What preliminary literature, ideas, and concepts should I be familiar with before undertaking Capitalism and Schizophrenia?
Do you mean secondary literature or the concepts DG drew on?
If the former, there lots of stuff out there. Manuel Delanda is a good one; he writes very clearly and thoroughly explains and uses particular ideas from DG to discuss different shit. If the latter: Marx and Freud are the two major reference points.
>>7877282
I meant more the concepts they drew on, but I do appreciate secondary literature as well. In the case of DeLanda or any other secondary literature, would you recommend reading it before or after C&S?
>>7877307
before wtf. have you actually opened either ao or atp yet? you're not gonna know what the fuck is going on.
>>7877311
Very briefly. I'm already familiar with a decent amount of critical theory, Marxism, psychoanalysis, etc. and understand it has no central point or standard literary structure, but I don't want to spend all that time reading such a massive work if I'm going to miss important points because I'm unfamiliar with what they're being drawn from.
is this a good book? been thinking about picking it up since i first read that morton feldman pasta
>>7877320
>morton feldman pasta
Care to post it here?
>>7877316
if you really know your Marx and Freud, you can probably dive right in. But expect to hear much more from Nietzsche than either of the other two skeptics. Hegel is important if only for the shadow he cast over Marx and Freud, which a lot of Deleuze's project is to escape from, of which the Anti-Oedipus is probably the decisive blow.
>>7877509
Interesting, so AO is a distinctive pull away from Hegel? Are there any Hegelian concepts in particular that they speak out against? And what about Nietzsche? I'm familiar with Hegel insomuch that he's contributed to Marxism and Lacan and have survey-level understanding of Nietzsche, so I would hope that's enough.
I would try Logic of Sense then Difference & Repetition beforehand to appreciate how Deleuze understands.
>>7877555
The flight from Hegel is due to the Kojevean interpretation of him, which dominated French philosophy until probably the 60s. the main thing to know is that Kojeve's Hegel can't think difference, only identity, which, when you're a liberal Eurocentrist, provides really good justification for orientalism. likewise, if you're a psychoanalyst, the submission of difference to identity makes it very easy to assign damning labels like neurotic and, worse, schizophrenic/psychotic to people deviating from the Oedipal norm. this half is mostly Deleuze, but they're trying to reinject our thinking with difference "for itself," rather than simply as a "tool" for unearthing dialectical identities, as Kojeve's Hegel would have it. I'll be the first to admit that i'm not an expert on Deleuze's Difference and Repetition, though, so I can't really concisely explain what "difference for itself" would think like. this could help: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/deleuze/
what a worthless book designed by the Jew to cuck and feminize white men
here's the only two books you will ever need: turner diarys and the rational male
>>7877604
Thanks Frank
>>7877588
>the submission of difference to identity makes it very easy to assign damning labels like neurotic and, worse, schizophrenic/psychotic to people deviating from the Oedipal norm
Can you expand on that?
Apocalypse du désir
Oedipe
Oedipe
Oedipe is your love
>>7878236
BOUTANG! AGAIN!
>>7877256
If you're talking about both volumes of Capitalism and Schizophrenia, some 4chan posts wouldn't adequately help you because they reference a lot of shit. There is the general Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche reading that most scholars will tell you to read before undertaking their work, so if you'd like a very rudimentary idea of what it is they're talking about. And while these three are important to Capitalism and Schizophrenia, Deleuze draws a lot upon Bergson, Duns Scotus, Kant, Spinoza, Proust, and others. Guattari was also a student of Lacan and integrates some of his psychoanalytic work into the project (I haven't yet looked at Guattari's work, so I would not be able to give you his influences, but he has written several books and articles). However you should be aware that and A Thousand Plateaus function for different purposes (the former is considered more radical in comparison to the latter). The two texts themselves aren't entirely philosophical and cover an array of disciplines.
With that said it's also best you get some understanding on Deleuze's earlier writings. >>7877583 Although it is understandable that you should read these two before starting AO, I wouldn't recommend starting with them as D&R is still pretty dense. Instead, his book on Nietzsche is fairly easier and it offers a unique interpretation of Nietzsche. You'll also see some concepts from there that you'll also find in AO and ATP. Deleuze's book on Hume is also relatively easy. Deleuze also has a collection of essays entitled "Desert Islands," which are pretty simple and helps you get a better grasp. Also, Deleuze's interview with Claire Parnet, "Dialogues, has Deleuze explain some of his overall work in relatively comprehendible terms.
When you do get to D&R, I'd recommend reading supplemental texts. Henry Somers-Hall writes a pretty digestible reading of D&R. I've read things about James Williams' readings of D&R and LS, but I have not personally read them.
>>7877307
As for secondary literature, there are numerous scholars and you should be aware that some of them have specialization and their texts typically reflect that (so you might seem some disagreement between various scholars). For the most basic understanding of D&G, I'd recommend "Deleuze for Architects." It's not the most in-depth, but it's a pretty easy read. I'm personally a fan of Daniel Smith's interpretations; he has a collection of published essays entitled "Essays on Deleuze" that cover different concepts, philosophical branches, and philosophers. DeLanda is good, but he mainly focuses on Deleuze's philosophical writings concerning Science. Claire Colebrook has some pretty good introductions on Deleuze's works regarding time and cinema. Brian Massumi is good, but I've been told some of his work is a bit denser than others. Eugene Holland and Ian Buchanan both offer really good supplemental texts for both AO and ATP.
>>7877256
Sokal and Bricmont - "Impostures Intellectuelles"
>>7877429
chilling with friends
put morton feldman's second string quartet
confront myself and my self (as an ontological historical entity) with the mirror of atonality (as a mirror is not an empathic but a reflexive entity, alien to the space and time it reflects and only existing by itself in relation to the other) and realize the boundaries of human thought, comprehension and consciousness
reach rational ecstasy
pleb friend gets up and says "what is this silence shit, lmao, put some nirvana"
get angry at their rockist subaltern consumption conditioned by the structures of power of the imperialist white economies, but contain it
calm myself down by remembering quotes from finnegans wake, my favorite book since i was a teenager
mfw can't express myself because i'm a spectator in the society of spectacle
>>7879349
Someday he'll become a meme
>>7880379
François Dosse's biography of Deleuze and Guattari is also a secondary text worth reading.
>>7880404
haha well memed
>>7880404
