Radio DelEuZe: Challenger goes Cephalopod

3.3.10

Challenger goes Cephalopod

To go from the Vertebrate to the
Cephalopod, bring the two sides of the Vertebrate's backbone together,

bend its head down to its feet and its pelvis up to the nape of its neck ...
Cuvier (angrily): That's just not true! You go from an Elephant to a Medusa; I know, I tried.

There are irreducible axes, types, branches.

There are resemblances between organs and analogies between forms, nothing
more.

You're a falsifier, a metaphysician. Vialleton (a disciple of Cuvier
and Baer): Even if folding gave good results, who could endure it? It's not

by chance that Geoffroy only considers anatomical elements. No muscle or
ligament would survive it
...

....Challenger admitted having digressed at length but added that there was
no possible way to distinguish between the digressive and the
nondi-gressive. The point was to arrive at several conclusions

concerning the unity and diversity of a single stratum, in this case the

organic stratum.

______________Image from Cephalopod

__________________Welcome home everyone Says Mona and she's Sister Maria Buttocks.

---------------------------------------------

__________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.