Changes

40From the early 1960s until his [[death]], 81-4Deleuze wrote many influential works on [[philosophy]], 96[[literature]], 135[[film]], 142, 151 Conversationsand fine art.

<!-- Image with unknown copyright status removed: His most popular books were the two volumes of [[Image:Gilles Deleuze.jpg|frame|right|Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Anti-Oedipus]] (1972) and [[Gilles Deleuze|A Thousand Plateaus]] (1980), both co-->written with [[Félix Guattari]]

== In the work of Slavoj Žižek ==Žižek’s most famous engagement with Deleuze takes [[place]] in '''Gilles [[Organs without Bodies: On Deleuzeand Consequences]]''' (. Žižek seeks to parse there both the [[theoretical]] and [[practical]] components of Deleuze’s philosophy from a [[Lacanian]] perspective. Žižek values Deleuze as a critic of [[January 18psychoanalysis]], a [[figure]] supplying theoretical underpinnings for [[1925materialist]] and anti- [[November 4capitalist]]activism, and an all-around staple of [[1995leftist]] academic [[thought]] (pron. <nowiki>In ''[</nowiki>[Organs without Bodies]]'', Žižek challenges some fundamental assumptions [[International Phonetic Alphabet|{{IPA|ˈʒil dəˈløz}}about]]Deleuze’s [[materialism]<nowiki>]</nowiki>), namely the tensions within his oeuvre regarding the [[France|Frenchnature]] of becoming. Žižek insists that there are two Deleuzes. The more accepted Deleuze champions the multitudinous nature of becoming in ''[[philosopherAnti-Oedipus]] of ''. However, the late second Deleuze is much more aligned with [[Jacques Lacan|Lacanian]] and [20th century[Hegelian]]thought. From the early 1960s until his deathThe title of Žižek’s book is meant to expose those aspects of Deleuze’s thought that situate him, ostensibly, Deleuze wrote many influential works on the ideologically suspect side of contemporary digital [[philosophycapitalism]], . Žižek claims that in his [[literatureintellectual]], privileging of flows of pure becoming Deleuze prefers the [[filmreality]], and of the [[fine artvirtual]]. His most popular books were to the two volumes reality of ''the [[Capitalism and Schizophreniamaterial]]'': ''potential trumps actual in this [[Anti-Oedipussystem]]. Reality for Deleuze, Žižek contends, is actualized through an “infinite potential field of virtualities” ('' (1972) and OWB'': 4). This is not unlike Lacan’s [[notion]] of [[the sinthome]], defined as “traces of [[A Thousand Plateausaffective]]intensities” ('' (1980OWB'': 5). For Žižek, both co-written [[affect]] is the key [[concept]] that aligns Deleuze with [[Félix GuattariLacan]]. His books ''In drawing an [[ontological]] [[distinction]] between [[Difference being]] and Repetitionbecoming, Deleuze ascribes a transcendental quality to the [[process]]'' (1968) and ''The Logic of Sense'' becoming. Becoming, then, is closely aligned with [[repetition]] (1969) led [[Michel Foucaultanother]] concept deeply significant to declare that "one dayLacan’s system of thought), perhaps, this century will be called Deleuzianfor only in the repetition of becoming can the new emerge." (DeleuzeIn addition, for his partby being [[Hegelian|anti-Hegelian]], said Foucault's comment was "Deleuze essentially repeats [[Hegel]] by supplying an antithesis that results in a joke meant [[dialectical]] production of something new. To Žižek this mode of repetition indicates Deleuze’s similarity to make people who like us laughHegel, and make everyone else lividin that both stress becoming through repetition."<ref>''Negotiations''By becoming-[[other]] to Hegel, p. 4Deleuze ironically supports and augments his philosophy.</ref>)

==Life and work==Deleuze was born in Paris and lived there for most his life. His initial schooling was undertaken during World War II, during which time he attended Deleuze’s approach to the Lycée Carnot[[body]] centres on [[becoming-machine]]. He also spent a year in We are [[khâgnedesiring-machines]] at the prestigious Henry IV school. In 1944 Deleuze went to study at whose affects result from the interaction of [[external]] (supplementary) and [[University of Paris|Sorbonneinternal]]parts. His teachers there included several noted specialists in The interplay of the material and its “virtual shadow”, and the history multiple singularities that erupt across this immanent plane, constitute Deleuze’s notion of philosophy, such as “[[Georges Canguilhemtranscendental empiricism]], ” (''OWB'': 19). The machinic explains why Deleuze reveres the medium of film. In this art [[Jean Hyppoliteform]], for Deleuze, “gazes, [[Ferdinand Alquiéimages]], movements, and ultimately [[Maurice de Gandillactime]], and Deleuze's lifelong interest itself” are liberated from their place in the canonical figures of modern philosophy owed much to these teachers. Nonetheless, Deleuze also found the work of non-academic thinkers such as discrete [[Jean-Paul Sartresubjects]] strongly attractive. He Instead, they flow through a literal [[agregation|aggregatedmachine]] in philosophy in 1948: the camera (''OWB'': 20).

The [[political]] turn taken by Deleuze taught at various allegedly resulted from him being “[[Secondary education in FranceFélix Guattari|lycéesguattarized]] until 1957, when he took up a position at ” (ibid.). Evidence backing the Sorbonne. In 1953, he published his first monograph, ''Empiricism and Subjectivity'', on [[Humeclaim]]. He married Denise Paul "Fanny" Grandjouan in that [[1956Guattari]]politicized Deleuze can be found by comparing and contrasting his early and late works. From 1960 Žižek suggests that Deleuze turned to 1964 he held a position at Guattari in an attempt to escape the Centre National de Recherche Scientifiquedeadlock resulting from his previous attempts to reconcile [[materialism]] and [[idealism]]. During this time he published ''Nietzsche [[Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and PhilosophySchizophrenia|Anti-Oedipus]]'' (1962which Žižek calls Deleuze’s worst book) and befriended Michel Foucault''[[The Logic of Sense]]'' encapsulate the two Deleuzes. From 1964 Deleuze’s idealism involves acknowledging that [[bodily]] realities can be produced from virtual flows. Deleuze’s notion of the quasi-cause is helpful, in that it supplies an alternative to 1969 he was reductionism. Quasi-cause is the non-[[symbolic]], non-[[linguistic]] and non-sensical [[event]] that disrupts the smooth flow and functioning of a professor at fi eld. It is not unlike the jarring [[University moment]] of Lyonthe [[Real, the (Lacan)|Lacanian Real]]. In 1968 he published his two dissertations, Deleuze offers an [[Organ]] ''Difference and Repetitionsans'' and Body in the form of [[the Gaze]] in ''Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza[[The Time-Image]]''. Again, Deleuze’s [[affirmation]] of an [[energy]], an affect and an organ that is [[autonomous]] from bodies yet territorializes [[them]] resembles Lacan’s own [[theory]] of the [[Gaze]]. Subjects erroneously assume that they possess it, but it resides in an elusive point [[outside]] the [[subject]]. In both Deleuzian and Lacanian thought the gaze disrupts subjects, but is in them more than themselves.

In 1969 he was appointed Deleuze ultimately politicizes his philosophy by focusing on an immanent [[excess]] that is essential to [[revolutionary enthusiasm]] thought through the University Lacanian lens of Paris VIII at Vincennes/St[[desire]]. Denis[[Dialectical materialism]], in this Deleuzian system, an experimental school organized can fruitfully benefit from [[understanding]] the autonomous flows of [[sense]] as ecstatic [[jouissance]]. This [[model]] can provide the tools to [[help]] [[the multitude]] organize. Tracing Deleuze back through [[Baruch Spinoza|Spinoza]], Žižek shows another connection to implement educational reform which drew a number of talented scholarspsychoanalysis: [[Partial object|partial objects]]. [[Partial]] [[objects]] quasi-cause desire; they mobilize it. Autonomous affects can fulfil this [[role]], as can [[concrete]] [[Fetish|fetish objects]]. Understanding Deleuzian becoming through [[Spinoza]], including and eventually [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] and [[FoucaultGeorg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]] , is a process that Žižek colourfully refers to as “taking Deleuze from behind” (''OWB'': 45). Žižek philosophically “buggers” Deleuze, who suggested himself used the term to describe how he would derive new [[meaning]] from twisting a philosopher’s [[concepts]]. Deleuze desires to produce monstrous off spring through buggery. In enacting the same [[practice]] himself, Žižek hopes to produce a monstrous off spring of himself and Deleuze be hiredthat is “deeply Lacanian” (''OWB'': 48). Žižek wonders if Hegel, and as a [[dialectician]], is the only philosopher who is immune to being buggered like this, because his thought-system has the practice built into it. Returning to Lacan, Žižek connects Deleuze’s concept of flat [[ontology]] to the systemic function of the psychoanalyst Lacanian [[Félix GuattariReal]]. Both hearken to a concept of [[constitutive excess]]. The [[true]] [[difference]] between Deleuze taught at Vincennes until his retirement in 1987and Hegel involves divergent notions of [[flux]] and [[gap]].

Many of Žižek’s other works mention Deleuze suffered a severe respiratory ailment , and most contain similar [[analyses]] to those found in ''[[Organs Without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences|Organs]]''. In ''[[The Metastases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality|The Metastases of Enjoyment]]'', Žižek unites Hegel, Deleuze and Lacan under the notion of [[the event]] and [[the logic of the last decade signifier]]. He argues there that Deleuze’s notion of his life[[the Sense-Event]] attempts to [[suture]] the gap between [[words]] and things, thereby challenging [[Platonic]] notions of [[space]] by reconciling [[Ideas]] with their material copies. He also further engages with Deleuze’s responses to psychoanalysis. In ''[[Living in the End Times]]'', Žižek accuses Deleuze of misreading [[castration]] by failing accurately to conceptualize the role of [[the unconscious]]. Here, he outlines Deleuze and Guattari’s parsing of the disparity between production and reproduction, a [[binary]] that defines their stake in [[1995dialectical materialism]]. Deleuze’s dialectical materialism also emerges in ''[[The Metastases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality|Metastases]]'', where he committed suicidementions a problem that is allegedly both Deleuzian and Lacanian: the passage from bodily depth to surface event. Here, throwing himself Sense and Gaze also align as autonomous forces that resist being pinpointed or assigned a [[cause]]. The passage from the window [[penis]] to [[Phallus|the phallus]] is also ascribed to Deleuzian (through Lacanian) thought in ''Metastases'', as the [[phallus]] is described, by Žižek, as a [[master-signifier]] and figure of non-sense that [[structures]] an entire symbolic field; one that regulates and distributes sense. In this formulation we see another Lacanian–Deleuzian reconciliation. For Deleuze, penis versus phallus encapsulates the difference between form and [[content]] (the organization and coordination of his apartmentsensible, [[erogenous zones]]). Here, Žižek also attests that Deleuze conflates bodily depth with [[transcendental]] depth, a crucial [[slippage]].

In ''Metastases'', Žižek also points out that Deleuze’s [[analysis]] of [[masochism]] rightly argued that [[sadism]] and [[masochism]] are asymmetrical. In ''[[The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology|The novelist Ticklish Subject]]'', Žižek praises Deleuze’s account of masochism for off ering an insightful formulation of [[Kantianism|Kantian]] [[Michel Tourniermoral]]law. In ''Ticklish'', who knew he attributes to Deleuze when both were students at a “[[perverse]] [[rejection]] of [[hysteria]]” by way of the Sorbonnelatter’s alleged call for [[polymorphous perversity]], described him thusand the rejection of [[the symbolic]] [[master]]-signifier, in ''[[Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia|Anti-Oedipus]]'' (TS:250). De- and re-territorialization ''vis-à-vis'' [[capitalism]] are also associated with Deleuze. More accounts of a politicized Deleuze are also to be found in ''[[In Defense of Lost Causes]]'', including distinctions between war machine and [[state apparatus]], a notion of “nomadic resistance” that implicates [[Antonio Negri]] (LC: 339), the [[economy]] as a [[quasi-cause]], revolutionary becoming and the notion of the [[post-human]].

"The ideas we threw about like cottonwool or rubber balls he returned In ''[[Less Than Nothing]]'', in addition to rehashing arguments found in earlier works (the phallus [[structuring]] the sensible field, Deleuze as Hegelian), Žižek develops his analysis of Deleuzian quasi-cause with respect to us transformed into hard and heavy iron or steel cannonballscapitalism. We quickly learnt Žižek argues that Deleuze “regresses” to be in awe the [[logic]] of [[representation]], evidenced by his gift for catching us redadmission of [[money]] as subject. This is another example of [[capital]] as pseudo-handed in cause, and the act virtual as a site of cliche-mongeringproduction. Money, talking rubbishlike the phallus, or loose thinkingbecomes a non-sense signifier that structures a field. Žižek has discussed Deleuze on the website [[Lacan.com]]. He had In the knack of translatingentry “[[Deleuze’s Platonism]]”, transposinghe challenges the notion that Deleuze is anti-Hegelian. As it passed through him, Citing the interplay between the virtual and the actual as the whole zone of worn-out academic philosophy re-emerged unrecognisableproduction for the new, totally refreshedhe attests that this process is akin to the [[Dialectic|Hegelian dialectic]]. Deleuze opposes representation, yet understands ideas as if it has not been properly digested beforematerially real, creating a tension. It was all fiercely newIn “[[Deleuze and The Lacanian Real]]”, completely disconcertingŽižek asserts that Deleuze has landed in a trap through the notion of the virtual element [[present]] only in its effects, for [[negation]] and it acted as the [[absence]] of meaning (a [[signifier]] without a [[signified]]) is itself inscribed into a goad to our feeble minds and our slothfulnesssystem of meaning."<ref>Mary Bryden (ed.)In sum, ''this last [[sentence]] appears to encapsulate Žižek’s fundamental critique of Deleuze and Religion'' (New York: Routledgein attempting to do away with a dualistic system of meaning, 2001), p. 201Deleuze’s thought falls back into its binaries.</ref>

==Philosophy==Deleuze's work falls into two groups: on one hand, monographs interpreting modern philosophers ([[Spinoza]], [[Leibniz]], [[Hume]], [[Kant]], [[Nietzsche]], [[Bergson]]) and artists ([[Proust]], [[Kafka]], [[Francis Bacon (painter)|Francis Bacon]]); on the other, eclectic philosophical tomes organized by concept (e.g., difference, sense, events, schizophrenia, cinema, philosophy). Regardless of topic, however, Deleuze consistently develops variations on similar ideas.  ===Deleuze's interpretations===Deleuze's studies of individual philosophers and artists are purposely heterodox. In ''Nietzsche and Philosophy'', for example, Deleuze claims that Nietzsche's ''[[On the Genealogy of Morals]]'' is a systematic response to Kant's ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'', a claim that would strike almost anyone who has read both works as curious at best, as Nietzsche nowhere mentions the First Critique in the ''Genealogy'', and Nietzsche's moral concerns in the ''Genealogy'' are far removed from the epistemological focus of Kant's book. Likewise, Deleuze claims that univocity is the organizing principle of Spinoza's philosophy, despite the complete absence of the term from any of Spinoza's works. Deleuze once famously described his method of interpreting philosophers as "buggery", as sneaking behind an author and producing an offspring which is recognizably his, yet also monstrous and different.<ref>''Negotiations'', p. 6.</ref> The various monographs are best taken not as attempts to faithfully represent "what Nietzsche (or whoever) meant" but as articulations of Deleuze's philosophical views. This practice -- Deleuze ventriloquizing through other thinkers -- is not willful misinterpretation so much as it is an example of the creativity that Deleuze believes philosophy should enact. A parallel in painting might be Bacon's [http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/762.html ''Study after Velasquez''] -- it is quite beside the point to say that Bacon "gets Velasquez wrong". (Similar considerations apply to Deleuze's uses of mathematical and scientific terms, ''pace'' [[Alan Sokal]].) ===Metaphysics===Deleuze's main philosophical project in his early works (i.e., those prior to his collaborations with Guattari) can be baldly summarized as a systematic inversion of the traditional relationship between [[Identity (philosophy)|identity]] and [[Difference (philosophy)|difference]]. Traditionally, difference is seen as derivative from identity: e.g., to say that "X is different from Y" assumes some X and Y with at least relatively stable identities. To the contrary, Deleuze claims that all identities are effects of difference, and that difference ontologically comes first. Apparent identities such as X are composed of endless series of differences, where X = the difference between x and x', where x = ... . Difference goes all the way down. To say that two things are "the same" obscures the difference presupposed by there being two things in the first place. To confront reality honestly, Deleuze claims, we must grasp beings exactly as they are, and concepts of identity (forms, categories, resemblances, unities of apperception, etc.) fail to attain difference in itself. Like Kant and Bergson, Deleuze considers traditional notions of space and time as categories imposed by the [[subject (philosophy)|observer]]. Therefore he concludes that pure difference is non-spatio-temporal; it is an ideal, what he calls "the virtual". (The coinage refers not to the "virtual reality" of the computer age, but to Proust's definition of the past: "real without being actual, ideal without being abstract.") While Deleuze's virtual ideas superficially resemble Plato's forms and Kant's categories, they are not originals or models, nor are they abstract conditions of possible experience; instead they are the conditions of real experience, the internal difference in itself. "The concept they [the conditions] form is identical to its object."<ref>"Bergson's Conception of Difference" in ''Desert Islands'', p. 36.</ref> A Deleuzean idea is not a wraith-like abstraction of an experienced thing, it is a real system of differential relations that creates actual spaces, times, and sensations <ref>See "The Method of Dramatization" in ''Desert Islands'', and "Actual and Virtual" in ''Dialogues''.</ref>.  Thus Deleuze, alluding to Kant and [[Schelling]], at times refers to his philosophy as a ''transcendental empiricism''. In Kant's [[transcendental idealism]], experience only makes sense when organized by intellectual categories (such as space, time, and causality). Taking such intellectual concepts out of the context of experience, according to Kant, spawns seductive but senseless metaphysical beliefs. (For example, extending the concept of causality beyond actual experience results in unverifiable speculation about a first cause.) Deleuze inverts the Kantian arrangement: experience exceeds our concepts by presenting novelty, and this raw experience of difference actualizes an idea, unfettered by our prior categories, forcing us to invent new ways of thinking (see below, ''Epistemology'').  Simultaneously, Deleuze claims that being is univocal, i.e., that it has only one sense. Deleuze borrows the doctrine of [[ontological univocity]] from the medieval philosopher [[John Duns Scotus]]. In medieval disputes over the nature of God, many eminent theologians and philosophers (such as [[Thomas Aquinas]]) held that when one says that "God is good", God's goodness is only analogous to human goodness. Scotus argued to the contrary that when one says that "God is good", the goodness in question is the exact same sort of goodness that is meant when one says "Jane is good". That is, God only differs from us in degree, and properties such as goodness, power, reason, and so forth are univocally applied, regardless of whether one is talking about God, a man, or a flea.  Deleuze adapts the doctrine of univocity to claim that being is, univocally, difference. "With univocity, however, it is not the differences which are and must be: it is being which is Difference, in the sense that it is said of difference. Moreover, it is not we who are univocal in a Being which is not; it is we and our individuality which remains equivocal in and for a univocal Being."<ref>''[[Difference and Repetition]]'', p. 39</ref> Here Deleuze echoes Spinoza, who maintained that everything that exists is a modification of the one [[substance]], [[God]] or [[Nature]]. For Deleuze, the one substance is an always differentiating [[process]], an origami cosmos, always folding, unfolding, refolding. Deleuze summarizes this ontology in the paradoxical formula "pluralism = [[monism]]".<ref>''A Thousand Plateaus'', p. 20.</ref> ''Difference and Repetition'' is Deleuze's most sustained and systematic attempt to work out the details of such a metaphysics, but like ideas are expressed in his other works. In ''Nietzsche and Philosophy'' (1962), for example, reality is a play of forces; in ''[[Anti-Oedipus]]'' (1972), a "[[body without organs]]"; in ''What Is Philosophy?'' (1991), a "plane of immanence" or "chaosmos". ===Epistemology===Deleuze's unusual metaphysics entails an equally atypical [[epistemology]], or what he calls a transformation of "the image of thought". According to Deleuze, the traditional image of thought, found in philosophers such as [[Aristotle]], [[Descartes]], and [[Husserl]], misconceives of thinking as a mostly unproblematic business. Truth may be hard to discover -- it may require a life of pure theorizing, or rigorous computation, or systematic doubt -- but thinking is able, at least in principle, to correctly grasp facts, forms, ideas, etc. It may be practically impossible to attain a God's-eye, [[neutral point of view]], but that is the ideal to approximate: a disinterested pursuit that results in a determinate, fixed truth; an orderly extension of common sense. Deleuze rejects this view as papering over the metaphysical flux, instead claiming that genuine thinking is a violent confrontation with reality, an involuntary rupture of established categories. Truth changes what we think; it alters what we think is possible. By setting aside the assumption that thinking has a natural ability to recognize the truth, Deleuze says, we attain a "thought without image", a thought always determined by problems rather than solving them. "All this, however, presupposes codes or axioms which do not result by chance, but which do not have an intrinsic rationality either. It's just like theology: everything about it is quite rational if you accept sin, the immaculate conception, and the incarnation. Reason is always a region carved out of the irrational -- not sheltered from the irrational at all, but traversed by it and only defined by a particular kind of relationship among irrational factors. Underneath all reason lies delirium, and drift."<ref>''Desert Islands'', p. 262.</ref>  Deleuze's peculiar readings of the history of philosophy stem from this unusual epistemological perspective. To read a philosopher is no longer to aim at finding a single, correct interpretation, but is instead to present a philosopher's attempt to grapple with the problematic nature of reality. "Philosophers introduce new concepts, they explain them, but they don't tell us, not completely anyway, the problems to which those concepts are a response. [...] The history of philosophy, rather than repeating what a philosopher says, has to say what he must have taken for granted, what he didn't say but is nonetheless present in what he did say."<ref>''Negotiations'', p. 136.</ref>  Likewise, rather than seeing philosophy as a timeless pursuit of truth, reason, or universals, Deleuze defines philosophy as the [[Concept#Gilles Deleuze's definition of Philosophy|creation of concepts]]. For Deleuze, concepts are not solutions to problems, but constructions that define a range of metaphysical thinking, such as [[Plato]]'s forms, [[Descartes]]'s cogito, or [[Kant]]'s doctrine of the faculties. In his later work (from roughly 1981 onward), Deleuze sharply distinguishes art, philosophy, and science as three distinct disciplines, each analyzing reality in very different ways. As philosophy creates concepts, the arts create new sensory combinations (what Deleuze calls "percepts"), and the sciences create theories based on fixed points of reference such as the speed of light or [[absolute zero]] (which Deleuze calls "functives"). According to Deleuze, none of these disciplines enjoy primacy over the others: they are different ways of organizing the metaphysical flux, "separate melodic lines in constant interplay with one another."<ref>''Negotiations'', p. 125.</ref> Philosophy, science, and art are equally, and essentially, creative and practical. Instead of asking, "is it true?" or "what is it?", Deleuze claims that better questions would be "what does it do?" or "how does it work?" ===Values===In ethics and politics, Deleuze again echoes Spinoza, albeit in a resoundingly Nietzschean key. In a classical [[liberalism|liberal]] model of society, morality begins from individuals, who bear abstract [[natural rights]] or duties set by themselves or a God. Following his rejection of any metaphysics based on identity, Deleuze criticizes the notion of an individual as an arresting or halting of differentiation (as the etymology of the word "individual" suggests). Guided by the [[ethical naturalism]] of Spinoza and Nietzsche, Deleuze instead seeks to understand individuals and their moralities as products of the organization of pre-individual desires and powers. In the two volumes of ''Capitalism and Schizophrenia'', Deleuze and Guattari describe history as a congealing and regimentation of "[[desiring-production]]" (a concept combining features of [[Freud]]ian drives and [[Marxist]] [[labor (economics)|labor]]) into the modern individual (typically neurotic and repressed), the nation-state (a society of continuous control), and capitalism (an anarchy domesticated into infantilizing commodification). Deleuze, following [[Marx]], welcomes capitalism's liberating destruction of traditional social hierarchies, but inveighs against its homogenization of all values to the aims of the market.  But how does Deleuze square his pessimistic diagnoses with his ethical naturalism? Deleuze claims that standards of value are internal or "immanent": to live well is to fully express one's power, to go the limits of our potential, rather than to judge what exists by non-empirical, transcendent standards. Modern society still suppresses difference and alienates persons from what they can do. To affirm reality, which is a flux of change and difference, we must overturn established identities and so become all that we can become -- though we cannot know what that is in advance. The pinnacle of Deleuzean practice, then, is creativity. "Herein, perhaps, lies the secret: to bring into existence and not to judge. If it is so disgusting to judge, it is not because everything is of equal value, but on the contrary because what has value can be made or distinguished only by defying judgment. What expert judgment, in art, could ever bear on the work to come?" <ref>''Essays Critical and Clinical'', p. 135.</ref> == Bibliography ==By Gilles Deleuze:*''Empirisme et subjectivité'' (1953). Trans. ''Empiricism and Subjectivity''.*''Nietzsche et la philosophie'' (1962). Trans. ''Nietzsche and Philosophy''.*''La philosophie critique de Kant'' (1963). Trans.''Kant's Critical Philosophy''.*''Proust et les signes'' (1964, 2nd ed. 1970). Trans. ''Proust and Signs''.*''Le Bergsonisme'' (1966). Trans. ''Bergsonism''.*''Présentation de Sacher-Masoch'' (1967). Trans. ''Masochism: Coldness and Cruelty''.*''Différence et répétition'' (1968). Trans. ''[[Difference and Repetition]]''.*''Spinoza et le problème de l'expression'' (1968). Trans. ''Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza''.*''Logique du sens'' (1969). Trans. ''The Logic of Sense''.*''Spinoza - Philosophie pratique'' (1970, 2nd ed. 1981). Trans. ''Spinoza: Practical Philosophy''.*''Dialogues'' (1977, 2nd ed. 1996, with Claire Parnet). Trans. ''Dialogues''.*''Superpositions'' (1979).*''Francis Bacon - Logique de la sensation'' (1981). Trans. ''Francis Bacon: Logic of Sensation''.*''Cinéma I: L'image-mouvement'' (1983). Trans. ''Cinema 1: The Movement-Image''.*''Cinéma II: L'image-temps'' (1985). Trans. ''Cinema 2: The Time-Image''.*''Foucault'' (1986).*''Le pli - Leibniz et le baroque'' (1988). Trans. ''The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque''.*''Périclès et Verdi: La philosophie de Francois Châtelet'' (1988).*''Pourparlers'' (1990). Trans. ''Negotiations''.*''Critique et clinique'' (1993). Trans. ''Essays Critical and Clinical''.*''Pure Immanence'' (2000).*''L'île déserte et autres textes'' (2002). Trans. ''Desert Islands and Other Texts 1953-1974''.*''Deux régimes de fous et autres textes'' (2004). Trans. ''Two Regimes of Madness: Texts and Interviews 1975-1995''. In collaboration with [[Félix Guattari]]:*''Capitalisme et Schizophrénie 1. L'Anti-Œdipe.'' (1972). Trans. ''[[Anti-Oedipus]]'' (1977).*''Kafka: Pour une Littérature Mineure.'' (1975). Trans. ''Kafka: Toward a Theory of Minor Literature.'' (1986).*''Rhizome.'' (1976).*''Nomadology: The War Machine.'' (1986).*''Capitalisme et Schizophrénie 2. Mille Plateaux.'' (1980). Trans. ''[[A Thousand Plateaus]]'' (1987).*''Qu'est ce que c'est la philosophie?'' (1991). Trans. ''What Is Philosophy?'' (1996). Most of '''Deleuze's courses''' available [http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/sommaire.html here] (in French, English, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese...) On Gilles Deleuze:* Descombes, Vincent (1979). ''Le Meme et L'Autre''. Minuit. Trans. ''Modern French Philosophy''. Cambridge University Press.* Frank, Manfred (1984). ''Was ist Neostrukturalismus?'' Suhrkamp. Trans. ''What Is Neostructuralism?'' University of Minnesota Press.* Hardt, Michael (1993). ''Gilles Deleuze: An Apprenticeship in Philosophy''. University of Minnesota Press.* Lecercle, Jean-Jacques (1985). ''Philosophy through the Looking-Glass''. Open Court.* May, Todd (2005). ''Gilles Deleuze: An Introduction''. Cambridge University Press.* Williams, James (2003). ''Gilles Deleuze's Difference and Repetition: A Critical Introduction and Guide''. Edinburgh University Press. ===On Deleuze and feminism===Some [[feminism|feminist]] theorists have sought to criticize and adapt Deleuze's work in the context of contemporary feminist theory. Some such texts include: * Braidotti, Rosi (2002). ''Metamorphoses: Towards a Materialist Theory of Becoming.'' Blackwell. * Braidotti, Rosi (1994). ''Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory.'' Columbia UP.* Braidotti, Rosi (1991). ''Patterns of Dissonance: A Study of Women in Contemporary Philosophy.'' Trans. Elizabeth Guild. Polity Press.* Colebrook, Claire, ed. (2000). ''Deleuze and Feminist Theory.'' Edinburgh UP.* Colebrook, Claire (Spring, 2000). "From Radical Representations to Corporeal Becomings: The Feminist Philosophy of Lloyd, Grosz, and Gatens," in ''Hypatia'' - Volume 15, Number 2, pp. 76-93.* Gatens, Moira (Spring 2000). "Feminism as 'Password': Rethinking the 'Possible' with Spinoza and Deleuze," in ''Hypatia'' – Volume 15, Number 2, pp. 59-75* Goulimari, Pelagia (Spring, 1999). "A Minoritarian Feminism? Things to Do with Deleuze and Guattari," ''Hypatia'' – Volume 14, Number 2, pp. 97-120. * Grosz, Elisabeth (2005). ''Time Travels. Feminism, Nature, Power.'' Duke UP.* Grosz, Elisabeth (1994). ''Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism.'' Indiana UP.* Grosz, Elisabeth (1994). "A Thousand Tiny Sexes: Feminism and Rhizomatics," in ''Deleuze and the Theatre of Philosophy,'' ed. Constantin V. Boundas and Dorothea Olkowski. Routledge, pp. 187-210.* Olkowski, Dorothea (1999). ''Gilles Deleuze and the Ruin of Representation.'' University of California Press. * Olkowski, Dorothea (1994). "Nietzsche’s Dice Throw: Tragedy, Nihilism, and the Body without Organs," in ''Deleuze and the Theatre of Philosophy,'' ed. Constantin V. Boundas and Dorothea Olkowski. Routledge, pp. 119-140. == See also ==*[[affect (philosophy)]]*[[concept]]*[[deterritorialization]]*[[percept]]*[[rhizome]]*[[Gilbert Simondon]]'s theory of psychic and collective [[individuation]]*[[minority (philosophy)]]*[[Schizoanalysis]]*[[Plane of immanence]] ==External links=={{wikiquote}} *[http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/sommaire.html Webdeleuze - courses & audio put on line by [[Richard Pinhas]], availables in French, English, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, etc.]*[http://www.mythosandlogos.com/Deleuze.html A collection of links]*[http://www.purselipsquarejaw.org/research_design/notes/dandg.html A short summary of vital terms]*[http://www.protevi.com/john/DG/index.html Lectures and notes on work by Deleuze and Guattari]*[http://www.uta.edu/english/apt/d&g/d&gweb.html Deleuze and Guattari on the Web (UT-Arlington)]*[http://www.langlab.wayne.edu/CStivale/D-G/index.html Web resources from Wayne University]*[http://www.driftline.org The Deleuze and Guattari listserv]*[http://www.egs.edu/resources/deleuze.html Biography]*[http://www.revue-chimeres.org Website of the review 'Chimères', founded by Deleuze and Guattari]*[http://www.lichtensteiger.de/methoden.html Das "Anrennen gegen die Grenzen der Sprache" - Methoden des Schreibens und Strategien des Lesens by Ralph Lichtensteiger] (Discussion transcript in German)*For ongoing work influenced by Deleuze see [http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/ the works of Manuel de Landa]: "Intensive Science & Virtual Philosophy" (found under "2002"), & "1000 Years of Non-Linear History" ("1997").*{{fr}}{{cite news | title=Jean Ristat : entretien avec Gilles Deleuze (France-Culture, 2 juillet 1970) | publisher=L'Humanité | date=February 28, 2006 | url=http://www.humanite.fr/journal/2006-02-28/2006-02-28-825077}} == Endnotes References==

{{Philosophy navigation}} [[Category:1925 births|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:1995 deaths|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:20th century philosophers|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:Continental philosophers|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:French philosophersPeople|Deleuze, Gilles]]

[[Category:PoststructuralismPhilosophy|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:Social philosophyPsychoanalysis|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:Writers who committed suicideIndex|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:Slavoj Žižek|Deleuze-Guattari, Gilles]][[Category:PeopleLooking Awry|Deleuze, Gilles]][[Category:Philosophy]][[Category:PsychoanalysisZizek Dictionary]]