Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

cyberrose wrote

First of all: I agree to a lot of points.

So then I had to read this winding diatribe about the several different definitions and their nuances then put them into context and try to figure out which deleuze means.

And you think this is really that important? When I read this stuff I rather do it to understand the content overall not in detail. I mean when you really want to understand every single sentence you have to go down a never ending rabbit whole. How do you want to understand Deleuze and Guattari without understanding Marx ( -> Hegel), Stirner ( -> Hegel), Spinoza, ... ? Understanding every single sentence as you explained is in my opinion not possible. So I'm fine to read it from my perspective and be fine to get some things "wrong" as long as I have the feeling to get a grip of the overall philosophy. (In the end I do not read this stuff to reproduce every single bit someone else said but include the stuff I find valuable in my own world-view)

Can you imagine what reading this shit would be like for someone who rarely reads or someone with dislexia or a learning disability. Honestly it would be such a undertaking.

I didn't want to say it's easy. Sorry if it sounded like this. I rather wanted to say it's not harder than other philosophical/political texts for people reading those for fun. I didn't want to sound like an asshole, sorry. (I mean there are a lot of philosophical memes saying deleuze is hard) [And I'd like to add that I have dyslexia as well and it takes a lot of time for me reading such stuff]

Philosophers just love wasting people time writing in the least acessible way possible for their own amusement.

I really don't think thats the point with Deleuze and Guattari, as some other person wrote refering the repetition book: The style they write is analogue to the content. It sounds hard to suck you in the thinking they want to transfer. And this makes Deleuze/Guattari more accessible to me.

Sorry I have to stop here. Have a nice day.

3

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

Oh I completely misunderstood u. Mb. I thought u meant Deleuze was as easy as regular books while you meant Deleuze was just as hard as other writers like Kant or Hegel ect. Which I agree with and don't dispute in any way.

3