Radio DelEuZe: Deleuze a Big sur altere'd somewhat

2.08.2010

Deleuze a Big sur altere'd somewhat

Deleuze was at Big Sur once. he travelled to the US of A once. he had many passages of Kerouac and Henry Miller memorized by heart ~ This photo was taken by Jean Jacques Lebel _-I've altered it somewhat. __ In the Dosse doubled bio he remarks that Deleuze knew many passages from the work of Kerouac and Miller by heart . One of the funniest things to my mind is the english translation of Dialogues. In it The Subterraneans a small novel of Kerouacs is mistranslated back into English as The Underground Ones! it's a cute oversight on the part of the editor of that translation who did not think to use the proper english title . So translation then: and so its beauty . I love this quote of Deleuze's . and it reminds me of how Frank O'Hara always tried to put things positively. Not always an easy task!
But possible. ---------------------------------

---------------------------------- Speaking oF Henry Miller I recently stumbled across this 'death bed 'interview .&; Remarkable as always! He accuses the creator of 'this' world! as well he ought to have!. Wonderful! Isn't he just wonderful?

Yes yes Always Say Yes.

I cant say the word dying

I'm alive to the end ~ . I must say
I have enjoyed it thoroughly

It was wonderful

I had the love of people
their love
not their admiration
their deep love....

I 'm alive to the end....

_AnD______as_______for___

As for the method of deconstruction of texts I see clearly what it is, I admire it a lot, but it has nothing to do with my own method. I do not present myself as a commentator on texts.

For me, a text is merely a small cog in an extra-textual practice. It is not a question of commenting on the text by a method of deconstruction, or by a method of textual practice, or by other methods; it is a questin of what use it has in an extra-textual practice that prolongs the text ..

Professor DChallanger speaking

in Clinical Critical terms as the hat was in the wind

__________AnD What I most detested was Hegelianism and dialectics.

_____

__________AnD

What I most detested was Hegelianism and dialectics. my book on Kant’s different; I like it, I did it as a book about an enemy, a book about an enemy tries to show how his system works, how its various cogs-the tribunal of reason… but I suppose the main way I coped with it at the time was to see the history of philosophy as a sort of buggery or it comes to the same thing, immaculate conception. I saw myself as taking an author from behind taking an author from behind and giving him a child that would be his own offsprings, yet monstrous. It was really important for it to be his own child, cuz the author had to actually say all I had him saying,

but the child was bound to be monstrous too, cuz it resulted from all sorts of shifting, slipping, dislocation and hidden emissions…

_____AnD