Radio DelEuZe: Deleuze avec Guattari et vice-versa

1.12.07

Deleuze avec Guattari et vice-versa

----------------------- from Radio France _ Direct. Express... dig... dig .. dig....
Par François Noudelmann
Réalisation: Clotilde Pivin

Écrire à deux est le privilège des amis qui partagent leurs idées. Dans le cas de Gilles Deleuze et de Félix Guattari, la pensée à deux a permis bien davantage qu'un dialogue philosophique. Elle a dégagé un flux d'énergie pensive qui, à partir des années 70, a bouleversé les structures et les écritures théoriques. "Nous sommes très différents l'un de l'autre, observait Guattari, si bien que les rythmes d'adoption d'un thème ou d'un concept sont différents. Mais il y a aussi, bien sûr, une complémentarité. Moi je suis davantage porté à des opérations aventureuses, de commando conceptuel disons, d'insertion dans des territoires étrangers. Tandis que Gilles possède des armes lourdes philosophiques, toute une intendance bibliographique." Cette machine de guerre s'est construite dans le sillage de mai 68 et elle continue de produire ses greffes au-delà de la philosophie.

Invites

François Dosse. Historien

Edouard Glissant. philosophe

Stéphane Nadaud. Pédopsychiatre

Radio France Culture

__________AnD What I most detested was Hegelianism and dialectics.

_____

__________AnD

What I most detested was Hegelianism and dialectics.

And : The question of speed is important and also very complex. It doesn't mean the first in the race: you can be late through speed. Speed is to be caught in a becoming_ which is not a development or an evolution. One must be like a taxi, queue(ligne d'attente), line of flight, traffic jam, bottleneck, green and red lights, slightly paranoid,brushes with the police. To be an abstract and broken line, a zigzag which glides 'between'. The grass and speed. What you misnamed style just now_ charm or style_ is speed.

And :One only discovers worlds through a long, broken flight.

_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 question of what use it has in an extra-textual practice that prolongs the text ..

Professor D Challanger speaking

in Clinical Critical terms as the hat was in the wind

How else?

How else can one write of those things which one doesn't know, or knows badly? It is precisely here that we imagine having something to say. We write only at the frontiers of our knowledge, at the border which separates our knowledge from our ignorance and transforms the one to the other.
Only in this manner are we resolved to write. To satisfy ignorance is to put off writing until tomorrow -or rather, to make it impossible. Perhaps writing was a relation to silence altogether more threatening that that, which is supposed to entertain with death.
_______________________

Difference and Repetition.