The history of philosophy plays a patently repressive role in philosophy, it's philosophy's own version of the Oedipus complex: "You can't seriously consider saying what you yourself think until you've read this and that, and that on this, and this on that"' (Deleuze 1995b, 5). He explains how he freed himself from this repression and 'found his own voice' through a kind of depersonalisation, learned from reading Nietzsche: 'It was Nietzsche, who I read only later, who extricated me from all this. . . . He gives you a perverse taste . . . for saying simple things in your own way, in affects, intensities, experiences, experiments'. Deleuze explained that it was in this manner that he began to write in his own name: It's a strange business, speaking for yourself, in your own name, because it doesn't at all come with seeing yourself as an ego or a person or a subject. Individuals find a name for themselves, rather, only through the harshest exercise in depersonalization, by opening themselves up to the multiplicities everywhere within them, to the intensities running through them. A name as the direct awareness of such intensive multiplicities is the opposite of the depersonalization effected by the history of philosophy; it's depersonalization through love rather than subjection. (1995b, 6-7)
Patton, Paul(Editor). Between Deleuze and Derrida.
London, , GBR: Continuum International Publishing, 2003. p 3.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/ulincoln/Doc?id=10224763&ppg=16
No comments:
Post a Comment