Deleuze Drum Machines
- Thread starter ome
- Start date
woops
is not like other people
i'm not sure this would help at all actually and if you did you'd end up with another longer list
woops
is not like other people
i thought this was liam gallagher sever since you started using itJack Nicholson in The Passenger,
linebaugh
Well-known member
Is that not from the second section all about the oedipal triangle?
version
Well-known member
Nah, it's in the third section: 'Savages, Barbarians, Civilized Men.'
version
Well-known member
Yes, the first section is on the rhizome and the book itself is a rhizome.
luka
Well-known member
Irises are perennial plants, growing from creeping rhizomes(rhizomatous irises) or, in drier climates, from bulbs(bulbous irises). They have long, erect flowering stems which may be simple or branched, solid or hollow, and flattened or have a circular cross-section. The rhizomatous species usually have 3–10 basal sword-shaped leaves growing in dense clumps. The bulbous species have cylindrical, basal leaves.[citation needed]
linebaugh
Well-known member
anh yes that is the exciting section. maybe we should lower you from the red to blue reading group
version
Well-known member
This is the stuff I got fed up with. Just dull,
This may be seen clearly in a passage from Levi-Strauss, explaining for the
simple forms of marriage the prohibition of parallel cousins and the approbation
of cross-cousins: each marriage between two lines A and B bears a (+) or (-)
sign, according to whether this couple results from a woman being lost to or
acquired by line A or B. In this regard it is not important whether the regime of
filiation is patrilineal or matrilineal. In a patrilineal or patrilocal regime, for
example, "related women are women lost; women brought in by marriage are
women gained. Each family descended from these marriages thus bears a sign,
which is determined, for the initial group, by whether the children's mother is a
daughter or a daughter-in-law. . . . The sign changes in passing from the brother
to the sister, since the brother gains a wife, while the sister is lost to her own
family." But, as Levi-Strauss remarks, one also changes signs in passing from
one generation to the next: "It depends upon whether, from the initial group's
point of view, the father has received a wife, or the mother has been transferred
outside, whether the sons have the right to a woman or owe a sister. Certainly, in
real life this difference does not mean that half the male cousins are destined to
remain bachelors. However, at all events, it does express the law that a man
cannot receive a wife except from the group from which a woman can be
claimed, because in the previous generation a sister or a daughter was lost, while
a brother owes a sister (or a father, a daughter) to the outside world if a woman
was gained in the previous generation. . . . The pivot-couple, formed by an A
man married to a B woman, obviously has two signs, according to whether it is
envisaged from the viewpoint of A, or that of B, and the same is true for
children. It is now only necessary to look at the cousins' generation to establish
that all those in the relationship (+ +) or (—) are parallel to one another, while
all those in the relationship (+-) or (-+) are cross."
This may be seen clearly in a passage from Levi-Strauss, explaining for the
simple forms of marriage the prohibition of parallel cousins and the approbation
of cross-cousins: each marriage between two lines A and B bears a (+) or (-)
sign, according to whether this couple results from a woman being lost to or
acquired by line A or B. In this regard it is not important whether the regime of
filiation is patrilineal or matrilineal. In a patrilineal or patrilocal regime, for
example, "related women are women lost; women brought in by marriage are
women gained. Each family descended from these marriages thus bears a sign,
which is determined, for the initial group, by whether the children's mother is a
daughter or a daughter-in-law. . . . The sign changes in passing from the brother
to the sister, since the brother gains a wife, while the sister is lost to her own
family." But, as Levi-Strauss remarks, one also changes signs in passing from
one generation to the next: "It depends upon whether, from the initial group's
point of view, the father has received a wife, or the mother has been transferred
outside, whether the sons have the right to a woman or owe a sister. Certainly, in
real life this difference does not mean that half the male cousins are destined to
remain bachelors. However, at all events, it does express the law that a man
cannot receive a wife except from the group from which a woman can be
claimed, because in the previous generation a sister or a daughter was lost, while
a brother owes a sister (or a father, a daughter) to the outside world if a woman
was gained in the previous generation. . . . The pivot-couple, formed by an A
man married to a B woman, obviously has two signs, according to whether it is
envisaged from the viewpoint of A, or that of B, and the same is true for
children. It is now only necessary to look at the cousins' generation to establish
that all those in the relationship (+ +) or (—) are parallel to one another, while
all those in the relationship (+-) or (-+) are cross."
version
Well-known member
... whereas this stuff is great,
The schizo knows how to leave: he has made departure into
something as simple as being born or dying. But at the same time his
journey is strangely stationary, in place. He does not speak of another
world, he is not from another world: even when he is displacing himself
in space, his is a journey in intensity, around the desiring-machine that is
erected here and remains here. For here is the desert propagated by our
world, and also the new earth, and the machine that hums, around which
the schizos revolve, planets for a new sun. These men of desire—or do
they not yet exist?—are like Zarathustra. They know incredible suffer-
ings, vertigos, and sicknesses. They have their specters. They must
reinvent each gesture. But such a man produces himself as a free man,
irresponsible, solitary, and joyous, finally able to say and do something
simple in his own name, without as king permission; a desire lacking
nothing, a flux that overcomes barriers and codes, a name that no longer
designates any ego whatever. He has simply ceased being afraid of
becoming mad. He experiences and lives himself as the sublime sickness
that will no longer affect him. Here, what is, what would a psychiatrist
be worth?
The schizo knows how to leave: he has made departure into
something as simple as being born or dying. But at the same time his
journey is strangely stationary, in place. He does not speak of another
world, he is not from another world: even when he is displacing himself
in space, his is a journey in intensity, around the desiring-machine that is
erected here and remains here. For here is the desert propagated by our
world, and also the new earth, and the machine that hums, around which
the schizos revolve, planets for a new sun. These men of desire—or do
they not yet exist?—are like Zarathustra. They know incredible suffer-
ings, vertigos, and sicknesses. They have their specters. They must
reinvent each gesture. But such a man produces himself as a free man,
irresponsible, solitary, and joyous, finally able to say and do something
simple in his own name, without as king permission; a desire lacking
nothing, a flux that overcomes barriers and codes, a name that no longer
designates any ego whatever. He has simply ceased being afraid of
becoming mad. He experiences and lives himself as the sublime sickness
that will no longer affect him. Here, what is, what would a psychiatrist
be worth?
version
Well-known member
There's so much more energy in that second passage. It's exciting to both read and think about and certain words pop out before you've even read it: schizo, world, intensity, earth, machine, desert, Zarathustra.
Compare that to the first and its dull, dry language and concepts and laboured explanation. It's like sticking a poem next to the instructions for a washing machine.
Compare that to the first and its dull, dry language and concepts and laboured explanation. It's like sticking a poem next to the instructions for a washing machine.
luka
Well-known member
qote a cool line or two